Can the Senate and the House Subpoena Bush/Cheney???

[opihimoimoi]

Under Oath?

Jus askin.....

[Skink]

1. we can supeona a ham sandwich.

Rove is a ham club.:smoke:

[rumpel]

2. I guess only when

impeachment inquiry starts...

:(

[Hekate]

3. I believe they can, but I can't imagine Bush/Cheney actually responding

I could be wrong -- I'm sure someone else here will know if Congress is allowed to do that.

Better to bring back a special prosecutor -- someone like Ken Starr, only on the side of truth and justice this time. :-)

Someone like -- oh I don't know -- Patrick Fitzgerald?

Hekate

[KharmaTrain]

4. They're Citizens...They Can Be Summoned

Now, will they appear is another story. Stay tuned for a rumble royal over the definition of "executive privilidge". The last court test on this in '74 defined it as communications strictly with the President. Booooshie...or should I say, Crashcart, has determined this privilidge extends to him as well and now to everyone within his regime. This sucker is headed to the court and is the endgame of this regime...as I currently don't see the Roberts court in any hurry to hear a separation of powers case that will surely draw it into its most controversial case and ruling since the 2000 selection.

Remember, they were summoned to appear before both the 9/11 commission (they held hands) and the Plame case. I don't see why, if Bill Clinton was compelled to testify under oath in a deposition of a civil case why Booooshie can't be forced to face a Senate Judiciary committee or crashcart hauled in front of Henry Waxman's. The real question is the enforcement...remember, any contempt charges have to be filed and executed by the local DC Court...run by a booooshie appointing from the DOJ. Again...this is gonna be a lot of stonewalling...Democrats must play smart and continue to cut off the escape routes, press with the investigations and call this regime's bluffs.

:toast:

Cheers...

[Lobster Martini]

5. They can, but precedent indicates that it would be futile

They can, but precedent indicates that it would be futile. W. would simply claim executive privilege and, unless the subpoena was connected to a criminal case, W. would almost certainly win. See United States vs. Nixon. The only reason to issue a subpoena would be to force him to refuse to comply, thereby demonstrating that he's stonewalling Congress. Other Presidents have complied with subpoenas voluntarily.

[opihimoimoi]

6. Thanks to ALL of you for your comments..It looks like its gonna be CURTAINS for this ADministration.

Their Secrecy and selfinterest seems to be their downfall....