McClellan to testify in House in CIA leak probe(attorneys confirmed he will appear & be under oath)

[maddezmom]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush's former spokesman, Scott McClellan, will testify before a House committee next week about whether Vice President Dick Cheney ordered him to make misleading public statements about the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity.

McClellan's lawyers said he has accepted House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers' invitation to testify June 20. The attorneys said McClellan will appear and be sworn during the proceedings.

McClellan said he was misled by others, possibly including Cheney, about the role of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in the leak and has said publicly that Bush and Cheney "directed me to go out there and exonerate Scooter Libby."



Read more: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jh7ElHY9QqjAH63ueSVISAEdH4kQD916P2N02

---

McClellan Will Testify Before Congress

Word is that former White House spokesman Scott McClellan will testify June 20 under oath before the House Judiciary Committee about what he knows regarding the CIA leak case and the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman. Committee Chairman John Conyers has invited McClellan to appear. And a source close to the case says McClellan will do so - accompanied by famed defense lawyer Michael Tigar.

The Judiciary Committee is looking into the use of prewar intelligence, whether politics was behind the firing of eight U.S. attorneys in 2006 and the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson's identity. In addition, the committee reportedly wants to know what McClellan knows about the administration's response to Hurricane Katrina. In particular, was partisan politics involved in the way the Republican administration responded to the disaster.

more:http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/06/mcclellan-will-testify-before.html

[LakeSamish706]

1. Wow, maybe Bush won't come back from Europe... Handcuffs and leg...

irons work for me!

[rambler_american]

15. Handcuffs & leg irons NOT enough

I want orange jump suits. What time does the show start? It's like waiting for LOST to resume only better.
:popcorn:

[Lone_Star_Dem]

2. This has potential to be interesting.

We'll just have to wait and see.

[speedoo]

3. Scotty under oath with Mr. Conyers. Rut roh.

K&R.

[pjt7]

5. summer of truth?

[99th_Monkey]

4. Can the WH put some kind of gag order on McClellan, to prevent him from testifying?

Some here on DU have suggested that's what they expect Bush to do.

Can he really do that? Anyone know?

[mikelgb]

6. yes they can cite exec priv

it will be interesting if they do with such a willing participant

[Tangerine LaBamba]

7. No.

He had an advance copy of the book sent to the White House a month before it was published, and no objections were raised. I haven't read the book, but from what I've seen, he went into adequate detail about these incidents that his testimony would not go much further in terms of expansion.

He's just a citizen, doing his duty.

Dear little Scottie. He just might turn out to be the latter-day Alexander Butterfield.

[TroglodyteScholar]

9. The WH could still stop him...

Clearing the book has nothing to do with allowing him to testify.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

23. No, it has everything to do with it

It's him as a private citizen being called to testify. There's no executive privilege now that the book's been published. That argument goes nowhere. And subpoena power is a vast power, indeed.

[TroglodyteScholar]

34. Well, I hope you're right...

...but he wasn't a private citizen when he was telling their lies for them. :shrug:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

35. True, but irrelevant

I don't know how much you know (or remember) of the Watergate hearings, but John Dean's testimony opened the door, so to speak, for the revelations concerning the White House tapes when Alexander Butterfield testified.

You just never know where some things might lead, and, in this case, after having endured the narrow boundaries within which Patrick Fitzgerald was forced to operate, the Committee has a vast landscape spreading out before them when Scottie testifies.

And, I daresay, Scottie's quite anxious to testify. I'd let someone else start my car from now on, if I were Scottie, if you get my drift...................

[Occulus]

36. He does seem anxious, doesn't he?

It almost makes me wonder if there are some more specific pieces of information he knows that were left unpublished for this exact reason. This development makes the whole thing smell strongly of a set-up of truly massive- not to say, earth-shattering- proportions. If true, it's a beautiful power play: Mr. Change of Heart tells just enough in a book already vetted by the White House itself to get called to the stand under oath, and then spills the real beans.

If that's the case, his life is definitely in danger, and I'm not going to don tinfoil while saying it. Were I he, I'd assume that was the case and take every reasonable precaution, and a few unreasonable ones, just for good measure.

I won't get my hopes up, as I've been burned with the possibility of taking this Mastered Puppet down for quite a while now, only to be repeatedly disappointed, but really- I think Bush may be about to realize that he, a sitting President, has been massively played.

You have to admit, if it fell out that way, it would be just... well, awesome. :D

[whistle]

10. I'm not so sure, if he has nothing to add why ask him to appear?

...Democrats will grill Scott, the repukes will smear Scott and perhaps Scott has more smoking guns to give the committee :shrug:

[FatDave]

13. Get it under oath.

Makes perfect sense to me.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

24. It's about opening up the matter

Scottie has now provided information that wasn't available in judicial proceedings - the law that Fitzgerald was charged with enforcing was so narrowly drawn as to be almost unenforceable - and that opens the door for the Committee. Whatever he can give them can lead to other things. This is a great way to begin.

