|
Banned
|
It is clear that neither party is committed to upholding the provisions of the constitution defining our rights we have clearly, for 208 years, not ceded to government authority.
Why is it then, that it is not obvious that a discussion of the appropriatness, and the probable pitfalls, of taking to arms, for the purpose of protecting our bill of rights, ourselves, is not now timely or appropriate?
In chronological order, a diary of ultimatums, postponements, excuses, and finally, accountability is "off the table", in the interests of "bi-partisanship":
Quote:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004339.php
U.S. Attorneys Investigation Waits on House Leadership
By Paul Kiel - October 3, 2007, 2:15PM
"The scandal at the Department of Justice has gone on long enough," said Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-IL) back in March. "Careers have been destroyed and legitimate public corruption cases have been derailed. It is time for accountability -- it is time for the truth."
Six months and several Department senior resignations later, it's a different time. The urgency is gone.
More than two months after the House Judiciary Committee passed contempt resolutions against White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former counsel Harriet Miers for ignoring committee subpoenas, it's still unclear when, or if, Democrats will hold a vote on the full floor.
The leadership has indefinitely delayed taking up the issue. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) told The Politico last month, “I don’t think anything is going to happen on that for a while,” and couldn't offer a range. Three weeks later, that hasn't changed.
And apparently scheduling concerns are not all that's at issue. A source familiar with the ongoing discussions told TPMmuckraker that getting the leadership to bring the contempt resolutions to the floor at all is an "uphill struggle."
An aide to the Democratic leadership, however, said that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is "committed" to bringing the votes to the floor. When? That's unclear. "We are working with the judiciary committee, consulting with the leadership and will bring it to the floor when we are ready," the aide said.
As we outlined last month, the contempt resolutions against Miers and Bolten constitute just one piece of the stalled push by Democrats to get information from the White House about the U.S. attorney firings. But no other piece is so near a court clash with the White House, which has so far successfully stonewalled the committee's inquiries. The court battle itself is likely to last many months.
The issue, Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) has argued, goes right to the heart of Congress' oversight prerogatives. After Miers didn't even show up to claim executive privilege, Conyers asked, "Are Congressional subpoenas to be honored or are they optional?... If we do not enforce this subpoena, no one will ever have to come before the House Judiciary Committee again."...
|
Quote:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004573.php
House Dems Moving Towards Contempt Vote
By Paul Kiel - October 26, 2007, 12:32PM
Better late than never. Three weeks ago, we reported that the House leadership seemed to be wavering in its pursuit of contempt citations for White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former counsel Harriet Miers. Both of them, remember, refused to even show up in response to a House Judiciary Committee subpoena relating to the U.S. attorney firings.
But now things seem to be moving along again. The Politico reports that vote counting has begun and quotes a House aide as saying that a vote is likely in the next couple of weeks.
The committee passed the resolutions in July, and once the House votes on them, they would be referred to the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C. What happens then will be, to say the least, interesting. Michael Mukasey was a noncommittal on that question during his confirmation hearing last week. And the Miers and Bolten contempt citations aren't likely to be the only ones.
The Dems are apparently confident that they could easily pass the resolutions despite no likely Republican crossovers. For his part, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) has put the emphasis on institutional integrity, rather than subjecting Harriet Miers to a frog march:
<i>Conyers said the contempt battle was not aimed at seeking criminal sanctions against Bolten and Miers personally, but would nonetheless surely spark a long legal fight over the reach of executive privilege.
“Remember – no handcuffs,” Conyers said in an interview Thursday, noting that contempt of Congress is a misdemeanor.</i>
|
Quote:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004640.php
Conyers Makes White House Final Offer before Contempt Vote
By Paul Kiel - November 5, 2007, 12:31PM
The wheels are once again in motion towards the first court battle between the Democratic Congress and the White House. After a months-long lull, preparations are underway for a vote in the House to find White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former counsel Harriet Miers in contempt of Congress.
Today, House Judiciary Committee Committee Chair John Conyers (D-MI) sent his final offer over to White House counsel Fred Fielding (see below). The letter lays out a process where Congressional investigators would get what they want -- documents and testimony concerning the U.S. attorney firings -- while bowing to some White House conditions. But there's a deal breaker in there. And that's Conyers' request for "on-the-record interviews" with current and former White House staffers. Ever since the spring, the White House has refused transcribed interviews, and there's no indication that having dragged out the struggle this long, the adminstration would accept that offer now....
|
Quote:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/005067.php
House Dems to Finally Vote on Contempt for White House Officials
By Paul Kiel - January 14, 2008, 12:47PM
From The Washington Post:
In its first couple of weeks after it returns tomorrow, the House is likely to take up contempt-of-Congress resolutions against White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers for their refusal to appear before Congress for questioning about the 2006 removal of nine U.S. attorneys, Democratic leadership aides said.
For those keeping track at home, it's been nearly six months since the House Judiciary Committee initially approved the contempt citations. As for what the timing might be on the Senate side, where the Senate Judiciary Committee recently approved contempt citations for Karl Rove and Bolten, it's not yet clear
|
Quote:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004701.php
House Dems Push White House Contempt Vote to December
By Paul Kiel - November 14, 2007, 3:12PM
December: a time of carols, sleigh bells, and contempt citations.
The House Democrats were set to hold a vote this Friday on whether to find White House officials in contempt of Congress for ignoring subpoenas related to the U.S. attorney firings investigation, The Politico reports. But no more. The vote, already delayed since July, has been pushed to December, at the earliest. The reason? The Politico quotes a "top House Democratic leadership aide": "[Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-NY)] has been saying that this week is not the time to do this, that it will step on our message on Iraq and FISA."
So at least former White House counsel Harriet Miers, who refused to even show up for a House Judiciary Committee hearing, can enjoy her Thanksgiving. Happy feasting, Harriet!
|
Quote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/8057.html
Top Dems stall Miers, Bolten contempt vote
By: John Bresnahan
January 23, 2008 07:35 AM EST
House Democrats will postpone votes on criminal contempt citations against White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, while congressional leaders work with President Bush on a bipartisan stimulus package to fend off an economic downturn, according to party leaders and leadership aides.
Senior Democrats have decided that holding a controversial vote on the contempt citations, which have already been approved by the House Judiciary Committee as part of its investigation into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, <h3>would “step on their message” of bipartisan unity in the midst of the stimulus package talks.</h3>
Bush, citing executive privilege, has refused to allow Bolten or Miers to testify before the House Judiciary panel about the prosecutor purge. And former deputy White House chief of staff Karl Rove was barred by the administration from appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the same issue.
<h3>“Right now, we’re focused on working in a bipartisan fashion on [the] stimulus,”</h3> said House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), indicating that the contempt vote is not expected for weeks, depending on how quickly the stimulus package moves.
Brendan Daly, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said “no decision has been made” as to when a criminal contempt vote would be held by the House.
The Judiciary Committee approved contempt citations against Bolten and Miers on July 25, but Pelosi has yet to bring the measures to the floor.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved similar contempt citations against Bolten and Rove shortly before Congress adjourned in December....
|
|