Rove’s prior refusals to testify were based on claims of “absolute immunity” due to executive privilege — the idea that even former presidential advisers cannot be compelled to testify before Congress because of the confidentiality of their conversations with the president. But the legality of that claim was rejected by U.S. District Judge John Bates as part of the ongoing suit over executive privilege, House Judiciary Committee v. Harriet Miers.

Apparently, Rove has made it clear that despite the new administration, he still won’t be showing up to testify. In a letter to Rove’s attorney, Bob Luskin, Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) said he won’t delay the hearing any further, just so Rove can continue to blow them off:

Thus, absent an actual commitment by Mr. Rove to comply with the subpoena, I am not in a position to agree to yet a further delay. In essence, given Mr. Rove’s public statements that he does not intend to comply with the subpoena, I am puzzled as to why Mr. Rove needs a mutually convenient date to fail to appear.

Around, and around we go.

From the report:

The evidence in our investigation showed that Schlozman, first as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General and subsequently as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Acting Assistant Attorney General, considered political and ideological affiliations in hiring career attorneys and in other personnel actions affecting career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division. In doing so, he violated federal law – the Civil Service Reform Act – and Department policy that prohibit discrimination in federal employment based on political and ideological affiliations, and committed misconduct. The evidence also showed that Division managers failed to exercise sufficient oversight to ensure that Schlozman did not engage in inappropriate hiring and personnel practices. Moreover, Schlozman made false statements about whether he considered political and ideological affiliations when he gave sworn testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee and in his written responses to supplemental questions from the Committee.

Schlozman is no longer employed by the Department and, therefore, is not subject to disciplinary action by the Department. We recommend, however, that, if criminal prosecution is declined these findings be considered if Schlozman seeks federal employment in the future. We believe that his violations of the merit system principles set forth in the Civil Service Reform Act, federal regulations, and Department policy, and his subsequent false statements to Congress render him unsuitable for federal service.

Schlozman worked as the head of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, later replacing fired U.S. attorney Todd Graves in Kansas City, before finishing his work in the federal system at the agency’s headquarters. Schlozman’s claim to fame was his frequent invocation of replacing Clinton appointees with “good Americans.”

It appears that that Schlozman’s machinations to fill Justice with Bushies went far beyond classifications of “good Americans.” We’ll have more Schlozman-isms as the day progresses and we work through the report (PDF).