BREAKING: Conyers and Leahy Name July 9th D-Day to Take it to NEXT LEVEL

[KoKo]

Conyers, Leahy to WH: Tell Us More
By Spencer Ackerman - June 29, 2007, 1:12 PM

July 9 is the new June 28 in the U.S. attorneys scandal, if House and Senate judiciary committee chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and Pat Leahy (D-VT) have anything to say about it. That is, it's the next phase of the White House-Judiciary Committee showdown.

In a just-released letter (posted in full below) to White House Counsel Fred Fielding, Conyers and Leahy signal their intent to hit back against the White House's claim yesterday that its internal discussions about the firings of nine U.S. attorneys are outside congressional scrutiny. The two chairman write that unless Fielding specifies the claim of privilege for each document being withheld by July 9, they'll "consider whether the White House is in contempt of Congress." A contempt vote in committee is the first step, to be followed by a vote in the full House or Senate. Experts say the process has never gotten further. But if the clash between Congress and the White House continued, the next step would be a referral to the District of Columbia’s U.S. attorney to enforce the subpoena by seeking an indictment from a grand jury.

more with quotes from their letter here.....

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003571.php

[SharonRB]

1. We're fucked without a special counsel

They've got the Justice Department and the courts stacked against us.

[Kingshakabobo]

4. ......and they know it. n/t

[SharonRB]

5. Of course they do.

We're stuck between a rock and a hard place and they've got us right where they want us. Damn them!

[cui bono]

10. Which is why we have to impeach Gonzo.

Come on already!!!

[KoKo]

32. Gonzo needs to Resign...he's a disgrace and it takes too much time for Fredo to be

impeached. Haven't heard of an Attorney General being impeached. Usually resignation was the "graceful" way out. With these criminals though....who knows. Bush isn't going to schedule a fishing trip...I wouldn't think...but who knows. :shrug: Maybe Congress can find a way to get Fredo out on that boat....

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blackhatjack]

8. Getting a Special Prosecutor Appointed Is Indeed The High Hurdle...

It sure is looking like this will go to the mat UNLESS time runs out or Bush and Cheney are forced from office either by impeachment and removal or resignation.

[Kagemusha]

11. Special counsels don't have greater subpoena powers than Congress.

If you're convinced the courts will kill congressional subpoenas, there is simply no chance at all that a special counsel could ever investigate any matter covered by executive privilege.

OTOH, there is a long history of Congress getting its way when push comes to shove. Right now, Congress just began to shove..

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. The only power the Dem Congress can count on, is public support for

impeachment.

[SpiralHawk]

33. But, but, but - that's the Day MERCURY goes DIRECT !!!!!

Brilliant timing !

The Dems must be taking a page from the republicon playbook !

Highly auspicious

[orleans]

49. "that's the Day MERCURY goes DIRECT "

what does that mean?

[SpiralHawk]

55. A basic energy pattern symbolized by Mercury moves forward

The planet itself, of course, never changes direction. But viewed from the Earth (think relativity), the planet appears to cease its retrograde (or reverse) motion, stop, and move forward. Considered potent.

[Divine Discontent]

36. which is the very reason I put my ticked off thread in the the GD forum!

they must be stood up against now! things are looking mighty grim, this calls for all good men & women to stand!

[mattomjoe]

2. I really hope this goes somewhere

but I'm done with holding my breath anymore

[KoKo]

7. deleted....by OP

[aquart]

3. A grand jury, you say?

God help their asses.

[OzarkDem]

6. Wrong answer

Impeachment is better. Dems will lose if they let Bush drag it through the courts. It will cause a little kerfuffle in the news, then disappear from the public radar as it works its way through the process where it will ultimately die.

I guess this means they've made their decision, sad to say its the wrong one.

[jwirr]

46. The same process is used in an impeachment hearing. Nixon

stonewalled on every request the Congress sent him. He just wasn't as stubborn as *ss. *ss has nothing to lose since his goal has been to destroy the government in the first place. This is the crisis that everyone has been hinting at. They own the Justice Department and the SCOTUS and they still have enough pugs in the Senate to stop us if they want to.

The only thing we have is the power of the purse and public opinion. We can only get the Senate pugs to vote with us if we keep the pressure up on the pugs as it nears the election. IMO we are not helping by pulling the Dems down with them. All of this hangs on the support of the pugs.

[MasonJar]

9. Is the Attorney General the only one who can appoint a Special Investigator?

[OzarkDem]

12. Gonzales needs to be impeached first

before they can get to the rest of the crooks.

Of course, the quickest way would be impeachment of Cheney, bypassing the politicized judicial system and DOJ.

[blogslut]

13. Good

May July 9 come real fast.

[Tom Joad]

14. They will not go that far, and they will NEVER impeach... not unless there is massive

protests on the streets. and their own jobs become endangered.

I expect they will work out some deal with W, and they'll call it a day.

I think they are pretending to do their job.

[L. Coyote]

22. This is a step in the Impeachment process, one of many. Where else does this road lead?

Unless you presume no crimes were committed. I was past that in Nov. of 2000.

And, it seems they have something to hide too. If crimes are evidenced, impeachment follows, or we can all just go home and not have government, just dictatorship.

[Tom Joad]

31. Takes a cop that has not been bought off to bust a crook.

Not enough in the House for that to happen... Hope to be proved wrong though.

[L. Coyote]

35. If Doolittle and a few others get indicted in July .... the makeup changes.

Or, in the case of Katherine Harris, the makeup will run! :rofl:

Remember, Abramoff's other buddies, Cunningham and Ney, have convict numbers now!
And more to follow, perhaps all the way to the top, up Jack's Ladder.

Things are really changing fast, unlike when McCain was holding his pre-election Abramoff cover-up hearing.

[Toots]

37. Yes but Democrats had nothing to do with it at all

:shrug:

[bigtree]

42. they do now

House Democrats expand Abramoff probe

June 5, 2007

WASHINGTON --House Democrats are expanding their investigation into ties between jailed GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff and the White House and have contacted several Abramoff associates recently about testifying to Congress.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/06/05/house_democrats_expand_abramoff_probe/

[mmonk]

54. Like impeachment followed Iran Contra?

The only steps in the impeachment process is to write articles of impeachment and put it to a vote. We may end up arresting plenty of underlings with the current path or issuing a contempt of congress charge and let it play around in the courts (primarily stacked with republican nominees) but we might not get justice and many breaches of the constitution aren't in the criminal code.

[tomp]

47. unless pretending to be the "opposition" is their job. nt

[Throwing Stones]

16. get ready for some foot stomping

and maybe they'll even hold their breath until they turn blue.

Breaking news July 10, 2007:

Several Congressional Democrats were taken to Bethesda Naval Hospital after stubbing their toes while stomping up and down and throwing a tantrum.

I used to have a lot of respect for these guys, but lately they've been all huff and no stuff.

[loudsue]

18. You know, this is really a problem with BOTH Dems & repukes in congress.

Even when the FBI raided Jefferson's office several months back, the REPUBLICANS in congress threw a fit, along with the Dems, because they didn't like setting the precedent that the executive branch (or DOJ) could just waltz into their offices any time they felt like it and snoop around and/or help themselves to papers. The split between some of the repukes in congress & the administrative branch happened BECAUSE of disagreements about that (Jefferson) issue.

So that tells me that the repukes don't like being marginalized by the administrative branch any more than the Dems do. And what bush/cheney/gonzo are doing (about these subpoenas) is NOT making the repuke senators look any more competent or powerful than it is making the Dems look.

IOW, bush is making the repukes look just as bad as the dems....like they're powerless.

Let me say this about senators & congresscritters: if nothing else, they have egos the size of the sun & moon put together. They like looking important to their constituents (and family, and donors) back home....as well as when they look in the mirror at their oh-so-impressive selves. Bush/cheney/gonzo are making ALL of congress look not quite so important, and I wouldn't be too surprised to see a LOT of republican congresscritters getting pretty pissed about being dissed by the White House.

:kick::kick::kick:

[mikelgb]

19. why give time to prepare

do it now

[DKRC]

20. Shredders are smokin as we speak

:grr:

[lovuian]

21. its in the constitution that Distric tof Columbia US attorney

has to do his duty

Constitutional Crisis heading our way

the Military needs to know where they stand as well as the Justice Departments

but I see States receding from the Union if things are not resolved

[drm604]

56. I think you mean secede, not recede.

In any case this is an interesting comment. Secession is not an option, Lincoln setled that, but I wonder what kind of power the states do have in all this. Can governors or state legislatures do anything?

[JerseygirlCT]

23. Do they really need time to "consider whether the White House is in

contempt of Congress"???

I think that question's probably been given plenty of consideration already.

[robinlynne]

24. and who exactly is the dc district attorney..... (rhetorical question...)

[bigtree]

25. deserves a straight answer

the current United States Attorney for the District of Columbia is Jeffrey A. Taylor.

From 1999 to 2002, Mr. Taylor served as majority counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee where he advised Chairman Orrin Hatch and drafted provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act.

