Karl: Get Iglesias.

“‘Under the Bush regime, honest and well-performing US Attorneys were fired for petty patronage, political horse trading and, in the most egregious case of political abuse of the US Attorney corps — that of US Attorney Iglesias — because he refused to use his office to help Republicans win elections,’ Conyers said. ‘When Mr. Iglesias said his firing was a ‘political fragging,’ he was right.‘” The House Judiciary Committee releases the information they’ve collected on the US Attorney scandal, and — hold on to your hats, people — it looks like Karl Rove has been less than truthful with Congress about his role in the illegal firings. A huge surprise, I know.

So…are political firings and lying to Congress still against the law these days, or is the plan to treat these particular criminal offenses like we do torture? In the meantime, I’d expect Rove is on the phone right this very moment, imploring his good friends at FreedomWorks and the like to dial up the crazies for the next few news cycles.

Update: More comes to light on Harriet Miers’ involvement as well.

No, you back down.

“As the letter from the Acting Attorney General explained in considerable detail, the assertion of Executive Privilege here is intended to protect a fundamental interest of the Presidency: the necessity that a President receive candid advice from his advisors and that those advisors be able to communicate freely and openly with the President, with each other, and with others inside and outside the Executive Branch.” Dubya invokes executive privilege again in response to the Leahy/Conyers letter of a week ago, prompting further outrage among congressional Dems and increasing the likelihood of a protracted legal standoff. “Speaking on the floor of the Senate Monday afternoon, Leahy blasted what he called ‘the White House disdain for our system of checks and balances.’ ‘What is the White House trying to hide by refusing to hand over this evidence?’ he said.”

Leahy/Conyers: Not so Fast.

“We had hoped our Committees’ subpoenas would be met with compliance and not a Nixonian stonewalling that reveals the White House’s disdain for our system of checks and balances…The veil of secrecy you have attempted to pull over the White House by withholding documents and witnesses is unprecedented and damaging to the tradition of open government by and for the people that has been a hallmark of the Republic.” In a “barbed” letter to the administration, Judiciary Committee Chairmen Conyers and Leahy demand that Dubya explain his rationale for executive privilege (which he invoked earlier in the week to thwart subpoenas concerning the persecuted prosecutors case.) Thus far, the White House has described the letter as “another overreach.“

Signs of Trouble.

“‘At least it makes clear the signing statements aren’t solely for staking out a legal position, with the president just saying, “I don’t have to do these things, but I will,”‘ Fein said. ‘In fact they are not doing some of these things. You can’t just vaporize it as an academic question.‘” Also in the administration malfeasance department, a new study by Congress’s Government Accountability Office finds that more often than not Dubya has been ignoring the laws he’s flagged in signing statements as not in tune with his imperial mood. “‘The administration is thumbing its nose at the law,’ said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), who requested the GAO study and legal opinion along with Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.). ‘This GAO opinion underscores the fact that the Bush White House is constantly grabbing for more power, seeking to drive the people’s branch of government to the sidelines,’ Byrd said in a joint statement with Conyers.”

More Subpoenas Sent.

“By refusing to cooperate with congressional committees, the White House continues its pattern of confrontation over cooperation. The White House cannot have it both ways–it cannot stonewall congressional investigations by refusing to provide documents and witnesses while claiming nothing improper occurred.” After e-mails surface showing their involvement in responding to the persecuted prosecutor fervor (and after an attempt to hold a no-confidence vote on Gonzales is derailed by the Senate GOP), former White House counsel (and Supreme Court nominee) Harriet Miers and former White House political director Sara Taylor are subpoenaed by the House and Senate Judiciary committees to ascertain what they know about the scandal. “‘This subpoena is not a request, it is a demand on behalf of the American people,’ Conyers said.”

Now Dubya has a Monica problem.

Ah, I do love me that oversight. On the persecuted prosecutor front, the House Judiciary votes 32-6 to grant Gonzales aide Monica Gooding limited immunity, so that she may testify with impunity about the shady goings-on in Dubya’s Justice Department. “‘She was apparently involved in crucial discussions over a two-year period with senior White House aides, and with other senior Justice officials, in which the termination list was developed, refined and finalized,’ Conyers said.” Meanwhile, despite Dubya’s reaffirmed support of late, more Republican senators call for Gonzales’ ousting, including Norm Coleman (MN), Lamar Alexander (TN), and Susan Collins (ME).