« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
House Pushes for Quick Handling of Contempt Suit
A quick update on the House's lawsuit against Harriet Miers and White House chief of staff Josh Bolten. From The Politico:
The House General Counsel's Office, which is representing the Judiciary Committee in a civil contempt lawsuit against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, has asked a federal judge to set up an expedited schedule to resolve portions of the case, a schedule that would require a ruling by this summer, according to court documents filed today.The Justice Department, which is representing Bolten and Miers in the case, countered that the only reason the Judiciary Committee is seeking a speedy determination of the case is so that it "recommence prior to Congress' August recess" its investigation into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006. The Justice Department wants a slower review of the contempt case, and it is already warning that it may appeal any ruling that goes against it.
What the House wants is to just settle the White House's more expansive claims of privilege -- namely, that Miers didn't even need to show up in response to the House Judiciary Committee's subpoena and that both Bolten and Miers didn't even need to indicate what sort of documents the White House were claiming privilege for.
A private conference is scheduled for tomorrow. The judge's decision will likely indicate whether the House has any hope of hearing any actual testimony from Miers or seeing any documents from Bolten during the Bush administration.
Josh
Zachary
The judge in this case couldn't be more of a Bush protector. He's going to side with the administration, zero question.
March 20, 2008 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
...the only reason the Judiciary Committee is seeking a speedy determination of the case is so that it "recommence prior to Congress' August recess" its investigation into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006.
Don't you love the "recommence" language? Or more simply, how dare they try to seek any JUSTICE while we (the accused) are still in office...
The real question for the attorneys out there is: Do the laws and proceedings lose any standing once any of the Bush lawbreakers leave office? Or can the broken laws be pursued against the minions of law breakers in Bush's cabal after they leave?
March 20, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The danger in pushing these cases now, especially regarding the attorney firings, is that if charges are coalescing by January, Bush can pardon everyone on his way out the door. It may be better to draw it out into next year.
As for appealing the decision, Congress can play that game as well.
March 20, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The possibility the President might pardon someone for criminal activity should have no bearing on decisions about the schedule to review the civil contempt.
The article states the House is pushing for "civil" contempt:
The President can pardon for only criminal offenses against the United States.
AII S2
Here's some discussion on the difference between civil and criminal contempt. Is someone suggesting the President would pardon for non-criminal, civil offenses?
March 20, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's say it! Mukasey is being no different to protect Bush and the White House from any crimes, war or otherwise, as was his predecessor, Gonzales.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
March 20, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
So if there were impeachment proceeding in progress, he couldn't pardon?
March 20, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some would agree:
Even if the Senate does not convict, the initiation of impeachment proceedings would, arguably, trump the President's pardon.
March 20, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a crock! The Justice Dept. is representing these two (Miers and Bolten) against Congress.
In another universe, not the Bush universe, it would have been the Justice Dept. helping Congress to implement our Constitutional Law.
What a precedent for future Administrations.
BTW, they are all going to get away with everything. Even after they leave office, out of site, out of mind mentality.
Gonzales must be laughing his head off to the bank.
March 21, 2008 12:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ironic, in re a House civil case against the President's legal counsel, that DOJ would suggest Congress is scheduling for improper reasons. The alleged DOJ Staff counsel assertions cited above are a smokescreen, but should be reviewed by DoJ OPR per the Atty Standards of Conduct.
March 21, 2008 1:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
A much quicker route to getting Meirs and Bolten to testify is to Impeach AG Mukasey. Mukasey (the DoJ) is require by law to convene a Grand Jury to investigate the contempt charges issued by Congress. His refusal to do so is ample grounds for impeachment.
Impeachment of a federal official is explicity authorized in the Constitution. The best part is that it circumvents the courts. Mukasey could be gone this spring.
ITMFA
March 21, 2008 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink