E-mail Subpoenas Weren't For Rove: Where Is Rove's Subpoena?

In the last couple days, a number of Diaries and blogs have referenced a set of newly-released documents in the Plame case that contain subpoenas and memos.

There seems to be a generalized misunderstand about the contents of those documents. They contain orders for discovery of White House communications. But, they are all directed at the Office of the Vice President (OVP). Nowhere in these subpoenas is any reference to Karl Rove, who is not an employee of the OVP.

If Rove deleted his e-mails, that is not a violation of the court orders we have just been shown.

Of course, other subpoenas would have applied specifically to Rove. As to whether he complied fully in producing copies of all his e-mails, one can only speculate.

Presumably, any subpoena to Rove would have required him to turn over all his e-mails on all WH servers, not just the ones used for "official business".

This raises a very good question, where are the Rove subpoenas?

****

Among those who seem to have misread a memo about preservation of communications and records related to the Plame case is Larry Johnson. His blog -- http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/04/more_obstructio.html#comment-66309834 -- quotes an extract of a memo from David Addington to staff members of the Office of the Vice President (OVP).

The memo and order are part of a 35-page PDF document file here: http://wid.ap.org/documents/libbytrial/jan30/GX06501.PDF

The extract quoted appears in a memo from Addington at pages 8 and 9 of 35. As I read it, the DOJ Order -- pages 4 and 5 of the PDF file -- and Addington's memo is addressed to employees of the OVP, not the Executive Office of the President (EOP). Mr. Rove, of course, is the President's assistant, and works for EOP.

Rove is not a member of the OVP. He is not otherwise named in the Order or in the Addington memo.

As much as I would love to see Rove nailed, this does not seem to provide the hammer.

Johnson wrote: http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/04/more_obstructio.html#comment-66309834



As one reads the final two lines, above, it becomes clear that the order applies to persons within OVP. No reference is made to Karl Rove or any other OEP employee in any of the memos or subpoenas contained in the PDF document file.

Some false expectations may have been raised by misinterpretation of these Plame case documents, but it also causes us to ask: when are we going to see the subpoenas issued for Mr. Rove and others who work directly with the President? What will they tell us?

Did Karl, indeed, delete e-mails after he was subpoenaed? Where are his subpoenas, and why haven't they been released?

Maybe we'll see the Congressional committee seeking Rove emails from Fitzgerald?

(OTOH, Fitz' interests in Rove emails would have been confined to Plame matters. OTOH, OTOH did Fitzgerald know and specifically seek emails from the private RNC accounts? I wouldn't think so, because, then, he would have uncovered a violation of federal law in the course of his limited investigation, and the authority given him would permit him to investigate such violation.

Perhaps Congress will be referring -- or has already referred -- the matter to Special Counsel Fitzgerald!?!?! (...or perhaps even learned Fitzgerald was already on the matter, re Rove, at least?))

Why haven't we seen a copy of Rove's subpoena? Is it still being retained by Fitz's office?

...otherwise he'd already be investigating the violation of federal law.

Sooo...maybe he is! (...and Waxman already knows so)

That's widely-known in Washington.

There's another explanation for this, I'm sure.

preserve WH communications.

Are you saying that Fitz knew about Rove's use of the private gwc43.com email accounts?

He would have -- I think immediately -- recognized a violation of federal law by Rove et al WH aides, No?

But, if it was done to destroy evidence of another crime, then it was OOJ.

offices a crime?

There are about 20 other aides who had email accounts on the RNC system.

Did Rove cease using the system altogether after, presumably, informing Fitz about deletions (assuming Rove did such)? He and 20 aides were still in violation of going around protocol prescribed by law, no?

(Maybe I'm misunderstanding the possible federal violation...which I believe Fitagerald would have authority to deal with, if -- as you say -- Fitzgerald knew about the private servers.)

...it's part of Sealed vs Sealed?

[...which I suspect you've already surmised ;) ]

Plamegate meets Attorneygate - It's Rove, Again!

why I think this is damning is if the FBI and Fitzgerald did not know about these email accounts, this would change the dynamic of the investigation as well as what was presented in discovery. While you are correct about the mandate being limited to the OVP, but what sorts of communications coming from Libby et al was Fitzgerald not privy to? When Rove was interviewed by the office of the Special Council and the FBI, did he omit knowledge of these email accounts? Did Rove and Libby communicate with each other? I don't know if I am making any sense. But like you, I'd like to know where the Rove subpoenas are, as well.

because Fitzgerald has plenary authority to investigate any violations of federal law extending from his investigations into the Plame matter...and we know the private email accounts used by WH aides are in violation of preservation statutes, No?

I'm sure he was asked many questions about internal communications, and he just didn't mention the account where he did 95% of his communication from.

James Comey, in his capacity as Acting Attorney General, with respect to the Justice Department's investigation into "the alleged unauthorized disclosure of a CIA employee's identity"...delegated his plenary authority to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 508, 509, 510, and 515, conferring upon him "all of the authority of the Attorney General" thereby transferring his status as Acting Attorney General, in this matter, to Fitzgerald.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=201658#233430

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=201658&mesg_id=233262

If Rove told Fitz about the deletions, there was no crime to charge Rove personally.

There is an implicit penalty, destruction of government property.

By definition the records are owned by the fed, not the president.

-Hoot

In fact, the threat of an Obstruction charge gave Fitz a powerful tool over Karl. There's a reason that Fitz didn't indict Karl -- the obvious reason is that Kark cut a deal and gave someone up. The only question is, was it Dick or Dubya, or both?