Conyers and the Rove Subpoena; What, Again?!?
Congressman John Conyers, Democrat of Michigan. With the start of every session of Congress for the last God knows how many sessions, he puts in a bill to fund a study to investigate the benefits of reparations for African-Americans whose ancestors were slaves. It’s never gone anywhere; but there’s Conyers filing it session after session after session (it’s there again for the 111th Congress). Along with longtime Democratic Congressional mate John Dingell, Conyers sued President Bush for signing a bill that Conyers stated wasn’t voted on in both the House and the Senate; the suit was tossed. He’s involved himself in every hair-brained conspiracy theory against the Bush administration, whether it was about Iraq or “stolen elections” (who knows; maybe Conyers thinks the Bush administration had the gunman on the grassy knoll for the JFK assassination).
Conyers also has it in for Karl Rove. Like so many others, Conyers has been trying to nail Rove for something, mostly because Rove committed the cardinal sin of helping to get a Republican elected to be President of the United States. Conyers attempted to issue subpoenas to Rove in order to force the latter to testify on his role in the “firing” of nine (or is it eight) U.S. Attorneys by the Bush administration, and the mysticism Rove invoked in getting former Democratic Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman convicted on corruption charges. While President Bush was still in office, he rebuffed Conyers citing executive privilege. With Barack Obama in the White House, Conyers went ahead by issuing another subpoena to Rove earlier this week requiring him to testify this Monday, February 2nd. According to Conyers, the Obama administration won’t offer any immunity to Rove; yet, Rove has been told that he can continue to use the same arguments to avoid testifying. In the laugh riot of the day, Conyers delayed any hearings for three weeks, giving the Obama administration time to see if Rove, indeed, is immune to any inquiries.
But the question that has to be asked is, why? I don’t buy anything that says he’s doing this to be noble and “uphold the rule of law”. In my opinion, it’s because Conyers is an old man who is, and has been, allowed to behave like an indulgent, spoiled brat, doing the Congressional equivalent of pulling the wings off of flies. If anyone has some other answers, I’m all ears.