« Blood money | Main | More Reason to Fight Back »

House Judiciary subcommittee wants war

They voted to approve the subpoenas of Karl Rove and Harriet Miers.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- House Democrats voted Wednesday to give their leaders the authority to force White House officials to testify on the firings of U.S. attorneys.


The House Judiciary subcommittee vote was to authorize subpoenas. It does not mean that subpoenas will be issued; only that they could be if the four White House officials Democrats want to question do not voluntarily testify under oath.

But the act puts congressional Democrats on a collision course with President Bush. He said Tuesday that the four -- top political adviser Karl Rove, former White House counsel Harriet Miers, and their two deputies -- could be interviewed in the matter, but no oath could be administered and no transcript would be taken.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said later Wednesday that the administration's offer for interviews would be pulled if subpoenas were issued.

"The moment subpoenas are issued it means they have rejected the offer," Snow said.

Rep. John Conyers, head of the House Judiciary Committee, said during Wednesday's debate that the committee needed more than a simple conversation with Rove, Miers and their deputies.

John Conyers is subpoenaing Rove and Miers. Who does he think he's kidding? Conyers has so many ethical problems for him to sit in judgment of Rove and Miers is beyond asinine.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference House Judiciary subcommittee wants war:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Rove might talk about prosecutors

Comments (26)

First we should learn what ... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

First we should learn what Conyer did with all the "turkeys". LMAO

I think I just got it. Thi... (Below threshold)
kim:

I think I just got it. This is turning into an argument about immigration. Who'd a thunk it.
=============================

Just who are we to question... (Below threshold)
serfer62:

Just who are we to question conyers; an honest, clean, literate black!

Oh never mind...

"Who does he think he's k... (Below threshold)
MyPetGloat:

"Who does he think he's kidding? Conyers has so many ethical problems for him to sit in judgment of Rove and Miers is beyond asinine."

Ethical problems- as per an August 2006 Op-ed from the Washington Times, citing allegations from former staffers that Conyers has repeatedly violated House ethics rules.

Of which, the matter was closed this past January.


Too lazy to research? Contempt for your readership? Stupid?

Asinine?


All of the above?

Who are you to judge?

mypetgoat:And why ... (Below threshold)
marc:

mypetgoat:

And why was the case "closed" asshat? Because nothing was found? Because Conyer's is the model of honesty and the American way?

Well no it was closed on what amounts to a plea bargin:

...after he agreed to stop using staffers for campaign work and personal errands.

Mr. Conyers, a Michigan Democrat, acknowledged a "lack of clarity" in his dealing with the taxpayer-financed staffers, who reportedly worked on political campaigns and performed other nonofficial jobs, including baby-sitting Mr. Conyers' children and tutoring his wife.

Pol covering for another pol.

Nice try asshat, now go play with your goat.

Jeez....I heard that "thwak... (Below threshold)
Actual:

Jeez....I heard that "thwak" way down here.

No matter how dark the kett... (Below threshold)
gattsuru:

No matter how dark the kettle is, the pot doesn't get cleaner or dirtier by mere aspect of accusation.

Have Rove and Miers talk. They know better than to get caught up in stupid titchy mistakes like what Scooter did, and the truth can't hurt Republicans here.

Claim executive priviledge ... (Below threshold)
John S:

Claim executive priviledge and let Conyers take all the way to the Supreme Court.

Of course, the Busheviks do... (Below threshold)
Herman:

Of course, the Busheviks don't want Rove, Miers, Gonzales, et al, to testify under oath for if these Bush Administration officials did testify under oath, chances are excellent that THEY WOULD LIE. Now, as we have repeatedly seen over the past several years, such lying would not violate the moral standards of the Bush base, oh no, for the Bush base has little at all in the way of moral standards. But most Americans aren't like the Bush Bootlickers; most Americans don't like being lied to. Moreover, lying under oath could get the Bush stooges in trouble with the law (think Lewis Libby).

So thus we have Tony Snowjob telling the press, hey, Bush would let his underlings talk to Congress, but not under oath and no transcribing the discussion. MAKES YOU WONDER WHAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS TRYING TO HIDE FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, DOESN'T IT? Oh, well, neither Leahy nor Conyers would ever accept such ridiculous terms, recall that members of the Clinton Administration oftened testified under oath to Congress, and if I recall correctly, even the Bush Administration's own Tom Ridge testified under oath. So this will go the courts, which likely won't rule on anything (given how slow they are) until Bush is gone. Damn.

You righties are nuts! "Lo... (Below threshold)
Ryan:

You righties are nuts! "Look at Conyers, he had a staffer babysit his kids". Wow, I'd laugh if you weren't joking. So that gaffe by Conyers amounts to political-motivated career assasination of u.s. attorneys, and lying to a grand jury about revealing the identity of a CIA agent.
Hey, sit back, nutjobs. This is just the tip of the iceberg of what's about to happen to this administration. Libby's on his way to prison, Alberto "Illegal Wiretap" Gonzales will soon tender his resignation, and we've only been in power 2 months! I LOVE IT!!

Herman:Of cour... (Below threshold)
marc:

Herman:

Of course, the Busheviks don't want Rove, Miers, Gonzales, et al, to testify under oath for if these Bush Administration officials did testify under oath, chances are excellent that THEY WOULD LIE.

And you know that how? Partisan blinders? That's a guess BTW, just as your assertion is.

