Conyers Introduces Contempt Resolution, Call for Lawsuit against White House

[Hissyspit]

Source: Talking Points Memo

Conyers Introduces Contempt Resolution, Call for Lawsuit against White House

By Paul Kiel - February 13, 2008, 3:23PM
As expected, things are finally moving forward in the House today to bring contempt resolutions against White House officials for ignoring Congressional subpoenas as part of the U.S. attorney firings investigation.

House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers (D-MI) introduced two resolutions this afternoon related to the subpoenas. The first is a criminal contempt resolution against White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers -- both were subpoenaed and did not respond, citing the White House's invocation of executive privilege. But Conyers also filed a resolution that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) file a civil suit against the White House.

Update: You can read both of those resolutions as prepared here. The second resolution would authorize the House Judiciary Committee to go to court, where it would be represented by the House general counsel

That second resolution would serve as an available alternative should Attorney General Michael Mukasey follow through on his threat not to enforce the criminal citation. The battle would then head into court, where a judge would have a shot at sorting out the White House's far-reaching assertion of privilege.

Read more: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/conyers_introduces_contempt_re.php

[gateley]

1. Oh, PLEASE let them move quickly on this! Thanks, Rep Conyers!! nt

[gateley]

2. DUPE

[bpeale]

3. 3...2...1...conyers rolls over & plays dead!!!

[YDogg]

7. yep

[RuleOfNah]

9. Yet another Conyers prelude to prevarication?

I've lost count of how many time Conyers has pretended to be effective on matters of grave National importance.

Lead or get out of the way.

[file83]

51. Exactly. It's like some twisted version of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"

...maybe we should call it, "The Congressman Who Cried I'll Do My Job", but then, never does.

[hisownpetard]

64. Oh, you mean the Democratic version of the Arlen Specter Syndrome?

[OKthatsIT]

4. Is Conyers for real? Seems to me he tosses US crumbs

Where has he been? Is he banking on this next 'so-called law suit' move...to once again, make US believe he's working for US and to gain contributions for his next election?

He's been VERY DISAPPOINTING.

[H8fascistcons]

21. Disappointing?

That's generous, he has been an absolute and complete FAILURE!!! Sadly, father time has definately passed him by...

[Seabiscuit]

63. At the pace our reps are moving, it will be 2010 before anything is filed.

[Deny and Shred]

5. Gee, I wonder how Mukasey will decide.

It doesn't matter that BuchCo may be out of office before this is resolved. If not pursued, it'll just happen again, and that time the defense will be based on precedent.
Bush ran on 'Rule of Law' (FLA-2000) and 'accountability'(Clinton). Can some Congressperson please throw that in his face over this.

[99th_Monkey]

28. Mukasey's ALREADY SAID how he'd "decide" (paraphrased) => Fuck you Congress, no way

is he going to do squat .. he openly just told Conyer's committee this JUST A FEW FREAKING DAYS AGO.

So now I'm supposed to be excited that Conyers is posturing again, pretending to "do something" .. pfff.

[KoKo]

6. well......I don't think I'll hold my breath....

[happygoluckytoyou]

8. from germany in ww2 to today... teflon bush moves on

go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama go bama go bama go bama yo mama

[MilesColtrane]

54. Teflon bush?

Sounds slippery.

[alllyingwhores]

60. I think you left off the "sarcasm" tag--we all know how "go bama" goes on impeachment

"Obama said he would not back such a move, although he has been distressed by the "loose ethical standards, the secrecy and incompetence" of a "variety of characters" in the administration."

"I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority,"


http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-28-obama-impeachment_N.htm

[formercia]

10. Perhaps Congress is finally getting the message

People are mad as hell and they aren't going to take it any more.

[bleever]

49. I think you may be right.

:)

[ClayZ]

11. K and R

[pleah]

12. The crooked pres. and co. keep blatantly breaking the law and all our reps. and

congressmen do is file resolutions. Wake me up when they actually do something.

[Supersedeas]

13. What has taken so friggin long on this!!

[ladywnch]

14. is this a step that must be taken before the House can file inherent

contempt charges and have these folks arrested by the Sargent at Arms?

[creeksneakers2]

32. Only for political appearances

It would look like a grandstanding publicity stunt if the House would take on inherent contempt without trying easier routes first. There is no legal reason why the House can't proceed with inherent contempt.

Inherent contempt hasn't been used for 70 years and its never been used against the executive branch. It would have to survive years in court. There's a long road ahead, a short time to journey down it, and so far, a unacceptable lack of effort by the majority.

[sofa king]

41. Here's my chance to pimp my magazine article on inherent contempt!

By coincidence, my first article for our small Shenandoah Valley publication hit the streets just last week, and it was on this subject. Right now, it's the only thing available online, so those interested can look it over here:

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=282558512&blogID=355394476

[HughMoran]

15. K&R

Let's hope they actually mean it this time :eyes:

[CaptJasHook]

16. About time you toothless wonders.

10 dollars says this goes nowhere.

[Ino]

17. This would have filled me with joy 10 months ago.

Pelosi filing a civil suit against the WH. Bwahaha! :rofl:

Color me cynical.

[bluesmail]

18. I know how they have to do thorough investigations first

I've got my fingers crossed, but I just don't get as excited over this kind of news anymore

[ooglymoogly]

19. Notice how these posturings come out when the coffers need to be

filled and an election year is approaching.

[raebrek]

57. My thoughts exactly

I don't think they care about the lawsuits at all. I think they only care about filling Rep suits with Dem suits and an election year is the perfect time to have all of this type of news coverage. They don't care about the cause just the coverage.

Raebrek!!!

[beezlebum]

20. K&R n/t

[Phred42]

22. I'll beleive it when it happens.

I"d love to see it but we've been here many times and the talk always ends cheap.

I've said this before here:

Lucy is holding the football again for Charlie Browns big kick.

Well....you know what's going to happen.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

23. why does he need a resolution?

he's chairman of the judiciary committee!

[King Coal]

24. Nancy will refuse to file the civil suit, and then we'll really be bummed... Again.

[Wapsie B]

25. I have to wonder what the repugs have on the Democratic leadership

that would explain this inaction? Cheney and the gang should've been frog-walked out of office long ago.

[fascisthunter]

27. I'm Not Sure They Have an Excuse Like That

[NewJeffCT]

29. They just don't have the guts to do it

Bush has basically said to them "I dare you to impeach me!"

Bush and the Dems know that the media is on Bush's side and can be relied upon to give 50-50 accounts of every high crime & misdemeanor of Team Bush and create a ton of reasonable doubt...

The Dems don't want to risk taking a strong stand out of fear. Fear of the media and fear of change - right now, it looks like the Dems will win the White House and gain seats in both houses of Congress. If they launch serious impeachment proceedings, they fear it will energize the dispirited Republican base and also take the focus off of Congressional elections. Lame excuse, but I think that is the reason.

[DeeDeeNY]

56. Very well said! NT

[Gonnuts]

43. The BIG Question

The big question is why, after all the numerous reasons to impeach, we haven't seen real movement to do so by those that have the power to implement it. Why after Rep. Conyers had written a book on impeaching this president he now cowers behind statements you can see he himself doesn’t believe. How can, Rep. Waxman stand before a group of citizens and say without apparent shame that investigating steroid use in baseball is more important than allowing Sibel Edmonds to testify about treason committed by high government officials in an on-going criminal enterprise. There has to be an explanation beyond mere run-of-the-mill corruption and incompetence. What I'm about to propose is extraordinary and fraught with conspiracy but when you take it all into context it adds up.

I've noticed over the past seven years when those of influence would go into a meeting with Bush&co, after which they would come out and start singing the praises of those they went to condemn. It was puzzling to say the least and would conjure-up dark thoughts of blackmail or something even more sinister. It's the more sinister part we're about to explore.

To wit, what we have now is not a functioning government or government at all, but an on-going full-blown criminal organization of staggering proportions, with unlimited money, power and influence. It crosses all boundaries and cultures, and encompasses criminal elements of so-called intelligence agencies, corrupt governments of other nations, mega-international corporations, bankers and old world money. The only function of this organization is to do what all criminal organizations do and that's to take the resources of the many and place them into the hands of the few by using all means of persuasion, murder, extortion, intimidation and threat to achieve their goal are applied and much more. They are not to govern, but to destroy and if you should stand in their way they have the full force of the deadliest weapons ever devised along with the people to employ there use behind them.

We can start with 9/11. We could start with the 2000 election, or even go back generations, but 9/11 did indeed change everything. Let’s assume that 9/11 was an inside job. I’m not going to go into arguing the case that it was, but for the sake of argument let’s assume that it was a “false flag” black-ops operation orchestrated and executed with in-your-face bravado by a handful of strategically placed operatives. One of its effects is to inflict “shock and awe” intimidation. The shock of accepting this is enough in itself to intimidate anyone. I've heard it on more than one occasion where someone would say, "Well if that's true, than all is really lost." And indeed that's the premise.

