Is This What Is Going To Make The Dems Back Down........

[global1]

Check Out What Daily Kos Has To Say About *'s Standoff

http://www.dailykos.com/

.....realize that the resolution of this stand-off will determine the extent to which the Congress is able to investigate everything that's still on their plate. If they(the Dems)lose this showdown, they lose their leverage in investigating NSA spying, the DeLay/Abramoff-financed Texas redistricting, Cheney's Energy Task Force, the political manipulation of science, the Plame outing... everything.

[babylonsister]

1. Why can't other investigations continue? The rethugs will be watched

like hawks for one mis-step.

[GregD]

3. I think the point is that all those other investigations

will necessarily require being able to get WH personnel, from the lowerlings to the highly-placed lowlifes, under oath. Without that, we continue to be somewhat blockaded. We have to penetrate their veil of priviledge.

[msongs]

4. actually, its a veil of deceit... nt

[GregD]

6. You got that straight

[pnwmom]

9. Of course they can continue -- but if Bush succeeds now in his claims

for Executive Privilege -- the country is screwed. We could continue to have investigations, but without possible subpoena power at least weighing in the background, our ability to gather real evidence would be severely hampered. If the Bush doctrine of Executive Privilege holds, why would any administration ever cooperate with any future Congressional requests?

If we're going to have a showdown on the issue of Executive Privilege, we have to be in a position to win it. Are we now? I don't know. I'd have felt a lot better about it under a different Supreme Court.

The full discussion in the OP's link is well worth reading. For example:

"Instead, Congress depends for its enforcement powers on the executive branch. If you defy a Congressional subpoena, you face the possibility of charges of contempt of Congress, pursuant to the adoption of articles by whichever house is charging you. But those charges are not self-executing. In other words, they're a request that charges be brought. In order to be effective, those charges still have to be prosecuted in court, and that's up to the discretion of the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. He's an employee of the "unitary executive," of course, and reports to the Attorney General.

SNIP

That's some game, eh? Enforcement of the contempt power falls to the U.S. Attorneys -- the political strong-arming and contamination of which brought us to this crisis in the first place. Heck, you'd almost think they... planned it.

When it comes to deploying its Executive power, which is dear to Bush's understanding of the presidency, the President's team has been planning for what one strategist describes as "a cataclysmic fight to the death" over the balance between Congress and the White House if confronted with congressional subpoenas it deems inappropriate. The strategist says the Bush team is "going to assert that power, and they're going to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court on every issue, every time, no compromise, no discussion, no negotiation."

SNIP

And the day they get five Justices to say they're right, everything you thought you knew about checks and balances becomes wrong.

[John Q. Citizen]

2. No, because if they back down, they can kiss oversight good-bye. I think now

is the time for Nancy and Harry to muse openly about impeachment, and the possibility it may have to be brought back on the table.

Or at least some other ranking Dems might want to do that.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. The only thing worse than a failed subpoena process

is a couple of failed subpoena processes followed by a failed impeachment attempt. And boy, that WOULD run out the clock.

And have no doubt about it, even if impeachment were to pass, conviction would fail in the Senate.

[pnwmom]

10. Worse than a failed subpoena process would be a precedent-setting

failed subpoena process -- a subpoena process that failed because of a ruling on Executive Privilege that came down strongly on the side of the "Unitary Executive."

[John Q. Citizen]

16. The Dems have no choice now but to subpoena. They are on record.

And they will. If they don't their base will take all it's anger and frustration at the bush administration out on them.

Miers is a private citizen. She's no longer bush's attorney and she will do time if she ignores the subpoena. The most she can do is take the 5th.

The Dems should have the votes to impeach in the house. The Senate won't get 67 votes for a conviction, but that's not the point here. The point is the process, because that what a constitutional government is about, process.

The alternative is to just bend over, and wait for the clock to run out and hope the voters forgive them for not even attempting to push it. That's the worst alternative, IMHO.

