mdsh00
Posts: 3968
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 11:28 am

Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:30 am

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/11/fired.prosecutors.ap/index.html

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush ordered his former White House counsel, Harriet Miers, to defy a congressional subpoena and refuse to testify Thursday before a House panel investigating U.S. attorney firings.

"Ms. Miers has absolute immunity from compelled congressional testimony as to matters occurring while she was a senior adviser to the president," White House Counsel Fred Fielding wrote in a letter to Miers' lawyer, George T. Manning.

Manning, in turn, notified committee chairman John Conyers, D-Michigan, that Miers would not show up Thursday to answer questions about the White House role in the firings of eight federal prosecutors over the winter.

So Bush basically sends another "f**k you" to congress and the law. I'd like to hear the excuses from the Bush camp about this one. Calling on executive privelege is one thing, but openly defying subpoenas REALLY makes it look like you have something to hide.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."
 
fumanchewd
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:43 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:34 am

What a crackpot. He has no power to limit someone's freedom of speech. She doesn't even work for him anymore.
In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey...
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoe

Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:24 am

Christ, this isn't Burger King. The White House can't keep running around saying they want it their way all the time. How arrogant. I guess this isn't the nation of laws any longer.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:10 am

I'm not a lawyer, but can the executive branch (i.e. President) order her not to testify, since this does not appear to involve any classified information. Perhaps Halls120 or someone else with knowledge of can enlighten us.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 2):
The White House can't keep running around saying they want it their way all the time. How arrogant. I guess this isn't the nation of laws any longer.

Apparently they are going to try, which I got a hunch will continue to exhaust any good will left with the hard core loyalist in Congress, especially since this issue is a nothing issue, as these prosecutors served at the will of the president and he could have fired them for any reason.
 
Kuna
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 10:38 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:16 am

Quoting Mdsh00 (Thread starter):

All the Bush supporters keep saying that he isn't doing anything wrong, not lying....

Well he keeps everyone from testifying so that they don't have to lie. Us Americans can only assume he has something to hide, and until he allows the laws of this country to do their job, we will always assume that he has something to hide from us.
Pinnacle Airlines
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:51 am

Quoting AirCop (Reply 3):
I'm not a lawyer, but can the executive branch (i.e. President) order her not to testify, since this does not appear to involve any classified information. Perhaps Halls120 or someone else with knowledge of can enlighten us.

I'm not an expert on executive privilege by any means.

Legally speaking, we are on very murky ground when it comes to a Congressional attempt to overcome a claim by the President to invoke executive privilege.

The most instructive case we have is of course US v. Nixon. The problem with trying to draw parallels between Nixon and this case is that with Nixon, we had a Special Prosecutor appointed by the Attorney General to investigate allegation of criminal conduct in the White House.

Quote:
The Attorney General by regulation has conferred upon the Special Prosecutor unique tenure and authority to represent the United States and has given the Special Prosecutor explicit power to contest the invocation of executive privilege in seeking evidence deemed relevant to the performance of his specially delegated duties. While the regulation remains in effect, the Executive Branch is bound by it. United States ex rel. Accardi v. Shaughnessy, 347 U.S. 260

I'm not sure whether a Congressional subpoena will be afforded the same weight as a Special Prosecutor appointed to investigate a potential federal crime. Especially since we don't have a similar factual situation in the instant case.

If it were a criminal investigation, I believe the Bush claim would fail.

Quote:
Neither the doctrine of separation of powers nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances. See, e. g., Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177; Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 211 . Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, the confidentiality of [418 U.S. 683, 685] Presidential communications is not significantly diminished by producing material for a criminal trial under the protected conditions of in camera inspection, and any absolute executive privilege under Art. II of the Constitution would plainly conflict with the function of the courts under the Constitution.

However, since what is currently being fought over are discussions about the possible involvement of the White House in the firing of the 8 US Attorneys, not a federal crime, I suspect that if this comes to a head in the Courts, based on what we know now, Congress would lose this fight.

Quote:
Since a President's communications encompass a vastly wider range of sensitive material than would be true of an ordinary individual, the public interest requires that Presidential confidentiality be afforded the greatest protection consistent with the fair administration of justice, and the District Court has a heavy responsibility to ensure that material involving Presidential conversations irrelevant to or inadmissible in the criminal prosecution be accorded the high degree of respect due a President and that such material be returned under seal to its lawful custodian.



