Posted on 07/13/2007 1:11:07 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - House Democrats told no-show witness Harriet Miers on Friday that she could soon be held in contempt as they issued the Republican National Committee a new subpoena for White House e-mails.
The deadline for replies from both: Tuesday.
Miers, President Bush's former legal counsel who a day earlier defied a subpoena to appear before the House Judiciary Committee, could be held in criminal contempt of Congress if she fails to notify the panel by Tuesday that she has changed her mind and will appear, according to a letter sent to her attorney by Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich.
Though instructed by Bush to skip the hearing to which she was subpoenaed, Miers — not Bush — owns that decision and could be punished for it, Conyers wrote.
"Ms. Miers could not legally be compelled by the White House to disregard the subpoena, but instead made her own decision to disregard it," Conyers wrote to Miers' lawyer, George Manning of Atlanta.
Conyers repeated that Miers' failure to "promptly mitigate her noncompliance could subject her to contempt proceedings."
The toughly worded letter was an incremental step toward launching any such proceedings, which would first be considered by the committee and later by the full House. If a majority of the House approves a contempt order, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., would refer the matter to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeff Taylor, a Bush appointee.
Two knowledgeable Democratic aides said committee members and House leaders were preparing for contempt proceedings in case negotiations advance no further.
The dispute showed no signs of being resolved. Instead, the standoff has escalated into a broader fight over the limits of executive power that touches on other congressional investigations — from the FBI's abuse of civil liberties under the USA Patriot act to Bush's secretive wiretapping program.
Conyers added more fuel to the fight Friday when he issued a subpoena to the RNC for e-mails on the firings sent by White House officials on RNC-sponsored accounts. White House legal adviser Emmet T. Flood instructed RNC lawyer Robert Kelner on July 9 to withhold virtually all of those e-mails "without prior authorization to the White House."
Congressional Democrats probing whether the White House ordered the firings to help Republican candidates want to interview current and former administration officials on their roles in the dismissals. Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales have denied any wrongdoing, pointing out that federal prosecutors are political appointees who can be fired by the president for almost any reason.
held in contempt, huh?
contempt like the American people express in the latest?
AP Poll: Public gives Congress low marks (has fallen 11 points since May, to 24 percent)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1865521/posts
Give it a rest , Dems and do us all a favor.
I hold them in contempt too, what’s so unusual here?
American people have contempt for the Dem congress. Their approval numbers tanking.
Apparently the 24% aren’t paying attention.
Keep it up Democrats. Keep fiddling while Rome burns.
So, at what point does Bush issue a pardon for Miers for Contempt of Congress? That would be elegant.
Congress however is acting more like NiFong!
Judge: "You're out of order."
AP: "No, you're out of order!".
The judge (played by Jack Warren, IIRC) eventually fires a gun in the coutroom. Funny bit...
Honestly, though, is there such a thing as contempt of Congress? And what kind of punishment can they mete out? To swear not to approve her if she is appointed to anything in the future?
Bwahahahahahaha
Would it be okay if I hold Congress in contempt?
Pursuant to the Constitution and the separation-of-powers doctrine, Ms. Meiers doesn’t have to testify.
DoJ supports the WH position. Now, I suppose Congress could try to do something and the court case would be scheduled sometime in 2010.
Whar a waste of time and money.
I have held the majority of ‘Rats in contempt for years.
Empty threat. If he tries it, it will backfire on him.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress
LOL - do I smell another commutation of sentence coming?
Dunno.
But I find it ironic that a person refusing to testify before a Congressional Committee about the controversial (but hardly illegal) firings of eight U.S. Attorneys would have to have their “Contempt of Congress” citation referred to the executive branch for action. (DC U.S. Attorney makes the presentation to the grand jury.)
I hold most of them in contempt - the bunch of COngresscritters who tried to screw us over illegals.
G.R.I.P. = Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians.
Vote Hunter or Thompson in 2008.
.
And just how many divisions do these idiots have to back up this threat :)
Hunter is an incumbent.
This might cause a real separation of powers crisis over a non issue like Bush firing people who work at his pleasure.
I think they will come to regret this overstep like none other
The way the Dems do things, it’s ready, fire, aim. Then yell MEDIC!
Not ALL incumbents - just RINOs and Dems.
Considering the Justice Department, not Congress, needs to prosecute any contempt complaint, and considering that any prosecutor would open himself up to a civil rights allegation if they prosecute someone who was ordered by the President not to testify ... Well, good luck with that Mr. Conyers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.