Put yourself in this situation. Say you have a grievance and were influential enough to present it to the powers that be. You're taken into a room and you’re brazenly confronted with all the evidence of 9/11. Who was behind it, how it was pulled off, how the media is manipulated, influence over the justice system, and how investigations are stymied and controlled -- enough to make the extent of the criminal organization make your blood run cold. What would you do? What could you do? Knowing this organization has the power to commit mass murder in broad daylight and get away with it, what would you do?

Next they would use Sen. Paul Wellstone's mysterious plane crash that killed him and his family as an example of what could happen to you if you bucked the organization, along with the Anthrax sent as warnings to Senators Tom Dashle and Patrick Leahy, which was traced back to a U. S. military base, before its investigation was abruptly stopped, by then Attorney General Ashcroft, wouldn't that be enough to have you stand down? Knowing that if you walked out the door you couldn’t trust normal channels of authority for fear of them being compromised and that if you dared go public it could all go for naught and your family would be put in mortal danger regardless. But if you did what you were told, you and yours would come to no harm and instead flourish and be “protected”. What would you do?

Now look at all the lame excuses given for not touching anyone in this organization -- do they make sense? Do you really believe steroid use in baseball is more important than investigating the sale of nuclear weaponry to terrorist organizations, or the people that say this tripe believe what they’re saying? Do they really believe we’re that stupid? Are they? Who has been held accountable? Save for one greedy lobbyist and a few low-lying politicians whose crimes were so obvious they could not be ignored and didn't affect those in the organization no one from the higher echelon of the organization has been touched. What has been the effect of any of the investigations so far? Who's been held accountable for ignoring subpoenas or destroying evidence? If you or I committed the above, would we be running around free, giving speeches, offered high-paying consulting jobs or lobbying for the companies you were suppose to be regulating when in office or to continue in our jobs or in many cases promoted?

This organization didn't spring up overnight. One could make an argument that it's been around for generations by tracing organizations such as Skull & Bones, Bilderberg Group, Tri-Lateral Commission, PNAC and a host of other groups, corporations, agencies and families both rich and/or royal. This criminal organization has reached its zenith and is now so entrenched as to be near impossible to eradicate through normal means, but rather requires a total uprising and revolution.
If what I propose is real, what recourse does we the people have? If powerful people can’t effect change and are brought to their knees, if we know that we have no say in who leads us and that our votes are simply for show, that our petitions are less than worthless and indeed make us targets instead, that there’s going to be no one person, or party, or authority, or media figure to bring justice - who do we turn to?

Thomas Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be nourished from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

I submit - that time is long pass due.

[sce56]

48. The only thing we can do is to get the deadwood that is keeping impeachment off the table

out of the way!

[lisainmilo]

69. True.....but the newest elected Dems...

know why they were elected. They know why new people got involved in the election process. They ran on the theme of change and it worked! Newly elected Dems could ban together, they could make a stand., but I doubt they will. They flicker of hope that lies in my heart is only a flicker, like when a candle is almost burning out drowned out by the wax rising and surrounding the wick. I am terribly saddened with what is has happened in and with our country, even with the upcoming elections.

[AllyCat]

52. They are complicit in allowing these thugs to run over the country for 7+ years

And impeachment hearings or contempt hearings or any other hearings will expose them for the criminals they are.

Pelousy will never do ANYTHING to harm this pResident.

[bobthedrummer]

26. Proceed with the impeachment of Richard B. Cheney-NOW! eom

[Webster Green]

30. It's all bullshit!...Timed to run out the clock and protect the chimp..

Nothing will come of this. It's posturing in order to appear that they are actually an opposition party.

The dems in the senate and the house are cowards. I can count the ones who aren't cowards on the fingers of one hand.:mad:

[Infinite Hope]

31. These Democrats voted for Mukasey:

Including "not voting" as well as Independents (Lieberman):

Evan Bayh (Watch for potential VP of either candidate)
Biden (Not Voting)
Carper
Feinstein (I dislike her more by the day)
Landrieu (Holding hands with Feinstein)
Lieberman
Nelson (Nebraska)
Schumer (Holding hands with Landrieu who's holding hands with Feinstein)

7 crossovers and 1 not voting.

