Low-key office launches high-profile inquiry
The Office of Special Counsel will investigate U.S. attorney firings and other political activities led by Karl Rove.
By Tom Hamburger
LA Times Staff Writer
April 24, 2007
WASHINGTON — Most of the time, an obscure federal investigative unit known as the Office of Special Counsel confines itself to monitoring the activities of relatively low-level government employees, stepping in with reprimands and other routine administrative actions for such offenses as discriminating against military personnel or engaging in prohibited political activities.
But the Office of Special Counsel is preparing to jump into one of the most sensitive and potentially explosive issues in Washington, launching a broad investigation into key elements of the White House political operations that for more than six years have been headed by chief strategist Karl Rove.
The new investigation, which will examine the firing of at least one U.S. attorney, missing White House e-mails, and White House efforts to keep presidential appointees attuned to Republican political priorities, could create a substantial new problem for the Bush White House.
First, the inquiry comes from inside the administration, not from Democrats in Congress. Second, unlike the splintered inquiries being pressed on Capitol Hill, it is expected to be a unified investigation covering many facets of the political operation in which Rove played a leading part.
"We will take the evidence where it leads us," Scott J. Bloch, head of the Office of Special Counsel and a presidential appointee, said in an interview Monday. "We will not leave any stone unturned."
(The rest is here.)
By Tom Hamburger
LA Times Staff Writer
April 24, 2007
WASHINGTON — Most of the time, an obscure federal investigative unit known as the Office of Special Counsel confines itself to monitoring the activities of relatively low-level government employees, stepping in with reprimands and other routine administrative actions for such offenses as discriminating against military personnel or engaging in prohibited political activities.
But the Office of Special Counsel is preparing to jump into one of the most sensitive and potentially explosive issues in Washington, launching a broad investigation into key elements of the White House political operations that for more than six years have been headed by chief strategist Karl Rove.
The new investigation, which will examine the firing of at least one U.S. attorney, missing White House e-mails, and White House efforts to keep presidential appointees attuned to Republican political priorities, could create a substantial new problem for the Bush White House.
First, the inquiry comes from inside the administration, not from Democrats in Congress. Second, unlike the splintered inquiries being pressed on Capitol Hill, it is expected to be a unified investigation covering many facets of the political operation in which Rove played a leading part.
"We will take the evidence where it leads us," Scott J. Bloch, head of the Office of Special Counsel and a presidential appointee, said in an interview Monday. "We will not leave any stone unturned."
(The rest is here.)
Powered by Blogger
2 Comments:
Shades of Enron using Anderson Consulting while employing Arthur Anderson as its auditor.
I can hear the questions now, “Mr. Attorney General, do you recall doing anything improper?” “Mr. Rove, same question?” … “Thanks for your forthright and immediate answers … we’ll publish a report of our findings in … oh, in about 19 months.”
All this is a smokescreen so that Bush can repeat his Plame-mantra “I will not comment on any ongoing investigation.”
If he really wanted an investigation, why not a special prosecutor? My nomination would be David Iglesias … he’s out of work right now and knows a little about the situation.
Whoa, be careful here! I work for Accenture (the former Andersen Consulting) and have for ten years and while Andersen Consulting rose from Arthur Andersen, the two companies have been separate corporations since the late 1980's. In 1998, AC filed for a formal split from the umbrella corporation that governed redundant functions for both companies (HR, travel, benefits, etc...). Accenture was not involved with either Arthur Andersen or Enron on any level in any capacity when the Enron scandal exploded in 2001.
Wikipedia has a very accurate flow of events regarding Arthur Andersen and Enron and Accenture had only the misfortune of sharing the same Andersen name. The AC name change to Accenture had nothing to do Enron.
Post a Comment
<< Home