[villager]

7. this may be the critical line:

Enforcement of the contempt power falls to the U.S. Attorneys -- the political strong-arming and contamination of which brought us to this crisis in the first place. Heck, you'd almost think they... planned it...

[global1]

17. Is It That Rove Is Still A Couple Of Steps Ahead Of The Dems?.....

"Heck, you'd almost think they....planned it...."

Could it be that they wanted this confrontation? Also - there still is time before this gets all the way to SCOTUS - for another Justice to die, retire, etc - and they get to appoint another RW cronie to the bench - perhaps even Alberto Gonzales (well don't criticize me too much - the pResident is sticking by him).

I've said this before here on DU - I don't think they thought Clinton would beat poppy * 41 and then stay in the WH for 8 years. They were taken by surprise. I believe that they said they would never let that happen again. I think during the Clinton years - they studied and studied and plotted and plotted and put together what * 43 has brought down on us since SCOTUS put him in power. I think everything they do is calculated. I believe that they have had internal challenges and worked out all the angles and are now bringing their plan to fruition.

You're going to say what about Nov '06. Well - there were many theories after the elections that they let us win that one because they thought that the Dems would shoot themselves in the foot and not win back the WH in '08.

Now if they were planning this 'subpoena challenge' to go along with the 'unitary executive' angle - they are now in a position to implement this part of their plan. Rove is sitting there probably laughing his ass off today.

They are probably figuring we Dem supporters will get disillusioned with our elected Dem officials because they weren't able to reign these criminals in after their big win in '06 and we either vote independent or sit out the '08 election.

And the Repugs continue their hold on power and the WH and in fact push for more.

Too many things have happened since that 2000 election that seemed coincidental. Don't make me name them - but some of you might want to take a stab at it.

Now I'm not a mathematician - but I would think the odds of everything going their way since 2000 are mathematically astronomical.

Even Libby will walk - because * will pardon him. In fact - even before he was convicted - the MSM had him pardoned if convicted.

Being pResident is the license to lie, cheat, steal, kill, torture, spy, etc.... and you get a 'get out of jail free card' when its over.

Let's here it for *'s legacy (or should I say Rove's legacy).

[Dr Fate]

8. Good to know we are crafting our "keep your powder dry" excuses early on. n/t

n/t

[Mojambo]

13. My thoughts exactly.

There's always a bigger more important issue that they need to stay equipped for.

Total Bull.

[Dr Fate]

19. Right-there is always going to be a fight with Bush "next time"somewhere just over the next rainbow.

n/t

[enough]

11. Link to the actual article on dailykos:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/20/192727/375

Worth reading.

[pinto]

12. I see the point made by the poster, Kagro X, but I disagree.

While they may run out the clock ("Their thinking is that they'll either win it in courts, or run out the clock trying.") they will not run out the resurgence of legitimate Congressional oversight. Bushco has made no secret of taking it to the mat on assertions of unilateral Executive power as the Time snip in the post cites. Recent actions of a Democratic Congress seem to accept the challenge. I don't see them as backing down - nor do I see the Kos post imply that. It implies a Constitutional tug of war concerning oversight, subpoena power, and possible outcomes.

Watergate posed many of the same issues in it's eventual progression and the assertion that the Executive was beyond reproach *or* repercussion for dismissing legitimate Congressional oversight was shot down - in effect if not in statute.

I agree with the poster's note that many of these players are Watergate "recidivists" and I welcome the rematch.

[The Magistrate]

14. Indeed, Sir

This is just the opening salvo of the big push....

"War is declared and battle come down."

[knight_of_the_star]

15. Once more into the breach

I think the Dems in Congress will hold their ground. They aren't going to cave on this, not that they have the whip hand. They know if they do they WILL lose the majority they have in '08.

[windbreeze]

18. y'know...does anyone think the Dems don't know

that this current show down is as serious as a heart attack? C'mon now...they're done if they back down...and I believe they know it...I don't see it happening..
wb

[mmonk]

20. They lose no leverage. It's up to the committees.

As long as they control committees, they can investigate until the cows come home.