"Bill O'Reilly: This is the Associated Press. Quote, “Former White House Political advisor, Karl Rove was deeply involved in the firing of the US attorney in New Mexico, according to White House emails and transcripts of closed door testimony released today.”And you say, what?
Carl Rove: Anybody can go to Rove.com and read the testimony, and that’s not what it says.
Bill O'Reilly: So the AP lied?
Carl Rove: AP has not read the document; they gotta go read the transcript of my interview." (FOX News)
Those interviews, along with over 5,000 pages of White House documents regarding the controversial US attorney firings in 2006 have been released to the public.
While Karl Rove denies his involvement in the decision to fire nine US attorneys, the media are characterizing him as a key player.
But does his involvement even matter? Our research shows the media are taking different perspectives.
Speaking with MSNBC, reporter Michael Isikoff says Rove was just engaging in politics as usual.
“US attorneys are political appointees; they can be replaced at the pleasure of the president for political reasons. They can’t be replaced to obstruct investigation, but if the President wants to have somebody who’s a buddy of Karl Rove replace a US attorney, there’s no reason he can’t do it.”
In his blog on CBS News, Andrew Cohen acknowledges the President’s power to fire attorneys, but says it just doesn’t look good.
“But it's equally true that it's terrible governance to dismiss for political reasons federal prosecutors who have consistently met or surpassed professional expectations and responsibilities. It's terrible form to lie about it.”
Now the question is, will Rove be prosecuted for his involvement? Washington Post reporter Carrie Johnson says Rove himself doesn’t seem too worried. In regards to an interview Johnson had with Rove, in which he denied any wrongdoing, Johnson adds...
“Characteristically, perhaps, he also took a swipe at Democrats for allegedly peddling false statements and "innuendoes" about him. Not the posture of a guy who feels he's on the firing line.”
But Mother Jones writer David Corn speculates about the fate of Rove’s career on MSNBC.
“Karl Rove now makes his living as a pundit, a so-called truth-teller, his own truth, and if this evidence turns out to indicate this guy isn’t to be trusted, that should have some impact, too.”
So what do you think of this case—abuse of power? Or just playing the political game?