Just my 2 cents. All quotes from the Supreme Court decision in U.S v. Nixon.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoe

Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:07 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 5):
However, since what is currently being fought over are discussions about the possible involvement of the White House in the firing of the 8 US Attorneys, not a federal crime, I suspect that if this comes to a head in the Courts, based on what we know now, Congress would lose this fight.

There is the greater issue of if Gonzales lied to Congress while White House counsel. We had a thread about this 3 months ago.
International Homo of Mystery
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:21 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 5):
However, since what is currently being fought over are discussions about the possible involvement of the White House in the firing of the 8 US Attorneys, not a federal crime, I suspect that if this comes to a head in the Courts, based on what we know now, Congress would lose this fight.

They will have to show how Congress has oversight over those that serve at the pleasure of the President. Sara Taylor basically told the Senate Judiciary comittee the same thing today and a little bit more.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QAIVO80&show_article=1

Apart from her comments about Bush, Taylor revealed a few other details: She said she did not recall ordering the addition or deletion of names to the list of prosecutors to be fired. Taylor said she had no knowledge that Bush was involved in the planning of whom to fire, an assertion that echoed previous statements by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, his former chief of staff Kyle Sampson and Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty.

What more Miers could add is beyond me. This is fishing with a long pole at best.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Queso
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:37 am

Let's turn this around a little bit. Is it not an abuse of Congressional powers to be able to subpoena the President or any of his staff without limits?
 
Longhornmaniac
Posts: 2962
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:33 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:45 am

Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
Let's turn this around a little bit. Is it not an abuse of Congressional powers to be able to subpoena the President or any of his staff without limits?

FLIP FLOPPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Smile Maybe if the Executive Branch would be honest the first time around, all these subpoenas wouldn't be necessary.

Cheers,
Cameron
Cheers,
Cameron
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:57 am

Quoting Mdsh00 (Thread starter):
So Bush basically sends another "f**k you" to congress and the law

Your half right,

He said FU to the circus known as the Democratic run congress

But not the law, as others have alluded to he is probably going to win that fight.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:18 pm

Quoting Mdsh00 (Thread starter):
So Bush basically sends another "f**k you" to congress and the law. I'd like to hear the excuses from the Bush camp about this one. Calling on executive privelege is one thing, but openly defying subpoenas REALLY makes it look like you have something to hide.

Oh, come off it. The Democratic leadership launched 300 official, congressional investigations of the White House in the first 100 days, and more are still coming. They are simply throwing everything possible at the President in order to 1) see if anything sticks, 2) paralyse the Bush administration from having the time to do anything, and 3) by convincing people like you that "Bush must be hiding something" when he balks at having to answer to literally hundreds of investigative committees. You are a fool to fall into the trap.

The fact is that virtually all of these investigations are pure PR. In this case about the attorney firings, even if all their accusations are true, Bush still would have done nothing illegal. This is just to embarass Bush - nothing else, and I hope Bush fights back.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoe

Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:21 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 11):
In this case about the attorney firings, even if all their accusations are true, Bush still would have done nothing illegal.

Gonzales might have--Rove's e-mails basically confirm that. Others might have complications as well.
International Homo of Mystery
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:24 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 6):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 5):However, since what is currently being fought over are discussions about the possible involvement of the White House in the firing of the 8 US Attorneys, not a federal crime, I suspect that if this comes to a head in the Courts, based on what we know now, Congress would lose this fight.
There is the greater issue of if Gonzales lied to Congress while White House counsel. We had a thread about this 3 months ago.

If Gonzales did lie while WH counsel, then that would indeed be more serious. Which makes one wonder why Congress isn't investigating that, instead of this much ado about nothing sideshow.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:28 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 12):
Gonzales might have--Rove's e-mails basically confirm that. Others might have complications as well.

Confirm what - that the firings were politically motivated? Of course they were! Big deal - that's his right as President, just as Clinton and every other President fires US Attorneys for political reasons.

Congress' poll numbers are now far lower than even Bush's, and I think that this is mainly because the American public sees them as screwing around non-issues such as this rather than actually working on their agenda, whatever that is. Either that or it is the realization that Bush-baiting IS their only agenda.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoe

Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:34 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 14):
Confirm what - that the firings were politically motivated? Of course they were! Big deal - that's his right as President, just as Clinton and every other President fires US Attorneys for political reasons.

