Bush Admin: 'If Congress Holds WH Officials In Contempt-DOJ Simply WILL NOT PURSUE CHARGES'

[kpete]

When executive privilege becomes executive disdain
Published: July 22, 2007

The Bush administration, which has been pushing presidential power to new extremes, is reportedly developing an even more dangerous new theory of executive privilege. It says that if Congress holds White House officials in contempt for withholding important evidence in the U.S. attorney scandal, the Justice Department simply will not pursue the charges. This stance tears at the fabric of the Constitution and upends the rule of law.

............................

There is no legal basis for this obstructionism. The Supreme Court has made clear that executive privilege is not what the president claims it to be. It must be evaluated case by case by a court, balancing the need for the information against the president's interest in keeping his decision-making process private.

The White House's extreme position could lead to a constitutional crisis. If the executive branch refused to follow the law, Congress could use its own inherent contempt powers, in which it would level the charges itself and hold a trial. The much more reasonable route for everyone would be to proceed through the courts.


Congress should use all of the tools at its disposal to pursue its investigations.
It is not only a matter of getting to the bottom of some possibly serious government misconduct. It is about preserving the checks and balances that are a vital part of American democracy.

more at:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/22/opinion/edbush.php

[Unreconstructed Lib]

1. Impeach now!

[Blue_In_AK]

2. No question...

They've gone over the top. IMPEACH NOW!

[Disturbed]

5. Issue Inherent Contemp tommorow!

Impeachment can arrive after Josh Bolton, Ms. Meirs & Ms. Rice are in jail and then agree to testify Under Oath and all of the documents that are under Subpoena are delivered in full!

[MuseRider]

3. So what are you going to do about it?

I can hear him now. The only problem is that sadly we will probably do nothing. I am beginning to think they are all walking around with a "KICK ME" sign on their backs.

[SpiralHawk]

4. Smirk, smirk, smirk." - Commander AWOL

"We corrupt republicon cronies are special. We are better than the rest of you. We are above the law.
So you all can just eat my diapers. Smirk, smirk, smirk."

- Commander AWOL

[SoonerPride]

6. Congress no longer co-equal branch of government

The Executive has declared it so.

If they do not impeach him, they are ceding their right to Congressional oversight for all time and forsakign their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.

It is not matter of choice.

It is imperative.

If they do not, then we are lost forever.

[wundermaus]

7. Impeach Now!

No Justice, No Peace!

[Nite Owl]

8. If they cannot see that the only answer

is to impeach then they are complicit as well.

[Rex]

9. If George Bush won't allow the JD to enforce the law, based on a whim

then all laws are null and void.

Hear that JD, GWB is telling you to all fuck off and do what he says. Even if that means laws become useless.

[Disturbed]

11. Conyers, Waxman &/or Leahy can issue Inherent Contempt

charge and nothing can be done about stopping the violators from being arrested by Congress. Research "Inherent Contempt." One possible fly in that ointment. The House needs to vote on the charge.

[Rex]

12. Well I will believe it when I see the violators cuffed and stuffed.

Not that it wouldnt be a glorious day for justice! Just saying.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

10. K & R. I know this piece by John Dean has been posted here on DU...

...but it does seem relevant to this thread -- maybe someone can clarify the last couple paragraphs. Is he (Dean) saying Congress can do a parliamentary workaround of the judicial branch and hold Miers in contempt by their own authority? That's more or less what I get from it -- am I misinterpreting?

---SNIP---

Finally, if Miers is found in contempt, the House itself can take action against her at the bar of the House. (The Senate can similarly hold such proceedings.) Congress has the power to prosecute contumacious witnesses to require them to comply, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly reaffirmed this power. For example, in 1987, in Young v. U.S., Justice Antonin Scalia recognized "the narrow principle of necessity" or "self-defense" of the Congress in protecting its institutional prerogatives. Scalia said "the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches must each possess those powers necessary to protect the functioning of its own processes, although those implicit powers may take a form that appears to be nonlegislative, nonexecutive, or nonjudicial, respectively."

When all is said and done the only way Congress can protect its prerogatives is to undertake its own contempt proceedings. The parliamentary precedents of the House provide such procedures, by which Congress can effectively protect itself. There is no shortage of past instances where the Congress has held such trials. Readers may want to consult, for example, Hinds' Precedents and Canon's Precedents. Unfortunately, however, this machinery has become a bit rusty, for these procedures have not been used since 1934...

Source: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070713.html

[Disturbed]

13. "am I misinterpreting?"

No. You are correct. This is what must be done!

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

19. Thanks, and agreed! nt.

[HughMoran]

14. This is rather alarming

I hope the WH will choose to preserve our democracy. Why do I get the feeling that Bushco doesn't care if they initiate a second civil war?

[spacelady]

15. Like the serial killer wanting to be caught and deranged person

seeking "suicide by cop", I am beginning to think this is really a cry for help, so the truly merciful thing would be impeach, indict, imprison - anything - they want out!

[OzarkDem]

18. Except the cops aren't pursuing the criminal - they told him so

They've already promised they won't try to catch him or hold him accountable, he's free to commit as many crimes as he wishes - no one will hold him accountable.

[bonito]

16. K&R!

[Stinky The Clown]

17. It seems to me that those who oppose imepachment are the non believers.

What will it take?

[0rganism]

20. As bushco removes tools from Congress's toolbox, eventually only one will remain

and it's time for Nancy to put that one back on the table.

Fire right back at 'em: if the Bush administration refuses to enforce the law of the land as directed in the constitution, the Congress will pursue impeachment.

[The Stranger]

21. PAGING NANCY AND RUSS -- WE NEED TO IMPEACH, AND CENSURING ISN'T GOING TO CUT IT.

PAGING ANY DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN OR CONGRESSWOMAN -- WE NEED TO IMPEACH.

S.O.S.

S.O.S.

S.O.S.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

22. The shackles of a dictatorship become ever more visible.

A living nightmare unfolding before the world's eyes.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

23. 500 views -- 22 comments

:wtf: Guess we are resigned to this occurrence.

[abq e streeter]

24. Our brave Democrats

in congress will probably fire off a polite letter expressing concern. That'll stop 'em for sure .

[in_cog_ni_to]

25. Time to call the rat bastard's bluff. Call his bluff, then IMPEACH.

We may get rid of those psychos yet! They MUST Impeach Cheney first OR Impeach them TOGETHER. Cheney CANNOT be prez!:scared:

[badgerpup]

26. So...where, when, and what IS this 'Constitutional Crisis'

...I keep reading about?
Going by context, I'm guessing that our revered solons :sarcasm: will finally have had enough of being made fools of and fucking DO SOMETHING about it...
It was supposed to have happened several events back, but the only results I saw were a couple-three hearings that led up to ZILCH...and more abuses either revealed or being flagrantly committed.

WHAT THE HELL IS IT GOING TO TAKE?
Democrats in the Senate and House...I'M TALKIN' TO YOU!

:rant:

[Solly Mack]

27. but let's keep pretending this is just a normal part of our democracy

It's not just the emperor that is naked

[indepat]

28. As junior gives the Congress the middle finger, a chorus rings out "Do it to me one more tire for

once is never enough."