Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Pelosi: Rove and Miers Testifying Before Judiciary Committee is a Victory for the Constitution & Law

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
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 06:47 PM
Original message
Pelosi: Rove and Miers Testifying Before Judiciary Committee is a Victory for the Constitution & Law
Edited on Wed Mar-04-09 06:49 PM by kpete
Pelosi: Rove and Miers Testifying Before Judiciary Committee is a Victory for the Constitution and Rule of Law

By: PR Newswire
Mar. 4, 2009 06:28 PM


WASHINGTON, March 4 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement on today's agreement between the former Bush Administration and House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Jr. in which Karl Rove and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers will testify on matters related to the dismissal and retention of U.S. Attorneys. Rove and Miers will testify before the House Judiciary Committee in transcribed depositions under penalty of perjury, and the Committee reserves the right to have public testimony from Rove and Miers.

"The agreement for Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to testify upholds a fundamental principle: no one is above the law and Congressional subpoenas must be complied with.

"As public officials, we take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. It is the institutional duty of Congress -- as an independent branch -- to ensure against abuse of power through meaningful oversight over the Executive Branch. When there are credible allegations about the politicization of law enforcement, the need for Congressional oversight is at its greatest.

"In upholding our oaths of office, the House of Representatives was determined to preserve checks and balances -- the separation of powers that protects the rule of law. It brought action in court to enforce the Judiciary Committee's subpoenas, and won a major ruling by U.S. District Judge John Bates dismissing the extreme position of absolute immunity from Congressional oversight advocated by the Bush Administration for former Administration officials. Under this agreement, the precedent established by Judge Bates' historic ruling rejecting this extreme Bush Administration doctrine will be preserved.

"Today's agreement is a great victory for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the separation of powers. I appreciate the strong leadership of Chairman John Conyers and the assistance of the Obama Administration.

"Congress now has the opportunity to uncover the truth and determine whether improper criteria were used by the Bush Administration to dismiss and retain U.S. Attorneys."

SOURCE Office of the Speaker of the House

http://www.sys-con.com/node/864501

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/03/04/breaking-turdblossom-and-miers-to-testify/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. WBIWWSI
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. We'll Believe It When We See It -- I think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Yes. We say that so often here about this exact same issue
that I decided to shorten things up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. What BS. The agreed upon outcome: Congress talks, Rove walks. the People Lose. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
driver8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
5. blah, blah, blah...this should have been done a long time ago.
Stop patting yourself on the back for upholding your oath to the Constitution and for doing your job.

Pelosi is really starting to bug me...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. I hardly know what to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'd like to know what was in that 'agreement'
"agreement between the former Bush Administration and House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Jr"

And why would they have to ask the 'former Bush Administration' for anything?

Something's not right here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Yeah, that one yanks my chain
Agreement! These are crooks and liars here. Just arrest them and they'll eventually talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
10. Madame Speaker: taking impeachment off the table was an enormous blow to the Constitution and law,
so much so that it was unthinkable in a constitutional republic and thereby raised mere nonfeasance to malfeasance imv. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 17th 2024, 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 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