David Simas won’t appear before Issa’s panel

Politico ^ | 16 Jul 2014 | JENNIFER EPSTEIN and LAUREN FRENCH

[mandaladon]

David Simas, director of the White House Office of Political Strategy and Outreach, will not comply with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform’s subpoena for him to testify, White House Counsel Neil Eggleston said in a letter Tuesday to panel Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).

“The committee’s effort to compel Mr. Simas’s testimony threatens longstanding interests of the executive branch in preserving the president’s independence and autonomy, as well as his ability to obtain candidate advice and counsel to aid him in the discharge of his constitutional duties,” Eggleston wrote.

[Logical me]

Issa better be careful how he upsets the King of America. The power structure is getting so strong that Issa may find him in real trouble. Think not? Maybe those doubters should look at communist empires around the world. Getting very close.

[Jacquerie]

Incredible isn't it? After 225 years we have the worst of both systems. We are very close to de facto immunization of both the prez and his advisors from impeachment.

This end run around the consent of the senate by appointing various “czars” and others must come to a halt. In our system, those who are paid to advise the president must be accountable to us.

[Jacquerie]

From memory, and I could be wrong, Tea Tax revenue officers in the major ports were intimidated and never collected a shilling, but neither any of them nor other colonial ministers appointed by George III were killed.

[upchuck]

“The committee’s effort to compel Mr. Simas’s testimony threatens longstanding interests of the executive branch in preserving the president’s independence and autonomy, as well as his ability to obtain candidate advice and counsel to aid him...

Candidate? Perhaps big-britches White House Counsel Neil Eggleston meant candid?

The White House has pissed all over Issa. Wonder what his response will be? Should be Federal Marshalls or the Capitol Police frog marching Simas over to the House so he can testify.

This is such BS!

[Agamemnon]

Here's why it will be interesting:

Darrell Issa: Voicemail shows illegal fundraising by Obama administration

"Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is highlighting a a fundraising phone call former Labor Secretary Hilda Solis made to an department employee as evidence that the Obama administration has a history of illegal fundraising activities.

"The White House Tuesday night said Simas didn't have to comply because his activity is legal and “the committee has been unable to point to any indication that [he or his office] has violated the Hatch Act.

"After playing the recording, Issa recessed the panel to “assess its course of action in regard to Mr. Simas' refusal to appear,” a panel spokesman said in a statement."

FReegards!

[Red Badger]

Constitutional Crisis dead ahead, sir!
Shall we change course or continue on our present track, Captain?
..................

[1010RD]

You’re spot on. At the heart of it are the Bad Amendments and a century of government schooling. No government school teacher has any incentive to teach the Constitution and liberty to school children. It’s just the opposite.

[Carry_Okie]

Then Issa should, very publicly, send in crews to fix it up and get it ready for some “visitors.” Just a little threat, ya know?

I'm with you there, in spirit. So, when he calls the crew, who cuts the check? Who's authorized to do work on the Capitol? Who signs off on their security clearances?

The Executive Branch.

Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1788: This, sir, is my great objection to the Constitution, that there is no true responsibility — and that the preservation of our liberty depends on the single chance of men being virtuous enough to make laws to punish themselves.

If your American chief be a man of ambition and abilities, how easy is it for him to render himself absolute! The army is in his hands, and if he be a man of address, it will be attached to him, and it will be the subject of long meditation with him to seize the first auspicious moment to accomplish his design; and, sir, will the American spirit solely relieve you when this happens? I would rather infinitely — and I am sure most of this Convention are of the same opinion — have a king, lords, and commons, than a government so replete with such insupportable evils. If we make a king, we may prescribe the rules by which he shall rule his people, and interpose such checks as shall prevent him from infringing them; but the President, in the field, at the head of his army, can prescribe the terms on which he shall reign master, so far that it will puzzle any American ever to get his neck from under the galling yoke. I cannot with patience think of this idea. If ever he violates the laws, one of two things will happen: he will come at the head of his army, to carry every thing before him; or he will give bail, or do what Mr. Chief Justice will order him. If he be guilty, will not the recollection of his crimes teach him to make one bold push for the American throne? Will not the immense difference between being master of every thing, and being ignominiously tried and punished, powerfully excite him to make this bold push? But, sir, where is the existing force to punish him? Can he not, at the head of his army, beat down every opposition? Away with your {60} President! we shall have a king: the army will salute him monarch: your militia will leave you, and assist in making him king, and fight against you: and what have you to oppose this force? What will then become of you and your rights? Will not absolute despotism ensue?

And here, in the words of the clerk who recorded Henry's speech, as would echo EVERY RINO with whom we deal today:

[Here Mr. HENRY strongly and pathetically expatiated on the probability of the President's enslaving America, and the horrid consequences that must result.]

"Pathetically," eh? Looks to me like he was right. Tailback, I hope you were appropriately entertained.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

Thanks CO! Great Henry quote I hadn’t seen before!

[Carry_Okie]

Thanks CO! Great Henry quote I hadn’t seen before!

Thanks, but it should be two quotes, both from the same speech. I should have added a "[snip] between the first and second paragraphs.

My apologies to the forum.

[Tailback]

the preservation of our liberty depends on the single chance of men being virtuous enough to make laws to punish themselves.

That's a great quote right there. I know of quite a few politicians and generals that need a little dose of punishment.

Yes I was entertained, thank you very much.