We had this in a thread three months ago. Gonzales lied to Congress about what had gone on. That was the crime. Go back and read it.
International Homo of Mystery
 
lowrider
Posts: 2542
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:09 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:42 pm

Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
Let's turn this around a little bit. Is it not an abuse of Congressional powers to be able to subpoena the President or any of his staff without limits?

I am not sure that it is an abuse or even a bad thing, so long as these subpoenas are recognized for the fishing expeditions that they are, and not given the same weight as those in criminal proceedings. If there is malfeasance or criminal activity in any branch of government, I would like the other branches to have the means to bring it to light. Congress should be able to ask for whatever testimony they want. They just may not always get it. Further, I would like for members of Congress to be held accountable for time spent in these "investigations". How much time did this take away from budget bills, border security bills, tax reform bill, and so on. How much money has been spent investigating something that is not a crime and within the power of the president. If it turns out that the president was justified in firing these prosecutors, I would like to see the wages of the Representatives involved garnished to repay the public.
Proud OOTSK member
 
FlyingTexan
Posts: 2998
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:30 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:11 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 15):
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 14):
Confirm what - that the firings were politically motivated? Of course they were! Big deal - that's his right as President, just as Clinton and every other President fires US Attorneys for political reasons.

We had this in a thread three months ago. Gonzales lied to Congress about what had gone on. That was the crime. Go back and read it.

He doesn't recall.

 confused   Wink
"Wouldn't your boss like to fly home nonstop at 4:30 on a Friday afternoon?" -Airline Exec to Congressional Staffer
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:26 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 15):
We had this in a thread three months ago. Gonzales lied to Congress about what had gone on. That was the crime. Go back and read it.

If you post the link I will. otherwise, I don't have the time (hence my sparse contributions to this forum lately).

But what did he lie about? if he lied to cover up a crime, that's one thing, but if he said a white lie hoping to avoid bad press or simply to deny he farted in the elevator, that is another.

Remember when Clinton was exhonerated for his lies? I agreed with the decision back then because, yes, he lied, but a BJ is not a crime, and was not worth convicting him over. Same thing here. There was no underlying crime. That should have also been the case with Libby - he was sentenced harshly for no real crime, which shakes my opinion of the American justice system.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:29 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 18):
If you post the link I will.

If you're going to participate, do your own education. I'm not here to take the same real estate twice.

Quoting FlyingTexan (Reply 17):
He doesn't recall.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. Big grin
International Homo of Mystery
 
seb146
Posts: 13923
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:50 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 6):
There is the greater issue of if Gonzales lied to Congress while White House counsel.

How could he lie about something he did not recall? Do you remember his testimony was pretty much all "I don't recall, I don't remember." That is not lying. IMO, he should be removed from office if he has such a severe memory problem.

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Reply 9):
Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
Let's turn this around a little bit. Is it not an abuse of Congressional powers to be able to subpoena the President or any of his staff without limits?

FLIP FLOPPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe if the Executive Branch would be honest the first time around, all these subpoenas wouldn't be necessary.

Hear hear, Longhorn! If this administration has nothing to hide, they should answer all the subpoenas instead of invoking "executive privilege" and telling everyone to not testify.

GO CANUCKS!!
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
DrDeke
Posts: 805
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 7:13 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:11 am

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 20):
IMO, he should be removed from office if he has such a severe memory problem.

 checkmark 

"Subpoenas... Now with immunity! Proven memory recovery for Republicans"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwXWEil09b4


DrDeke
If you don't want it known, don't say it on a phone.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:32 am

So I take it that

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 20):
If this administration has nothing to hide, they should answer all the subpoenas instead of invoking "executive privilege" and telling everyone to not testify.

That's the whole point. There are hundreds of investigations going on, and if they answered them all, the White House would simply cease to function, and so would Congress.

Pelosi/Ried have gone completely off the deep end on this issue.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:47 am

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 20):
How could he lie about something he did not recall?

Perhaps you forgot the testimony of Monica Goodling just this May, where she testified that Gonzales "reviewed" his testimony with her. Not all of his answers weren't "I don't recall".