Before his appointment as U.S. Attorney, Mr. Taylor served as Counselor to Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales from 2002 to 2006 where he oversaw law enforcement operations by U.S. attorneys. He was appointed interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia by Alberto Gonzales on September 22, 2006 and was sworn in seven days later; interim U.S. attorneys do not need to be confirmed by the Senate . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_A._Taylor

[robinlynne]

26. fuck. but then he is not legal. didn't go through the senate. which is exactly where

this started....

[bigtree]

27. looks like a huge conflict with the present investigations

"Mr. Taylor served as Counselor to Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales from 2002 to 2006 where he oversaw law enforcement operations by U.S. attorneys. He was appointed interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia by Alberto Gonzales on September 22, 2006"

[robinlynne]

28. BIgtree, I think this subject deserves it's own thread. The circle is amazing.

The fact that they acted unconstitutionally, and if are called on the cover-up, which is what this thread is talking about, the non response only, we are faced with their phoney prosecutors..... They have woven a semi perfect web. between the courts and the prosecutors.....

I.E. Those attorneys who weren't sworn in by the senate need to go YESTERDAY!!!! This is actually something we can do something about if we scream it to the senate.

I dont write well, or I would do it, will you?

[bigtree]

29. waiting for the contempt citations

this guy would rule on those, I believe.


"Contempt of Congress is initiated by a resolution reported from the affected congressional committee which can cite any individual for contempt. The resolution must then be adopted by the House or Senate. If the relevant chamber adopts the contempt resolution recommended by one of its committees, the matter is referred to a U.S. Attorney for prosecution. The U.S. Attorney may call in a grand jury to decide whether or not to indict and prosecute. If prosecuted by the courts and found guilty of contempt, the punishment is presently set at up to one year in prison and/or up to $1,000 in fines."

http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly9.htm

[Joe Chi Minh]

48. I think sentences should always be designated as: "no less than... and up to...."

particularly where politicians are concerned, because of their familiarity with lobbying and the use of influence.

[KoKo]

30. Taylor would have to recuse himself....but who would be chosen in his place?

That's the tough one.

[robinlynne]

34. seems to me there were 2 supreme court judges who "had' to recuse themselves from gorevsbush in

2000, and did not.

[robinlynne]

38. They are not in the habit of recusing themselves.

[KoKo]

39. Someone needs to remind them...then....n/t

[robinlynne]

40. Bigtree, I got very upset about mr jeffrey taylor, and started calling people and...

he is out in october! They all are. (the backroom appointees). It was part of the undoing of the patriot act clause by the senate. All interim appointees can now only serve for 4 months, as of the date they passed the new law, which was this past month.

[bigtree]

43. The timetable for citatitions and petitions to the US Attorney

might have him still siting there when one of these committees clamps down.

Got to look at this later.

[proud patriot]

41. perfect , that's the day I get back from camping

:)

[Hubert Flottz]

44. The NeoCon Rapture?

Go get 'em boys!

[Handsome Pete]

45. Here's an interesting quote fer ya....

"Control the coinage and the courts. Let the rabble have the rest." ---Jacob Broom 1752-1810: American politician


I think Broom was being sarcastic when he uttered this, but looks like someone in the Bush disadministration took Ol' Broom at his word. With Gonzales as the nations top cop (not my phrasing) corruptions has, and will run rampant.

[disndat]

50. I heard that Banana Republic

dictators first control the courts, then proceed to commit all the crimes they want. My question is, what if Conyers, Waxman, Leahy have solid evidence, people close to the WH ready to sing?

[Akoto]

51. They'll consider it?

Better to say that they ARE in contempt of Congress if they don't comply by the 9th.

[pat_k]

52. Oh goody! More excuses for escaping their duty to impeach. . .

Toss it over the wall to the courts.

We empowered Congress, not the Courts to impeach. We charged them with the duty to "support and defend." The Democratic leadership -- particularly folks like Leahy and Conyers -- KNOW Bush and Cheney are waging open war on the Constitution, and yet they dilly-dally. They tolerate the intolerable. They refuse to stand up and say, these actions demand immediate removal. From this day forward, we're going to do everything in our power to see them removed.

Our heroes aren't being so heroic these days.

[disndat]

53. What if

Leahy, Conyers, and Waxman have the recovered emails or the big canary sings, can the Supreme Court still say it is not enough to charge that crimes against the Constitution have been committed?

[southerncrone]

57. Guess July 9 will be the attacK Iran date.

They've got to come up w/a BIG DIVERSION for this. Paris Hilton is not enough.