TPM pointed to the recently released transcripts of Senate Judiciary Committee interviews with Rove, as well as e-mails on the subject.

“Rogers would be the dream” candidate to replace Iglesias, Jennings wrote to his boss in a January 6, 2007 e-mail, a month after Iglesias was fired.

Jennings was an ambitious operative intimately familiar with the political landscape in New Mexico.  As his bio states:

Before he joined the White House staff, President Bush’s re-election campaign asked Scott to move to New Mexico to manage its efforts there in 2004. Scott and his team flipped New Mexico from blue-to-red, one of only two states to go that way between 2000 and 2004. Scott’s efforts caught the attention of the White House, landing him in Washington.

Although Jennings had never met Iglesias, he did know Rogers and other state GOP figures. Once he moved Washington to work for Rove and Bush, Jennings invited Rogers and another state GOP lawyer, Mickey Barnett, to the White House for a breakfast. During testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2007, U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., asked Jennings why, after the breakfast, Jennings asked the White House liaison to the Justice Department, Monica Goodling, to meet with the two New Mexicans “on a sensitive issue.”

Rogers had been a vocal critic of Iglesias, who he said had not been aggressive enough in pursuing charges of voter fraud. In 2004, Rogers pushed Iglesias repeatedly to pursue voter registration fraud cases, specifically against ACORN. Voter fraud was an issue he believed, if pushed properly, could help Republicans win.

In the transcripts released yesterday, House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Adam B. Schiff, D-Calif., pursues, a long line of questions about voter fraud, specifically about what the investigators see as the attempt by Rove to use allegations of voter fraud to their political advantage. The questions suggest that Rove wanted Iglesias to make voter fraud an issue in New Mexico because he would be seen as impartial.

From page 37 of the transcript:

Schiff: Suggesting that one party was engaged in voter fraud, whether it was true or not, could have a political impact on an election, couldn’t it?

Rove: As I have said twice before, a de minimis impact. And it also you are — implicit in your question is that only one party is engaged in voter fraud. That has not been my experience.

Schiff: Now, if you went to New Mexico, for example, and made an allegation of voter fraud, by virtue of your position as a political adviser to the President, that would tend to be discredited by some voters. Am I right?

Rove: Every argument in politics generates a counter argument, yes.

Schiff: And the fact of your position, though, would have an effect on how voters would perceive your raising the issue.

Rove: Yes.

Schiff: That issue would have more impact if the accusation came from a neutral party. Am I right?

Rove: Like the Albuquerque Tribune, yes.

Schiff: Or like a U.S. Attorney. Am I right?

Rove: I am not certain that — you may have the view that U.S. Attorneys ought to be used as people making political accusations in political campaigns. That is not my view.

Schiff: But a U.S. Attorney making an allegation of voter fraud would carry much more weight than if Karl Rove, political adviser to the President, made that allegation. Am I right?

And it continues with this exchange on page 41, where Rogers’ name comes up in a discussion of voter fraud:

Schiff: Take a look at page 161 and 162 of the OIG report. That is the other binder in front of you. Do you know a Republican from New Mexico named Pat Rogers, who is now a member of the executive committee of the Republican National Committee?

Rove: Yeah, I know of him, yes.

Schiff: And how do you know of him?

Rove: He is a long-time Republican activist in the State.

Schiff: The OIG report quotes an e-mail Mr. Rogers sent to a number of people associated with the New Mexico Republican Party as follows: “I believe the voter ID issue should be used now at all levels, Federal, State, legislative races, and Heather Wilson’s race. You are not going to find a better wedge issue. I have got to believe the voter ID issue would do Heather more good than another ad talking about how much Federal taxpayer money she has put into the State education system and Social Security. This is the single best wedge issue ever in new New Mexico.” He then goes on to talk about a lawsuit they plan to file concerning voter registrations by ACORN. Isn’t it correct, Mr. Rove, that some Republicans active in the Republican National Committee believed that this was a great wedge issue?

Rove: Mr. Rogers obviously did. I don’t.

Schiff: Did you ever pass on complaints about voter fraud by groups affiliated or leaning towards Republicans?

Rove: I don’t recall.

Also released were zillions of e-mails pertaining to the fired U.S. attorneys, including this gem from state Sen. Rod Adair, R-Roswell, who had e-mailed Rove to weigh in on the discussion of a replacement for Iglesias. Adair wrote that although Rogers would be “a fantastic choice,” he didn’t want him to be nominated because, “he is simply too valuable an asset elsewhere.”

