Waxman Meets Impeachment Delegation, Says He Will Keep Open Mind, Wasn't Aware Of Inherent Contempt

[Hissyspit]

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/25571

Waxman Says He Will Keep an Open Mind on Impeachment
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2007-08-09 02:46. Impeachment
By Marcy Winograd

Congressman Waxman, Chair of the House Oversight Committee, told an impeachment delegation meeting with him in his Los Angeles office, Tues., Aug. 7, 2007, that he would mull over his constituents' articulate arguments, watch the Bill Moyers' interview on impeachment, and weigh whether there was sufficient evidence to, not just impeach, but convict Bush and Cheney. Waxman told the delegation it was not enough to believe Bush and Cheney were responsible for high crimes; his decision to support or co-sponsor an impeachment resolution must be predicated on the knowledge that there is overwhelming evidence for a conviction.

Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles, California's 41st Assembly District Delegates, the Los Angeles National Impeachment Center, and the LA Green Party participated in the office delegation, while a group of impeachment supporters rallied outside, holding Impeachment is Patriotic signs and a 14-foot banner that read "Impeachment is on Our Table."

... At one point one participant said, "Congressman Waxman, we are asking you to defend us."

At the outset of the meeting, Waxman expressed a hesitancy to come out publicly for impeachment, explaining that his role as a vigorous investigator would be compromised by taking a stand that could be perceived as partisan or partial. Winograd responded with, "At some point you, the investigator, have enough evidence to hold these criminals accountable. What is the point of continuous investigations unless an indictment or impeachment process is begun?" Showing some hesitancy, Waxman insisted that a successful impeachment trial would necessitate strong and convincing evidence to persuade both Democrats and Republicans that high crimes had been committed. In the next breath, Waxman recited a litany of Bush and Cheney's crimes, everything from the Iraq war to the outing of a CIA agent to illegal wiretapping. "You sound like you are delivering the opening argument for an impeachment trial," said Winograd. With good humor, Waxman nodded and smiled.

Towards the end of the meeting, Dorothy Reik, President of Progressive Democrats of the Santa Monica Mountains, urged Waxman to use the "inherent contempt" power of Congress to bring criminal charges against Bush and Cheney and their aides, hold a hearing in Congress on those charges, and then hand down the punishment, prison time. Reik expressed frustration with the refusal of Bush administration officials to testify before congressional committees, despite the fact that subpoenas had been issued.

"Your witnesses aren't showing up -- They're ignoring your subpoenas," said Reik, "so it is time for you, Congressman Waxman, to recognize that there is a precedent for members of congress to initiate criminal proceedings." Waxman said he was unaware of the "inherent contempt" power. In a follow-up letter after the meeting, Winograd emailed him information on the "inherent contempt" precedent.

[EFerrari]

1. Go, L.A.!

:woohoo:

[calimary]

123. Yes! I was there - it was exhilarating!

We were out on the sidewalk. It was cramped, a very busy, heavily-trafficked, but relatively narrow commercial-district street in West Hollywood. Not much room on the sidewalk, either. A couple of dozen of us, at least. Nice people ALL. I saw Marcy there and thought she represented us superbly.

Outside, we got loads and loads and loads of honks from passing motorists. Even from some city buses and delivery trucks! LOTS of honking, power-fists in the air, thumbs up, waves, peace signs. I also counted one shaking finger and, from a limo driver, one "other" finger. And early-on, the police were called. A couple of cop cars came roaring up, sirens blaring (probably to clear a path in the late afternoon rush-hour traffic). They parked and several officers approached us. They were pretty mellow, overall. They took a bit of an issue with one of the protestors - a small, slight woman dressed in a baggy orange jumpsuit who stood with her hands tied in front of her and a black hood covering her face. The one police officer removed the hood to see who was under there. She had a brief and benign conversation with him, and he handed her hood back to her. The cops said they'd been called. We were peaceful, completely non-confrontational, and cooperative. We made a serious and ongoing attempt to avoid blocking the sidewalk (which wasn't easy, considering how little room there was, as is), and we were successful. We were respectful and polite and as mellow as could be. I met some really nice people, and saw a few others with whom I was familiar from earlier events.

And I collected a souvenir! A lady there had made up a bunch of orange wristbands that said "IMPEACH bush & cheney" (caps and lower case my own) on them in black, block letters. She gave me one. She was passing them out just on general principles. I, in turn, passed out some info on those TOLL FREE Capitol Hill switchboard numbers. The folks at the L.A. IMPEACHMENT center said they had some of them already, but not all of them, so maybe I helped a little.

MAN we got a lot of honks. And I was also amazed at how many fists-in-the-air there were among people driving by. It felt good to be there. REALLY good.

We HAVE TO press onward.

[grasswire]

2. unaware of inherent contempt?

God save us.

[WillyT]

3. HOLY CRAP That Speaks Brittanica's !!!

:wtf::banghead::wtf:

[proud patriot]

49. No kidding

and it explains why my rep. responded ignorantly when I
called her office .

[hisownpetard]

15. Unaware of Inherent Contempt? Waxman should join DU, STAT! n/t

[truth2power]

70. That jumped out at me right away. Inherent contempt...

Lessens Waxman's credibility with me. Doesn't he talk with his own fellow Congressmen? Watch TV? Read newspapers or the internet?

Sorry, Henry! You're not being truthful. Why is that?

[redqueen]

81. Yup...

hope we're not in for more theatrics.

[LiberalFighter]

115. If he doesn't know about "Inherent Contempt" then

either he is being incompetent and/or his staff are incompetent.


At the very least his staff should be doing their job and knowing what the hell is going on out in the real world. And letting Mr. Waxman know about it.

To represent the people he has to know the people.

[rucognizant]

119. Staff...........

They're just kids most of them. ( The phone answerers.....he older staff have more important duties.) They have little history, only 2 years out of 4 of civics in high school, if other places are like my County! Pop culture is very intrusive, & how many of them are distracted by lascivious e-mails from congressmen & Senators. Or have their heads turned a bit by the ambiance of traveling with Wash. insiders.
Even if one is super bright a straight A student, they just haven't had enough time & experience. It's up to US to help them learn new stuff! When you call don't just deliver the message/ request and get off the line. Chat with them.........tell them a story ( a facial expression/ body language bit that you caught on cspan, how you felt when________ or something that happened while protesting in the 60's, your personal pertinent experience ..........make them laugh....... It really works, they are interested in getting new information, because if they weren't bright and eager to learn they wouldn't be interns or staff members. ( Even Repugs...sometimes.......) Of course if it's good information they will pass it up the chain.
Excuse the quote. "It takes a village!"
Skip this if I posted ithere.......I can't remember...........I think it went to another blog.
I called Mike Michaud & Tom Allen, re: being two of the 3 to join in with Conyers on Kuchinich's impeach Cheney bill. Allen's intern told me that issue was n/a, and Allen had signed H. R. 333 which pertained to dropping taxes on recent vets. I looked it up on Thomas ( H of R) and discovered that Kuchinich's bill was named H. Res. 333.
House Rule 333 ( about the taxes) House RESOLUTION 333 about the impeachment!!! I printed that all out to send to their offices.
I read a lot of valuable information here....is it going out THERE?
Or just recycling in the choir?

[calimary]

125. Welcome to DU!

Yes, it does filter outward, and you are VERY smart and shrewd to help educate these young 'uns. Hey, look, if veteran congressmembers don't have a clue about "inherent contempt," how could we expect their very young assistants to know this stuff?

If Henry Waxman wasn't aware of it, and remember how thorough and long-standing he is, I'd guess most of his colleagues never heard of it, either. But then again, they've never been faced with THIS unique level of executive branch criminality before. Whooda thunk it would ever even have to come up? But then again, whooda thunk we'd ever have this kind of criminal in the Oval Office?

Good work! Glad you're here! We need you and your activism for sure!

[peace frog]

88. Unfathomable

How can it be that us regular folks know about Inherent Contempt of Congress, but a US Congressman does not?! If I felt betrayed by Congress because of FISA before, it was in the presumption that they were at least in possession of this basic knowledge. Now, I feel not only betrayed but disgusted and baffled beyond belief.

I can see where this is heading, and it ain't getting better.

[Javaman]

99. I don't want to work, I just want to...

:banghead: all day.

good lord.

Well, it just goes to show that we are a well informed public. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. :rofl: :cry:

[sce56]

111. Unaware of Inherent Contempt but Fully aware of the cosequences on those who Buck the Bush Family

Like JFK, MLK, RFK, JFK-JR, Ronald Reagen etc etc etc etc.

[C_U_L8R]

4. unaware of inherent contempt ??? HUH ????

What was he thinking after those republican jerks didn't show up ???
"Oh well guess they didn't feel like obeying the subpoena" ????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[stubtoe]

76. He knows all this. Why is he playing with the LA delegation?

It's weird. I don't get this little game.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

5. OK, this confirms it. Our own reps have very little understanding of the Constitution.

Even the good ones.

I suspected this recently, after years of entertaining the apparently naive assumption that a representative who swore to uphold the Constitution might have an inkling of its contents.

MKJ

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. It goes beyond that

an empire does what an empire does

And at this point, even good reps may be having second thoughts about the constitution

Now inherent contempt, in his defense, has not been used since '32, but for god sakes it has been on the airwaves, oberman, rhodes... so they have no excuses

[LiberalFighter]

116. The first thing they should know about the Consitution

is that the Legislative Branch is in Article I not the Executive Branch.

[rodeodance]

6. I just learn of I. contempt a few weeks ago. He is a very buzy man.

[seemslikeadream]

7. he was unaware of the "inherent contempt" power

he was unaware of the "inherent contempt" power

[porphyrian]

8. Well, Congressman, now you know. - n/t

[flyarm]

9. How could Waxman be unaware of the "inherent contempt" power???

so many of us have called his office demanding they use it..so many have emailed and sent letters and faxes regaring inherent contempt..that just doesn't make sense!!
Conyers has discussed Inherent contempr..

where is the disconnect??

perplexed..fly

[hisownpetard]

20. Exactly. Makes you wonder if they ever read those emails. And if the faxes

shoot directly into the circular file right under the fax machine. (And I thought
Waxman was one of the best).

[KoKo]

24. That's a good question...particularly since Waxman asked if Dems wanted to be put on his E-Mail

a couple of years ago. I get "Updates" from him because I signed up for them...he was even asking for "tips" that folks could send to his website.

All I've gotten is updates on his investigations...but nothing personal ...just updates. He's NOT my Rep..but at the time he was calling for Progressives to sign up to get the updates from him. :shrug: Remember...I said that was a couple of years BEFORE Election '06!

It's not sounding good out there for our Heroes...Waxman and Leahy... What's up with them? Suddenly they are "clueless?" don't know what's in the Constitution? Leahy giving deadline after deadline to folks he's issued subpoena's for and Waxman sounding like he's not "quite sure" what can be done about Bush/Cheney? Why is GONZO STILL FREE?

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Threats? Anthrax....

you know I could go on...

But I am getting more than just suspicious

[KoKo]

39. If it's that bad...that our Dems

are held "hostage to threats" then what the hell does that mean for the rest of us.

Or...are they all IN ON IT? Just love the sound of "Unitary President" with unlimited powers....

This is getting unbelievable and on top of all the other unbelievable shit we've been through including "Selection 2000!" and the "Hunting of Clinton" for 8 years BEFORE!

I don't see how we can give more excuses for weakness unless we know what the TRUTH IS.....

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. Well, they think we cannot handle the truth

that said... I heard that from a Senator quite off the record

That they are scared for their lives

My view, they are in it, to their necks

They are part of the Corporatist party, partly because we are an Empire, and democracies don't work well in Empires. The Unitary Presidency is part of the Empire

Rome... Persia, even England come to mind, as well as Spain and Portugal

There are so many paralels that it literally scares me to death.

And after the last vote, all of this is kabuki theater, for the benefit of us the mindless masses

[dickbearton]

108. The truth is..

America is a corporate fascist state. Day by day, the
corporate fascist oligarchy increases it's power over the
people. 

[hisownpetard]

77. It's such an embarassment to know that Gonzo is still free, that he is allowed,

in all his glorious ineptitude, to continue to hold his position as the top law enforcement
officer in the country - and that Congress even voted to EXPAND his powers! It is strange
living in the land of Oz...

[hootinholler]

79. Between the phone and the rep...

I.E. Staffers who are just counting issues mentioned in phone calls and emails. All real information is apparently ignored. This is confirmed to me every time I call or write and get a form letter back.

-Hoot

[blogslut]

10. So, now he knows about inherent contempt

Good. :)

[tularetom]

11. Wasn't aware?!?!? Does his committee have a frickin legal staff

We're in more trouble than I thought. I always respected this guy as someone who knew the rules and had a stiff enough spine to enforce them. Now we find out he's groping for solutions and has no more of an idea of his powers than the spineless Pat Leahy. I guess we all need to stop assuming our reps know WTF they are doing and make a real effort to p[oint out what they can do and what we expect of them. I'm calling my congresscritter's office tomorrow to point this out.

[FourScore]

17. Maybe he ought to visit Du from time to time

He might get better legal advise.

[FourScore]

18. Oh yeah, and recommend.

This one will definitely make it to the top, IMHO.

[Pierogi_Pincher]

62. Ain't that the truth!

And not being aware re: I. Contempt?? I just don't know what to think anymore.
P_P

[OzarkDem]

22. Do they understand/know of Deep Modem's info?

Something tells me they don't. Here's a guy putting his career, family and life on the line and Congress doesn't have the decency to stay up with what's going on.

What are they watching all day, Fox News? I really don't want to know.

[KoKo]

42. It's hard to know

if "Deep Modem's Stuff" was real or more disinfo to throw the internet techie diggers off on a wild goose chase. But, I wondered myself if Deep was the DOJ guy Tamm that got raided.

What if...Deep Modem tried to send both Conyers and Waxman info when they asked for "whistle blowers" (both Conyers and Waxman asked folks to contact them...I can find links if you don't believe me) and what if Deep Modem or say some whistle blowers contacted both of them and found that neither really WANTED their INFO? Or, that maybe they passed info along to the Bushies....

You know if we have to think things like this...what does it say about our Government? This shouldn't be. We elect them so they will do legislation on behalf of the American People...not so they can be a Separate State in collusion with the Executive Branch! :wtf: is going on here????

[Wiley50]

46. Waxman Promised to Hold Hearings on Sibel Edmonds Allegations When We Got the Majority

Now we have the Majority
and he won't even return their phone calls

Can't say i have a lot of hope at this point

[FourScore]

56. I certainly have expected more from Waxman.

I always held him in very high regard, but I don't understand his choices now.

[hootinholler]

80. Don't forget the Halliburton hearings that were mentioned also. n/t

[redqueen]

82. Starting to remind me of the days under Clinton...

those two years with a Dem congress... we could have done so much.

*sigh*

[KoKo]

26. It's seemed odd to me that the House & Senate don't seem to have good Legal Counsel and

instead we have Bruce Fein (a Reagan Repug Lawyer) out there screaming for Impeachment...and our own Dems always act "clueless."

Something just isn't making sense with our Dems these days. It's starting to feel like we are being "gamed." I hope to hell that isn't true.

[tularetom]

30. I agree - something stinks

they could not be as obtuse as they seem and still manage to dress and feed themselves. I used to respect these people for having a depth of knowledge on a breadth of subjects. Now I just wonder if that was all PR to fool us rubes while they and the repubs schemed to rob us blind while they all split the profits with their corporate buds.

[OzarkDem]

31. The people who advise them

have an average age of about 25. Think Chandra Levy. Nice kids, too young to know squat.

[tularetom]

37. I'm afraid you are correct

My granddaughter's best friend from high school is in a fairly responsible position on the staff of one of our CA Dem congresspeople. She's like 24 or 25. She used to come over to our house to ride the horses and while she isn't Britney Spears or Paris Hilton, she isn't in danger of being invited to join Mensa. She's a poli sci grad from one of the first tier Cal State U campuses but is totally lacking in life experience.

[napi21]

40. Perhaps that is the real problem. Dems have hired young and

inexpensive aids and the Pubs spent their $$ on experienced lawyers. Since both parties seem to have access to lots of money, I don't understand! SHAME on Harry for not knowing, and shame on his staff for not finding out what the options really are!

[calimary]

122. Indeed. If he wasn't aware, maybe the rest of 'em aren't either.

Perhaps that's why they don't move. They're mired in the IMpossibilities.

Well, I'm NOT gonna let him get any rest. And I'm NOT going to go away and be quiet.

[AuntPatsy]

13. But isn't what investigating is for, to expose the criminals? How can you

expose the crimes if you refuse to investigate? And as far as the crimes not being apparent, I think it is pretty obvious that failure to adhere to subpeonas should be a pretty good reason to believe someone is hiding something...I would think.

[Gold Metal Flake]

14. Back off, folks. Give him two weeks to research.

Then we lay into him en masse. Plan?

[OzarkDem]

21. No

Its completely irresponsible of him to not even bother with basic research. He could have learned about it from reading the newspaper, for crying out loud.

Maybe we need to accept these people are unqualified for their jobs. Its time to educate them very quickly.

Unbelievable.

[KoKo]

27. House has Legal Counsel....Committees have Legal Counsel...they aren't clueless about this...

and if they pretend they are...then they are lying... :grr:

[OzarkDem]

28. I'm from Missouri

they will have to prove that they know WTF they are doing. It sounds very much as though they don't.

BTW, I've been lobbying Congress for 8 years, their staffers are no smarter or better educated than you or I. Also keep in mind that, for some unfathomable reason, some of the Dem leaders who took over committees actually kept the GOP staffers. :wtf:

[KoKo]

32. WHAT? That group of Young Repug Recruits from the RW Think Tanks & Religious Universities?

You have got to be kidding me on this. That's insane. There are tons of Young Dems out there who would love to have Internships or full jobs working to get ahead in their careers. I can't believe that Dems would use REPUG SPIES (and that's what these folks are...Goodling/Sampson and their ilk recruited by Karl Rove).

:eyes: I can't imagine something like this. Are they trying to PRETEND they are SO CLUELESS that they AREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS? NOW THAT THEY ARE A MAJORITY? :grr:

[OzarkDem]

35. IIRC Obey kept a bunch of them on

and probably others. The opinion was that these staffers who worked managing the committees (not regular office staff) knew more about how things worked and had experience to keep things running.

Dumb idea. I would like to know how many more GOP staffers are working for Dems.

[PATRICK]

105. Obey, the loudmouth

against confrontation?

Well, let's keep these things in perspective so we won't be constantly surprised. Outraged, yes. Let no euphoria of movement toward the right thing, like a gentle wave washing against a rock soothe the outrage.

The perspective is that we are still not fairly or justly represented in DC. We, the people. We, the sane, the middle class, the poor, you name it. Only the naive and the kooks think they have adequate representation in DC. The Dems have decided not to deal with the central legitimizing problem- an legitimate, rogue, incompetent president. The tiptoes move toward the bear-traps of the general election in timid hope and deferred courage. The aftermath will be some bluster and reform with the crooks sneaking away with their powder dry. Healing, they will call it. The same weak justifications will be used- in the face of a market meltdown and worse threats- to avoid catastrophe, or rather defer it to the pleasure of the Dynasty.

FDR made the deal when he could have lynched the bastards for reasons very similar. In our day and age you can't hide the truth so conveniently. The insult of this theater is that it is all bad, all fake, all known, reviewed in its original in need of serious editing.

When our shaky representatives are afraid, we fight and die in vain in stupid wars, in looted economies, in decaying societies without rights or hope. Small satisfaction if they too end up meeting the same fate which they largely don't, divided except in a cuddly huddle of self-protectiveness long after their office and fraternity has ceased to have any meaning or respect.

But this is what we always knew lay before us. Not individuals able to fix things, but a party in need of improved leadership, of grass roots change, of a unity of the people united in ANY sacrifice to uphold the law, civilization, America, hope, the future of our children, and duty to humankind and ALL the values held in the highest common esteem as necessity.

Long way to go.

[loudsue]

60. I'm with you, KoKo. They already know all that Waxman was told at the meeting.

He's a politician, and ALL serially elected politicians are good actors. Playing sincere and innocent are what they do for a living.

It's just so hard to get my arms around WHY in the hell they aren't going after the criminals inhabiting the white house and DOJ. But when all is said and done, they just aren't doing it.

:kick::kick::kick:

[NJCher]

102. that doesn't mean anything

House has Legal Counsel....Committees have Legal Counsel...they aren't clueless about this...

and if they pretend they are...then they are lying...


Knowing the way lawyers operate, they don't always tell their clients what they need to hear.

In fact, the only way to operate successfully with lawyers is for the client to practically become a de facto lawyer. I'm sorry to have to say that but that's the kind of people they are. Ninety per cent or so of them, anyway.

Lawyers are just as incompetent as these apparent boobs we have running the government.



Cher

[Stardust]

121. And Waxman has a law degree from UCLA

[robinlynne]

73. How about laying into Feinstein who voted for the fisa "ammendment" instead?

[Gold Metal Flake]

84. Follow your bliss.

But Waxman is the topic of this thread.

[robinlynne]

93. I was there, at waxman's office. Everyone was pleased with Waxman's

thoughtfulness. he listened. he heard. HE also explained that he doesn't think he should be the one leading for impeachment because he is the one leading the investigations whihc may lead to impeachemnt, and he would get no cooperation for his investigations. In summary we were all quite pleased with Mr Waxman's response. We all signed a letter right there insisting that he read up on inehrent contempt. He also promised to watch the BIll Moyer's tape this week, which he has and hasn't watched yet.
in other words give Waxman hell is just plain wrong. Noone at that protest had an attitude of give him hell. The prevailing attitude was "we need the help of our congressmen right now". he heard that. he said "you ahve given me a lot to think about."
Giving waxman and conyers hell would be not only stupid, it would be really counterproductive. but there are a lot of dems who deserve hell from their people right now.
waxman, not one of them.

[Gold Metal Flake]

100. Ah, now I get it.

You misunderstood what I posted in my first post in this thread (post 14). When I wrote "Back off, folks. Give him two weeks to research. Then we lay into him en masse. Plan?", I was referring specifically, and exclusively, to the shocking claim by Waxman that he was unfamiliar with Inherent Contempt. I was suggesting that we politely take him at his word, allow him an interval to research (as we trust he will), and then demand that he use the tools at hand, including, and perhaps especially, Inherent Contempt in his investigations of the Executive branch. I was not posting specifically about impeachment, nor was I ruling out impeachment, nor was I criticizing anyones efforts to direct his attention toward impeachment, nor was I criticizing Waxman's approach toward impeachment or lack thereof.

[robinlynne]

103. cool. and there are some people who need "laying into..."

[Gold Metal Flake]

107. When it comes to congress critters, it's a bit like driving mules.

Only we can't acutally use whips on them.

Well, maybe the Repukes, but they like that sort of thing.

[Ghost in the Machine]

16. Great article! Thanks for posting...

We all need to visit our congress critter and see exactly WHAT they are aware of, I guess. I'm actually thinking about working on the repugs here in Tn. I've emailed Steve Cohen several times, as well as Zack Wamp, John Duncan and Senators Alexander & Corker.

Maybe something will get through to them.

K&R :kick:

[BlooInBloo]

19. DU wasn't aware of it until a couple of months ago. Kos somewhat before....

... Better late than never.

[L. Coyote]

51. Thanks to Bushco, we are all just learning of these powers

IC is arcane.

[BlooInBloo]

53. True that.

[truedelphi]

23. I have often noted how the Pharmaceutical companies hold Waxman in their pocket

he has more than once come out with legislation to curtail the evils of vitamins, minerals and herbal therapies.

Thousands of people die each year from Big Pharma getting them on drugs that are not safe and for conditions where a little prudence would be better than pill dosing. So why the furor over vitamins? Why does Waxman collude with Big pharma??

I hope I am wrong and that he occasionally proves better than that. (Especially in the issue of impeachment)

[KoKo]

29. Maybe we need to research who gives money to Waxman and Leahy...

They shouldn't get a pass .... Big Pharma is having lots of trouble with lawsuits over bad drugs that they didn't monitor. Also pushing out drugs too soon before they were tested. They may be throwing buckets of money at Dems...but why should that stop them impeaching Gonzo and Cheney? Cheney's money is from DEFENSE Industry... and Gonzo is just Bushies Best Buddy they propped up from Texas. :shrug:

[truedelphi]

33. I've heard that the reasons for the Big TIme collusion

Of the Democratic leaders with the Repugs is blackmail.

And then one Du'er said that Wellstone was TOLD by Cheney to support the IWR or ELSE. ANd of course Wellstone and his wife, daughter, staff and two pilots did get theirs.

What would mainstream media say if someone like Waxman came forward and said "Cheney ahs threatened me."? And would the person who came forward be sure that he was not cooking the goose of someone he loved by doing that??

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. Here is the rub, if all of them came before the

press with evidence and exposed it... it would be over for the dolt, and especially if they demanded prosecution and ... impeached

But at this point, fear is the only thing driving them now... and fear is killing this country

I actually told pelosi that if that is the case, it is time to come out in a nationally televised press conference, and yes they can NOW get media, and just go on the air and expose it

I expect that letter met its fate at the shredder

[piesRsquare]

66. I personally believe (and have for many years)

that WE are that "goose".

This administration has been blackmailing the Dems using US--the citizenry.

Remember Michael Chertoff's "gut feeling" about a terrorist attack on US Soil this summer? Interesting, how after he reported his "gut feeling", the bill to start bringing troops home failed and the FISA bill passed.

Back in 2004, Cheney made the statement, "If John Kerry is elected, they'll be another terrorist attack on the country"...and look how quickly Kerry conceded the election.

There are other examples, too.

Don't ever forget the Bush Senior was not only in the White House for 12 years--he was head of the CIA. He still gets daily briefings. He created Al Quaeda. He's buddies with the Saudis. Don't ever underestimate his influence and power. He is a scary son of a bitch.

Valerie Plame was no petty "revenge" deal. Exposing her unravelled her entire network and un-did the entire WMD intelligence program she was part of--THAT CLINTON STARTED. When she was exposed, NOCs around the world--and their sources--were killed. We'll never know who, nor how many. But there is absolute guarantee that people were killed when Plame was exposed. Bush Senior and his buddies wanted that program gone, wanted those people dead (dead people can't talk). Why? Because they're doing business with the international criminals that Plame's group was charged with bringing down.

This administration "restructured" the CIA, frustrating long-termers, neutering those with important projects. People quit out of frustration, and people were "re-assigned". And for simple reasons: They cleaned out Clinton's people, and filled the CIA with their own. They've made the CIA useless when it comes to intelligence regarding the drug and weapons trades as so people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Kissinger, and the rest of their "mafioso" can keep doing business. Afghanistan is growing opium that Bush and his cronies are profiting from (in the 80's it was cocaine...however, it seems cocaine is making a comeback). The Pentagon didn't "lose" thousands of weapons...they've been smuggled/sold to the other side. Does anybody here actually believe that people in Iraq can be as desperate as they are, yet the "insurgents" have a seemingly endless supply of weapons, ammo, and explosives?

The reason for all of this is very simple: When you control both sides, you always win the game. If you put money down on both teams, you'll never lose a bet. These people aren't leaders. They're businessmen. It's all just business to them. They don't care about anything else...just the money and the business. Nothing else exists to them.

I don't believe for one second that people like Waxman, Pelosi, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, and others are part of this crime ring. I especially don't believe Bill Clinton was/is into it. Leaders like Clinton and the others I listed are terrible for the Bush-Mafia business. Which was why they set out to destroy him. Why they set out to destroy Kerry. The person likely to serve this nation's best interests is the one whom the Republicans set out to slander and destroy--which is one reason I have my eye on Edwards (the haircut crap, the house, calling him a "faggot", etc).

I believe the Democrats in Congress have been threatened with the lives of the American People. THAT is what is is scary to me. Put impeachment back on the table and a bomb will go off in San Francisco. Refuse to pass FISA and gas canisters will blow in the Chicago subways. A part of me feels that Nance Pelosi is painfully doing what she has to do to protect the lives of the people--Californians in particular--in her "lovely family" remarks about Bush and saying no to impeachment proceedings. These monsters have already hit New York (East Coast), Katrina took care of New Orleans (lower U.S.). Bush hates California and he's got a buddy in the governor's seat here(Schwarzefucker); I've always had the feeling that we're next on the hit list. I always knew we were next in line to have our elections rigged.

Anyway...my two cents.

[truedelphi]

124. If what you say is true, and I for one am leaning that way since last weekend's

Vichy Dem capitulation, then all of the people I know that say it makes no sense to be involved politically are right.

I mean, it still makes sense to get involved for the local scene, the dog catcher, the school board, etc - but why bother with the Congressional seats or the Presidency??

[grasswire]

25. I'm remembering that no congressperson believed the AWOL stuff

In 2000, thousands of e-mails, FAXes, phone calls, personal visits, and more went out to congresscritters and members of the press from citizen-researchers who had documented Bush's AWOL scandal.

It wasn't until the Friday before the election that one of them actually understood the facts. Senator Bob Kerrey woke up to it, and called a press conference to ask Bush to explain his record.

All those months, no one could get the message through. BAH! BAH!

[KoKo]

34. Starting to sound like they didn't WANT TO BELIEVE IT....

We've had 6 1/2 years of this evil/radical Administration after a STOLEN ELECTION...and no one knew that Son of Poppy had some BIG PROBLEMS? That's just too unbelievable.....

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. It goes beyond that

this is an empire now

And in an empire we are just gadflies

The republic's dead and all of them are in it.

Cynical... perhaps, but Occam's razor applies here

[KoKo]

43. so....

the Empire puts out a few Stooges who act tough and we all believe in them ...that they are going to do the honorable legal thing and hold criminals in the WH accountable...and instead they are "ringers" who are just out there for the show to get the believers into the big tent?

Pick a guy who marched with MLK (Conyers) ...then Leahy (tough former prosecutor who seems to have voted
against Repugs most of his life), then Waxman {who's known as a BULL DOG and stickler for details and who ferrets out and catalogs criminality for fun), and throw in Pat Fitzgerald...{Mr. Clean who has creds that no one can deny...a latter day Elliot Ness) and after all is said an done...they ALL CRASH AND BURN?

I need to go back to re-read some Robert Ludlum spy novels to get up to speed on this.

But...as I said upthread....something smells about all of this. Too much "cluelessness" that seems to make Dems and anyone associated with them seem to be idiots compared to the Great Rove/Bush/Cheney Crowd who just never seem to lose.

Life doesn't work that way. No one could have the power of Rove/Bush/Cheney with their poll numbers and what they've done and still be in power....WITHOUT LOTS OF HELP...

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. You are right

and this is why even Scooter walked

He is a good servant of the Empire

And as I said upthread, I have come to the conclusion all of this is kabuki theater and they are on it

We are well beyond Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent stage, or Howard Zinn

What is worst... perhaps... Nader was right...

Or how did Chomsky put it? team A, the Pubs and team B, the dems

[KoKo]

48. I just saw your reply upthread

before I posted this...Yep...something isn't good. And, while I've not been one who thought everything was rotten to the core...and that it's so bad it needs to be brought down and we need to start over...I'm beginning to think that what's been said by Gore Vidal/Chomsky and Zinn is the dreadful reality.

Problem is that you can get so depressed with all that...you can't function. The SOLUTIONS to what we suspect is the truth...just aren't out there. This isn't a country where people have free time to go around becoming anarchists. We've been so beaten down...most of us are trying to get by...finding health insurance if we can, keeping a job or working two and three jobs and with both parents and kids all trying to do this...who is going to be trying to crash the system?

so...either give up and live with the empire and let it burn itself out and take us or our kids and grandkids with it...or keep trying to go at the power structure. Build alternatives to the Powerful RW Think Tanks...get our own Media and fight like hell for them not to take it away, and try to get rid of debt and live as self sustainably as we can. It sounds like a miserable life. One more suited to what the folks in the Soviet Union or Communist China had to do. I didn't think it would come to this in my lifetime. But, I know that this kind of stuff can eat into your mind and screw your brain if you aren't part of a University or have some independent way to get away from it.

I think we have to keep doing what we are doing...Networking and working with like minded groups. Keep the phone/fax/thing...going. Eventually something will have to give. We don't have any other tools right now...and until we find some more leverage...we just have to keep at it. Those of us who care and can do it...without going into depression or burn out... What else can be done? :shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. National Strike

the problem is that strikes, let alone national ones, were taken out of the American way of life a generation or two ago

But one of those, would quickly get their attention

And that is the begining

What we need is direct action, but shh, Idol is on... and as you said, people are busy living

That was done on purpose, the 60s scared the power structure to the core

[AuntPatsy]

59. LOL funny and yet sadly true, Idol is on, such avenues I think have been

made in order to turn our attention away from what is realy important, I for one do not watch Idol but it could be something else that keeps the attention away for so many of us.

How much are the citizens of this country willing to give up? That is a key question. One of the ways they gain momentum is through the religious zealouty, I don't understand how easy some can be swayed by fear of something that might or might not happen after one dies? I just don't get that kind of fear but it is definately used on far too many and works far too well.

Religious beliefs are a huge hurdle to jump in this fight for winning back our government and once honorable country.

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. I write a role playing game

I created, for fluff, a full religion out of full cloth

The chapter is headed by Marx's dictum... Religion is the Opium of the People

I used other quotes trhoughout the book

Sadly, this game world is based on today... and I fear the kids who play it will miss it completely

After all Idol is on tonight... on TNN... Tashkeni News Network, or CNN, same shit, different century... at one time it was bread, circus and lions

[AuntPatsy]

58. I firmly agree with you, it won't be easy, are people willing to give up their comfort zones?

If not this country is lost.

[Pierogi_Pincher]

64. "Eventually something will have to give."

That's the internal message I've been getting lately.
FWIW, I clicked a link earlier related to the latest contaminated seafood news from you know where, and posters' comments there were 99% P-Oed content; i.e, this admin. and how we should "take America back". Something will get the general population's attention sooner or later. Just hope it's not something drastic.
P_P

[AuntPatsy]

57. Agree, I love your post, rethinking a plan of attack to win back our country

needs to be set in motion, and this time, we have to be more involved, well more of us, many many more of us, this is a huge country and MILLIONS of citizens are in disgust at this administrations antics, they cannot win if we all come together despite our differences, we have to come to some sort of alliance.....

[tekisui]

69. something, one day, will shake the People into action

Each disaster, each failure, each lie that We see angers more of Us and builds more rage inside each of Us. We have passed the tipping point. We are nearing a Critical Mass. The Hundreth Monkey. Something will happen, intentional or unexpected, that will strike the People into action. It's happeneing every day. Something will knock all of us out of our Comfort Zones, not just New Orleans, or soldiers, or a few on a bridge. When that happens, nothing will be able to hold the People back.

[hisownpetard]

118. I wonder if anything could stir or disturb the average American enough to shake

him/her out of their comfort zone? I mean, we watched people being
killed in Viet Nam while eating our TV dinners and kind of got used
to the idea of televised death and destruction, sandwiched in between
commercials for breath fresheners and diet pills.

"We" let Bush steal two elections for himself and his contemptuous cronies,
and were afraid to object to his trashing of our Constitution because what if... I mean, just
what if 9/11 were to happen again, and we turned out to look like fools for not believing him?

If the country has not risen up by now against this idiot czar who cares nothing for
honesty, integrity, diplomacy, decency, fairness, respect, tradition and the rule of law,
what's left to stir us to revolt? While there is that tight core of people (DUers included)
who do feel as you've described in your post, there is still that 28% of brain-dead droolers
who will never give up or give in.

So it seems that, after all these abysmal years of Bush's bullying, shredding
and taking pot shots at all the things that once made us proud, nowadays
just about the only thing that ain't hurtin' is Halliburton.

[proud2BlibKansan]

47. Californians, I LOVE YOU!!

Thank you for doing this. We ALL should be meeting with our congress reps and pounding this message until they get it!!

[KoKo]

50. Yep...Hold them ACCOUNTABLE! They think we are Stupid ...Sheeple...Media Indoctrinated

They NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE!

[deacon]

52. k + r

[VP505]

54. After reading that article

it seems to me that forming an "office delegation" in each state party to meet with Dem House members and Senators one by one might just be the thing to turn them around. If it accomplishes nothing else it could eliminate any excuse of "not knowing" about "inherent contempt" and like procedures plus no one should come away from such a meeting not knowing exactly where that Rep stands on issues like impeachment.

[orleans]

63. didn't know about it--my ass! i wrote him a lengthy two page letter

several weeks ago, explaining it, saying the words: INHERENT CONTEMPT, and telling him to USE IT!

didn't hear of it....oh REALLY??

[halobeam]

72. I do not believe he didn't know about inherent contempt.

No way, no how. WHY he would state that is more scary to me. He'd rather look like an inept fool, than state why he isn't using it.. makes ya think "not so pretty" things about his motives.

Damn. He takes us for idiots.

[orleans]

83. wish someone could get this for randi rhodes to see--waxman is her

congressman and she adores him, from what i understand

[jackstraw45]

92. Do you actually think members of congress read letters and emails from us?

Two words for you:

Staff and Autopen.

[orleans]

94. you know, i was kinda being sarcastic saying of course he knew

about it because i wrote him a letter.

(tho i did write a letter talking about inherent contempt)

i think it's mind blowing that he is saying he never heard of this. if it's true--he should take a second look at the people he depends on to keep him on top of things.

[Vidar]

65. Thank you LA.

[Disturbed]

67. Did Waxman send US Marshal to locate that General who

ignored Waxman's Subpoena? Was I mis-informed about that? It is flabbergasting that he said that he wasn't aware of "Inherent Contempt". He damn sure knows now so what will be his next explanation when his Subpoena is ignored?

[Vidar]

68. Don't know. Sorry.

[KoKo]

71. Actually it was reported that he did...but the US Marshalls couldn't find the General...

Amazing isn't it. They just couldn't find him. There was a thread here on DU about it and it was reported on MSNBC. Must have been a stunt or the US Marshalls didn't look very hard....

[Hissyspit]

74. Thanks, I missed that. n/t

[OzarkDem]

75. Remember the Texas Killer D's?

The state legislators who went into hiding as a way to refuse voting on bad GOP legislation (it was a budget, IIRC). Tom Ridge used Homeland Security planes, etc. to track them down in a hotel room in north Texas.

But we can't find this guy?

[creeksneakers2]

78. Waxman was probably just being polite

Inherent contempt is only available to punish those who interfere with the orderly business of a house of Congress. It can't be used to prosecute criminal offenses. One of the movement people at the meeting, who didn't understand which powers Congress has and doesn't have said:

Toward the end of the meeting, Dorothy Reik, President of Progressive Democrats of the Santa Monica Mountains, urged Waxman to use the "inherent contempt" power of Congress to bring criminal charges against Bush and Cheney and their aides, hold a hearing in Congress on those charges, and then hand down the punishment, prison time. Reik expressed frustration with the refusal of Bush administration officials to testify before congressional committees, despite the fact that subpoenas had been issued.

Perhaps, instead of embarrassing the woman, Waxman just said he hadn't heard of that power.

[Generator]

98. Wow that sounds like what they used

on Sheehan et all in Conyers office. I must say I join them in my contempt of all of congress. Orderly business! Yes, they get so MUCH done-approving whatever Bush wants.

Still waiting for them to act like it's their duty to uphold the constitution.

[Gold Metal Flake]

85. This story has hit the front page of Daily Kos

Waxman's ears must be burning.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/9/13058/42383

[KoKo]

86. Poster Kagro X says "Inherent Contempt" on p. 36 of Congressional Oversight Manual!!!

WTF?

This is the Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight.

Do you want to know where I learned about inherent contempt? In the Congressional Oversight Manual (PDF).

Yeah. Tough to find. Starts on page 36 if you know anyone who might be interested in, you know, enforcing their subpoena power.

Now I don't know how accurate that quote -- or rather, paraphrase, I guess -- actually is. But the truth, unfortunate as it is, is that you can never simply assume your Members of Congress know what they're doing. That's why I asked back in April, "Does your delegation know what inherent contempt is?"

Did anybody write Waxman? Or did we just figure he knew?

* ::

[Gold Metal Flake]

87. Link to download manual

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30240.pdf


It starts on sheet 36 of the document, but sheet 42 of the PDF version, if you get what I mean.

Text is copied below. Sorry for the usual formatting disaster when one copies text from a pdf.

C. Enforcement of the Investigative Power
1. The Contempt Power.
While the threat or actual issuance of a subpoena normally provides sufficient
leverage to ensure compliance, it is through the contempt power, or its threat, that
Congress may act with ultimate force in response to actions that obstruct the
legislative process in order to punish the contemnor and/or to remove the obstruction.
The Supreme Court early recognized the power as an inherent attribute of Congress’s
legislative authority, reasoning that if it did not possess this power, it “would be
exposed to every indignity and interruption that rudeness, caprice or even conspiracy
may mediate against it.”18
There are three different kinds of contempt proceedings. Both the House and
Senate may cite a witness for contempt under their inherent contempt power or under
a statutory criminal contempt procedure. The Senate also has a third option,
enforcement by means of a statutory civil contempt procedure.19

(a) Inherent Contempt

CRS-37
20 See Anderson v. Dunn, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 204 (1821); see also McGrain v. Daugherty,
273 U.S. 135 (1927).
21 The 10 officials are as follows: Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (1975); Secretary of
Commerce Rogers C. B. Morton (1975); Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Joseph
A Califano, Jr. (1978); Secretary of Energy Charles Duncan (1980); Secretary of Energy
James B. Edwards (1981); Secretary of the Interior James Watt (1982); EPA Administrator
Anne Gorsuch Burford (1983); Attorney General William French Smith (1983); White
House Counsel John M. Quinn (1996); and Attorney General Janet Reno (1998).
Under the inherent contempt power, the individual is brought before the House
or Senate by the Sergeant-at-Arms, tried at the bar of the body, and can be
imprisoned. The purpose of the imprisonment or other sanction may be either
punitive or coercive. Thus, the witness can be imprisoned for a specified period of
time as punishment, or for an indefinite period (but not, at least in the case of the
House, beyond the adjournment of a session of the Congress) until he agrees to
comply. The inherent contempt power has been recognized by the Supreme Court
as inextricably related to Congress’s constitutionally-based power to investigate.20
Between 1795 and 1934 the House and Senate utilized the inherent contempt power
over 85 times, in most instances to obtain (successfully) testimony and/or documents.
The inherent contempt power has not been exercised by either House in over 70
years. This appears to be because it has been considered too cumbersome and timeconsuming
to hold contempt trials at the bar of the offended chamber. Moreover,
some have argued that the procedure is ineffective because punishment can not
extend beyond Congress’s adjournment date.
(b) Statutory Criminal Contempt
Congress recognized the problem raised by its inability to punish a contemnor
beyond the adjournment of a congressional session. In 1857, Congress enacted a
statutory criminal contempt procedure as an alternative to the inherent contempt
procedure that, with minor amendments, is codified today at 2 U.S.C. §§192 and 194.
A person who has been subpoenaed to testify or produce documents before the House
or Senate or a committee and who fails to do so, or who appears but refuses to
respond to questions, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to
$100,000 and imprisonment for up to one year. A contempt citation must be
approved by the subcommittee, the full committee, and the full House or Senate (or
by the presiding officer if Congress is not in session). After a contempt has been
certified by the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House, it is the “duty”
of the U.S. Attorney “to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action.”
The criminal contempt procedure was rarely used until the twentieth century, but
since 1935 it has been essentially the exclusive vehicle for punishment of
contemptuous conduct. Prior to Watergate, no executive branch official had ever
been the target of a criminal contempt proceeding. Since 1975, however, 10 cabinetlevel
or senior executive officials have been cited for contempt for failure to produce
subpoenaed documents by either a subcommittee, a full committee, or by a House.21
In each instance there was substantial or full compliance with the document demands
before the initiation of criminal proceedings. However, following the vote of
contempt of EPA Administrator Anne Gorsuch Burford, but before the contempt
CRS-38
22 2 U.S.C. § 288 d.
23 Christoffel v. United States, 378 U.S. 89 (1949).
24 House Rule XI(2)(h)(2).
25 Senate Rule XXVI(7)(a)(2) allows its committees to set a quorum requirement at less than
the normal one-third for taking sworn testimony. Almost all Senate committees have set the
quorum requirement at one member.
citation was forwarded to the United States Attorney for grand jury action, the
Department of Justice raised the question whether Congress could compel the U.S.
Attorney to submit the citation for grand jury consideration. The documents in
question were turned over to Congress before the issue was litigated in court. The
question of the duty of the U.S. Attorney under section 192 to enforce contempt of
Congress citations remains unresolved and has left some uncertainty as to the
efficacy of the use of criminal contempt proceedings against executive branch
officials.
(c) Civil Contempt
As an alternative to both the inherent contempt power of each house and
criminal contempt, a civil contempt procedure is available in the Senate. Upon
application of the Senate, the federal district court issues an order to a person
refusing, or threatening to refuse, to comply with a Senate subpoena. If the
individual still refuses to comply, he may be tried by the court in summary
proceedings for contempt of court, with sanctions imposed to coerce compliance.
Civil contempt can be more expeditious than a criminal proceeding, and it also
provides an element of flexibility, allowing the subpoenaed party to test legal
defenses in court without necessarily risking a criminal prosecution. Civil contempt
is not authorized for use against executive branch officials refusing to comply with
a subpoena except in certain limited circumstances.22 Since 1979, the Senate has
authorized the Office of Senate Legal Counsel to seek civil enforcement of a
document subpoena at least 6 times, the last in 1995. None have been against
executive branch officials.

