From DKos - The penalty for ignoring a Congressional subpoena is...

[XOKCowboy]

being charged with Contempt of Congress. Who prosecutes those charges on our behalf?

Cue the Jeopardy music

The U.S. Attorney's office.

You think these guys don't know how the game is played?

[Bluebear]

1. Bush treats the US attorney's office as his own personal attorney.

Which of course under Gonzales, the office is becoming.

[Solly Mack]

2. They very much know how the game is played

and when all else fails - mass pardons aren't exactly alien to a Bush

[City Lights]

3. Andrea Mitchell mentioned having to pay a fine.

Big deal. :argh:

[solara]

4. Are you saying that nothing will happen if the WH ignores the subpoenas?

Geez.. this reeks. Imagine what would happen if there was a Resolution for Impeachment....damn


INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT INCARCERATE :patriot:

[XOKCowboy]

8. Impeachment proceedings

Modern Impeachment Procedure:

* Impeachment resolutions made by members of the House of Representatives are turned over to the House Judiciary Committee which decides whether the resolution and its allegations of wrongdoing by the President merits a referral to the full House for a vote on launching a formal impeachment inquiry.
* The entire House of Representatives votes for or against a formal impeachment inquiry, needing only a simple majority (a single vote) for approval.
* If approved, the House Judiciary Committee conducts an investigation to determine (similar to a grand jury) if there is enough evidence to warrant articles of impeachment (indictments) against the President. The Committee then drafts articles of impeachment pertaining to specific charges supported by the evidence. The Committee votes on each article of impeachment, deciding whether to refer each article to the full House for a vote.
* If the House Judiciary Committee refers one or more articles of impeachment, the entire House of Representatives votes on whether the article(s) merit a trial in the Senate, needing only a simple majority for approval.
* If the full House approves at least one article of impeachment, the President is technically impeached and the matter is referred to the U.S. Senate. The House then appoints members of Congress to act as managers (prosecutors).
* The trial of the President is held in the Senate with the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court presiding. The President can be represented by anyone he chooses. He may appear personally or leave his defense in the hands of his lawyers.
* The entire Senate may conduct the trial or it or it may be delegated to a special committee which would report all the evidence to the full Senate.
* The actual trial is conducted in a courtroom-like proceeding including examination and cross-examination of witnesses. During questioning, Senators remain silent, directing all questions in writing to the Chief Justice.
* After hearing all of the evidence and closing arguments, the Senate deliberates behind closed doors then votes in open session on whether to convict or acquit the President. The vote to convict must be by a two thirds majority, or 67 Senators. If this occurs, the President is removed from office and is succeeded by the Vice President. The Senate's verdict is final and there is no right of appeal.

[aquart]

11. Yup. He's gonna force it.

We aren't putting it on the table. George is.

He doesn't have a choice. Truth is not his friend.

[Morgana LaFey]

18. Possible nothing would happen if up to extreme Bush loyalist

sitting in a U.S. Attorney's seat.

That's the JOY of having everyone totally loyal: you can go after your opponents with politically-motivated investigations and legal proceedings; you can muke sure your friends are let off the hook; you can ensure that your own illegal dealings (like election fraud) never see the light of day; and you can avoid nasty little consequences like Contempt of Congress, or other absolutely illegalities that an independent and non-partisan U.S. Attorney's office might very well look into.

Shit, that's a lot of bang for the buck.

[rosesaylavee]

5. Ok. Patience our collective ass...

IMPEACH. NOW.

[renate]

6. were congressional subpoenas issued during Watergate?

Anybody know?

[Morgana LaFey]

19. Yeah, I'm pretty sure. I know there were a ton of people who

testified -- they couldn't all have been volunteers. The Senate Watergate Hearings went on for weeks, literally. John Dean alone testified for the better part of a week, if memory serves (and it may not).

Wonder if the video archives of those hearings are available anywhere? I was so proud of my government and the Constitution during the hearings: the system of checks and balances clearly worked AND most of those guys on the Senate panel were actually (mostly) honorable men.

