Leahy Says He May Seek Charge Of Contempt Against President »
Posted By deathray 1 year, 3 months ago in NewsThe chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said yesterday that he will attempt to cite the White House for criminal contempt of Congress if it does not turn over documents related to the firing of nine federal prosecutors.
Read Full Story at washingtonpost.com »
Submitted By:
deathray
Hm...summarizing a life...Investment banker, sailor, unintentional gourmet cook. Ex US Naval officer, also Foreign Service. Split my time between NYC and Miami Beach ...
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 346
-
0%
deathray1 year, 3 months ago
Looks like events around the politicization of the Justice Department and the question of the "unitary executive" are coming to a head.
Reply-
0%
deathray1 year, 3 months ago
Here's the process around which events can proceed.
FTA:"Leahy's committee last week issued more subpoenas to the White House, Justice Department and vice president's office seeking information about the domestic eavesdropping program run by the National Security Agency.
The next step is for the congressional committee chairman to rule on the validity of the privilege claims. If the claims are deemed invalid, the committee can repeat the directive to comply. If the president continues to refuse, the committee can find the president in criminal contempt, and the issue would go to the full Senate or House. If a majority in either chamber approves the criminal citation, the matter is referred to a U.S. attorney with a recommendation to issue an indictment."
Reply-
MichaelRhodenteComment removed: User banned.16 Replies
-
-
0%
UBCONFUSE1 year, 3 months ago
Bull- This is just sharp edged partisan politics. Leahy is like a broken record. Every time he has been chairman, he has launched a witch hunt.
Bush is right to protect the Executive Branch for future Presidents and Bill Clinton did the exact same thing. I hope the Supreme Court will take this up quickly, but Leahy wants to keep it active until after November 2008.
Reply-
0%
markmawn21 year, 3 months ago
Let's compare this to Truman, when in 1952 he seized the steel industry to avert a nationwide strike. Was that partisan politics too? The Supreme Court averted the attempt because they were doing their job. Could the SC of today do their job? Or serve only their master (not the Constitution)?
Reply -
100%
thegemacogroup1 year, 3 months ago
Man you are RIGHT, Mr Clinton, gets away with murder ( google " clintons friends " ) and mr burger steals which changes United States history, and nothing has been done about eather, those two need to be looked at before anything Bush has done. Bush and Clinton are protecting the Exective Branch for future Presidents like you said,
Reply
-
-
0%
BravoSierra1 year, 3 months ago
The founding fathers of this country knew and frequently stated that power corrupts. They would have hated any interpretation of Constitutional law that allowed the Chief Executive to hide evidence of a crime or violation of his oath behind "executive priviledge". I hope they throw Bush in jail or impeach him.
Reply -
100%
Rasica1 year, 3 months ago
Kangaroo Congress Leahy part of the lowest rating in 30 years 14%...Let him bark he has nothing else to do LOL :O)
Reply -
0%
KingOfTruth1 year, 3 months ago
Leaky Leahy should have been in Leavenworth for the many real agents he got killed when he leaked a huge list of them many years ago......
Reply
-
-
0%
Formidable1 year, 3 months ago
I wish congress would focus on more important issues like immigration and healthcare. I do know they quietly voted last week to ban funding for any pursuit of the Fairness Doctrine agenda. But, they did manage to clear the way for a $4,000.00 a year raise for themselves.
Reply-
0%
scott42611 year, 3 months ago
I agree and disagree...
First, I DISAGREE on the importance of this issue. The DOJ scandal and the abuse of power that surrounds it is like a cancer that must be removed if our country is to survive.
On the Fairness Doctrine, you seem to be relieved that it will not be pursued. The FD could not be back in the same form because media is different than it was when it was dissolved in the '80s. But it will resurface in some form...wait a couple of years...
I AGREE that Congress SHOULD NOT HAVE voted themselves a raise. On that, I agree 100%!
Reply-
0%
Formidable1 year, 3 months ago
I did not indicate that I was relieved or not. I merely pointed out a fact. I commend you on the civil manner in which you worded your post. Good discussion is healthy. Have a good day.
Reply -
89%
PsychoHosebeast1 year, 3 months ago
"First, I DISAGREE on the importance of this issue. The DOJ scandal and the abuse of power that surrounds it is like a cancer that must be removed if our country is to survive."
Agreed, this is at least a LITTLE more important than Clinton getting head, and we spent two years on that.
Reply -
100%
ramblingwreck1 year, 3 months ago
"The DOJ scandal and the abuse of power that surrounds it is like a cancer that must be removed if our country is to survive."
Hyperbole and utter nonsense. Every U.S. Attorney serves "at the pleasure of the President", who can therefore terminate them for any reason. Leahy is simply on a "witch hunt" (again) and seeking to accrue political points for his efforts.
As far a a "contempt of Congress" charge, what a laugh! With an approval rating of around 15%, there are many of us that hold this congress in contempt. Instead of placing their collective nose in the executive branch's business, they should pay more attention to their own responsibilities and duties.
Reply
-
-
0%
lenseview1 year, 3 months ago
I agree that Congress ought to at least simultaneously really tackle some of the other big issues it's either been avoiding or failing at.
I do think the DOJ issue is big, or worthy of investigation. The thing that bothers me, though, is how Leahy and certain others act as if "partisanship" or US Attorney appointments for "political" reasons somehow started just now. It didn't. The Bush Admin has taken it to new extremes. But the DOJ and the US Attorney system haVE been politicized for decades -- under Republicans & Democrats. I agree it's a system that ought to be fixed. It's corrupt, filled with nepotism and politics. But it hurts the credibility of those who really want reform and who have wanted it for years to hear Leahy and others -- now that the cameras are on them -- screech about all kinds of violations and outrages. Where has Leahy been for decades?
Again, I'm not condoning what Bush and his cronies having been doing -- it's been outrageous. CONT.
Reply-
0%
lenseview1 year, 3 months ago
But I've been watching Leahy and his colleagues for years. Where was the courage on this long ago? US attorneys have been appointed for decades based on who they know, what they're politics are, how they "fit" into the then current Administration needs. The system stinks. Just like the judicial appointment system stinks -- there too, who can possibly claim appointees aren't based almost entirely on politics, ideology, "favors" owed, etc. It's been that way with Republicans and Democrats. It ought to be changed -- but the best chance of change, IMHO, will come not from partisan screeching as part of photo-ops, but as part of a serious bi-partisan acknowledgment that change is needed -- and, most importantly, that the public wants and demands the change.
Reply
-
-