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 22):
There are hundreds of investigations going on

I've looked for some confirmation of this. Done Google searches, etc. Can't find a single source that confirms there are "hundreds of investigations" going on, or that the White House is swamped with subpoenas.
International Homo of Mystery
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:00 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 23):
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 22):
There are hundreds of investigations going on

I've looked for some confirmation of this. Done Google searches, etc. Can't find a single source that confirms there are "hundreds of investigations" going on, or that the White House is swamped with subpoenas.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/4946194.html

The administration has not said when or if it will respond. Spokesman Scott Stanzel noted today that the White House has received a flurry of inquires since Democrats took control of Congress in January, and has turned over some 200,000 pages of documents.

"They've launched over 300 investigations, had over 350 requests for documents and interviews, and they have had over 600 oversight hearings in just about 100 days," Stanzel said. "So that's about six oversight hearings a day."
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
seb146
Posts: 13923
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:40 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 22):
There are hundreds of investigations going on, and if they answered them all, the White House would simply cease to function, and so would Congress.

Maybe if the current administration had been honest and open from the start, none of the "hundreds of investigations" would be on right now. Maybe if the current administration had been honest and open from the start, the heads of the different departments would not have such severe memory problems. Maybe if the current administration would have been honest and open from the start......

But they have not been. When are we as citizens of this nation going to be fed up enough with this administration telling us all to f**k off that we will do something about it? When are we as citizens of this nation going to DEMAND accountability?

GO CANUCKS!!
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:50 am

...and to think, this MyLittleCrony chick could've come close (if not been confirmed) as a friggin' justice of the Supreme Court.

Methinks we dodged another Bork-bullet in that case, mes amis!
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:20 am

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 25):
Maybe if the current administration had been honest and open from the start, none of the "hundreds of investigations" would be on right now.

This administration has been no more or less dishonest than any other that I can recall, including Bill Clinton's who had more administration members jailed or otherwise convicted in history.

This is all politics. If you have a docile press that will repeat the lie that the firing of the US Attorneys was somehow criminal, for example, some will believe it. If you tell people enough times that Bush knew there were no WMDs in Iraq, some will believe it, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. Many people respond to emotional need to hate, and will grasp at a target when offered, closing their ears to reason - it just takes too long to think things through.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
Arrow
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:03 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 27):
This is all politics. If you have a docile press that will repeat the lie that the firing of the US Attorneys was somehow criminal, for example, some will believe it.

The president has the authority to fire the attornies, but I doubt that the authority is carte blanche. It has to be done with cause. And if the "cause" was purely political, i.e. they investigated too many Republicans and not enough Democrats, then there is a legitimate reason for Congress to probe the firings. Public testimony strongly indicates that politics was indeed the real reason, and the hunt was on to find a "cause" to deflect that accusation.

If the administration (any administration) fired the attornies because they were black, or Hispanic, or because they were women, there'd no debate over the illegality of the firings. But whether these particular firings play out as legal or not, they sure have brung the US justice system into serious disrepute, and if nothing else maybe that will lead to some serious reforms of how the attorney's are appointed in the first place, and how they are fired. This story makes the whole judicial system look like a kangaroo court.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:27 am

Quoting Arrow (Reply 28):
The president has the authority to fire the attornies, but I doubt that the authority is carte blanche.

It is, and no "cause" is necessary. He can fire US Attorneys for having his hair parted the wrong way, if he likes. They serve "at the pleasure" of the President.

Quoting Arrow (Reply 28):
If the administration (any administration) fired the attornies because they were black, or Hispanic, or because they were women, there'd no debate over the illegality of the firings.

It would still be legal. Not politically sound, but legal.

Quoting Arrow (Reply 28):
But whether these particular firings play out as legal or not, they sure have brung the US justice system into serious disrepute

For no other reason than the Democratic opposition and their media minions want to make it look so.

Quoting Arrow (Reply 28):
and if nothing else maybe that will lead to some serious reforms of how the attorney's are appointed in the first place

I am all for finding a better way. But what are the alternatives? Elected US Attorneys? Then they REALLY get political. The Attorneys are part of the executive branch, so you can't allow Congress (hardly non-political) to choose them without violating the separation of powers.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:37 am

Quoting Arrow (Reply 28):
The president has the authority to fire the attornies, but I doubt that the authority is carte blanche. It has to be done with cause.

Wrong. While a presidential appointee cannot be fired for an illegal reason, the President can ask for and recieve the resignation of every one of the Executive Branch employees who are not protected by civil service tenure. No "cause" need be shown by the President.

Quoting Arrow (Reply 28):
This story makes the whole judicial system look like a kangaroo court.

