You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #95: You make my point [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Snazzy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #76
95. You make my point
"Conceivably, the house could go to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia if the evasion is successful over a long period of time and ask for some form of alternative service, but most likely it will not come to that."

That's exactly right. Just like anyone else who refuses to obey a court order to appear. (Yes Congress is not a court, but in the specific manner they act like one, although they have to ask DC AG to act for them as enforcement). It isn't "we can't find him" so he wins. In fact, his attorney told Congress he's evading. On that basis, directing the DC AG to act shouldn't involve a lot of waiting, especially if the US Marshals are unwilling/unable to locate a such a recent General and DC area CEO.

As far as whether issuing a notice that you will evade via attorney is exactly some prime facie Contempt of Congress--I'd have to research further (find more time to read!). It is of course rhetorically contemptuous of Congress, not to mention us, the American People. A judge can seemingly issue contempt orders at whim for disobeying his/her directives; Congress in this special power does act like a judge. As you point out, my previous link suggests the breadth of how seriously the court system has affirmed Congress' power to investigate. It must have teeth.

I take issue with my further statements being labeled absurd. Congress does indeed posses mighty power, just like the other two branches. They merely have to use it or even threaten to use it, along the lines I have suggested or maybe even more sophisticated. Congress/Waxman has so many options to make the guy show up. There is no "this is the way the system works." Waxman can bust balls with even more leverage than your typical DA and compel testimony. He has a big podium.

Regarding executive privilege--unless you know this guy and aren't telling us something, it is totally consistent with the Admins serial attempted (and so far successful) undermining of our Democratic Congress' power to investigate and hold accountable while trumpeting up the so-called Unitary Executive. Several are currently evading subpoenas, although we aren't hung up on service that I'm aware of. The Tilman fiasco and apparent cover-up may reach high levels in DOD if not the WH.

This isn't thumbing your nose. That man's oath doesn't dissolve at retirement. Nor is an oath be required to do what is right. But those who do take an oath and serve, should have a special awareness of who they serve--the people. Not a political cover up. That's the crime there, even if we don't have a law for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC