No Comment — February 26, 2008, 6:05 am

Rove’s Monday Whoppers

He calls himself “Grendel,” “Moby Dick,” and “Lord Voldemort.” He is the man ever behind the scenes, manipulating and driving the events on the surface without being seen. His hand is behind the hiring and firing of U.S. attorneys and his manipulations were a conscious effort to put federal prosecutors to work for partisan political purposes. And his involvement is so sensitive that the White House had adopted a scorched earth policy to thwart all Congressional efforts to probe it. Karl Rove won’t appear before Congress, deliver up his documents showing his communications or dealings with Justice Department matters or raise his hand, swear an oath and testify. But he has no compunction about talking about these matters on Fox News, where he knows he’ll get one fluff ball after the next and never be asked for follow-up. Moreover, he knows that Fox will go to the mat, and will dispense falsehoods to protect him, one of their own. Over the weekend, Karl Rove sent his lawyer Robert Luskin and his spokesman (and former Justice Department spokesman) Mark Corallo to lie for him. Today, he enters the lists, bravely lying for himself. Here’s his appearance on Fox News:

Rove states that he’s never met Jill Simpson, then he backtracks on that, owning up that, well, maybe he did. But “I never asked her to do a darn thing.”

Jill Simpson has said the opposite, and she has given much of her account, naming him, under oath and subject to cross examination. My hunch is that Karl Rove will do anything to avoid speaking under oath. Time for a subpoena? Karl Rove has been in a lot of campaigns in Alabama, and sat in a lot of conference rooms in Montgomery and elsewhere strategizing about them. And indeed, there are quite a few people who were present at these meetings.

But note the slithering here. Fox headlines that Rove has never met Simpson, that CBS never called for his comments, and that Simpson has never before made these statements implicating Rove. Each of these statements is untrue. Rove actually doesn’t offer up nearly so clear-cut a denial of having met Simpson–maybe he did, he says. Rove also now admits that he spoke with CBS, contradicting the statements made on his behalf earlier. He says it was “five months ago,” which is imprecise–the CBS interview with Rove occurred four months ago. He says he “will honor” the discussion being off the record, but of course Rove is the one who wanted it kept off the record, so what he really wants is for CBS to keep his interview secret. CBS should in fact now publish that interview, so we know what Rove said. And, on Fox News (of all places), he says that CBS is the National Enquirer of networks. Such are the thin reeds upon which Karl Rove builds his case.

I think we should hear Karl Rove out on this in some detail. He should be sworn in and testify subject to crossexamination. Then let’s see if he says the same thing he offers up to Fox now.

Rove has a long career as a campaign advisor. Simpson’s allegations are credible because they stack up perfectly with Rove’s record. He has long been the master of “opposition research,” who propels campaigns by smears and inuendo, with a real penchant for lurid sexual pieces (think about the whispering campaign he launched questioning the sexuality of Ann Richards, or the smears he directed at John McCain in South Carolina, relating to his adopted South Asian daughter, to cite just two prominent examples.) And he built his career shuttling between Texas and Alabama with an amazing series of coincidences in which federal prosecutors went after the targets of his political campaigns, turning his campaign into a cake walk. James Moore documented his abuse of the criminal justice system to take down the Texas Agriculture Commissioner shortly after he had been tapped by Republican Rick Perry (now the governor of Texas) to manage a campaign for that office. Read my interview with the author of the leading Karl Rove political biography, James Moore, here and focus on the cases of Mike Moeller and Peter McRae. This is very well documented, and it perfectly parallels what Rove is accused of doing in the Siegelman case. The short of it is simple. Simpson is accusing Rove of engaging in tactics, and of involving her in tactics, that are the hallmarks of the Rove campaign playbook. And that playbook also calls for Rove to aggressively deny accusations, always carefully building clever little escape hatches into his denials.

Rove will attempt to make Simpson into some sort of nutcase, of course, or rather he will have his hatchetmen at Fox and in the rest of his menagerie do it. But the road to the truth here still runs through the legal process. We need a prosecutor who will put Rove under oath, issue subpoenas to him and others to get the background documents, and expose the truth about how successfully masterminded a campaign to take a statehouse–by putting a governor in jail.

Rove Holding Banner Calling for Siegelman’s Release
To top off his antics from yesterday, Rove closed the day holding a “Free Don Siegelman” banner in Los Angeles, and giving a brief interview to Alan Breslauer. Here’s the YouTube:

And you can read the interview at the Brad Blog, here.