Only because people keep insisting - wrongly - that the firings were illegal. They weren't.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
Arrow
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoe

Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:20 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 29):
For no other reason than the Democratic opposition and their media minions want to make it look so.

I'll bow to your far superior knowledge of the legalities of how these folks serve, but surely Alberto Gonzales' ham-fisted attempts to make the firings sound routine (as I recall, he did suggest that "cause" was the reason -- incompetence, or whatever) in the face of some rather embrassing coincidences goes far beyond what the "Democratic opposition and their media minions" are saying. Maybe I'm chafing because I identify with those "media minions," but there are lots of smoking guns here that Gonzalez et al have had a very hard time explaining. How many times has Gonzalez lied?

It strikes me that these attorney appointments are blatantly political, and given the power they wield over who and what to investigate, and who and what to prosecute, I can't fathom how an advanced democratic society could tolerate it.

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 29):
But what are the alternatives? Elected US Attorneys? Then they REALLY get political. The Attorneys are part of the executive branch, so you can't allow Congress (hardly non-political) to choose them without violating the separation of powers.

It's bad enough that you elect some your judges, I would never suggest you do the same at the attorney level (although, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't district attorneys elected?). I thought the justice system was there to protect the rule of law from the other two political branches through the disinterested administration of the justice system.. Hard to see how they can perform that duty if they are part of the executive branch and appointed based on their standing as good Republicans or good Democrats. Maybe it requires an independent tribunal to make the selections, based on merit, and maybe tribunal members have to declare and prove that they have no political affiliation. It's clear that the process needs to be removed from the executive branch, and I agree that allowing Congress to do it wouldn't be an improvement.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:39 am

Quoting Arrow (Reply 31):
but surely Alberto Gonzales' ham-fisted attempts to make the firings sound routine

No question - Gonzales and the rest of the administration played this clumsily, and played right into the hands of their political opponents.

Quoting Arrow (Reply 31):
It strikes me that these attorney appointments are blatantly political, and given the power they wield over who and what to investigate, and who and what to prosecute, I can't fathom how an advanced democratic society could tolerate it

I think it was Winston Churchill who said that "Democracy is the worst of political systems, with the exception of all the others."

Quoting Arrow (Reply 31):
I thought the justice system was there to protect the rule of law from the other two political branches through the disinterested administration of the justice system.. Hard to see how they can perform that duty if they are part of the executive branch and appointed based on their standing as good Republicans or good Democrats

Remember that while the prosecutors are part of the executive branch, the judges are part of the judiciary branch. The executive branch is responsible for enforcing the law, which includes "who and what to investigate, and who and what to prosecute". To earn a conviction, they must satisfy a judge, who does not report at all to the same chain of command. That's the basis of the Seperation of Powers.

I agree, the system is far from perfect. But until someone comes up with a better idea, that is what we have. AFAIK, no other country has a clearly better system.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
tsaord
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:46 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:32 pm

Can the Republicans possibly take back the house in the next elections? I am more dem than GOP but they are starting to irk my nerves. The dems seem to just be staying on this "we will show we have no power by going after the president" trip.

Just like IL dems can get a budget going and they control IL. The Red will be back in power soon!
there are icons, then there are legends, then there is rick flair
 
seb146
Posts: 13923
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:47 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 29):
It is, and no "cause" is necessary. He can fire US Attorneys for having his hair parted the wrong way, if he likes. They serve "at the pleasure" of the President.



Quoting Cfalk (Reply 29):
For no other reason than the Democratic opposition and their media minions want to make it look so.



Quoting Halls120 (Reply 30):
Only because people keep insisting - wrongly - that the firings were illegal. They weren't.

So, if nothing was done wrong, why is the entire administration is dodging subpoena after subpoena? Why is the entire administration so secretive if nothing was done wrong? If the administration has nothing to hide, there would be no need for hearings. Even if the attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president, why is everyone in the administration hiding? Why is everyone dodging this?

GO CANUCKS!!
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
Duff44
Posts: 1561
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:48 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:54 pm

Am I the only one at the "who cares" point?

It's the same garbage over and over again. People wonder why only half of Americans vote... you're seeing it. Nobody has passion for politics because it's all about showboating, grandstanding, and working the system, and the voters get the shaft.

