Miers Warned of Contempt Citation for Ignoring House Subpoena

[Hissyspit]

Source: Bloomberg

Miers Warned of Contempt Citation for Ignoring House Subpoena

1 hour, 17 minutes ago

July 13 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. House Judiciary Committee threatened former White House Counsel Harriet Miers with criminal contempt charges if she continues to defy its subpoena to testify about the firing of eight U.S. attorneys.

Committee Chairman John Conyers of Michigan gave Miers until 5 p.m. Washington time on July 17 to say whether she will comply. Miers failed to appear yesterday to answer questions under oath before the panel's commercial-law subcommittee, which then voted 7-5 along party lines that her refusal to testify had no valid legal basis.

The contempt threat against Miers further escalates Congress's legal confrontation with President George W. Bush over his refusal to let aides testify under oath about private White House discussions. Congressional investigators are trying to determine whether federal prosecutors were replaced to spur investigations of Democrats or quash probes of Republicans.

``We must insist on compliance with the subpoena,'' Conyers said in a two-page letter to George T. Manning, an Atlanta lawyer representing Miers. Her refusal ``could subject her to contempt proceedings.'' Refusing to testify or produce documents to Congress can lead to prosecution for a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine of as much as $1,000. The Judiciary Committee and the full House of Representatives would have to vote to refer the case to the U.S. attorney in Washington, a Bush appointee, for prosecution.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20070713/pl_bloomberg/arrgfpjevcwk

[rodeodance]

1. keep your health.

[Duer 157099]

2. Wait -- he's giving her until the 17th to say whether she'll

show up yesterday?

No wonder we dems are ridiculed constantly

[Kagemusha]

4. Didn't anyone read about the details yesterday at all?... Well, if not...

Yesterday, the committee gave 5 days. The House rules on the subject mandate a minimum of 72 hours; I don't know if the Senate rules are identical or what. But they have rules that give a grace period, a chance to "come to Jesus" - those rules apply to both parties, they are not specific to the Democrats. So I don't understand why Democrats need to be ridiculed for a situation like this which is pretty much unprecedented. I'd like to say it is unprecedented but I'm not personally certain of that so I won't.

The committee probably wasn't going to meet again before Tuesday to begin with.

[ChickMagic]

6. That's true

They are given the grace period to provide evidence that testifying will harm national security.

[Alexander]

3. Quit talking already, and JUST DO IT!

Of course there will be no time for impeachment, if it takes you a week to decide to punish someone for something they did yesterday.

[pinniped]

5. The POS* will issue a pardon or whatever.

.

[yodermon]

7. Congress MUST invoke inherent contempt, else bush will just pardon her.

Inherent contempt is not subject to presidential pardon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress

Inherent contempt

Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited for contempt is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subject to punishment that the House may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment reasons, imprisonment for coercive effect, or release from the contempt citation.)

[Worst Username Ever]

8. She knows she'll get a pardon regardless

[many a good man]

9. Segeant-at-Arms: dust off your handcuffs!

House Sergeant-at-Arms Wilson (Bill) Livingood

[Faux pas]

10. They can 'warn' and 'threaten' all they want. It's not like she'll tell the

truth or remember anything. Just another dog and pony show complete with smoke and mirrors. SHEESH.

[napi21]

11. Maybe, but Harriett never impressed me as a very tough cookie.

I like to think that I'm pretty tough, but I sure wouldn't want to have to face either Judicial Committee! You MAY be surprised what a case of real bad nerves does to her.

[Faux pas]

16. Maybe not so tough, but it doesn't take much nerve to say 'I

don't recall' or 'I can't remember...' I'm pretty sure she'd rather hang herself than let her beloved down. JMHO of course, but that's my take.

[Az_lefty]

12. Their warnings mean nothing...

and will mean nothing until they actually put someone in handcuffs! Stop the cheap talk and DO SOMETHING!!!!!!! :grr:

[BootinUp]

13. The warnings are probably necessary

to get enough votes for the actual vote on contempt.

[PSPS]

14. Oh no! Another of those dreaded warnings!

It's no wonder congress is reviled more than bush these days. I've never witnessed a more inept and pusillanimous bunch than these milquetoast democrats.

[Gman]

15. So Bush commutes her 1 year sentence and she writes a check

then what? It's over?

[antonialee839]

17. I think you mean Tucker Carlson's dad and the

other financial backers of the Harriet Miers defense fund write the check.

[Gman]

18. The fine is only $1000

that's walking around money for these people.

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. Read post #7....n/t

[Gman]

20. Damn. I learned something

I heard Conyers say "inherent contempt", but I thought he was being descriptive of his perceived degree of contempt or something.

[TankLV]

21. Oooooo! Another WARNING from our SPINELESS Dems!

Oooooooo!

Wake me up when they actually DO something productive...

I'm sick and tired of the same old shit from these SPINELESS assholes - every fucking one of them...

But - remember - always remember - if the Dems do NOTHING - absolutely NOTHING - from now on - they've at least STOPPED all repuke initiatives in further destroying our country - and THAT in and of itself is a quantum improvement as far as I'm concerned...