Remember INHERENT CONTEMPT???

[niceypoo]

We were promised by the Democratic congress that Harriet Miers and Josh Bolton would be TRIED BEFORE CONGRESS AFTER THE AUGUST RECESS!!! Remember Karl Rove not showing up? HELLO DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS! DID YOU THINK I WOULD CONVENIENTLY FORGET?? When the August recess ended they said, "Wait til October,"; well guess what folks, IT'S OCTOBER and nothing is being mentioned about it!!

It is so obvious to me that the democrats, 'don't have the stomach,' to do what is necessary to maintain separation of powers. It is looking like the 25%, failed, president has used them for a doormat AGAIN. Another self neutering by the Democrats.

...Just one more thing about the democrats in congress that makes me want to puke...

[jmp]

1. You've got to learn to let go of the past.

That is like sooooo two months ago. You can't hold congressional Democrats to promises made that far back. ;)

[tekisui]

4. Yeah, it's Blackwater today, and they will be passed over and forgotten tomorrow.

[niceypoo]

6. Like the republicans would say, "Thats old news."

[radfringe]

2. the lights on the helmets

they wear during a cave-in don't have the VOLTS...

[ShortnFiery]

3. The Democratic Leadership in Congress has sold it's SOUL to the highest bidders ...

AND/OR there are files that can be used to blackmail some.

However, instead of resigning like moral LEADERS, our gutless wonders in Congress FAIL MISERABLY to stand tall and actually represent *the working people - wage slaves* in America.

The Democratic Leadership Disgusts me.

VOTE THESE BUMS OUT BY THEIR NEXT DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY CHALLENGER! :grr: :puke: :grr:

[Uben]

5. So, you're one of "those" people

......those people who hold people to their word, huh? Can we really expect them to keep promises? After all, the president doesn't have to tell the truth, so neither should they! As ridiculous as it seems, that's exactly how it looks!

Where are our leaders? Not the current ones, I mean real leaders, men and women who are honest, trustworthy, and true to their word. The ones not afraid to take a stand for the issues their voters elected them for, despite the fact they might not have the votes.

[BridgeTheGap]

7. Say what? You can't possibly expect them to DO SOMETHING

about the criminality in the White House, now can you?

[cali]

8. Please. Accuracy and facts should mean something.

Who promised that Meyers and Bolton would be tried in the Senate? find one quote from one Senator that asserts that.
And what do you know about Congressional contempt? Do you know how inherent contempt works? Do you know who Jeffrey Taylor is? Do you know anything at all about this?

I'm guessing NOT.

[niceypoo]

9. We were told before August recess that the contempt citations would be coming in September.

September is GONE!

Judiciary Committee sends contempt charges for Miers, Bolton to full House

The House Judiciary Committee Wednesday passed two measures to hold former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in contempt for failing to answer subpoenas related to the firings of eight U.S. Attorneys last year

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/25/house.contempt/index.html">House inches toward constitutional showdown with contempt vote

Is that clear enough for you or do I need to rub your nose in it some more?

[cali]

14. Do you fucking understand that that isn't a promise

to try them in the House? Obviously not. A contempt citation has to be enforced by Jeffrey Taylor, the U.S. Attorney for D.C. The admin has ordered Taylor NOT to enforce. Is that legal? I'm not sure, but I am sure that Taylor is a bush appointee and isn't going to buck them on this. Duh.

In addition, Committee Chairman and whips count votes, and they DON'T have the votes on this. Another duh.

So far from rubbing my face in anything, you've just further displayed your ignorance.

Oh, and Inherent Contempt needs a vote too.

[rateyes]

16. A contempt citation has to be enforced by Jeffrey Taylor, the U.S. Attorney for D.C.

No, it doesn't. It can be enforced by the House and/or the Senate. The fact that the votes aren't there, when all it needs is a simple majority, combined with the fact that the Democrats are in the majority tells you something about the lack of courage of many congressional dems...including their leadership.

[cali]

19. There's a difference between inherent contempt and

regular contempt. And the fact is that the dem caucus is a diverse one with only a small majority. Even the greatest leadership imaginable would have a hell of a time with those facts.

[rateyes]

32. We have a THIRTY-ONE seat edge in the House

over the Republicans. You're telling me, then, that we can't hold on to 30 of those Democrats? You're saying that even the "greatest leadership" couldn't do that, let alone the spineless leaders we have now? If that's the case, the country is screwed.

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. Who needs accuracy and facts when you can make hysterical accusations?

[niceypoo]

11. LOL..."hysterical," accusations like??

I see that congress is well represented here.

[havocmom]

12. So, you are gonna provide links to quotes that those crooks would be tried?

Wake me when you find something of substance to back up the rant.

[niceypoo]

18. I see that the 11% who approve of congress are well represented here today...

Please send an email to your congressperson begging them to forget the whole contempt matter....

[cali]

21. oooh, cute little feeble strawman.

It has nothing to do with supporting Congress. It has to do with being somewhat educated as to the facts, and reality. Two things you clearly lack any acquaintanceship with.

[niceypoo]

25. Do you want congress to hold Miers and Bolton accountable or not?

It seems, by your guffawing, that you do not. If you do not, then why?

[havocmom]

28. Hint: Requests for links to back up claims in OP are NOT same

as not wanting to hold others accountable.

Your OP made a claim that things were said, and some of us would like some evidence.

Instead of evidence, you offer ad hominem attacks and cast aspersions on us.

Do we want to hold the OP accountable or not?

Oh, please, a link to back up your assertions?

:rofl:

[niceypoo]

30. So, you wish them to be held accountable? Or not?

Its a very basic question.

[havocmom]

41. Accountable to WHAT? You made an assertion and so far....

nothing to back it up.

It's a very basic question. You make an accusation, you back it up or you are just making ad hommine attacks on those of us who want some facts.

Accountability is a double edge sword. You need practice at the wielding of it.

Basic question: Do you have links demonstrating they said what you claimed they said.

It is not just about them being held accountable. Make a charge, show some evidence then we can move forward on your charge. Until then, the argument is based on hearsay

Accountability. Yes, I FIRMLY believe in it.

[2rth2pwr]

46. "The Vermont Senator said he'll begin contempt proceedings"

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/White_House_Senate_headed_for_subpoena_0820.html
The Vermont Senator said he'll begin contempt proceedings in the Judiciary Committee if the Bush administration does not comply with the subpoenas by the end of the current congressional recess. A majority of Judiciary Committee members would have to endorse the decision to begin criminal proceedings before the full Senate could consider pursuing prosecution.

"The time is up," Leahy told a few dozen reporters in the Judiciary Committee's hearing room. "We've waited long enough."

However, the White House has been granted a de facto extension for compliance because contempt hearings could not begin until Congress reconvenes after Labor Day. Leahy did not specify which administration officials could face charges.

Leahy said he hoped the White House and committee would be able to avoid criminal charges by working out an agreement over access to the requested documents, but he criticized the administration's unwillingness to negotiate or lay out reasonable accommodations in the past.

"The only accommodations we tend to get from the White House is, 'Do it our way and we'll be happy,'" Leahy said.

[cali]

29. I'm guffawing at your posts. Nothing else.

Yes, of course I do, and I know damned well that Waxman, Leahy and Conyers do too. Anyone who's even passingly familiar with the records of those three, would know that. They can count. They don't have the votes to pass contempt citations. And they can't just wave little sparkly wannds and make it happen. That's reality. What can they do? Keep investigating. Keep putting pressure on those dems who won't go along with contempt citations. If you can think of anything else, do contact them.

[niceypoo]

31. Ahhh, so we have the old, "not enough votes so lets do nothing and it will go away," defense

Milquetoast

[cali]

36. You really are incapable of actually analyzing the situation

at all. Sorry, votes are the sine qua non in this situation.

[loudsue]

40. If they don't have the votes, it is due to the DLC asshats ...the republican infiltrators

into the dem party. We need to get rid of every single DLCer.... which includes hillary clinton.

:kick:

[havocmom]

23. So, you don't have ANYTHING to back your claim? But you get lots of exercise

jumping to conclusions about people you don't know and making accusations to try and intimidate any of us who actually expect you to back up your claim.

That shit tactic is SO Rush Limbaugh, you know. Doesn't fly well around here.

Try again or pick from some of our lovely parting gifts and go start another whiny thread based on nothing you can actually point to.

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. Claiming that someone in Congress promised to hold a trial of Josh Bolton and Harriet Miers

[niceypoo]

17. I am curious about something...

Whos side are you on? Bushes or ours?

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. Ours. What about you? Does it further our cause to make up facts to attack Democrats?

:shrug:

[niceypoo]

27. So you think that congress should hold Miers and Bolton accountable?

Or not?

[havocmom]

35. Yes, most of us (if not all) absolutely do want them held accountable

But, we can only hold them accountable to what they actually SAID.

In that light, we want you to be accountable to your assertion that the DEMS on the Hill actually said the things you assert they did in you OP. Since you used their failure to live up to what you tell us they actually said, we feel justified in asking for links that they actually said what you assert they said.

Not too hard. You made a claim. You attacked them based on your claim. You have, thus far, refused to back up your claim.

Nice tactic. We've seen it before. We've seen it a lot. It is not debate nor even discussion. It's a tactic, a tactic used when the argument really has no legitimate base.

If you really care about the issue, it would be helpful to the cause if you could hone your debate/discussion skills. DU is a great place to do that. Please take our constructive criticism in the vein it is intended. Most here want to encourage effective discussion and advancement of liberal, Democratic issues. That goal is served by helping each other actually improve out abilities to make our case.

Link to assertions in OP?

[niceypoo]

37. So, its about your ego then?

"LOL"

One word sums up our congress, Milquetoast; face it.

[havocmom]

43. Again, you make an accusation you cannot back up with fact

You know nada about me. You know nothing of what I have or have not done. Yet, you make ad hommine attacks on anyone who dares to just ask you one basic question: LINKS?

Not my ego that seems to be tripping you up in a debate.

[Freddie Stubbs]

42. Of course they should be held accountable. But is it necessary to fabricate lies to do so?

:shrug:

[havocmom]

26. 'you're either with us or with the terrorists!' but no evidence...Nice tactic.

Where have we seen THAT ONE used?

[cali]

38. The irony is....... that's such a bushian "question"

get stuffed.

[rateyes]

15. Leahy caved like a Utah coal mine....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3577363&mesg_id=3577363

Why the hell vote out contempt charges if you're not going to try the case? They are now complicit.

[cali]

20. Ignorant bullshit n/t

[rateyes]

33. Yes, you're position on the matter is ignorant bullshit. nt

[niceypoo]

22. The democratic congress' menu is down one single item.....

Milquetoast

[rateyes]

34. That's a good way of putting it.

[progressoid]

39. Damn! Put a picture warning on that sucker! Yikes, that's scary.

:) K&R.

[BlueJac]

44. You know.......

The Democrats are cowards, they sometimes say a couple of tough things like, "I'm going to..." and "you better turn over...." or "I will hold up...". They just don't know how to confront bullies and lawbreakers.


I have actually given up on all of them, I hate cowards.

[mikelgb]

45. ouch I read the word 'doormat' as 'democrat' and didn't skip a beat