Share
Single Page

More from Scott Horton:

Conversation August 5, 2016, 12:08 pm

Lincoln’s Party

Sidney Blumenthal on the origins of the Republican Party, the fallout from Clinton’s emails, and his new biography of Abraham Lincoln

Conversation March 30, 2016, 3:44 pm

Burn Pits

Joseph Hickman discusses his new book, The Burn Pits, which tells the story of thousands of U.S. soldiers who, after returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, have developed rare cancers and respiratory diseases.

Context, No Comment August 28, 2015, 12:16 pm

Beltway Secrecy

In five easy lessons

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

February 2018

Notes to Self

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Within Reach

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Bodies in The Forest

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Minds of Others

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Modern Despots

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Before the Deluge

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Minds of Others·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Progress is impossible without change,” George Bernard Shaw wrote in 1944, “and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” But progress through persuasion has never seemed harder to achieve. Political segregation has made many Americans inaccessible, even unimaginable, to those on the other side of the partisan divide. On the rare occasions when we do come face-to-face, it is not clear what we could say to change each other’s minds or reach a worthwhile compromise. Psychological research has shown that humans often fail to process facts that conflict with our preexisting worldviews. The stakes are simply too high: our self-worth and identity are entangled with our beliefs — and with those who share them. The weakness of logic as a tool of persuasion, combined with the urgency of the political moment, can be paralyzing.

Yet we know that people do change their minds. We are constantly molded by our environment and our culture, by the events of the world, by the gossip we hear and the books we read. In the essays that follow, seven writers explore the ways that persuasion operates in our lives, from the intimate to the far-reaching. Some consider the ethics and mechanics of persuasion itself — in religion, politics, and foreign policy — and others turn their attention to the channels through which it acts, such as music, protest, and technology. How, they ask, can we persuade others to join our cause or see things the way we do? And when it comes to our own openness to change, how do we decide when to compromise and when to resist?

Illustration (detail) by Lincoln Agnew
Article
Within Reach·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

On a balmy day last spring, Connor Chase sat on a red couch in the waiting room of a medical clinic in Columbus, Ohio, and watched the traffic on the street. His bleached-blond hair fell into his eyes as he scrolled through his phone to distract himself. Waiting to see Mimi Rivard, a nurse practitioner, was making Chase nervous: it would be the first time he would tell a medical professional that he was transgender.

By the time he arrived at the Equitas Health clinic, Chase was eighteen, and had long since come to dread doctors and hospitals. As a child, he’d had asthma, migraines, two surgeries for a tumor that had caused deafness in one ear, and gangrene from an infected bug bite. Doctors had always assumed he was a girl. After puberty, Chase said, he avoided looking in the mirror because his chest and hips “didn’t feel like my body.” He liked it when strangers saw him as male, but his voice was high-pitched, so he rarely spoke in public. Then, when Chase was fourteen, he watched a video on YouTube in which a twentysomething trans man described taking testosterone to lower his voice and appear more masculine. Suddenly, Chase had an explanation for how he felt — and what he wanted.

Illustration by Taylor Callery
Article
Before the Deluge·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the summer of 2016, when Congress installed a financial control board to address Puerto Rico’s crippling debt, I traveled to San Juan, the capital. The island owed some $120 billion, and Wall Street was demanding action. On the news, President Obama announced his appointments to the Junta de Supervisión y Administración Financiera. “The task ahead for Puerto Rico is not an easy one,” he said. “But I am confident Puerto Rico is up to the challenge of stabilizing the fiscal situation, restoring growth, and building a better future for all Puerto Ricans.” Among locals, however, the control board was widely viewed as a transparent effort to satisfy mainland creditors — just the latest tool of colonialist plundering that went back generations.

Photograph from Puerto Rico by Christopher Gregory
Article
Monumental Error·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In 1899, the art critic Layton Crippen complained in the New York Times that private donors and committees had been permitted to run amok, erecting all across the city a large number of “painfully ugly monuments.” The very worst statues had been dumped in Central Park. “The sculptures go as far toward spoiling the Park as it is possible to spoil it,” he wrote. Even worse, he lamented, no organization had “power of removal” to correct the damage that was being done.

Illustration by Steve Brodner
Post
CamperForce·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

After losing their savings in the stock market crash of 2008, seniors Barb and Chuck find seasonal employment at Amazon fulfillment centers.

Chance that a Silicon Valley technology company started since 1995 was founded by Indian or Chinese immigrants:

1 in 3

A gay penguin couple in China’s Polar Land zoo were ostracized by other penguins and then placed in a separate enclosure after they made repeated attempts to steal the eggs of straight penguin couples and replace them with stones.

Trump’s former chief strategist, whom Trump said had “lost his mind,” issued a statement saying that Trump’s son did not commit treason; the US ambassador to the United Nations announced that “no one questions” Trump’s mental stability; and the director of the CIA said that Trump, who requested “killer graphics” in his intelligence briefings, is able to read.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today