[XOKCowboy]

21. From ThinkProgress....

But in reality, there is no such precedent. According to the Congressional Research Service, under President Clinton, 31 of his top aides testified on 47 different occasions. The aides who testified included some of Clinton’s closest advisors:

Harold Ickes, Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff - 7/28/94

George Stephanopoulos, Senior Adviser to the President for Policy and Strategy - 8/4/94

John Podesta, Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary - 8/5/94

Bruce R. Lindsey, Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel to the President - 1/16/96

Samuel Berger, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs - 9/11/97

Beth Nolan, Counsel to the President - 5/4/00

In contrast, between 2000 and 2004, Bush allowed only one of his closest advisers, then-Assistant to the President for Homeland Security Tom Ridge, to appear in front of Congress. He has also refused three invitations from Congress for his aides to testify, a first since President Richard Nixon in 1972. Clinton did not refuse any.

CRS also notes that although “White House aides do not testify before congressional committees in a regular basis…under certain conditions they do. First, intense and escalating political embarrassment may convince the White House that it is in the interest of the President to have these aides testify and ventilate the issue fully. Second, initial White House resistance may give way in the face of concerted congressional and public pressure.”

I don't know if they were subpoenaed but there ya go.

[Morgana LaFey]

22. Thanks, but that was the Clinton admin not Nixon admin nt

[XOKCowboy]

23. OOOPS!! My bad for equating Clinton with Watergate!

I'm so used to the "Clinton Did It" rhetoric that I forgot there was once a REAL impeachment.

:dunce:

[crappyjazz]

7. I guess this explains why he wants to keep Gonzo?

[aquart]

9. At that moment, the Republicans will oust Bush AND Gonzales.

Because, if they don't, we will not have a government.

And having a government has been way too much fun for them to let it go.

The Democrats, OTOH, can starve George's ass.

[XOKCowboy]

12. One good sign is the 94-2 vote in the Senate today...

to repeal that sneaky little provision that the Bushies put in the Patriot Act that let the WH appoint new USA's without getting Senate approval.

I don't think they appreciated Little Caesar telling them they didn't matter.

[MLFerrell]

26. Please don't insult my favorite pizza chain, Little Caesar's...

By connecting it to the abominable * in any way. :)

[WinkyDink]

10. If Bush suborns Contempt of Congress, I would think this would precipitate Articles of Impeachment.

[Vidar]

13. That's the way it should go, but we've been in bizzaro world too long.

[Morgana LaFey]

20. That would be a good outcome.

I could go for that.

[BuyingThyme]

14. Well, I guess they'd be looking at a special prosecutor.

(i.e. Fitz.)

[XOKCowboy]

16. Fitz = Our own Ken Starr!

Never thought of that.

[Hepburn]

15. IMO, since the DOJ enforces the subpoena,

there is an obvious conflict because of exactly what the issue under litigation would be. So.....enter a special prosecutor. IMO even Gonzo would NOT be so stupid to get involved this and not recuse himself ~~ well at least hopefully not this stupid and corrupt.

What I see? If Bush defies the subpoena, he is ASKING to be impeached. I say, grant his request.

[XOKCowboy]

17. Even Ashcroft recused himself for Fitz...

Although I'm sure he regrets that decision now.

[Hepburn]

25. Yeah, no kidding! n/t

[baldguy]

24. The monkey-boy would have to appoint an Acting AG

to avoid a constitutional crisis and also avoid looking like the fascist dictator he dreams of being.


Hey! Wait a minute...

[Cha]

27. Nobody ever said they weren't

unscupulous shits who think they're one fookin' step ahead of everyone else..they seemed to have dropped the ball a few times, though, so we'll see how this gonza ag episode plays out.

[loudsue]

28. And the media will play on, with how this is "partisan" and not

important. :argh:

Dems need to start getting some face time during the news hour!! They need to show the general public that this is NOT just a pissing contest.... which junior and his media whores are trying to make it out to be.

:kick::kick::kick:

[Cha]

29. For that we need a station

that is not corporatemediawhore permeated.

Progress is too slow with the mediawhores controlling the news.

IWT may be our answer.. I heard about last year and it was coming in "2007"..Well, 2007 is here!

I don't think the US mediawhores are going to change even if we protest their ass 24/7 with millions of signs in front of cnn in Atlanta and D.C. and msnothingbutcrap(except Olbermann).

http://www.iwtnews.com/