Every rich fat cat in Washington wasting my time and money can kiss my ass. You're not interesting to me anymore.
I'll rassle ya for a bowl of bacon!
 
seb146
Posts: 13923
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:35 pm

Duff44: That is why the same people keep getting elected and everyone complains. No one votes because everyone is fed up with the system. The best thing we can do about it is spread the word and vote like you mean it!

GO CANUCKS!!
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:35 pm

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 34):
So, if nothing was done wrong, why is the entire administration is dodging subpoena after subpoena?

Look what happened with Scooter Libby. Libby committed no crime, but was dragged in under oath, said something wrong (which was absolutely meaningless), and WHAM!

Being put under oath exposes you greatly - especially when there is no crime involved, and the questioner can go in any direction he wants. Ask any lawyer - you only accept being put under oath if you have to. The subpeonas are nothing but a fishing expedition, hoping to embarass the administration by coming up with some minor procedural violation (like Libby), or by the administration refusing to go along with the charade and spinning it to look like they are hiding something.

If Congress has some evidence that an actual crime may have been committed, it is their job to investigate. But this is nothing more than harassment for political gain.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
dan-air
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 1999 6:13 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:20 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 37):
hoping to embarass the administration by coming up with some minor procedural violation (like Libby), or by the administration refusing to go along with the charade and spinning it to look like they are hiding something.

Libby was questioned in the course of the investigation into who exposed a covert CIA agent - a case referred to the FBI by the CIA.

Libby deliberately obfuscated to cover for the Vice-President - that came out at the trial. Other administration officials, such as Rove, voluntarily returned to "amend testimony" once Libby had been charged.

Outing a CIA agent is treason: obstructing an investigation of treason is a felony, a crime Libby was found guilty of by a unanimous jury.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:24 pm

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 34):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 30):Only because people keep insisting - wrongly - that the firings were illegal. They weren't.
So, if nothing was done wrong, why is the entire administration is dodging subpoena after subpoena?

Two reasons. One is the protection of executive privilege. And if you think this is just something the republicans do, you would be wrong. The other? Someone may have done something else wrong that might come to light, or someone might pull a Scooter and stupidly lie under oath.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
flynavy
Posts: 2177
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2002 1:48 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:05 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 11):
Oh, come off it. The Democratic leadership launched 300 official, congressional investigations of the White House in the first 100 days, and more are still coming. They are simply throwing everything possible at the President in order to 1) see if anything sticks, 2) paralyse the Bush administration from having the time to do anything, and 3) by convincing people like you that "Bush must be hiding something" when he balks at having to answer to literally hundreds of investigative committees. You are a fool to fall into the trap.

The fact is that virtually all of these investigations are pure PR. In this case about the attorney firings, even if all their accusations are true, Bush still would have done nothing illegal. This is just to embarass Bush - nothing else, and I hope Bush fights back.

And I suppose if a DEMOCRAT was in the White House and, say, had a in-house sex scandal, your moral majority would just sit back and not investigate it? Give me a break, already.

I'm Jesus and I'm running for President.  butthead 
Change is: one airline, six continents!
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:17 pm

Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 38):
Libby was questioned in the course of the investigation into who exposed a covert CIA agent - a case referred to the FBI by the CIA.

Wrongly, as the investigation found that Plame was not covert, as defined by the law.

Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 38):
Libby deliberately obfuscated to cover for the Vice-President - that came out at the trial.



But the VP did not do anything wrong - he had nothing to do with the Plame outting. The "leak" came from the State Department, and was accidental by all reports.

Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 38):
Outing a CIA agent is treason:

Once again, Libby did not out Plame. The VP did not out Plame. Nobody in the WH outted Plame. Armitage outted Plame, and he was never charged. Why? Because she was not covert. So the entire Fitzgerald investigation was nothing but a witchhunt. The Plame Affair was settled by Fitzgerald within the first couple of days of the investigation - he found out almost immediately who the leaker was, and that it wasn't really a crime. Everything after that was simply to see if they could catch a Bush Admin person, somehow, someway, in revenge for Florida 2000 and other supposed slights.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:24 pm

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 40):
And I suppose if a DEMOCRAT was in the White House and, say, had a in-house sex scandal, your moral majority would just sit back and not investigate it? Give me a break, already.

And that's all it was, in house, right up until the President lied, under oath, in a court of law. Then it becomes the publics business just like Libby.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:32 pm

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 40):
And I suppose if a DEMOCRAT was in the White House and, say, had a in-house sex scandal, your moral majority would just sit back and not investigate it?

