« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Conyers Introduces Contempt Resolution, Call for Lawsuit against White House
As expected, things are finally moving forward in the House today to bring contempt resolutions against White House officials for ignoring Congressional subpoenas as part of the U.S. attorney firings investigation.
House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers (D-MI) introduced two resolutions this afternoon related to the subpoenas. The first is a criminal contempt resolution against White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers -- both were subpoenaed and did not respond, citing the White House's invocation of executive privilege. But Conyers also filed a resolution that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) file a civil suit against the White House.
Update: You can read both of those resolutions as prepared here. The second resolution would authorize the House Judiciary Committee to go to court, where it would be represented by the House general counsel
That second resolution would serve as an available alternative should Attorney General Michael Mukasey follow through on his threat not to enforce the criminal citation. The battle would then head into court, where a judge would have a shot at sorting out the White House's far-reaching assertion of privilege.
The House rules committee is expected to meet and begin work on both of these resolutions in the next hour.
Josh
Zachary
Praise Jeebus!! Its about friggin time! Are they bored or did they run out of other issues? How long has this been hanging around over a year?
February 13, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
In lieu of impeachment, I guess.
Still, how weak is this as a check and balance on imperial pretense.
February 13, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is just doing this to run out the clock on impeachment. The AG will ignore the citations and Pelosi will drag her feet on the civil suit. It is all just really bad kabuki theater.
February 13, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ideally, if this goes to court, the judge has heard of "checks and balances."
But would anyone else be surprised if this ends up strengthening our beloved unitary executive?
February 13, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
The civil suit has possibilities. If (as one would expect) the White House and DoJ treat the suit with their usual disdain, they could face criminal penalties (judicial contempt, perjury) that would extend beyond the current term of office.
February 13, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The contempt res and civil suit are a waste of time. Go for impeachment. If you haven't done it yet, you should visit congresswoman Zoe Lofgren's site and read her letter to Conyers exploring impeachment. You should also read the PDF of a report that was prepared to brief congress on the history of impeachment. It was prepared in 1974 as many talked of impeaching Nixon. The historical references are chilling: It's as though the framers of the constitution saw GWB in our future. Congress should also consider impeaching Scalia for torture comments yesterday. This guy has no place speaking to the foreign press representing America with those views. He added to the embarassment our nation is already suffering.
I want to see McCain campaigning for another Bush term while Bush is going through impeachment proceedings.
February 13, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
If these resolutions have to be voted on the Republican minority will find a way to put the kabosh on it (or enough Dems will side with the Republicans).
And does anyone really believe Pelosi will file a suit against the WH??? That's a pipe-dream.
February 13, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, it is a start I suppose. Impeach for any of a hundred high crimes (including war crimes).
February 13, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's about damn time. The Judicial Branch should have gotten involved in sorting out these ridiculous "privilege" claims years ago. There's at least one person with guts left in the Democratic Party.
February 13, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Assuming the various scandals aren't getting resolved soon, can't we someday expect Congressional (if not other) subpoenas for a former President GW Bush (and Cheney)?
February 13, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're not going to get impeachment. The best we can hope is that the Constitution gets put back together somehow. However, with Scalia and Alito as the final arbitors, I guess that may be too much to ask also.
February 13, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, "bad kabuki theater" sounds about right.
You have to wonder if the Dems have deliberately delayed this stuff as a pre-election stunt. What are the chances that any such legal action will be resolved before November?
Just imagine how different the political landscape might look today if impeachment had gone on the table in 2006. John Conyers, we hardly knew ye...
February 13, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would like to see more comments/discussion on "inherent contempt," which would -- in theory -- be an independent House/Congress action outside the Courts and DOJ AG. The current resolutions appear to do the opposite: Rely on the DOJ AG to enforce, and for the courts to adjudicate.
February 13, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The WH will ignore Conyers and he'll be forced to draft another strongly worded letter.
