Admin
Verse of the Day
The Newsroom
Recent Posts
- I Haven’t Deserted You
- Can You Relate?
- Tis Better To Give Than To Receive
- Commander-In-Chief
- Got A Minute?
Recent Comments
- ~J~ on Can You Relate?
- ~J~ on Happy Thanksgiving
- Piano Girl on Does Our President Have to Go to Church to Prove He’s Christian?
- ~J~ on Does Our President Have to Go to Church to Prove He’s Christian?
- David M. on Does Our President Have to Go to Church to Prove He’s Christian?
- ~J~ on Those Wonderful Church Bulletin Bloopers
- David M. on Those Wonderful Church Bulletin Bloopers
- ~J~ on Bar-B-Que
- ~J~ on Taking The Charity Out Of The Church
- ~J~ on Back In The Swing Of Things Soon..I Hope
Blogroll
Newspaper Rack
Categories
Well folks, it looks like the White House is going to be dragged, screaming and hollering, before the Judiciary Committee in both houses.
I wonder how it’s going to turn out.
Written by GussHouse Judiciary Committee Democrats warned yesterday they would pursue a contempt of Congress motion if the White House fails respond to subpoenas for testimony and documents related to the firings of U.S. attorneys last year.
The deadline for a response is Thursday, June 28. If the White House does not comply, it opens the possibility of a constitutional showdown between the two branches. In an ironic twist, the Department of Justice (DoJ) would be called on to enforce the contempt motion.
During yesterday’s testimony by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, panel Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) asked McNulty whether he would enforce such a motion. McNulty responded that he would recuse himself from handling such matters because of an internal DoJ investigation into the U.S. attorneys matter.One of the contempt motions would likely be directed at Presidential Chief of Staff Josh Bolten, to whom the subpoena for documents was addressed, according to a Democratic aide.
Others who could face contempt motions include ex-White House Counsel Harriet Miers and former White House political director Sara Taylor. Last week, the House Judiciary Committee voted to subpoena testimony from Miers, while the Senate Judiciary panel voted to subpoena testimony from Taylor.
“The House and Senate judiciary committees have issued subpoenas to the White House for documents and testimony,” said Conyers. “We’re still hopeful they may cooperate. But it’s still possible that enforcement action may be taken.”
Big Mo Says:
June 22nd, 2007 at 2:50 pmVisit Big Mo
And…what could they do if the White House says “NO!” ? Seriously. What?
We still have separation of powers, and Congress does not rule the Executive branch, no matter how much Generals Pelosi and Reid think they do.
~J~ Says:
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:26 pmVisit ~J~
The courts have almost always sided with the Executive in cases like this. I’m thinking back to Watergate days. It may have to go before an emergency hearing at SCOTUS before it’s over but Congress cannot demand information from the advisers to the president.
Sue Says:
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:35 pmVisit Sue
Big Mo:
We know what will happen.
It will just go on and on and on and on..oh well, I know you get the picture.
Big Mo Says:
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:43 pmVisit Big Mo
And I would say this if the party affiliations were reversed. In fact, I was saying so in the late 90s. Congress can only demand so much of the executive branch.
The founders may have intended the Congress to be the dominent branch, but that went out the window when the American government was actually put into practice, and the early presidents, from Washington through Madison (author of said constitution), realized a stronger executive was needed than initially visualized. And the SCOTUS came it to its own as a real equal branch in part through the creation of judicial review.