U.S. Rep. John Conyers: Contempt of Congress Update

[marmar]

Contempt of Congress Update

Submitted by JC on March 28, 2008 - 10:46am.

As you know, the House voted 233 to 32 last month to hold Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten in contempt for failure to comply with subpoenas issued by the Judiciary Committee in its investigation into the U.S. Attorney firings and the politicization at the Bush Department of Justice. Speaker Pelosi referred the contempt citations to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and on February 29, Attorney General Mukasey responded that the Justice Department would not prosecute.

Along with the contempt of Congress vote, the House authorized the Judiciary Committee to file a lawsuit to enforce the subpoenas. (TPM has our complaint posted here.) On March 10, we filed in the District Court here in DC. Since then, the Judge in the case, Judge John Bates, has scheduled the first oral arguments for June 23, and we hope to have a ruling on the White House's most expansive executive privilege claims shortly thereafter.

I will continue to keep you updated on the case as we move forward, but I also want to recommend TPMMuckraker.com for excellent, up-to-date coverage. And as always, thank you for all of your support as we work to bring accountability to the Bush Administration.


http://www.johnconyers.com/node/205

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

1. Recommended.

I hope they take this all the way. In spite of the possibility our SCOTUS may further expand executive powers, at least we will have greater certainty about the future of this nation, for better or for worse.

[warren pease]

2. I guess the word "inherent" just doesn't roll right off his tongue...

Hey John -- Having a tough time getting them to even show up for a hearing? How to compel testimony? How to get them under oath? How to keep them from laughing at you one more time?

A tip: Say the words "inherent contempt" and those problems magically go away.

Free advice; no charge. But unlike most free advice, this could actually be worth quite a lot. Like maybe the survival of the republic if you can somehow get some truth out there quickly enough to stop the madmen before they nuke Iran.


wp

[L. Coyote]

3. We need a permanent solution. A ruling will do that.

Otherwise, you are having to do the same thing over and over, rounding up the crooks instead of having them show up!

[warren pease]

4. Well, there's a certain satisfaction in watching a parade of arrogant Bushies...

...who got used to ignoring anything they didn't want to bother with being led into the Capitol in handcuffs for their day in court.

I don't care if there's a definitive ruling that covers all of them, nor do they. They'll still continue ignoring subpoenas until the consequences are a little more severe than a strongly worded letter. Like they're arrested and shoved into the dock to testify in open session and under oath, with the cameras recording it all and even Fux and CNN finding it difficult to spin their way out of this one.

I'm OK with that.


wp

[malaise]

5. I can't wait n/t

[Voice for Peace]

6. I just sent a message to our future President, asking that he hold aggressive hearings

into the war crimes of the current administration.

I recommend more people send the message to him, by hook or by crook. The future of the world, not only America, depends on our taking a stand against all that has been so wrong. The pre-emptive war, the torture, the many deceptions.

[navarth]

7. why don't they send a Sargeant-at-Arms and arrest these assholes?

they can do that can't they? WTF?