[alllyingwhores]

59. Actually, you forgot a couple...

Clinton (D-NY) Not Voting
Dodd (D-CT) Not Voting
Obama (D-IL) Not Voting

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00407

[Infinite Hope]

68. Oh, good eye. I saw "not" and read it as "Nay" n/t

[L. Coyote]

33. K & R + VIDEO: Conyers on FISA and Bush - 2/13/08

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x93202

[JBoy]

34. I'm not getting my hopes up, but

it's better than spending the day investigating baseball players.

[jazzjunkysue]

35. I wish I had a reason to believe this. n/t.

[defendandprotect]

36. Good for Conyers . . . . but ONLY A YEAR LATE --- !!!

[defendandprotect]

37. Actually, I think the contempt which the WH/VP have been showing

has pretty much made the Dems look like absolute fools ---

beyond their BETRAYAL of voters ---

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

39. IMO, EVERY WH/VP/GOP conversation begins and ends with . . ..

"Don't worry; they won't do anything . . . "

[McCamy Taylor]

40. Go Conyers! I guess he is one of the few not being blackmailed with AT&T mined data.

[Highway61]

42. K & R...n/t

[ToughLuck]

44. Better late than never..consider emailing your elected official..keep up the heat

even if they do not.

[WyldRogue]

45. Yeeeaaaahhhhh riiiiggggghhhhttt

Do these jokers actually believe that we will actually think they'll finally grow a back-bone and start ANY sort of impeachment process??

I'm not gonna hold my breath over it but I will be sure that SOMEONE does not get re-elected due to dereliction of duty.

[ladywnch]

46. I just recieved this letter from Congressman Wexler

Please take note of the comments regarding Pelosi about half way through the letter.




Today, in hearings on Capitol Hill, I confronted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on her role in the lies, exaggerations, and misdirection that led us into the Iraq war.

During my questioning, Secretary Rice falsely stated that she never saw intelligence casting doubt on the Bush Administration claims that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. This unbelievable statement is flatly contradicted by numerous government reports and CIA testimonials.

Secretary Rice's responses demonstrate once and for all that we need aggressive oversight over this out of control Administration. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has ignored the constitutional right of Congress to provide such oversight.

It is time Congress took aggressive action to assert our rights on behalf of the American people.

The House of Representatives must immediately hold former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in contempt of Congress for their failure to respond to congressional subpoenas.

I have been aggressively lobbying Members of Congress to support a vote on contempt, and I am thrilled to report that Speaker Pelosi told me directly that she agrees it is well past time to vote on contempt. I am anticipating that the House will shortly vote on resolutions of both civil and criminal contempt for both Miers and Bolten.

No one should be immune from accountability and the rule of law.

Not Harriet Miers or Josh Bolten.

And especially not Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush or Dick Cheney.

It is time to defend the Constitution and our rights as a co-equal branch of government.

I will continue to take on the Bush Administration for their outrageous abuses just as I confronted Condoleezza Rice today and Attorney General Mukasey last week.
With your help we will hold these top Bush officials in contempt and continue our efforts to hold impeachment hearings for Vice President Dick Cheney.

Thank you, as always, for your great support.

Yours truly,


Congressman Robert Wexler

[Usrename]

55. Here's 5min and 41 sec of Wexler questioning AG Mukasey!

It's almost unbelievable. Only it's not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7M9sjRLCtQ&feature=related

Thank you, Sen. Schumer and Fienstien, for saddling us this guy. :mad:

[Javaman]

47. Wake me up, if and when they actually hold someone accountable. nt

[jeff30997]

50. Yawn.

I'll go back to bed now that the Dems almost did sometin'...

[fshrink]

53. I wonder who of the 3

would be the most rabid against the junta once in the WH... I really do.

[f the letter]

58. Wish this would have an effect :

i think that Conyers serves to prevent us getting fed up with the whole thing. "At least there are contempt resolutions, that's some degree of judiciary independence right? Right??????"

But no, it's not. And this will do nothing, again. i wish i wish i wish that we would just start the impeachment proceedings and at least bring about something with teeth. This stuff is too light.

[L. Coyote]

61. This is the process we have. I just wish it moved faster. Too many scandals, so little time!

The Watergate time line is no short dance either, by the way!

[snappyturtle]

62. K&R kick!

:kick:

[progressoid]

65. Tease.

Nothing will happen.

[diane in sf]

66. Good, now I hope they go somewhere with it.

[solara]

67. Unfortunately, I am now at the point where I will have to actually SEE it

to believe it.

I no longer have the faith in my Democratic leaders that I had just a year ago..( seems like a lifetime)

But thank you for posting this.. I am grateful that I can still hope for justice..


:hi:


INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT IMPRECATE INCARCERATE :patriot: