HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ANNOUNCES IT WILL HOLD HEARINGS ON BUSH'S 'IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY'

[kpete]

Congressional hearing to examine 'Bush Imperial Presidency'Nick Juliano
Published: Thursday July 17, 2008


In a release Thursday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) announced he will hold a hearing July 25 examining "the imperial presidency of George W. Bush and possible legal responses."

The word "impeachment" was not mentioned in the announcement, but it appears the hearing is going to examine issues raised by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) in his resolution to impeach Bush.

“Over the last seven plus years, there have been numerous credible allegations of serious misconduct by officials in the Bush Administration,” Conyers said in a news release. “At the same time, the administration has adopted what many would describe as a radical view of its own powers and authorities. As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I believe it is imperative that we pursue a comprehensive review commensurate to this constitutionally dangerous combination of circumstances. Next Friday’s hearings will be an important part of that ongoing effort.”

.......

Kucinich:
“Legislative leaders of a foreign capital” have a “new angle that I haven’t thought of before but is relevant,” he said. “This interest in whether we’ve been told the truth has extended to other countries.”

more at:
http://rawstory.com//news/2008/Judiciary_hearing_to_examine_Bush_Imperial_0717.html

[daa]

1. Waste of time Pelosi said no impeachment

and Murkasey won't give up any documents thanks to Feinstein.

[tekisui]

6. It's not about Impeachment tomorrow.

It is about accountability, documenting and cataloging the crimes of this administration. Prosecution will come one day. It looks like Impeachment won't happen before they leave office, but with the dirty crimes aired for all to see, it could bring it.

[Breeze54]

18. It's not tomorrow either. It's June 25th!

:D

[bdamomma]

26. July 25th Breeze54!!

[Breeze54]

30. LOL!

:P

[Radio_Lady]

31. Don't fret. I had done a yearly calendar today and absolutely could not remember what month it was.

:rofl: My husband looked at me as if I were nuts.

Later, I misplaced a couple of earrings and two gold rings (gifts from my husband and a friend).

For two hours, I tried to recreate the scene last night when I took them off and did NOT put them back in a jewelry pouch.

I finally remembered that I dunked them in the soaking bottle of jewelry cleaner.

"So, what did you do today, Stupid?"

:loveya:

[polmaven]

36. I sure hope so!

'Cause if it is June 25 we are talking about impeachment for President Obama, and all he is going to do is restore the Constitution! Don't sound like no impeachable offense to me! Shred the Bushstitution and bring back the Constitution.

[petgoat]

22. They can impeach in one day. Bush already confessed on TV.

Dean Johnson is a former prosecutor and he says the strongest legal case against Mr. Bush would likely be for the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretaps of millions of American telephone calls.

ABC7 Legal Analyst Dean Johnson: "Section 1809 of the FISA Act provides that any public official who engages in a wiretap, without authorization, is guilty of a felony - I think it's beyond a reasonable dispute that President Bush violated that statute."

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local&id=4911758

[Kaleko]

10. Pelosi has been exposed as a colluder in at least one major Boosh crime

along with Jane Harman, Feinstein et al. See Glen Greenwald's exposé at Salon.com.

Call her Nancy, the Torture Queen, and think of those tortured souls who haunt her in her dreams.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. This thing...

Is slowly starting to flesh out.

[tekisui]

7. Nice,huh?

It puts them in check, FINALLY! Whether or not we get Impeachment before Jan 20 is yet to be seen. But, this could very well prevent the scorched earth polices that the war criminals are trying now.

[Kaleko]

3. Let's see if we can buzz this up like busy bees

until the sound becomes DEAFENING

:toast:

[bdamomma]

4. the Code Pinkers will be there.

[Lorentz]

37. So much for people taking this seriously, then.

All they do is disrupt Democratic initiatives in order to hear the sound of their own voices.

[tekisui]

5. Here's what they will look at.

(1) improper politicization of the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorneys offices, including potential misuse of authority with regard to election and voting controversies;

(2) misuse of executive branch authority and the adoption and implementation of the so-called unitary executive theory, including in the areas of presidential signing statements and regulatory authority;

(3) misuse of investigatory and detention authority with regard to U.S. citizens and foreign nationals, including questions regarding the legality of the administration’s surveillance, detention, interrogation, and rendition programs;

(4) manipulation of intelligence and misuse of war powers, including possible misrepresentations to Congress related thereto;

(5) improper retaliation against administration critics, including disclosing information concerning CIA operative Valerie Plame, and obstruction of justice related thereto; and

(6) misuse of authority in denying Congress and the American people the ability to oversee and scrutinize conduct within the administration, including through the use of various asserted privileges and immunities.

This is a step, a great step. They picked the big ones from Kucinich's 35 and will have hearings on them. This is great. This will be the trial, and chimpy and the American People will all know that it is sitting, compiled and ready to go at moment's notice. And, it preps for prosecution after they war criminals leave office.

[jwirr]

17. Agreed. We should remember that if we handle this after they are

out of office, they no longer have the power to pardon each other. We would not get true justice now with *ss in office even if we did move on them.

[pleah]

8. K&R!

:thumbsup:

[intheflow]

9. Wish I could rec this a thousand times.

I really had started to despair about John Conyers, he'd been pretty progressive in the past. But the wording of this statement makes me very hopeful that the junta that's taken over our government will be held accountable at some glad future day.

:kick:

[islandmkl]

11. many of you all are probably too, maybe way too young to remember how watergate started...

i'm not saying anything today will end up like that mess (and a good mess it was)...but the first steps at watergate...BEFORE hearings, BEFORE investigations on a deep level...were baby steps aimed at merely uncovering what had happened, who was involved, who bore responsibility, who was to blame, and who had to be held accountable...

most likely, bush and his gang will get away....

just ask richard nixon (just yell out the question)...he was surrounded by henchmen equal or worse (in fact, his boys set the agenda for this neocon bunch) and looked invincible....

it ain't over till it's over...and nancy, diane, harry and all might want to keep their fingers wetted and help up high...

wouldn't want them to miss that breeze before it turns into a gale...

[LWolf]

14. Completely off topic response:

That Springer in your sig line bears a strong resemblance to my old Springer, who died in my arms at the age of 12, in the late 90s.

It brings an unexpected tear to my eyes. He's been gone for a decade or more, but is still remembered with love by me, and by my boys, who grew up with him.

[wryter2000]

12. Good news

We old fogeys who watched all of Watergate will remember that the hearings weren't impeachment hearings up until the end. In fact, I'm not sure there ever was an impeachment hearing per se. The hearings were about Watergate.

This won't lead to impeachment, I don't imagine. But it could be very valuable, indeed. We'll have to see if the corporate media even covers it, though.

[onenote]

32. There were impeachment hearings in the House in 1974

On Feb 6, 1974 the House voted 410-4 to authorize the Judiciary Commmittee to conduct an impeachment inquiry and report back to the full House. That step was taken a full year after the Senate Watergate hearings chaired by Sam Ervin. The House Judiciary hearing did not actually start until May and culminated in the adoption of impeachment articles by the committee in late July 1974. A few days after that, the "smoking gun" tape came out (its release was required by the SCOTUS decision in US v. Nixon that was issued on July 24 -- just before the artcles of impeachment were adopted by the Committee).

[Ichingcarpenter]

13. The president has the power to pardon everyone unless he is impeached

kick nominated.


US constitution

"he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

[jwirr]

19. Stupid of me but what does the word reprieves in this context mean? nt

[Patchuli]

15. Kick, Rec & Yippeee!

The BFFE and Associates are going to be held accountable. Maybe this fear will stop them from doing any further damage to the country that most of U.S. love before we get them out of there. Baby steps can grow!

[AntiFascist]

16. K&R n/t

[Breeze54]

20. Looks like davidswanson beat you to this announcement.

;)

[eShirl]

21. k&r

[BeHereNow]

23. Uh, yeah Conyers- it's taken you SEVEN years to address this?

Sorry folks, I think this will be another
"Oh boy, their finally going to get the bastards..."
moment, followed by further confirmation
that the Congress is complicit in these crimes
and all this is no more than a badly produced
sitcom.

BHN

[Independent_Liberal]

29. That negative attitude is exactly why the keep running us over.

As David Swanson said, we wouldn't have gotten this far if it hadn't been for us pushing and pushing constantly. We can't let up now.

[BeHereNow]

33. How many years have you been watching this charade?

I've been a DU member since early 2002.
Time and again, we have fallen for the
kabuki congress theatrical machinations.

Every time, it was "THE smoking gun!!!!"
that would restore justice and rule of law
to our country.

EVERY time, NOTHING came of any of it.

So, am I being negative?
Or REALISTIC.

Let's discuss it again after it dies in
the smoke and mirrors that fill the
halls of our house and senate.
I can assure you that nothing will come of it.
AS usual.
BHN

[onenote]

34. so in your alternate universe, Conyers has been judiciary chair for seven years?

INteresting. Who is president in your alternate world?

These hearings are being time for their possible impact with respect to the fall elections. Nothing less, nothing more.

[BeHereNow]

35. Conyers, who has allowed Rove to ignore a subpoena? That Conyers?

Conyers, who gave Rove 5 days to show after he
thumbed his nose at the LAW?
I do believe those 5 days are now over.
Nothing- nada.

Rove walks free for an act that
would land you or me in jail in a heartbeat.

So now, tell me what you think
will come of this new kabuki production?

BHN

[onenote]

38. I'm just still wondering about that 7 years comment.

[BeHereNow]

39. I see, I think you misunderstood my point-

It hasn't made a whit of difference WHO has been
the chair of the house judiciary.
And it's not like a member can not
speak out against crimes with out being
part of the HJC.

Conyers has done nothing more than
those before him against the administration.

WE have witnessed our public servants DO nothing
for YEARS.

I expect no different from Conyers.
Perhaps some more elaborate Kabuki,
but no consequence for the criminals-
witness ROVE in contempt, yet flitting around
the country- a FREE man.

BHN

[onenote]

41. maybe your post should've been clearer since it accused Conyers of doing nothing for 7 years

Quite explicitly: "Uh,yeah Conyers - its taken YOU seven years to address this" (my emphasis)

[BeHereNow]

42. Like I said, Conyers could have addressed it ANY time before he was chair.

As could his associates.
Remember, the congress heard Sibel Edmunds testimony.
They DID NOTHING.

They were informed of Rove's attempt to have Fitz fired
during the Plame investigation.
They did NOTHING.

The list goes on, so if you expect me to
be impressed by this latest charade- don't.

As the saying goes,
the proof is in the pudding and I expect
no results from the congress on ANYTHING
close to upholding the law.

Seven years has taught me well.

Let's book mark this thread and meet
again in a year and see what the outcome
was.
Deal?
Deal.
BHN

[Independent_Liberal]

40. What if it doesn't die? What if you're actually wrong this time?

Things DO change. Like Swanson said, we wouldn't have gotten this far if we hadn't been fighting, pushing hard, and screaming our heads off. You can't always assume nothing will come of something just because it hasn't so many times in the past. If it looked like you had one chance it might actually work, wouldn't you at least want to try?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

24. K n R

[Gregorian]

25. Conyers is sounding like Conyers, again!

I'll believe it when I see it.

[bdamomma]

27. now what will the repigs say and do for these.

possibly pull a fire alarm, have a emergency vote on the floor of the House, say how we are on witch hunt, partisan politics, a waste of time, I can hear it now.

[petgoat]

28. Imperial Presidency is not a partisan issue.

We need to point out to the citizens that with ordinary hearings, Bush
can invoke Executive Privilege.

With Impeachment Hearings, no EP!

[EFerrari]

43. "Credible allegations" my @ss.

Mr. Conyers, you are complicit as hell.