deadline missed? -- karl rove's subpoenaed e-mail may lead to contempt of congress charges against alberto gonzales!
. . .Sen. Leahy requested the e-mails
first at the Committee’s oversight
hearing with the Attorney General
on April 19, 2007, and then again
in a letter to the Attorney General
on April 25, 2007. The Attorney
General has failed to respond to
those earlier requests.
[ed. note: click image, at
right, to view full-size letter.]
“You ignored the subpoena,
did not come forward today, did
not produce the documents and
did not even offer an explanation
for your noncompliance,”
the senators wrote. “Your action
today is in defiance of the Committee’s subpoena without explanation of any legal basis for doing so.”
Leahy and Specter set a deadline of 10 a.m. Friday, May 18, for a response.
“The Committee intends to get to the truth,” they wrote. . .
thinkprogress is reporting
that alberto gonzales
has missed the 2 p.m.,
e.d.t. deadline, today,
to turn over all of
karl rove's e-mail
in the possession
of his office. . .
i'd expect that sen.
patrick leahy will
wait until at least
5 p.m., today, to
issue a statement,
but i will run it
below -- when he
issues it. click on the
image of the subpoena, above, for the
background on this development. . .
sen. patrick leahy -- 05.15.07:
. . .We will see this afternoon whether
the Attorney General will comply with the
Committee’s subpoena requiring him to
produce to the Committee all of Mr. Rove’s
e-mails in the Department’s possession
related to the Committee’s investigation
or whether our efforts to learn the truth
will be met with more stonewalling. When
the Attorney General was before us last
month, I asked him whether he would
provide Mr. Rove’s e-mails in the
Department’s possession to the
Committee without a subpoena. . .
I did not hear back from him after the
hearing or in response to a follow up
letter I sent April 25th asking for a
response. I hope that the Attorney
General of the United States will
comply with a duly issued subpoena
of this standing Committee of the
Senate acting in its oversight capacity. . .
[ed. note: originally posted 05.15.07 at 2:18 PM;
floated to 5.16.07 for above development.]