Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
I agree that impeachment hearings would be highly unlikely. Thats not to say that some of the new Tea Party crowd wont introduce impeachment resolutions....they just wont reach the level of Judiciary Committee hearings.
The real issue is subpoena power...a power that is limited to the chairman of committees.
Darrell Issa, the current ranking member of the House Govt Oversight Committee has already said he would flood the administration with subpoenas if he assumes the chairmanship....on everything from the stimulus bill and health reform bill to alleged White House ties to ACORN and the White House role (wtf?) in the British "Climategate" controversy.
Much like the last Republican chairman of that committee who issued around 1,000 subpoenas of the Clinton administration between 1994 and 2000 (including a subpoena of the records of Socks, the Clinton cat and the Vince Foster suicide- murder by Hilary's cohorts!)...as opposed to the less than 50 subpoenas issues of the Bush administration in 2007-08 by Henry Waxman.
|
If what you describe above is an abuse of subpoena power, did democrats abuse subpoena power when Bush was in the WH?
What I said then was that Bush needed to defend executive privilege and maintain a proper balance of power with Congress. I seem to recall many here saying the Bush administration was being the most secretive in history and actually abusing his power - although most President's aggressively defended their executive powers when challenged. I fully expect, and I would want the Obama administration to do the same thing. It is far to easy for Congressional leaders to overstep the boundaries for short-term political gain. The integrity of the office of President needs to be preserved regardless of who is President. The voters will resolve any problems or affirm the administrations agenda in 2012.