But most Americans aren't like the Bush Bootlickers; most Americans don't like being lied to. Moreover, lying under oath could get the Bush stooges in trouble with the law (think Lewis Libby).

Indeed, thinking is in order, however not about Libby.

And lying to Congress while not under oath is also a crime and can be penalized with a 5 year term in the Fed pen.

Think...think asshat. Would you lie under those circumstances?

Ryan:Libby's o... (Below threshold)
marc:

Ryan:

Libby's on his way to prison, Alberto "Illegal Wiretap" Gonzales will soon tender his resignation, and we've only been in power 2 months! I LOVE IT!!

What wiretaps would those by Ryan?

2 months, yes lets talk about those two months. 2 much bally-hooed (by dems) bills are sitting in the Senate and have been languishing there for far too long. Among those six are one instituting recommendations of the 911 commission to make us ALL safer and raising the minimum wage law.

I wouldn't crow too much about "your" two months in power because they ain't much.

2 months of the Dems in pow... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

2 months of the Dems in power and every conservative prediction of what they'd do has proven true:

Nothing besides constantly filing subpoenas.
-=Mike

Explain this to me: If you... (Below threshold)
Ryan:

Explain this to me: If you don't have anything to lie about, what's the problem with appearing before Congress under oath? Lots of Clinton's cronies had to do it back in the mid-late '90s. I think it's hilarious how when the shoe's on the other foot, it's suddenly "a partisan fishing expedition". There's definately a lot of investigating that needs to take place, the voters decided that after watching the Republican congress sit back and collect pork while the administration basically wiped their ass with the Constitution.

Nothing besides constant... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Nothing besides constantly filing subpoenas Well MikeSC you be the judge, Gonzales lied and said the the prosecutors were underperforming, (not issuing enough supoenas or more likely issuing them to the wrong people) when in fact, they were probably performing too well

Explain this to me: If y... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Explain this to me: If you don't have anything to lie about, what's the problem with appearing before Congress under oath?

It's illegal to lie before Congress without being under oath. What is the point?

I think it's hilarious how when the shoe's on the other foot, it's suddenly "a partisan fishing expedition".

It clearly is a fishing expedition.

the voters decided that after watching the Republican congress sit back and collect pork while the administration basically wiped their ass with the Constitution.

And they find the Democrats even worse. Kudos to you.

Well MikeSC you be the judge, Gonzales lied and said the the prosecutors were underperforming, (not issuing enough supoenas or more likely issuing them to the wrong people) when in fact, they were probably performing too well

As usual, Steve, you are wrong.

There are plenty of very valid reasons to fire them. Not least of which is the President's power to do it for any reason.
-=Mike

Shorter Marc: I am... (Below threshold)
MyPetGloat:

Shorter Marc:

I am an idiot. My apologies to the rest of the world's idiots.

Shorter MyPetGloat:<p... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Shorter MyPetGloat:

*drool*

to ye old goathumper-ask Co... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

to ye old goathumper-ask Conyer about his "turkeys". LOL

Can anyone say VETO,VETO,VETO------

It's funny seeing how much ... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

It's funny seeing how much Kool-Aid the Cult of the 28% here have swallowed, eh?
-=Mike

"People just need to h... (Below threshold)
Steve Ccrickmore:

"People just need to hear the truth" about the firing of the 8 attorneys: President Bush...Good idea! let's hear it, or does that scare you Mike...And lets remember these were independently minded Republican attorneys who believed in the impartiality of the Justice system, and the fairness of the Republic and tried to administer it, just the sort of constituency that Wizbang hitherto used to apppeal to. I believe Bush is coming undone because when push comes to shove, when truth collides with power, despite his hypocritical obeisance to truth, he is a self-serving amoralist who will gut his own friends, and what few principles he has, rather than take one for the team...and that's your team, Mike.

Steve C, you still don't un... (Below threshold)
kim:

Steve C, you still don't understand that the US Attorneys must be under policy control of the Executive. This is the only way the people have input into the enforcement of the laws. Surely you wouldn't want Congress, the Legislative Branch, to enforce the laws, now, would you? Furthermore, were the Department of Justice not under policy control of the Executive, how would he carry out his sworn duty to enforce the laws?

Y'all 'bats have been led down this constitutionally rocky path either deliberately, or ignorantly; in either case you are useful idiots.
==========================

This is at least the tenth ... (Below threshold)
kim:

This is at least the tenth time in the last few days I've made this argument. Can you not read with understanding?
=====================================

Kim, my vote is for ignoran... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Kim, my vote is for ignorantly. ww

The ignorant were led delib... (Below threshold)
kim:

The ignorant were led deliberately down the path. Precision in speech often clarifies the image.

Now, just who was leading whom seems unclear. With the issuance of subpoenas, Bush's offer was withdrawn. Now, the Dems will have to sue and they'll lose. This leaves only the multitude of documents already in the record as the final say. Bush has figured out the Dems have become so desperate as to throw all ethics to the wind with put-up jobs like the Plame case. Where would Joe and Val be if the administration had stonewalled? Well, they'd be exposed. One mark of an honest administration is that they don't mind letting the record speak for itself, rather than letting showboaters like Waxman make a mockery of the truth. They are willing to stick with what is geschribben. All else is sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Well, signifying Moonbat Marchness.

And look who got exposed this round.
============================

Schumer's call for Comey to... (Below threshold)
kim:

Schumer's call for Comey to be AG was telling. Comey inflicted Fitz upon us, the brightest supernova star chamber of the all grand new millenium.
=======================================




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy