Republican Party

Desirous to Speak with Desiree

By Jay Newton-Small | @JNSmall | December 9, 2009 | +

Congressman Peter King had an awkward moment at the White House Monday night. Climbing the stairs in the East Wing to attend the President’s Holiday reception for Congress, the New York Republican bumped into White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers. The two exchanged pleasantries, never mentioning that King, the top Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, is looking to subpoena Rogers to compel her to tell her role in the party crasher scandal.

Today King will press on with the subpoena, although he’s holding out little hope. “A good number of Democrats at the last hearing said she should testify but I don’t think they’ll vote against the White House and the committee chairman,” King said in an interview. The White House invoked separation of powers to prevent Rogers from testifying, a move that raised many eyebrows on the Hill, especially after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went all the way to federal court to try and force George W. Bush advisers Karl Rove, Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers to testify not too long ago. Instead, the committee heard from the head of the Secret Service. “I’m a pretty strong supporter of executive privilege. But this clearly doesn’t involve advice to the president on Afghanistan, health care – it’s not a policy issue,” King said. “It’s totally inappropriate.”

Two subpoenas sure to be issued today: Tareq and Michaele Salahi, the party crashers at President Obama’s first State Dinner. Though, their lawyer warned the Washington Post not to expect much dishing: they plan on pleading the fifth.

In the meantime, King was gratified to see the White House has learned its lesson. Representatives from the Social Secretary’s office armed with clipboards and guest lists checked IDs outside the gates and again inside the security booths for the Holiday Party. “There were more people there than for the D-Day invasion,” King laughed.

Subscribe to Jay Newton-Small on Facebook
Related Topics: desiree rogers, party crashers, peter king, subpoena, Barack Obama, Congress, Democratic Party, Nancy Pelosi, Republican Party, White House

  • Latest on Swampland

    Barack Obama May 25, 2012

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    From our Partners

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    2012 Election May 25, 2012

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • pneogy

    Enough already.

  • spob

    Interesting from an Administration that promised transparency . . . .

  • http://www.ghostnote.com Cookie Puss

    Jimmy Berluti loves the subpoena.

  • grollican

    Peter King is an awkward moment. He embarrasses the human race every time he opens his mouth and reveals just what a waste of genetic material he represents.

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks, Jay. Did you go to that party? While playing spell check instead of world of warcraft, I found “Instead, the committee head from the head of the Secret Service” in para. 2, sorry about that.
    .
    Will the ID-checkers go too far now, such as if Peter King from Sports Illustrated showed up first, would Rep. Peter King be left outside yelling pottymouthed words that he’s the real PK? “Also,” did Sarah Palin hold a book-signing inside the WH lobby? BTW, will you, KT, or Kate have posts soon clearing up the real HCR “gang of 10” deal – PO still in / out, same plan as Congress for all of us instead, etc.? thanks

  • square1

    Correct me if I am wrong, but there appears to be a big difference between refusing to comply with a subpoena on concocted executive privilege grounds (e.g. Rove, Miers) and refusing to voluntarily appear on based on overblown separation of powers concerns (e.g. Rogers).

    BTW, the concern for Obama’s safety expressed by the GOP is truly touching.

  • cfukara

    Talk about persistence.
    JNS, what are you and Desiree fighting over?
    [Not cfukara for sure .. or can it be!]

  • Matt

    I’m sure Mr. King will also find a way to blame the Tiger Woods adultery fiasco on the White House, and then subpoena everyone from the president on down to apologize for it…

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Proof positive that we don’t always disagree.

    Not that I think there’s anything to be gained from her testifying except an opportunity for some R Congressmen to grandstand, but they are certainly with their rights to subpoena her and expect her to appear.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Square~
    The purpose behind executive privilege is to allow aides to be forthcoming to the President in their advice without fear that their personal thoughts will be subjected to Congressional vetting and public scrutiny. In this day and age of hypersensitive PC, it would be hard for anyone to comment to the President without offending some bloc of the American populace. They shouldn’t have to worry about this when giving advice to the President. Thus, “concocted” executive privilege it was not.
    ~
    As for Rogers, the administration has alluded to executive privilege in a matter that does not involve advice. That is concocted.
    ~
    If I am interpreting your views correctly, you do not support confidentiality of advisers to the President, yet you do support immunity for administration officials’ actions. Give advice, and you will be subpoenaed. Act irresponsibly and you will be protected.

  • http://svivar9087.newsvine.com/ svivar9087

    Thanks to the Secet Service, Desiree was given a reality check….she’s PART of a team, NOT the team !

blog comments powered by Disqus