Rumor has it that Bush will nominate Gen. Michael Hayden to replace Porter Goss as the head of the CIA (see earlier post). The tal of this has met with some dissent Sunday from some from some influential Republicans in Congress as well as from Democrats.

“I do believe he’s the wrong person, the wrong place, at the wrong time,” said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich. “We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time.”

Hoekstra said on “Fox News Sunday” that having a general in charge of the CIA could create the impression among agents around the world that the agency is under Pentagon control. If he were to get the nomination, military officers would run all the major spy agencies, from the ultra-secret National Security Agency to the Defense Intelligence Agency. Hoekstra said “there’s ongoing tensions between this premiere civilian intelligence agency and the Department of Defense as we speak.”

The sentiment was echoed by Republican Rep. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, who said Hayden’s military background would be a “major problem,” and several Democrats who made the rounds of the Sunday talk shows. Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., said Hayden could leave agents with the impression that the CIA has been “just gobbled up by the Defense Department.”

On another note, the NY Times reports Karl Rove is worried about Republican’s losing in the mid-terms and the “prospect of the [Bush] administration spending its last two years being grilled by angry Democrats under the heat of partisan spotlights has added urgency to the efforts by Karl Rove and Mr. Bush’s political team to hang on to the Republican majorities in Congress.”

Ah, but that’s not Karl Rove’s only worry these days, is it? No, it’s not. PlameGate is still hanging over Rove’s head and Jim VandeHei of WaPo reports that “Rove’s time in limbo” is near and end in CIA/Plame leak case.

Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald is wrapping up his investigation into White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove’s role in the CIA leak case by weighing this central question:

Did Rove, who was deeply involved in defending President Bush’s use of prewar intelligence about Iraq, lie about a key conversation with a reporter that was aimed at rebutting a tough White House critic?

VandeHei reports, “Fitzgerald is weighing Rove’s foggy-memory defense against evidence he has acquired over nearly 2 1/2 years that shows Rove was very involved in White House efforts to beat back allegations that Bush twisted U.S. intelligence to justify the Iraq war, according to sources involved in the case.”

Rove is expected to “learn as soon as this month if he will be indicted — or publicly cleared of wrongdoing — for making false statements in the CIA leak case, according to sources close to the presidential adviser.”

An indictment would be devastating to a White House already battered by low poll numbers, a staff shake-up and a stalled agenda. If Rove is cleared, however, it would allow Bush’s longtime top aide to resume his central role as White House strategic guru without a legal threat hanging over him.

Note to Patrick Fitzgerald: Bring it On.

Filed under: Bush Admin, Congress, Democrats, Elections, In The News, Politics, Republicans | Get Permalink or trackback |