[trashcanistanista]

89. THANK YOU SO CAL DEMS

FOR DOING THIS!!!!!!! From the bottom of my heart!!!!!!!:patriot: I am stuck up here with Doolittle and what we are doing is getting more democrats registered to get him out. We are working on the other front up here, yes, this is war!!!!

[Subdivisions]

90. I just called Waxman's office. And I fucking LOST IT! Holy shit!

I'm shaking right now.

I was told "I assure you that Cong. Waxman is aware of the inherent contempt powers of Congress."

I totally lost it.

"Then why the HELL doesn't he use it. I'm just a guy in my bedroom sitting in my underwear and I know about it! Just use it!" says me.

"Well, Cong. Waxman just feels that his time is best spent on other oversight matters and investigations. May I suggest that you also call your local representatives?" says Waxman phone-talker guy.

"I'm calling Waxman as a citizen if the United States of America and I have called my state and local reps who are worthless. I feel confident that I can speak for at least 60% of American citizens when I say that we don't care about those "other" investigations. We want investigations conducted as a part of impeachment proceedings. I'm just one guy in my house that's mad as hell and I guarantee you there are millions in this country just as pissed as I am." says me.

I went on for a bit but that was the gist of it.

FUCK! I need a beer!

[trashcanistanista]

91. Thank you TE, well put.

Have a cold one on me!:patriot:

[creeksneakers2]

110. I'm glad you called

I believe the woman from Waxman's office was telling you the truth when she said Waxman is aware of inherent contempt powers. The movement people who went to Waxman's office were probably confused.

The impeachment movement has been infiltrated by Greens who would love to parasitically suck the life out of the Democratic Party. Popular demands that can't be granted serve the Greens very well.

The impeachment movement goes from top Democrat to top Democrat and gets kind words but no real support. After the meetings, David Swanson trashes the Democrat who met with them. The other day Swanson went off on Chris Dodd. It happens every time.

The impeachment people passed off a story about Conyers promising to begin impeachment if he got three more votes. That turned out to be a hoax. Another story from the same crowd said Nancy Pelosi was taking a phone in poll on impeachment. The fingerprints were erased from that one before the truth was learned. I don't believe a word these people say, especially when it sounds far fetched like this one.

I do agree very much that Waxman should use the contempt power of Congress against any witness who doesn't comply with subpoenas. So far Waxman hasn't done that. If he's let anybody off the hook that's inexcusable.

[SharonRB]

95. Unaware of inherent contempt?

Conyers is definitely aware of it.

[Elidor]

96. That's rather amazing

But, as has been pointed out, inherent contempt hasn't been used in a long time. And it's high time Mr. Waxman familiarized himself with it by helping to put it into motion.

Other than that, I've usually been deeply impressed by his thoughtfulness and integrity. His insistence on undeniable proof - proof good enough to get a conviction - seems prudent, if frustrating. He seems to be a very practical man, but he has no sense of urgency.

[steven88]

97. Not aware of inherent contempt? Does he know of the Intertubes?

[southern_belle]

101. Unbelievable!!!

:eyes:

I suppose he wasn't an attorney in his prior life, huh?

[mvd]

104. Inherent contempt is our trump card!

I surely hope we realize it..

[quiet.american]

106. Well, I'm glad to see Rep. Waxman is listening to delegations, instead of having them arrested.nt

[Beam Me Up]

112. THAT ^^^ Got a belly laugh!

[quiet.american]

113. :) n/t

[acmavm]

109. I don't know about this "He didn't know shit". Check out Wiki...

<snip>

Waxman attended college at UCLA, earning a bachelor's degree in political science in 1961 and a degree from UCLA's law school in 1964. After graduating, he worked as a lawyer. He was elected to the California Assembly in 1969 and served six years, until his election to Congress in 1975. In 2003, Waxman delivered the keynote address to the Political Science graduating class at UCLA in Pauley Pavilion.

<snip>

[Gonnuts]

117. While sitting ...

in the local hang, in the French Quarter one day two pretty young ladies came in with puzzled looks on their faces.

Now the bartender, Lisa, asks if there's anything wrong?

One of the young ladies asks if anyone had seen her brand new car she had parked just outside the bar?

Lisa asks was it a silver Mustang convertible?

"Yes", came the answer.

"They towed it. You parked in a 24-hour Freight Zone", Lisa informed them.

The answer coming from this sweet little things face was: "But we weren't there for 24-hours."

Yes they were blonds.

The look that Lisa and I exchanged is what I'm sure I looked like again reading that Waxman didn't know about Inherent Contempt. It's like an alcoholic saying he's never heard of vodka. It's the kind of statement that will ricochet around your skull for a moment before it exits your open mouth with, please tell me I just didn't hear that.

Is this a ploy? Is Waxman playing the fool by letting someone else bring-up the Inherent Contempt first so it looks less partisan? Let the pressure build from the outside in and then use the threat of arresting both bush and cheney along with anyone else that gets in the U.S. Marshals way as they collect evidence. See who blinks first.

I hope this is it. Because the alternative means Waxman should get his little wagon towed too, and that's scary. I would hope that the people in position of power, that have our future in their hands, would be at least aware enough to know what's written on page 34 of the Congressional Manual referring to powers contained within they may enact?

If not, screw it! We have drunk monkeys running everything and we're doomed!

[progressoid]

114. Holy shit. We're gonna have to send a memo to every member of congress aren't we?

[Divine Discontent]

120. not saying he didn't 'not know'

just saying, we all misinterpret answers, or questions sometimes. This guy is very intelligent, I would think he's heard of it, quite often. I guess we'll find out in the future for sure. It's late... Sorry if I missed something in the story. Interesting article, indeed.