Tough question. Insofar as screwing someone who is not your spouse is not illegal, I'd say no. But at the same time, if someone cannot be trusted to stand by their marriage vows, how can you trust him to stand by the Oath of Office which he took?

Someone who cheats on his wife opens himself up to blackmail, and thus cannot be trusted with positions where he may be coerced via blackmail. In companies I have worked with, it was company policy that any management-level employee caught cheating in his marriage was automatically fired, and I know several people which it happened to. I personally know of a CEO of a very well-known and large company was fired after he was blackmailed over an affair, and was coerced into giving the blackmailer huge advantages in negotiations. Someone who cannot keep their pants zipped cannot be trusted. That was why the Clinton affair was such a big deal to so many people.

But it is not illegal, and therefore should not take up the time and resources of Congress to investigate, nor should it be the basis for impeachment. It's a matter of trust only, and is an issue which voters must decide whether or not to take into account on election day. On stories like that, let the newspapers do their investigating.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:35 pm

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 42):
And that's all it was, in house, right up until the President lied, under oath, in a court of law. Then it becomes the publics business just like Libby.

But with no underlying crime. The whole story should have been an embarassment at worst, but not the subject of a trial. As I explained in another thread, it's like putting a guy on trial for lying when he was asked if he farted in the elevator.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
dan-air
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 1999 6:13 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:48 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 44):
But with no underlying crime

Then why did Libby lie? Why did the president give him a full pardon, in which case he would not have been protected by the 5th amendment? This baloney about "nio underlying crime" is a) patently false and b) a lame excuse for lawbreaking. Remember the "rule of law" the Republicans were so vocal of during the 90's?

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 43):
Someone who cheats on his wife opens himself up to blackmail, and thus cannot be trusted with positions where he may be coerced via blackmail.

That would impact about half the Republicans in Congress. Fire them today!
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:18 am

Once again, the Administration tries to hide behind a veil of secrecy and paranoia, which, more and more, looks like it will be one of it's major legacies. Everything they do, when it comes to being open and honest with the Congress and the American people, seems to end up in a raised middle finger to both.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:23 am

Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 45):
Then why did Libby lie?

He said he could not remember a certain detail about a particular conversation that happened a year or two before. The court decided that he was lying when he said "I don't recall". Now how in the hell can you prove that another person remembers something? Can you remember every word of every conversation you had 2 years ago??? I sure as hell can't. The decision itself was a travesty.

Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 45):
Why did the president give him a full pardon

He did not give him a pardon - he just commuted the jail sentence. The conviction still stands until it gets thrown out in appeal - which should happen. Giving a pardon would be tantamount to admitting he was guilty in the first place, which IMHO he was not.

Quoting Dan-Air (Reply 45):
This baloney about "nio underlying crime" is a) patently false

Then explain why the person who leaked Plame's name to the press was never charged with a crime - in fact he was not even interrogated. The "Outting" had absolutely nothing to do with this case.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
seb146
Posts: 13923
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:30 am

So, what I am reading from this thread is anyone in the administration who was issued a subpoena COULD show up and testify. During testimony, they could invoke 5th Amendment rights or simply pull an Alberto "I don't recall" Gonzales. Don't you think that would have made more sense and would have put some faith in the administration instead of no one showing up and sending a great big F**K YOU!!! to Congress? Falcon is spot on when he said:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 46):
Once again, the Administration tries to hide behind a veil of secrecy and paranoia, which, more and more, looks like it will be one of it's major legacies. Everything they do, when it comes to being open and honest with the Congress and the American people, seems to end up in a raised middle finger to both.

GO CANUCKS!!
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Bush Orders Meirs To Defy Congressional Subpoena

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:36 am

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 48):
During testimony, they could invoke 5th Amendment rights or simply pull an Alberto "I don't recall" Gonzales.

Invoking the 5th is if you are charged with a crime. There are no criminal charges involved as far as I know.

"I don't recall" if you actually DO recall is not ethical, and the Libby trial shows that the court can read your mind.  Yeah sure

The best answer would be (in most of these so-called investigations), would be "None of your damned business. You do your jobs, and we'll do ours." But the Administration doesn't have the balls to come out and say it.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: fr8mech, NWOrientDC10, seat64k and 16 guests