February 13, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
...an inherent contempt finding could only bolster the case;
No need for the judiciary for that.
February 13, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can just hear their knees shaking over at the White House....Come on people, we all know this Administration has done more ill than any in a long time, but you truly are deluded if you really think any of these efforts to punish them will be successful, or even worse, if you think that this would somehow be politically beneficial to the Democratic nominee during an election year!!!
February 13, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a feeling that this comes on the heels of overwhelming support of Congressman Wexler. He launched his successful wexlerwantshearings.com call for impeachment and got something like a million signatures. Lighting fires one congressman at a time. I guess Conyers has to look like he's doing something. Lets see how long it takes in the court.
February 13, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those above who have criticized Conyers may want to weigh their words and get behind him.
Conyers is setting up a possible Supreme Court battle of just how much power the executive branch and the legislative branch have over one another.
Unfortunately, given the facts of how the Senate has just voted to grant retro-active immunity to the telecom industry (and I expect the House will cave in as well) we can expect that Conyers doesn't stand a chance.
But at least, he's standing up.
That's more than can be said for ALL Republicans and ALL crossover Democrats.
(In fact, it's getting to where you now need a program to identify one from the other).
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
February 13, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
It remains to be seen to what extent the US atty firings are linked with a Presidential policy to not enforce the laws of war. These issues are not simply domestic political issues, but matters of international criminal law with universal jurisdiction, without any statute of limitations.
On issues of alleged war crimes, an impeachment investigation is not a "political" issue, but a serious issue of war crimes. Congress, the courts, and DOJ AG have legal duties under Geneva to fully enforce the laws of war, not agree to do nothing. The court isn't a referee. The power the three branches have is in the Constitution. The issue is:
The individual persons in all three branches have an individual oath to enforce the Constitution against domestic enemies, not make excuses to silently condone unconstitutional, illegal conduct. This crew pretends another branches' violation of the Constitution is something they have no jurisdiction. Wrong. Either the Constitution is defended, or its not.
Inaction in the face of unconstitutional, illegal conduct can be adjudicated as malfeasance, or a subsequent oath of office violation which impermissibly enabled war crimes. This was the basis to prosecute judges, lawyers, and civilian policy makers at Nuremberg and the Tokyo War Crimes Trials.
February 13, 2008 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
dar,
Get behind Conyers? As Jack Handy would say. That's Con yers. I'm beginning to think Conyers has a barking problem. Every two to three months he starts barking and the White House beats him with a rolled up newspaper.
February 13, 2008 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
anyone for water boarding them both??
February 14, 2008 3:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Attention all Trolls and other "nanneyboobey" nay sayers on this particular thread - before the election there will be an inherent contempt of Congress vote taken regarding Meiers & others .
The "INHERENT CONTEMPT " of Congress is stand alone from any other branch . Google this phrase -it is a power that has been used before by Congress. We also need to keep sending money to wexlerwantshearings.com- Cong Wexler , does have balls, an intact spine , and needs us to quit listening to the "nanneyboobeys", and send him our love and support- this ain't over till its over.
Finally we also need to thanks Cong Conyers for starting the inherent contempt of Congress vote in motion-word is Vichy Speaker Pelosi will let a full floor vote occur on this issue soon ...
And to all you Trolls - do you really want President Obama to have the type of executive power this current crop of criminals now attempts to exercise - If you do you are even bigger 'NANNEYBOOBEYS' then I thought possible ..
February 14, 2008 5:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Dusty, I seen you on curren.com http://current.com/items/88842525_conyers_introduces_contempt_resolution_call_for_lawsuit_against_white_house#8884283, if you look at the discussion, you'll know what I mean when I ask, are you a cat taking over the world? because i really like that idea. Better then Bush. And, a cat. pretty funny because chiqe could'nt link a picture on thier report, so you're along with the headline! Car sueing and taking power of the whitehouse, YAY!
February 14, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink