Many vices have teeth. Some (although not all) vises have no teeth however.

Did Yglesias Spelling(tm) infect TPMMedia prior to his departure? ;-)

Cranky

So, short of impeachment, an administation can just say bugger off, and ignore congress?

IF that is the case, then this administration will. And it sets a horrible precedent, and shows a very real weakness in our structures of our democracy.

I know Rep. Whitehouse was looking at inherent contempt. How does this figure in? I take it that is the court route?

The Bush Admin will try to run out the clock, whatever that takes. Bet on it. They spent 6 years without meaningful oversight and they clearly see no reason to care about the Dems' attempts to bring it back. They'll just spin everything as partisan attacks (ignoring the few principled Repubs left), and continue to break the law until they leave on January 20th, 2009.

Some vices -- like meth -- will make you lose your teeth.

I have a question about the argument that Bush could contest the subpoena through the courts until his term ends. Can't the matter still be pursued after Bush's term is over? If criminal conduct is found, couldn't Rove, for example, still be indicted, tried and even convicted? I would love the truth to come out sooner rather than later, but I hope the misconduct will not just be dropped because Bush is no longer in office.

So, in reality, Congress does not really have subpoena power at all. It's subpoena powers are entirely notional --a theoretical fiction

...except, of course, when it comes to subpoenaing ordinary citizens.

My recurring theme is this; if the Congress doesn't make this administration pay somehow for thoer disdain for the Constitution, the rule of law and tradition, then Bush sets a precedent for the next President to be just as irresponsible and arrogant as he is.

To the right wingnuts who support Bush in everything; imagine President Hillary using Bush as a role midel for her Presidency.

Could the Senate Judiciary Committee make Mrs. Gonzales testify under oath as to who made that call from the White House? If it is not she who would be incriminated by her reply, would she be able to invoke the fifth?

It should also be noted that 2001 was the last time anyone asked Bush for anything more consequential than the White House lunch menu. Just you all wait and see how many times Bush tries to invoke exec privilege between now and Jan. 2009.

should be spelled vise, not vice.
this is an extremely disheartening analysis. which doesn't mean it's wrong.
it just means these crooks are going to get away with it.

security code: where, as in where will it all end?

Is it then the idea to subpoena the terminus of the Email chain rather then the origin ? If you want to know what Karl Wrote , don't ask Karl , he's in the White House. Ask the recipients. While RNC swine do act like another branch of the gov, they aren't, and so might they not be more susceptible to real legal threat ?
The President and the Actual President Cheney can claim privilege for any reason and will , including denying the people the video tape of Exxon writing the next decade of energy policy , oddly slanting toward fossil fuel, but I seriously doubt they can extend that umbrella all the way to the RNC , which is I believe no more an organ of the government than the local 4-H is .
I would nominaly suggest the RNC don't want the publicity of pugnatious protracted legal wrangling to avoid coughing up Karl'd Doom , but then I remember they couldn't care less about public perception, thus the polls.
Is there precedent for asking for the letter from the person who got it in the mail rather than from the note pad of the person who wrote it ? As I understand it , that's what current subpoenas are asking , for Rove emails from recipients to avoid exactly this tangle . Any experts still around?
Security word flag , as in flag anything from " KR@RNC/littleattwater.crook"

I agree that their plan is to wait out the clock. So it seems to me the right response is us to bother the MSM about covering the stonewall/contempt of Congress, and add those to the reasons for impeachment.

I don't care if a (successful) impeachment vote is held weeks or even DAYS before the transfer of power in January 2009 -- it is one important step for the US to show it is not completely irresponsible politically.

Impeachment is a show of accountability. Not sufficient, but necessary.

Security code = soap, as in time to CLEAN THIS PLACE UP.

To repeat what Josh already noted (and while the idea isn't original to TPM, that's where *I* read it first), The White House will stall, delay, and flat-out ignore any reality it doesn't like.

This is their game plan -- to run out the clock. The media runs on the sound bite, the shallow, two-sentence pronouncement, and the Bobblehead or Puddinhead pundits -- so, when the manufactured hoopla of the Presidential Election begins, it will tend to down out any (including the faux) analysis -- on the airwaves, at least.

This assumes that the Democratic leadership in the Congress keeps playing the Repub's game -- and it doesn't appear that any paradigim-busting actions are on the horizon. It's politics as usual, with the Democrats often acting as if they were still the minority party.

The country wants a strong response ... not an over-the-top response; a strong one. If someone would only stand *up* to these creatures, articulate what we all know to be true, and do so in a clear, forceful voice -- then the walls would come a-tumbling down. Believe it.

If the best we can do is offer Senator Reid's head-shaking disappointment and pursed-lipped disapproval, as he did last week, as our response to the monstrous crimes committed against the American People and against civilization by this pack of animals, then we're well and truly screwed.

If that's the best to offer the American people, then we should all just get it over with. We should just finish what Bush and his cronies have started -- the destruction of the United States Of America -- and elect another cretinous figurehead. Romney's grasp of reality seems to be equal to our current Sainted Leader's.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/27/113945/241

This is an article about "inherent contempt." (Please see my previous comment above.)

I agree with Puffy - pursue them through the courts if necessary. If they have commited high crimes they can still be prosecuted. Or at least be exposed to the world as the liars, cheats and criminals they are.

I know this has been said many times before. If these subpoenas issued by the Dems can't really generate anything meaningful like accountability, then the Dems look even more "gutless" !!! An important question for the 2008 election,why should I knock myself out to elect more Dems? How can they really effect anything?

Forget Gonzales, it's time for a "no confidence" vote for Bush. And no damned delays and threatnings, either. Just DO IT!!!

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

So the answer goes something like this: In the past, the White House and Congress have contended on these issues until they finally reach some sort of compromise, so judging by the past, we should expect some compromises to be reached.

I am not reassured in the least. I don't believe for a minute that the past should be any indicator of what this lawless White House will do to protect turdblossom. There will be no compromises. Subpoenas will not be honored. Congress will continue to be told to f___-off. Short of impeachment or immediate appointment of a special prosecutor who finds criminal wrongdoing with all due speed, tb and W will never answer for what they have done.

All of these experts expect business as usual and blind themselves to the reality around them. When the Executive branch (who control all the troops, including the guard) joins forces with the Judicial department(who controls the FBI and all the police) it leaves the Legislative branch powerless with no one to even enforce subpoenas. Has this administration taken control of the Judicial branch? It depends on when push comes to shove. Consider this:
With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.
In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.”

Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

He laid this all out in a document entitled “National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”
Under this control subpoenas are pointless. Rice and Rove and the DoJ etc. now see the Legislative branch as powerless. They laugh at impeachment, or any oversight from congress knowing they are powerless to stop Bush or subpoena any of the players. Ask your "experts" to address the issue of unregulated power coming from this administration. Everything else is just "gumming it to death"

Even if Bush puts off the investigation until he leaves office, he must be pursued. The law must prevail.

Besides the Republicans will not let him drag the party down. They will join the chorus for impeachment before the end of the summer.

We've got to go to court, though Senator Whitehouse's assertion may well prove true.

Not to do so is to put The Constitution in the proverbial shredder.

Security Code: White -- sheesh, ain't that irony.

The question everyone should be asking themselves now is: Why are the Republicans in Congress such lily-livered sycophants? What is it that the WH has on them...compromising photos with House interns? e-mails from Abramoff? This administration could NEVER have gotten away with gutting the Constitution and turning the DOJ into a political arm of the RNC without the complicity of the Vichy GOP. There is not a single backbone among them. Dems can't get anywhere with subpoenas or any other approach to WH accountability without the support of at least some of the Republicans. They need to be warned out loud in no uncertain terms that we will hold THEM accountable if the Dems fail. We will turn out against them in 2008, 2010, 2012 and make them pay, and pay, and pay.

More and more, our leaders are morphing into the pigs of "Animal Farm". We are seeing the accountability and consequences amongst those in charge diminishing to zero, as the accountability and consequences for the rest of us in the farm grows. Isn't it ironic that we, as a nation, are actually losing our democracy as we attempt to form democracies elsewhere. Our actions seem to show that we are giving our Constitution to other countries because... well... we aren't really using it anymore.
Sad fact is... the democrat controlled house doesn't appear to be attempting to do anything to change the rules. Their actions seem to show that their only goal is to make sure that they will be the ruling pigs.

Bushco may well stonewall this to doomsday, but that doesn't mean there will be no consequences. They have to rely on Republican solidarity, and every time they stonewall they make it harder on the R's to hang tough, especially as the election season gets closer. The cracks are already showing and by fall there will be mass defections (if not sooner). This affects anything the WH wants to get through Congress, including further war funding.

Also, even if they never get a single one of Rove's emails, he sent them to someone - they can subpoena those emails. The vise, like thumbscrews, is best tightened S-L-O-W-L-Y.

I have lived through numerous congressional investigations in my 62+ years. The striking difference between what we are now witnessing is that we ARE witnessing it.

Newspapers have been a part of the political landscape since our Repiblic began. They were the primary source of news and events. The telegraph hastenen the spread of news next, with radio soon following. Television only came on the scene in the late 1940's and had a major impact in the deliverly of news and information. Politics and politicians had to addapt to each new medium

These technological advances, ave now been overshadowed by the internet. Obviously, we are a part of something different that has yet to be fully understood or utilized.

Instead of a scholarly paper on the subject let me give you an example: I watched Comey testify on the internet, every word. Did you miss it? Go to C-SPAN and watch it. Later I saw a FOX (unfair and off-balanced) edited clip. It completely distorted the impact of the testimony. The point is, I saw something that I couldn't have seen if this was the 1970's AND I have the ability to show what I have seen to others.

Many of you, I suppose, might think things are moving slow right now, in regards to wanting the President and his minions brought to justice. You can help, especially if you have computer skills...

These dumb bastard republicans have done so many illegal things and told so many lies that there is no way they can eliminate all traces of their evildoing. You've got the skills to find out things to share not just with the rest of us, but the whole wide world!

I asked my Christian Conservative friend's wife if she watck O'Riley's Talking Points segment and when she said yes I told her to check out the TMP website. LOL

We're ahead of the repugs (this I love because my CC friends have 6 pugs) in use of this technology, let's keep the process going and growing.

I appreciate the optimism that things will be resolved without court.

However, we're in a different era: This Bush adminstiration has committed war crimes, and ignored Geneva; and ignored the FISA court. To think that it would bother to listen to Congress or the courts seems a stretch.

I take issue with this: "But to think that will actually happen 'is a naive way' of looking at Congressional investigations. No top government official has ever been indicted for failing to respond to a Congressional subpoena." I think it is reasonable to assume the President will do something unprecedented, but that the country and Congress will not do anything about it -- short of impeachment.

Again, I appreciate the optimism of "what should not happen," and "what the President will most likely do," but this President continues to ignore the Constution, laws, and precedent and Congress does nothing. I fully expect this President to do the unprecedented, and would not be surprised if he directs -- as he has the power to do -- for Congress to go into recess.

By taking all impeachment options off the table, the Congress is pretending the President is going to recirpcoate. No, he's going to take advantage of that pre-decision to tie Congress' hands, and further abuse his power.

As a side note, I appreciate that some lawyers are specuating of what will never happen, yet again this president defies that.

Time to wake up the legal community: This President isn't going to necessarily cooperate; and it's not prudent to rely on precedent to say what the President will or will not do by way of response.

Rather than waiting for the President and Congress to take this to the brink, I would prefer a direct confrontation with the legal community: "OK, if you think Congressional pressure is going to work -- as it may have done int he past -- give us a good reason why the public should believe the legal community's forecast in light of the President's continued defiance of precedent."

Bluntly, I'm not confident the legal community's statements about what is most likely going to happen -- based on precedent -- is relevant given this President's decisions to ignore precedent and the law.

I ask the public and media to re-engage with the legal community and ask why we should believe the legal community's forecasts of what is most likely going to happen. I am not convinced their assertions of what is most likely are reasonable, especially given the much larger legal issues confronting this President: war crimes, FISA violations, illegal prisoner abuse, rendition. Defying Congress is meaningless when compared to the larger legal issues.

People in this thread seems to believe that these crooks, swindlers, and power-hungry politicians will just quit and retire to the Bush cattle ranch in Uraguay, out of reach of extradition. Not me.

Their crimes - corruption of the government, looting of the treasury, torture, kidnappings, naked aggression against another country, and other crimes against humanity are too great to ignore. They can't take the chance that a succeeding administration can act against them.

I think we are in danger of enduring another mass-casualty event, followed by martial law, and complete loss of individual rights.

Our experiment in democracy will be over.

Posted by fuzz:
If our current laws allow them to get away with this, we need new laws.

Wrong answer. Our laws are only as effective as the authorities who enforce them and the judges who rule on them. Congress can pass a hundred new and better laws. Guess who has to sign them? And even when he signs one he attaches a signing statement that says the law is what he interprets it to be. And guess what packed court has final say on interpretation? Fact is we are in serious trouble. And laws are not going to bail us out.