The investigation into the Watergate scandal started as an almost tangential exercises, but, thanks to a note written to a judge, it became something else.

[cascadiance]

8. Step two... Mr. Waxman and Mr. Conyers, is to get Sibel Edmonds to testify...

... which you've been so reticent to do so far, even though she's volunteered to do so.

Once you've been able to assess that they outed Valerie Plame to shut down Brewster Jennings, it should be a no-brainer to realize that you need to assess how Brewster Jennings was shut down, which Sibel Edmonds claims to know it was done earlier by folks like Marc Grossman! A NEEDED testimony sirs!

[Amerigo Vespucci]

11. PAGING Speaker Pelosi...Speaker Pelosi, to the white courtesy phone, please...

...is it still off the table?

[Amonester]

22. Yes, it is.

The only true reason left must be that she is VERY scared of "what" the "dark actors" of the * family evil empire "might" do to her (or relatives...).

They R the worst mob on earth, among the few others.

[still_one]

12. Something tells me this won't get much coverage /nt

[liberal N proud]

14. At this point the nations best interest are served by prosecuting after Jan 20

To insure justice is served we need to prosecute these bastards once they are out of office so pardons can not be granted.

It would be great show from now through the election to drag this all out on the table in front of the world.

[cascadiance]

16. If you wait until afterward, it will be an incentive to invoke martial law and cancel elections....

... in future elections. The real problem is that all of the future bad guys are seeing how Bush is getting away with things while in power and not having anything done against him. If he goes through his complete term and noone prosecutes him, then one of three things will happen:

1) He'll NEVER get prosecuted and future potential despots will take that as a cue that they can damage our constitution, etc. any way they choose and will not have to be accountable for it. They might leave office voluntarily in that instance, since they view the ruling class won't do anything about it.

2) If we prosecute AFTER they leave office, then future despots will say to themselves that they can do exactly what Bush has done and worse, but that they won't make the same "mistake" that Bush did and leave office voluntarily when their term ends. They will find a way to invoke martial law and suspend elections, and then the great American democracy experiment will be over.

3) Bush and others in this administration realize that they will be toast once they step down from power, and therefore invoke martial law after some engineered assassination or some other incident like that and cancel the elections. Then our Democracy is done.

If however, we can at least get this effort started NOW, and perhaps get some form of accountability had while they are in office, they'll see that future despots will have a hard time defying accountability, and perhaps lack of full impeachment will be blamed more on the congress for not doing it earlier, rather than their "inability" to do so.

I think the future of this nation will be WELL SERVED if we do an impeachment process right now, and show that the rule of law still has force in this country!

[liberal N proud]

19. Points taken

[BR_Parkway]

26. Impeach now and the Constitution forbids Shrub from pardoning anyone

under impeachment. Do it now, and let the fight against it in court.

[Jackpine Radical]

28. I hear what you're saying but some contrarian thoughts arise--

First, a future despot might respond to any impeachment threat with martial law. If they're bold enough to suspend an election, I think they'd be bold enough to suspend civilian rule when necessary for self-preservation.

Second, to wait for trial, conviction & sentencing after the end of their term in this instance doesn't preclude acting sooner in some future instance. In fact, it may potentiate the likelihood of earlier action in the future, following the argument that "we don't want to make the mistake of waiting for them to leave office like they did back in '09."

[hootinholler]

21. I disagree...

It will be best served by making them too busy dealing with investigations to do more damage, and getting the truth out to the public so they are outraged by brand R by November.

-Hoot

[NewEnglandGirl]

29. That was my first thought too

because with us in power we know they can't weasel out of it with loopholes and nonsense. But I'm not knowledgeable about the laws and reasons cited in the following posts so they are well taken by me also.

[Imagevision]

17. This is bigger then Watergate and the MSM isn't going near this story, that speaks

volumes in itself. McClellan set to testify, and Bush leaves town? a coincidence I'm sure...

[rambler_american]

18. Note to Scottie

Watch your back and stay out of small planes! Those bastards will try to stop you any way they can.

[maddezmom]

20. Looks like Scotty's lawyer, Michael Tigar is a heavy weight

http://www.law.duke.edu/fac/tigar/

BACK ON HIS CONTROVERSIAL LIFE IN THE LAW:
A Review of His New Memoir, Fighting Injustice
By ELAINE CASSEL
----
Friday, May 24, 2002

Michael E. Tigar, Fighting Injustice (American Bar Association 2002)

Ask America's top litigators to name their best and brightest, and attorney Michael Tigar will be at the top of the list. Known for his mesmerizing courtroom presence and peerless trial preparation, Tigar has represented many controversial clients, among them Terry Nichols, whose life he convinced a jury to spare in the Oklahoma City bombing trial, John Demjanjuk, Angela Davis, John Connally, Kay Bailey Hutchison, and members of The Chicago Seven. Yet in the course of his career, Tigar also has stood beside scores of other lesser-known individuals who, according to Tigar, were victims of various types of governmental overreaching or illegality.

A Sense of Injustice Rooted in Childhood and Developed At Berkeley

Afraid of becoming a "well-to-do and skilled, but irrelevant, lawyer," Tigar has taken on issues he could embrace with "passion"--among them civil rights, the draft, free speech, government surveillance, the death penalty, and international human rights. His career has been marked by a sense of the injustice perpetrated by governments against citizens, a desire to "look at what needs correcting," and a mission to change the law and the administration of justice.

Tigar grew up in Glendale, California, where his father was active in the machinists' union and his mother, at her young son's request, volunteered as a community political canvasser. When he announced at the age of 11 or 12 that he wanted to be a lawyer, his father gave him Irving Stone's biography of Clarence Darrow, Clarence Darrow for the Defense, and encouraged him to be "that kind of lawyer." There can be little question that Tigar met that challenge.

In 1958, Tigar entered the University of California at Berkeley. There, his world view began to take shape; it was defined by the civil rights movement, and by opposition to McCarthyism, capital punishment, and American military policy in Vietnam. Tigar was active in free speech and anti-war movements.

more:http://writ.news.findlaw.com/books/reviews/20020524_cassel.html

[Tangerine LaBamba]

25. Michael Tigar is a giant

If he's representing Scottie, I'd say the country is in for a brilliant ride.

I'm stocking up on popcorn.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

27. Tell all, Scotty!

[The Backlash Cometh]

30. Oh, Martha! This is the big one!

[baldguy]

31. I think the 111th Congress will spend all its time investigating The Bush Regime.

[mac2]

32. Kucinich today demanded impeachment go forward.

"A few moments ago, (approximately 7:30 p.m. EDT), Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich took to the floor of the House of Representatives to present 35 Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush. The House session is being televised live on C-SPAN."

And Wexler...

"I am pleased to announce to you that the House Judiciary Committee has met my public call for Scott McClellan's immediate testimony with action:

Today, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers officially invited Mr. McClellan to testify under oath on Friday, June 20th at 10AM.

After all of our hard work pushing for impeachment hearings for Vice President Cheney – the McClellan hearing provides our cause with a legitimate opportunity to showcase the crimes and violations of this Administration for the American people, the mainstream media, reluctant members of the Democratic party, and sensible Republicans. This hearing provides us our first genuine opportunity to enter the public consciousness and change the dynamics that have prevented true accountability for Bush and Cheney.

Mr. McClellan was a major figure in the Valerie Plame/CIA scandal, as well as a leading propagandist for the Bush White House's deliberate attempts to hide the true costs of this war from the American public. As such, Mr. McClellan will testify under oath (and be subject to perjury charges should he lie) and be asked about the following matters:


What role did President Bush, Vice President Cheney , and key administration officials take in the effort to reveal the identity of covert CIA agent Valeria Plame Wilson – thus destroying her network and putting lives in jeopardy?

What role did President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and key administration officials take regarding the firing of U.S. Attorneys or political reasons?

What role did President Bush, Vice President Cheney, key administration officials take in conspiring to blatantly break U.S. and International laws prohibiting the use of torture?
I call on Mr. McClellen to immediately accept this invitation and testify under oath as he previously agreed to while being interviewed on national television.

During the hearing I will have roughly five short minutes to question Mr. McClellan and undercover the illegalities committed by this Administration – which is why it is critically important that every representative on the Judiciary Committee hears your voice. Please let them know that you demand answers to these questions.

Nor should it stop there: Karl Rove has thumbed his nose to the Judiciary Committee's subpoena – joining Harriet Miers, Joshua Bolten and Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff David Addington as the only Administration officials in history to claim Congress has no power to even bring them before a committee to be questioned.

I have called for Karl Rove to be held in inherent contempt and for the other renegade officials to appear as required by their subpoenas, or be forced to do so by the House Sergeant of Arms.

What the Judiciary's request of McClellan proves is that if we stay vigilant – if we call loudly and repeatedly for accountability - that we become very difficult to ignore.

Please stay tuned. I hope for more developments soon.

With great respect,

Congressman Robert Wexler"

[Maureen1322]

33. And so begins the road to redemption...maybe.

[MadrasT]

37. Live on CSPAN3

Testimony in progress... boy does McClellan look nervous...