Skip to main content

View Diary: Hopeful signs: Leahy, Russert discuss contempt of Congress (138 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well What You (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Norm DePlume

    think is wrong. Show us where they have been dragging their feet when it comes to investigations and having hearings. It hasn't happened.

    "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

    by talex on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 09:41:37 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Over 60 Days since Condoleeza Rice subpoena... (6+ / 0-)

      ...still no action. I've read comments from Dem congress critters where even they basically shrug their shoulders and express disappointment, but still no action.

      Apparently they don't seem to concerned over Rice's contempt of congress.

      We gave you a chance, you betrayed us.-Cindy Sheehan

      by Zero Carb Rob on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 09:49:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There Is No Contempt (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MrJersey, Norm DePlume, Nimbus

        From all I have read the subpoena was approved...

        but never issued. So at this time there is not contempt as Waxman has not issued it.

        And knowing Waxman as the competent bulldog that he is I'm sure he has his reasons. He has a lot on his plate and establishing what Rice knows about the false charges of WMD is secondary to other things. It has pretty well been established in the court of public opinion that they all lied about WMD so Wax man has to prioritize and has other fish to fry.

        "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

        by talex on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:38:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Spin spin spin (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          praedor, labwitchy

          QUESTION: You received a subpoena this week from the House Committee on Government Oversight. They want to look into how the White House -- you were National Security Advisor at the time -- handled prewar intelligence. And Chairman Waxman said at the hearing that one of the things he wants to look at is a statement you made on this program back in June 2003. I had asked you about the famous 16 words in the State of the Union about Iraq trying to get uranium from Africa. Here's what you said:

          SECRETARY RICE (from video tape): "We actually do go through the process of asking the intelligence community, 'Can you say this, can you say that, can you say this?' The intelligence community did not know at that time, or at levels that got to us, that this --

          QUESTION (from video tape): Well, let me show you something --

          SECRETARY RICE (from video tape): -- that there were some serious questions about this report."

          QUESTION: That statement wasn't true. You and your Deputy had both received memos in October 2002 from the CIA about this intelligence and they had raised serious questions about it.

          SECRETARY RICE: Well, first of all, George, I have answered these questions for Congressman Waxman by letter and also in the questions for the record as a part of my own confirmation hearing. The fact of the matter is that we have made very -- we made very clear at the time that the Niger issue was in the National Intelligence Estimate. I've said, and I said in my letter to Chairman Waxman, that I did not remember, didn't recall, that there had been a memorandum from the CIA at the time, three and a half months before the State of the Union, saying that this should be taken out of the Cincinnati speech. And Steve Hadley has attested to the same thing. Maybe we should have remembered. We didn't.

          Interview on ABC's This Week With George Stephanopoulos

          Yeah, good thing the dems aren't "dragging their feet when it comes to investigations and having hearings". /snark

          We gave you a chance, you betrayed us.-Cindy Sheehan

          by Zero Carb Rob on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:50:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not certain (0+ / 0-)

            the subpoena was ever issued. Stephanopoulos may have misspoke or maybe he didn't. That's not the point anyway.

            Issued or not Rice claimed executive privilege. In order to see if executive privilege actually applies the Dems would have to take it to court. And as Pelosi said yesterday they are being careful about doing that because if they lose in a 'stacked' court then a precedent is set and they would be screwed from then on out. Like Pelosi said - "some of these things are not as cut and dry as you might think".

            I write this for the benefit of other readers as I know it makes no difference to you that there are legit reasons for proceeding slowly. You are here solely for the purpose of bashing Dems no matter what the facts are. You are just a Dem Basher who gets some kind of strange gratification from doing it.

            "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

            by talex on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:17:47 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Leahy's the right issuee (0+ / 0-)

          The threat here is that a partisan Justice Department will refuse to pursue contempt of Congress charges after an indictment is ignored.

          Given that, it's much better that the ignored subpoenas come directly from the Judiciary Committee, so that malfeasance by the DOJ is exactly what the subpoenas are about to begin with.

          Remember, this isn't just a procedural dispute. Ultimately this has to play out in the media and in popular opinion. It's a smart move to make sure that the entire issue at hand is compact, easily understood, and doesn't involve too many ancillary players. As it is, the story's simple: Bush has been abusing the Justice Department by using it for partisan purposes. That makes any attempt to use the DOJ to ignore the subpoenas part of the same abuse.

          By contrast, if it had been Waxman's subpoenas that sparked the showdown, we've got two issues--the DOJ and the Iraq War. The GOP would use that to play their usual shell game--they'd use the war to hide the corruption.

    •  Show me any real action. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      labwitchy, Nimbus

      Like you said below, subpoenas have been approved, but not issued.  Why?

      •  JUST A GUESS (0+ / 0-)

        If I understand the process, the executive privilege thing will end up in the lap of the Supreme Court, or more exactly the lap of Justice Kennedy. If I am the Dems I am going to try to figure  out how low I have to go to get it past Kennedy.

        •  "how low I have to go to get it past Kennedy" (0+ / 0-)

          That is an interesting statement. Can you expand on it a bit more.

          "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

          by talex on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:45:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If late is better than never (0+ / 0-)

            Let me me say you have two ways to go low.

            One is how far down the chain of command do I have to go. Kennedy may think that Congress shouldn't be able to require the POTUS or VPOTUS to testify. But  the AG or Assistant AG is fine.

            The second way of going low is how low criminal went. If you can go to the court showing that there is a  very good chance that a felony was committed you have a better chance than if you are pursuing the violation of an executive order that has no penalties

            You want to start below his threshold and ratchet up. You want the previous decision to support the next one. Thus building momentem

        •  simple (0+ / 0-)

          You friggin skip the SCOTUS entirely and go for inherent contempt.  Ta-da!  Fixed.  No problem.  All done.  Action, not mealy-mouthed words.

          Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

          by praedor on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:47:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Like Pelosi Said (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Norm DePlume

        yesterday - "we’re gonna let the process work out" and "some of these things are not as cut and dry as you might think". And she is right, things need to take their course.

        Obviously there have been subpoenas issued or this thread would not be here. Right?

        Now we must consider that this is not only a contempt matter but it also has an element of politics. I know people do not want to hear that but this is about politics so there is no getting away from that element. So that being the case the next step is another offer to negotiate - which has been done via a letter late last week. Next comes the response. Then we go from there.

        So when you say there has been no real action you are factually wrong. There has been plenty of action leading up to where we are now.

        This isn't a 90 minute Bruce Willis Die Hard Movie where there is an explosion every 2 minutes. Listen to Pelosi's statements from the blog call at the top of the link below.

        http://bravenewfilms.org/...

        "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

        by talex on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:43:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Investigations are nothing (0+ / 0-)

      It is all useless if it leads nowhere, and so far the investigations lead to nowhere.  All they do is investigate, get angry, send letters to express their exasperation and anger, and continue.

      Then there is the ole Condasleeza Rice subpoena.  How's THAT working out?  No follow-through, naturally, because this is the Dems we're talking about.  All talk all the time - no action.  No doubt they are holding back a really irate letter, hoping against hope that they don't have to send it, about her continually ignoring their subpoena.

      Yawn.  Their investigations are shit.

      Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

      by praedor on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:45:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site