John Dean just said the House HAS TO go forward with Inherent Contempt proceedings

[LSK]

He thinks that the White House will start to take notice if the House actually goes through with that.

Just said it on Randi's show.

[GOTV]

1. I don't see what other option is open to congress n/t

[truebrit71]

3. Me either....

...it's time to draw the line in the sand...

[TahitiNut]

10. Incumbent Dems will lose a lot of votes if they don't.

Mine might be one of them.

[Tansy_Gold]

18. Mine, too

What's the sense in voting at all, if the people you elect then elect to do nothing that you want them to do -- and everything that you don't want them to do?

Tansy Gold

[TahitiNut]

34. Indeed. When a member of the NIXON WHITE HOUSE shows better sense than Dems in Congress ...

... then what the HELL are they doing there?? :banghead: :banghead:

[leftchick]

54. mine will be one of them

:hi:

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. Yep, they already lost the votes

unless they take CONGRETE ACTION

[More Than A Feeling]

2. Does the House know that?

Are they actually aware of the Inherent Contempt procedure, and do they understand why that's the only option if Congress wants to keep its institutional power?

[Junkdrawer]

4. They know...they don't want US to know...

They're banking on a sweep in 2008 IF THEY DO NOTHING.

[frogcycle]

35. as paul Craig Roberts said yesterday

that is betting on an unlikely future

either ther won't BE an election, or it will come on the heels of another, bigger 9/11 with a big "I told you so, but you listened to those evil democrats" speech

[leftchick]

50. yes, The Do Nothing Congress

didn't we just suffer through many years of that?

[KAT119]

63. It seems the last Congress did plenty, 21/2 wars, end of America....

[leftchick]

68. with a LOT of

Democratic help. In addition to Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran I am particularly peeved by the Patriot act and these two....



Which would never have happened without Help from the complicit Democrats.

[SammyWinstonJack]

6. If they aren't aware, we are in deep doo doo, don't you think?

:wow:

[frogcycle]

38. yeah, as if they'd be unaware of the contents

of the document they are sworn to uphold...

oh, wait...

but seriously, despite there being some
total incompetents, they don't need us to point out the possibilities - just need us to urge them on

[LSK]

11. yes the House Judiciary is aware of it

One member said Conyers is considering it.

[More Than A Feeling]

13. Oh, good, that's a little bit of relief.

[me b zola]

71. Although I have immense respect for Rep Conyers...

...wasn't the time to consider it before the threat was made to use it?

[frogcycle]

27. Yes, they are aware

I forget who it was, but saw an interview the other day wherein the interviewer brought it up and the congresscritter said something like, "oh, yeah, you're right, I am aware of that but need to need to go back and look in to that further"

[Doremus]

72. Funny you should ask. I just talked to my brother in Phoenix who just talked

to an aide in his Congresscritter's office about this very subject.

According to this aide, they're not sure whether they'll go for inherent contempt because, quote, it's never been used before. My bro pointed out that indeed it had, in the 30s, for the Postmaster General. Their reply? "We aren't sure that involved the Executive Branch."

>thud<

[Benhurst]

5. No, we've got to

keep our powder dry.

[depakid]

7. From what we've seen these past 7 years- they don't HAVE TO do anything

except enable and legitimize whatever the far right tosses at them....

So, while one can hope- I sure won't be expecting much of a response (much less results).

[pberq]

8. If not, then they given up their power and we no longer have a democracy

[elehhhhna]

52. their power? It's OUR POWER. Traitors, all.

[orleans]

9. did you hear randi talking to the freshman senator steve cohen

yesterday? she was surprised to hear that the judiciary had no plans on what move to make next after harriet stood them up for their wednesday deadline two days ago.

anyway, cohen is on the judiciary randi was talking to him about inherent contempt last friday and yesterday as well.

if they're gonna do something that is the only option the house has.

bruce fein is up in randi's second hour! he wants bush & cheney impeached. he was on the bill moyers journal last friday and the whole show was on impeachment!

[LSK]

12. yes

Randi was almost giving him orders. :rofl:

[NewJeffCT]

14. Isn't Fein a conservative?

Or, am I thinking of somebody else?

[blondeatlast]

20. He was one of the proime architects of the impeachment of Clinton.

He was on Bill Moyers' excellent program on impeachment last Friday night. He made the strongest case for impeachment I've seen or heard yet.

If you haven't seen it, check out the video forum It is eexceptionally good.

[grasswire]

21. Fein is a conservative

He wrote the articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton. He is a honcho in the Federalist Society. He is burning with anxiety to impeach George. It's really something.