Here’s the whole thing:

—— Forwarded Message

From: Rod Adair

,Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 11:56:05 -0500

To: Karl Rove <kr@georgewbush.com>

Conversation: US Attorney .

Subject: US Attorney

This Is a rare moment’when a matter is of such importance

that I must contact you.

The Albuquerque Journal this morning reported four names .

in consideration.for US· Attcirney for New Mexico. Three

are quite acceptable, the fourth would be a disaster. (Actually

Rogers would be a fantastic ·cholce, but it would be my hope

that he would never accept it – which I. am also certain Is

the case – ·in that he is simply too valuable an asset elsewhere.)

The singular wrong pick In this group would be Chuck Peifer.

He is, in shorthand, a wuss.

…If you are looking for someone who will follow the law scrupulously,

‘be fair, be honest, and be of service to the nation, all four~ even

Peifer, would be qualified (none more than’ Rogers, who,better not

get it). But if you are looking forsomeone who will do all the above

AND withstand any criticism, stand up to theWard ChurcbillLMkhaeL

Moore-bulliel;-Qf-the-world-and:norwony about critiCism ‘for doing

his job” the PEIFER IS DEFINITELY NOT THE CHOICE.

After receiving this message from Adair, Rove forwarded it to Jennings, asking “What is the situation here?” To which Jennings responded:

—— Forwarded Message

—-From:-SJennings@gwb43.com

Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2007 12:42:27 -0500

To: Karl Rove <KR@georgewbush.com>

Conversation: US Attorney

Subject: Re: US Attorney

Domenici wants Peifer.

Our political team wants Bibb, but Dornenici doesn’t like him for some reason•

..Rogers would be the dream, but won’t do it.

The other is .a throw-away name.

After Iglesias was fired, Rogers continued to pursue voter fraud allegations. In October 2008, just before the presidential election, he and other state GOP members (including former state Rep. Justine Fox Young, an associate of Barnett’s) claimed they had “bombshell” evidence of voter fraud at a press conference, handing out copies of voter registration cards and documentation suggesting that the registrations were fraudulent.

Days later, the claims fell apart as the allegedly fraudulent voters began appearing at press conferences to demonstrate that they were, in fact, real people and legally registered.

Also in 2008, in his capacity as attorney for the Republican Party of New Mexico, Rogers hired a private investigator to investigate possible voter fraud.

The private investigator’s visits to the homes of several voters resulted in two voter intimidation lawsuits, one filed by the ACLU and the other by the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, and the cases also attracted the attention of investigators from the Department of Justice.

Ousted U.S. Attorney David Iglesias

E-mails released today may appear to indicate that someone in the White House had the race between former U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., and Democratic challenger Patricia Madrid in mind when discussing former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias’ job performance in the weeks before he was fired.

But if Wilson is to be believed, the FBI was investigating Madrid at the time, and a reference to Madrid in the e-mails had to do with that probe, not the election.

The e-mail in question was sent from White House staffer Scott Jennings to White House Political Director Karl Rove on Oct. 15, 2006.

“… The US Attorney in PA has no trouble going after (former Rep. Curt) Weldon, so why should the US Attorney in New Mexico be shy about doing his job on Madrid,” it states.

The e-mail was among thousands of pages of documents released to the public today by the House Judiciary Committee following its investigation into the 2006 firings of Iglesias and several other U.S. attorneys. The committee’s chairman, John Conyers, D-Mich., said the documents, which include e-mails and transcripts of testimony from Rove and Harriet Miers, prove that “Karl Rove and his cohorts at the Bush White House were the driving force behind several of these firings, which were done for improper reasons.”

“When Mr. Iglesias said his firing was a ‘political fragging,’ he was right,” Conyers said in a news release.

In an interview, Iglesias agreed, saying Jennings’ e-mail and others in a chain started by Wilson “confirm my worst fear, that Heather wanted me to disregard my role as a law-enforcement officer and act as a political operative.”

“Heather wanted me to file a politically advantageous prosecution to help her out, but we had to stay out of politics, and they never understood that,” he said.

E-mail came the day before phone call to Iglesias

Wilson and former U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R.N.M, separately called Iglesias in October 2006 to discuss an ongoing criminal investigation into the stealing of $4.2 million in taxpayer money in the metro court scandal, which involved a high-ranking Democrat. At the time, Wilson was in a tough re-election battle against Madrid that she won weeks later by fewer than 1,000 votes out of about 211,000 cast.

Iglesias alleges that Domenici and Wilson pressured him to speed indictments against former state Senate President Manny Aragon and others involved in the case in an attempt to sway voters, a charge both deny. Days after the election, Iglesias was fired.

A special prosecutor is currently investigating whether obstruction of justice or other charges should be filed against anyone involved in the U.S. attorney firings and the congressional investigations into the firings.

Wilson’s phone call, Iglesias said in the interview, came a day after she started the e-mail chain that involved Jennings on the morning of Oct. 15. Wilson’s e-mail, sent to two of her staffers and Domenici’s then-chief of staff Steve Bell, included an Associated Press article about an FBI investigation into allegations against Weldon, a Republican from Pennsylvania.

“FBI or those close to them are talking about public corruption cases opngoing (sic) in other states,” Wilson wrote in the e-mail.

The e-mail was forwarded to Jennings by Bell, who wrote, “Seems like other USAttorneys can do their work even in election season… And FBI has already admitted they have turned over their evidence to the USA in NM and are merely awaiting his action.”

Jennings forwarded the e-mail to Rove, along with his own message about Madrid. (To read the e-mails, click here and scroll to page 15.)

Madrid under investigation

Wilson, who is considering running for governor next year, did not immediately respond to a message sent via Facebook. But she provided a statement to the Albuquerque Journal indicating that the documents released today “confirm that I did not have any communication with the Administration concerning anything related to Mr. Iglesias’ performance before the final decision was apparently made to dismiss him.”

Wilson pointed to a letter she released in September 2008. The letter, written in response to an inquiry from James Meade in the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), states that her Oct. 15, 2006 e-mail was not related to the U.S. House race but was related to “an FBI inquiry concerning my opponent, Attorney General Patricia Madrid, which occurred while she was running for Congress in 2006.”

The letter states that the FBI asked in June 2006 for information about Madrid’s connection to the political action committee Justice for America. Earlier, Wilson, Domenici and former U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce filed a related complaint with the Federal Election Commission, the letter states.

The letter contains no other details about the probe.

From the Wilson letter to Meade:

“The AP story on October 15, 2006 caught my eye because the FBI, or someone close to the FBI, had leaked information about an investigation of Representative Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania to the media.  I believed it was possible we would see a similar leak from law enforcement concerning Mrs. Madrid and that we could be asked by the media to comment on it.

“My staff had contingency press guidance that, if asked, we would confirm that we had received an inquiry from the FBI about Attorney General Madrid and we were cooperating with law enforcement. The recipients of my (Oct. 15, 2006) e-mail knew about the FBI inquiry and the contingency press guidance. This e-mail was intended to be a ‘heads up’ to them. “

The probe of Madrid was not revealed publicly until Wilson’s 2008 letter to Meade was released to the media, but even then the Meade letter was not widely covered by journalists.

In an interview, Madrid said she heard in 2006 from “a number of sources… that the FBI was threatening me.”

“If there was an investigation of me, I’m sure that they were put up to it by Karl Rove, Domenici and Heather Wilson. They instigated all of that,” Madrid said, adding that any allegations made against her were baseless.

“I guarantee you, if the FBI and Iglesias and Karl Rove had had anything on me, they would have used it. They didn’t. They had nothing,” she said.

It looks like Domenici isn’t the main target of the investigation by federal prosecutor Nora R. Dannehy — even if he might be eventually implicated in some sort of wrongdoing.

Dropping a subpoena on Domenici may have at least as much to do with the conduct of Justice Department officials as about Domenici, who retired from the Senate this year.

They are going after people in the George W. Bush administration. Did someone say Karl Rove?

The prosecutor is going to talk to Scott Jennings, the former White House deputy of political affairs. He is a former aide to none other than… Rove. Rove has said, according to the AP, that he will cooperate with the investigation.

Jennings, it appears, was the go-between for Domenici to get his complaints about former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias to Rove. Rove, of course, had the ear of President Bush and was among Bush’s most powerful advisers.

Iglesias was eventually fired for reasons that still remain unclear.

Jennings’ lawyer, Mark Paoletta, said, “It is my understanding that Scott is not a target in this investigation.”

Jennings was a footnote in a previous subpoena when Rove was subpoenaed by the Senate Judiciary Committee but failed to appear. Jennings, who was also subpoenaed, did appear, but basically refused to say anything.

Jennings repeatedly answered, “Senator, pursuant to the president’s assertion of executive privilege, I must respectfully decline to answer.”"It sounds to me like the American taxpayers are paying you to stonewall,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., told Jennings after his refusal to answer during Leahy’s first round of questions.

Perhaps Dannehy will find Jennings more forthcoming than Leahy did.