Hey Leahy, when are Meirs and Bolton going to be prosecuted for contempt of congress?

[niceypoo]

Remember? You said that it would be voted on then it would go to the US attorney for prosecution.....well....we are waiting. We have now been waiting since June:

I don't suppose you recall this letter?

Remember all of the talk about this being a fight for our constitution and separation of powers and how if nothing is done it would reduce congress to little more than a social club? Now even people like Randy Rhodes and Ed Schultz have stopped talking about it. Just sweep it under the rug with all the other parts of the constitution. This is the one area where they can truly go after the Bush administration and they have chickened out.

The mighty 25% approval colossus has ran over the timid milquetoast congress once again; surprised?

[babylonsister]

1. Don't forget Rice; she's also ignored subpoenas. nt

[niceypoo]

2. Yes, Rove too...

[babylonsister]

6. Whatever happened to that high-ranking man who didn't appear at the Tillman

trial? Never heard another word about that...

[Wilber_Stool]

3. Hell

Crazy Bob Murry didn't even show up.

[ccpup]

4. man,

if any one of us had the people we work for reminding us of what we said we would do because we hadn't done it yet, I trust we'd be out of our jobs! The only way you can ignore responsibility and still get a great paycheck, I guess, is if you're a US Senator or Congressperson. :eyes:

[cali]

7. Yeah, Leahy's just in it for the money.

What horseshit. He's been a very effective Senator for a great many years.

[ccpup]

16. and he hasn't dropped

one of the biggest balls in history by allowing the Administration and it's lackeys to outright ignore subpoenas? Being an effective Senator is great, but what he did (fill in the blank) years ago isn't helping us a whole hell of a lot now. And I trust the Administration is laughing behind our backs at the stunning lack of spine we have.

Leahy may be great, but until he actually stops with the strongly worded letters (yawn) and begins forcing people in whatever way he can to stop ignoring the law and begin honoring subpoenas, I'll remain unimpressed.

[cali]

17. For fuck's sake; how do you know he's dropped it?

And how do you know he's not working behind the scenes trying to garner the VOTES for it? And do you realize that Taylor has been instructed NOT to pursue it?

[ccpup]

18. okay

not sure why you're so angry at me, but I'll respond just the same.

I, in fact, don't know that he hasn't dropped the ball. I go by what I see or, in this case, don't see. But, by the same token, do you know that he is working behind the scenes? And what do you base that on? And are votes needed to force someone to comply with a subpoena? (I'm asking not to stir the pot but because I don't know and am curious) Taylor being instructed not to pursue it would without doubt make it more difficult for Leahy, though. That's true.

But you're making the assumption I made months ago -- and vigorously defended here on DU -- that there was work being done behind the scenes by the Dems in the hope that there WAS work being done behind the scenes to make the Administration accountable. But, as of yet, I've seen very little to support that.

[cali]

19. Sorry for taking out my frustration on you.

No, I don't know for a fact that Leahy is working behind the scenes. What I do know is that he's said repeatedly that he's not dropping anything, and I do have some familiarity with Leahy. He's been my Senator for a long time. I've met him and spoken with him on several occasions, in some depth, and until a couple of years ago, I had a good friend who was on staff.

Yes, votes are needed to enforce a subpoena via contempt charges. And not just regular contempt but also inherent contempt. And the votes for contempt charges are mandated to come from the full Senate, not just the Committee.

[ccpup]

20. thank you

it's incredibly frustrating when we don't know the (hopeful) inner workings of what's happening, isn't it? As for you having met Leahy, that's a good thing. It oftentimes gives you an insight into the person that many people on DU -- those who haven't met him or don't know the kinds of people he puts on his staff -- may not have.

In fact, I know Hillary, have worked with her, have even befriended her and Bill here in NY and see them when our schedules put us in the same place at the same time with a few moments to spare (not an event that happens often, unfortunately), but just try and explain to those on DU what good, decent, fun-loving, amazing people they are and how they're NOT the greedy, power-hungry, Royalty "wanna-be"s some on DU insist they are and you're often met with derision or worse.

In any case, I appreciate your response.

[cali]

21. Please do an OP

here in GDP about your personal knowledge of, and relationship with, the Clintons. And don't worry about the derision or other crap that will be hurled at you. I'd like to know more.

[ccpup]

22. oh my goodness

No. Ain't gonna happen. I see where it could be useful, but I've already mentioned my friendship with them and was mercilessly -- MERCILESSLY -- attacked and mocked and made to feel quite horrible. If people on DU were open to actually reading the info and taking what they need from it, I'd consider it. But that's not where DU is at right now. There are too many people eager and foaming at the mouth to attack Hillary, Bill and anyone who expresses support for them and I'm already feeling fairly bloodied and beaten from my recent journey through the Threads on GDP and GD!

Maybe later in the process when we see who is actually going to be the Nominee -- despite what's said here on DU, Hillary is more than aware of how uncertain the process is and how much work is left to be done to earn the Nomination; she's also aware that the Media is being fairly kind now, but that can change in a heartbeat and she knows it will ... and soon --, but the time for that OP isn't now. :-)

[cali]

5. I don't know. Why don't you call or contact his office, instead

of or at least in addition to, writing this? I do know that bushco has instructed Taylor not to enforce contempt citations. Maybe Leahy is trying to actually do something effective, like get a committment from Mukasey that he'll have Taylor enforce the citations. Maybe things are happening behind the scences that you're unaware of.

[niceypoo]

8. I have contacted them lots and lots of times

I suggest you join me and do the same:

http://leahy.senate.gov/contact.html

[cali]

9. Really? And what did they say?

And I contact Leahy at least once a week about issues that concern me, or just to thank him. He's my Senator. I've met with him on several occasions, and I know someone that was high up on his staff for years. I have a pretty good sense of who he is, and that he's serious about his job.

So do tell what they said, or even better produce a response in writing.

[radfringe]

10. still waiting for the powder to dry....

[cali]

11. Right. Because Leahy's done so little.

I mean what's fighting for your civil rights? nothing of course. Habeas Restoration Act? Meaningless to you, I'm sure. The War Profiteering Prevention Act? Mere fussing around the sidelines. 50 hearings on admin malfeasance? Yawn. Rove, Gonzo and others out? Big deal. Continuing the investigations into Rove and Gonzo? Not nearly enough, goddamnit. Perjury charges? So what.

[radfringe]

12. bush is still in office, he's not been held accountable

so put me on ignore and wake me when the powder has been deemed dry enough

[cali]

13. You're right! And Leahy is 110% responsible. n/t

[radfringe]

14. as long as bush/cheney have their butts in the white house

leahy, pelosi, reid, hoyers and all the rest of the democrats are responsible 1111111111111110%

[cali]

15. Just rank bullshit

Leahy, Waxman and others have been doing a great deal to uncover admin malfeasance and hold those who committed crimes, accountable. Comparing them to Hoyer, Reid or Pelosi, is crap.