"War" on Terror

Today at TPMCafe Senator John Kerry discussed ways our response to extremism and terrorism should be changed.  As so many well informed people have been saying all along about the "War on Terror," everything about the way our government approaches the subject needs to be rethought from the bottom up.  The basic strategy of Communist guerrilla recruiters, which was highly successful in so many places, was always to swell the ranks by winning over the hearts and minds of the local population.  Terrorist organizations have adopted roughly the same strategy.  The militaristic approach our nation has employed during the Bush years plays right into the hands of the recruiters.

More after the flip.

This just came out 12 minutes ago, so I'll just post the short AP summary, if that's ok with you:

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge has sided with Congress in its fight with the Bush administration over whether top White House aides can be subpoenaed by Congress.

The House Judiciary Committee wants to question the president's chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and former legal counsel Harriet Miers, about the firing of nine U.S. attorneys.

But President Bush says they are immune from such subpoenas. They say Congress can't force them to testify.

U.S. District Judge John Bates said there's no legal support for that stance. He refused to throw out the case and said the aides can be subpoenaed.

A hearing was held Monday on the issue of Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers compliance with congressional subpoenas related to an investigation of fired U.S. prosecutors. The House Judiciary Committee filed a lawsuit in March to compel them to respond to subpoenas. U.S. District Judge John Bates heard arguments from Irvin Nathan, a chief lawyer for the House of Representatives, and Carl Nichols, a Justice Department attorney.

During the three hour long hearing, Nathan said, "Not only doesn't it have the facts from the White House, it has false and misleading facts from former members of the Department of Justice." Nichols said Bolten and Miers have immunity and can't be compelled to testify about confidential advice they provided Bush.

U.S. District Judge John Bates, a Bush appointee said "Both sides have shown a little bit of intransigence," and "silliness."

It's a shame that this took so long, because it's this very process, where charges and investigations slowly cook and escalate that can lead to something starting with the letter "I".

You know that letter "I", the one that has been 'taken off the table'.

http://www.boston.com/...

Mukasey's ridiculous assertions, that lawyers operating under the protection of the Executive can do no wrong, and the implied acceptance that Executive actors when advised by these same lawyers can take bad advice and create 'facts on the ground', without recourse or oversight of of Congress .. are claims of power beyond irony.

Mukasey's claims are beyond irony, and it is treason to the concepts of the Separation of Powers, as outlined in our Constitution.

What a surprise?

Today, Attorney General Michael Mukasey "rejected referring the House’s contempt citations against two of President Bush’s top aides to a federal grand jury. Mukasey says they committed no crime." Mukasey claimed that White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former counsel Harriet Miers "were right" to ignore Congress’s subpoenas in the U.S. attorney scandal.

Yet again, the nations top law enforcement official refuses to enforce the law.  Rather than requiring that Bolten and Miers answer questions about how nearly a dozen U.S. Attorney's ended up in the unemployment line without a valid reason - while their positions were filled with political hacks like the one that prosecuted Don Sieglman - Mukasey has decided to pass.

But the story isn't over - not hardly.

Well, that didn't take long.

Yesterday, Nancy Pelosi gave "Attorney General" Michael Mukasey one week to answer her official referral of the House's contempt of Congress citations against Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten. Mukasey, toeing the "administration" line, didn't bother to wait, but did do exactly what he told the Judiciary Committee he'd do in his last appearance there: he refused to refer the charges to a grand jury, and will thereby prevent the U.S. Attorney from prosecuting.

For those who've somehow missed the story, that means that:

1. The Congressional investigation into whether or not the U.S. Attorneys have been overly politicized and are taking their prosecution orders from the White House will not go forward
2. because the White House has ordered the U.S. Attorney not to proceed
3. with the prosecution of the people who have defied their subpoenas and refused to testify
4. about whether or not the White House is calling the shots for the U.S. Attorneys.

Got it?

Subpoena power!

What happens next? The Judiciary Committee files a civil suit seeking to enforce their subpoenas.

What doesn't happen next? Inherent contempt.

[From the Frog Pond]

On Thursday, the House of Representatives finally found Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers in Contempt of Congress.  Two hundred and twenty Democrats and three Republicans voted for the measure.  Only one Democrat did not: Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas.  Cuellar got on a plane after that vote and returned to his home state.

Here is the Real truth about yesterday's Republican walk out.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

"During what was supposed to be a somber memorial service in Statuary Hall for Rep. Tom Lantos, who died Monday, the House chamber became mired in chaos over procedural votes," the Politico reports.

But Democratic aides were shocked when, during the middle of a memorial for Holocaust survivor and Congressman Tom Lantos, GOP Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart demanded a procedural vote on the floor, forcing members to leave the service early, even "while dignitaries were still giving tributes to Lantos."

"The disrespect that has been shown by a Republican member of Congress in calling a political procedural motion during the memorial service for the late Chairman Tom Lantos is incomprehensible," said Stacey Bernards, a spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.). "It is unjustifiable, and Republican leaders should restrict their members from further such action."

With a final vote of 223-23 the motion to find Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten in contempt for failing to honor congressional subpoena's over the politicization of the Justice Department - has passed.

Providing for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 979) recommending that the House of Representatives find Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten, Chief of Staff, White House, in contempt of Congress for refusal to comply with subpoenas duly issued by the Committee on the Judiciary and for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 980) authorizing the Committee on the Judiciary to initiate or intervene in judicial proceedings to enforce certain subpoenas

And it's about damn time too.

Today, thanks in great part to your advocacy and persistence, the House of Representatives took a major, tangible step towards holding the Bush Administration accountable.

In a vote on the House floor, we acted to enforce the law and our Constitution, and hold former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in Contempt of Congress.

While everybody has been caught up in this maelstrom of election hysteria, lets recap what went on today:

CBS Caves to White House Strongarming on Don Siegelman Story

Michael Mukasey will not enforce contempt citations on Josh Bolten, Harriet Miers and Karl Rove.

... he won't investigate warrantless wiretapping, either....

....or waterboarding...

...and we learn there is a super secret prison inside Guantanamo.

Just for context:

You're not getting your oversight.
You're still not getting your oversight.
You're still still not getting your oversight.

And now, your handy "oversight" timeline!

June:

House Judiciary Committee Democrats warned yesterday they would pursue a contempt of Congress motion if the White House fails respond to subpoenas for testimony and documents related to the firings of U.S. attorneys last year.

The deadline for a response is Thursday, June 28. If the White House does not comply, it opens the possibility of a constitutional showdown between the two branches.

July:

The House Judiciary Committee voted today to seek contempt of Congress citations against a top aide to President Bush and a former presidential aide over their refusal to cooperate in an inquiry about the firing of federal prosecutors.

September:

House Democratic leaders have decided to postpone a vote on a criminal contempt resolution against White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers for several weeks, and possibly longer, according to top lawmakers and aides.

October:

Democratic aides said a vote could come as early as next week. Pelosi’s office said no final decision has been made yet on whether there will actually be a vote or when it will take place if it does happen. The Judiciary Committee approved the contempt resolutions against Bolten and Miers back on July 25, but no further action has been taken since then.

November:

House Democrats have postponed a vote until December on contempt resolutions against White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, delaying for now any constitutional showdown with the White House over the president’s power to resist congressional subpoenas.

December:

The House contempt vote may come next week or be pushed into January as Democrats struggle to finish their work before Christmas.

January 14th:

In its first couple of weeks after it returns tomorrow, the House is likely to take up contempt-of-Congress resolutions against White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers for their refusal to appear before Congress for questioning about the 2006 removal of nine U.S. attorneys, Democratic leadership aides said.

January 22nd:

House Democrats will postpone votes on criminal contempt citations against White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, while congressional leaders work with President Bush on a bipartisan stimulus package to fend off an economic downturn, according to party leaders and leadership aides.

Go, "subpoena power!"

Yeah, I usually don't write about these things, but in this case it seems to be the right thing to do.

Today Bush has, once again, defeated the Democratic party. There is nothing left, just ruins and some smoke..

Telecom companies are going to get what they want and there is no time to do anything about Bolten and Miers.

And of course there is the filibuster..

More after the flip.

Things are accelerating in the FISA fight. Sen. Dodd has again threatened to filibuster the bill with telecom immunity, but Harry Reid, while nominally pushing for a short extension of existing law, is sticking the shiv in Dodd and anyone who wants to protect civil liberties.

Harry Reid -- who has (a) done more than any other individual to ensure that Bush's demands for telecom immunity and warrantless eavesdropping powers will be met in full and (b) allowed the Republicans all year to block virtually every bill without having to bother to actually filibuster -- went to the Senate floor yesterday and, with the scripted assistance of Mitch McConnell and Pat Leahy, warned Chris Dodd, Russ Feingold and others that they would be selfishly wreaking havoc on the schedules of their fellow Senators (making them work over the weekend, ruining their planned "retreat," and even preventing them from going to Davos!) if they bothered everyone with their annoying, pointless little filibuster.

I read that congress is again going to try pass SCHIP, thank god.  But what about the subpoenas against Myers and Bolton?  

The Senate Judiciary Committee joined its House counterpart yesterday in voting to send contempt of Congress citations to the floor against witnesses who've refused to comply with Congressional subpoenas.

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved contempt citations against Rove and Bolten on a 12 to 7 vote, rejecting the White House position that the work of two of President Bush's closest advisers is covered by executive privilege.

Earlier this year, the House Judiciary Committee cited Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers for contempt. But action by either chamber of Congress is still weeks or months away. Lawmakers and aides said neither house will take up the issue until late January at the earliest.

Procedurally, this puts the Senate on the same footing as the House. The judiciary committee has said the defiance of these subpoenas constitutes contempt. In both the House and the Senate, the full bodies must vote to approve those citations. If they do, they will be referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia for prosecution. That's Jeffrey Taylor, appointed under the now-defunct clause of the PATRIOT Act that permitted disgraced former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to install him in office without Senate approval, and later held over in the job by a vote of the D.C. Federal District Court.

Except for this, of course:

"The Department of Justice would not require a U.S. attorney to convene a grand jury or otherwise pursue a prosecution of an individual who carries out a president's instruction not to provide documents or testimony on the basis of the president's assertion of executive privilege," Perino said.

So the upshot of yesterday's vote is that the Senate is in the same boat as the House, which has had its Judiciary Committee's recommendation in hand for five months now, with no floor vote in sight. And even if that floor vote is taken, the White House says it will direct the DOJ not to prosecute. How that might effect the outcome of the vote itself is as yet unknown. It's said that Congress wants to proceed methodically, first taking the statutory contempt road to see if it finds itself blocked. Of course, there will first be the question of whether they can round up the votes for something "futile" -- which, of course, was the aim of the White House's comment.

It seems the game plan is still to try it anyway, and then when the citations are blocked by the DOJ, the Congress will try to sue it's way out of this fix. Of course there's always inherent contempt, which bypasses the courts entirely, and which has been getting more and more notice lately. But with the Congress pushing even the statutory contempt vote off repeatedly, it's unknown whether there's any serious consideration being given to any bolder moves.

UPDATE: What that means, of course, is that you could and should contact your Congressional representatives and ask what they know about inherent contempt, and tell them why you support it.

With Apologies to all.  Sorry this is going to be fast and loose as I am at my part time job.  Please forgive me for lack of personal detail here.  Busy day in Madland.

According to Rawstory:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee voted Thursday to hold two top aides to President Bush in contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate in its probe of fired federal prosecutors.

On a largely party-line vote of 11-7, the Democratic-led panel sent contempt citations against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove to the full Senate for consideration.

As with many of Bush's battles with the Democratic-led Senate, the president may ultimately prevail since his fellow Republicans may be able to block the citations with a procedural hurdle.

From Politico.com Senator Patrick Leahy has set a vote for Thursday on contempt resolutions for Josh Bolton and Karl Rove. Think Progess also has the story.

more......