The Democrats’ Privilege Problem

[rodeodance]

Source: congress quarterly




The Democrats’ Privilege Problem

By CQ Staff Mon Jul 30, 8:26 AM ET

By David Nather, CQ Staff


Until two weeks ago, Linda T. Sánchez was counting on the Bush administration to blink first in the fight over congressional subpoenas.

That was when the House Judiciary subcommittee she chairs started to ratchet up the conflict, which grows out of the Democrats’ investigations of the firing of a group of U.S. attorneys. On a party-line vote, the panel rejected White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten’s claims of executive privilege for the documents he had been ordered to produce.

...........

Whether they planned for it or not — and from all indications they didn’t — the Democrats are now locked into a potentially time-consuming battle with President Bush that could determine whether Congress really has the leverage to force executive branch officials to cooperate with its investigations. The public won’t necessarily care if the Democrats are winging it through this battle, public opinion experts say. But they will care about the end result — and the result isn’t likely to be a good one for Democrats if they don’t find a strategy that can prevail.

The Democrats will probably have the votes to win adoption of the contempt citations against Bolten and Miers when the House votes on them after the August recess. But they’re still trying to figure out their plan if the Justice Department doesn’t let the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia present the citations to a grand jury.

“I don’t get the sense that there’s a Plan B,” said Laurence H. Tribe, a constitutional expert at Harvard Law School who has discussed options for resolving the standoff with lawmakers from both parties. “There are lots of Plans A prime. But there’s no convergence around a single path.”

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20070730/pl_cq_politics/thedemocratsprivilegeproblem;_ylt=ApjJcLLp9H0ECw7Dhs0Gw6Os0NUE

[earthside]

1. 'Plan B'?

The sad and tragic thing for the Republic is that there should even have to be a 'Plan B'.

If the Justice Department, the U.S. Attorney, under orders from Bush, Cheney and Gonzales refuses to prosecute a contempt of Congress charge, then the nation is in serious trouble. That in and of itself should tell the American people just how tyrannical and corrupt is the Bush regime.

It is also sad to see an article like this that plays up this looming Constitutional crisis like it is just another political game that has to be strategized by the Democrats. If the House and Senate leadership fall for that way of thinking, then they are dooming our democracy (and possibly their political futures, too).

This should be simple for the Democrats (and all patriotic Americans) ... quote Lincoln: "... government of the people, by the people and for the people ..." This is OUR government, we all, Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Libertarians, unaffiliateds, have a right to know what the federal government is doing -- they work for us -- we are the boss.

There is your grand strategy ... it boils down to the principles in the Declaration of Indpendence and articulated in the preamble to the Constitution.

[The Stranger]

2. The Democrats are divided? What else is new?

[Demeter]

3. There's a Plan A?

Could have fooled me....

[jaysunb]

4. Plan B is impeachment..

and these people should be smart enough to know that...oops, they are smart enough, just trying to cloud the picture so that Democrats are seen to be in disarray.

Nice try, assholes. :evilfrown:

[Gman]

5. This article is complete horseshit

To make the assertion that anyone expected the WH to just lay down is absolutely ridiculous. Here's one article that tells how Bush was planning for the onslaught of subpoenas after the elections last year. It was common knowledge the WH intended to resist everything.

The info about Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers being pardoned is bullshit. If the House issues inherent contempt charges, they can be locked up until they talk or the end of the current Congress and neither Bush nor the SCOTUS can help them because of the separation of powers. There's nothing to "figure out" if the US Attorney for DC doesn't present contempt charges to a grand jury.

The entire implication of the article is that the Democrats should stop now to save face. That' horseshit. A lot of it may play out to a stalemate. But the Democrats are not powerless because of the separation of powers.

[trogdor]

7. Read your history (BTW, I agree with you)

That's what I would tell people. After Watergate, not much really got done about averting future abuses of power until the Carter administration began in 1977. Likewise, I'm not counting on anything much being done about Bush until he's out of office. He ought to watch out, because once he's gone, he won't be able to claim executive privilege anymore. The next AG ought to seriously consider criminal charges against anybody in the Bush administration he can convince a grand jury to indict.

[depakid]

8. criminal charges against anybody in the Bush administration

And that will be a long list....

[kevin4589]

6. Are democratics are dumb and immature?

Why in the hell would you start something when you have not considered all of the possible different scenerio? Only a stupid person would do that.