[LSK]

24. Fein is up next on the Randi Rhodes show

Stream: http://208.109.219.101:8000/live

[NewJeffCT]

25. Thanks, but

i can't listen at work.

[LSK]

26. show is archived

http://www.whiterosesociety.org/Rhodes.html

[NewJeffCT]

15. I'd love to see what Harriet's reaction would be

If the Sergeant-at-Arms from the House shows up at her door with handcuffs...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

19. or the MACE

Mace of the Congress of the United States

[UTUSN]

16. I always like what DEAN says, but has ANYthing he says ever happened? n/t

[BuyingThyme]

17. Looks like the Pukes need to get another blonde shill to interview Pelosi.

[IChing]

22. One of the problems with iherent contempt is the summer recess

Miers, if arrested, would have to be released when they go on recess.

I heard that, I think on Keith.

[Disturbed]

23. The House can have J. Bolton & H. Meirs arrested in Sept.

Let them stew on the prospect for a month.

Impeach Gonzo in Sept.

[IChing]

29. Maybe that is why they are holding off

until September and we haven't heard anything.

[frogcycle]

31. .

[kestrel91316]

46. You may be onto something......

I sure hope. I can't believe that they would just give this crap a pass.......

[frogcycle]

30. Dean said not so -

he said they could be in the Capitol basement on bread and water during the recess - it expires when the session ends

[IChing]

41. Well that sounds good to me and then it doesn't

I like the bread and water part, but then I don't like them not acting on it.

I don't know the legal implications of this, is there a good link on the rules
and legal backgrounds?

[frogcycle]

44. see post #32

[IChing]

48. thanks n/t

[bvar22]

73. Summer recess is NOT mandatory.

Reid (and Pelosi?)has threatened to keep Congress technically In Session through the Summer recess period by manning Congress with a Democratic skeleton crew. This was proposed in order to prevent bush* from any more damaging Recess Appointments.
Hopefully, this is NOT just another empty threat from those without spines.

[blondeatlast]

28. "First time in my life, I'm scared of our government."

Me too.

(Fein, not Dean)

[Junkdrawer]

32. MORE INFO ON INHERENT CONTEMPT POWERS HERE:

1. Congressional inherent contempt powers have the Supreme Court stamp of approval.

Bush keeps flipping the bird to Congress, which responds by trying to bend over backwards with more concessions. The Supreme Court has recognized that Congressional contempt powers are an important tool to prevent Congress from being "exposed to every indignity and interruption that rudeness, caprice, or even conspiracy, may meditate against it." Congress does not need to be rendered feckless by Bush. It just needs to stand up and use the powers that the constitution provides to prevent Congress from being trampled by the executive branch.

The US Supreme Court has recognized in at least two cases that inherent contempt power is a necessary power to enforce congressional investigative powers. In inherent contempt proceedings, the House or Senate Sergeant-At-Arms arrests the contemnor and brings him/her before the House or Senate, where there is a trial and the person can be imprisoned until he/she agrees to comply but not beyond the adjournment of a session of the Congress. Congress used inherent contempt powers over 85 times during 1795-1934. This power has not been used (pdf file) by either chamber in over 70 years because it was considered "too cumbersome and time consuming to hold contempt trials at the bar of the offended chamber" and the process was deemed ineffective "because punishment can not extend beyond Congress’s adjournment date."

However, inherent contempt trials is exactly what the Democrats need to conduct in order to publicly reveal the witnesses who refuse to testify and why, and the evidence that is being withheld from Congress. Will any TV channel not be covering these trials? It is one thing to read a newspaper article that Rove refuses to testify under oath before Congress. How about the public reaction to the Sergeant-At-Arms hauling Rove before the bar for a trial on why he does not comply with subpoenas? If found guilty, then Congress can send Rove to jail. If Congress can just muster the courage to bring one key uncooperative witness before its bar on trial, it will enhance its ability to obtain compliance from the WH with other witnesses and evidence. If not, move on to key witness No. 2. Even if the WH refuses to comply, it is real people, not Bush or Cheney, who will have to face the music. Some of these witnesses may be less likely to follow Bush's instructions when they see that they can be arrested, hauled into trial and imprisoned.

The Supreme Court has affirmed Congressional power to frog-march witnesses before the bar of Congress. In McGrain v. Daugherty, a recusant witness (the AG's brother) refused to comply with issued subpoenas. The Senate issued a warrant authorizing its sergeant at arms to take custody of the witness and bring him before the bar of the Senate to answer questions. The deputy sergeant at arms went to Cincinnati, Ohio to pick up the uncooperative witness to place him in custody. The witness objected by filing habeas corpus, but the Supreme Court upheld Congressional legal authority to use its own process to compel persons to appear and testify on issues needed to enable Congress to exercise its Constitutional legislative function.

Another case provides a glimpse into the trial. Congress used its inherent contempt power against the Postmaster-General, who also filed habeas corpus to overturn his arrest, but the Supreme Court held that Congress had acted constitutionally and denied the petition in Jurney v. MacCracken (1945). The Senate held a one-week trial presided over by the Vice President, who acted as Senate President, and he was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment.

Jurney v. MacCracken is also instructive for those Bush officials who would like to destroy incriminating evidence. In this case, MacCracken was arrested and brought to the Senate bar to explain why he should not be punished for contempt for the destruction and removal of files after being served with a subpoena. The sole issue was whether the Senate had power to arrest and punish him for destroying evidence or permitting others to review and remove or destroy files. Essentially he argued that since he destroyed the materials, Congress could not punish him for a past contempt, which the Supreme Court rejected.

Jurney v. MacCracken also shows how witnesses may react to Congress flexing its constitutional muscles. After testifying one day before the Senate, and realizing the gravity of the situation, the post office sent inspectors to one man's office to search the "sacks of waste papers" to collect the destroyed papers by pasting torn up pieces of paper together.


http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/9/20378/62042

More Here:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/12/192250/035
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/12/17271/9047

[lonestarnot]

36. Thanks for posting this! Very interesting. Postmaster in the slammer. Heh.

Wonder if they got everything taped back together.

[TahitiNut]

37. "The witness objected by filing habeas corpus ..."

Well, good luck with that nowadays, Harriet. :rofl: :rofl:

[frogcycle]

33. what do they have to hide?

it becomes ever more evident that this is far beyond politics. It is a coverup of crimes - crimes that would probably get them executed.

[blondeatlast]

39. Fein up now--this should be good.

My mistake upthread, Fein is on now.

[LSK]

40. .

:popcorn:

[blondeatlast]

42. Congress has no understanding of the Constitution." Scary and true.

"No understanding of what they are up against."

WTF does it take??? :banghead:

[Disturbed]

45. Since Impeachment is off the table Inherent Contempt is the

only remedy. It is obvious that the busholini Regime is blocking Investigations to cover up their crimes.

[blondeatlast]

51. Fein is saying the independent counsel may be a better idea. nt

[LSK]

43. Fein is saying the Congress does not know what power they have

Basically saying that Congress should grow a spine.

They should use the power of the purse more.

[frogcycle]

47. he's fricking wrong in this case

trying to get indy council and courts to act would be messier

they need to fire a shot across the bow RIGHT NOW

[LSK]

49. maybe he didnt read the WaPost this morning?

[frogcycle]

53. he doesn't understand the urgency n/t

[blondeatlast]

55. Oh, I think he does; he just trusts the process more than we do. nt

[bdamomma]

56. so what are our options here?

who can we call? our reps??

[LSK]

58. I'd say pressure Conyers with the inherent contempt proceedings

[bdamomma]

61. thanks do you have his number handy?

[LSK]

65. house.gov

www.house.gov

[frogcycle]

66. I think that's inadequate

what we need is massive visible protest

the congresscritters will react to that. We might have to go through a "Kent State" phase though

What we need is some charismatic non-politicians to start calling for sit-ins, sick-outs, marches, whatever. Like Farrakhan's(sp?) "million man march"

[LSK]

67. how do you get that going?

We've had big protests regarding the war before and nothing really happened (and hardly are reported).

[frogcycle]

57. just so ya'll know

I've been trying to dial in all afternoon, and if I got on i was going to give DU and all who are now listening a big shout out

steady busy signal though

[LSK]

59. thanks, hope you get through!

:hi:

[blondeatlast]

60. Good luck, m'friend. I'' be in the car soon but I'll listen for you! nt

[Nunyabiz]

62. Wanna bet the Demspinelesscrats roll over and piss on themselves

and do absolutely nothing...They may as well go home and start duct taping their windows and get ready for the next false flag attack because they aren't doing anything in Congress but being made to look ridiculous.
They have the power to do what MUST be done, problem is there is not a single ball between them all.

[bdamomma]

64. I just called Conyers office and left a message

[ThomWV]

69. One wonders if Bush will care as the minions get hauled off to jail?

As long as they don't talk, what does he care?