Subpoena Power to the People

by Larry Beinhart
Published on Friday, December 23, 2005 by CommonDreams.org

Yes, George Bush has committed impeachable offenses.

If there were an impeachment, even if the president were found not guilty, there would be subpoenas and people would be forced to testify under oath and a great deal of truth would be revealed. It would be covered, constantly, by the media. They love trials because they offer predictability – they’re scheduled so the crews know when to show up and where to place the cameras – and guaranteed daily surprises.

But no, there will not be an impeachment.

Impeachment has to be voted on in the House of Representatives. The House has a Republican majority. There will be no impeachment.

Yes, John Conyers has introduced a resolution to create a select committee to investigate charges that may rise to the level of impeachable offenses. Not sexual misconduct, but genuine political offenses: lying to the legislative branch, misrepresenting intelligence, and ordering illegal wiretaps.

No, there will not be any such committee.

What Conyers has done has been mentioned on left wing blogs and liberal websites and Democracy Now and right wing websites will sneer at him. But if it’s in the New York Times, it will be buried inside. It won’t top they cycle at CNN or be the lead on NBC. It won’t make much news because they know he can’t issue subpoenas.

Yes, as Congressman Maurice Hinchey says, this is the most corrupt administration in history.

An innovative feature of this majority has been to demand that lobbyists and anyone else who wants to put the fix in with the federal government give only to the majority and not at all to the minority. So as long as the Republicans retain control, there will be no House or Senate committees looking into how our legislators were bought.

Corruption. Abuse of power. Impeachable offenses. Indictable crimes. Technical violations. Lies. Deception. All those things are merely subject matter. They are not actionable. Only power creates action. Power, in this context, comes from the ability to issue that simple piece of paper that compels testimony.

There are, mind you, small pockets of independent power. Somehow, the administration slipped and allowed a federal prosecutor, with subpoena power, to investigate the Plame leak. A local DA in Texas took a look at how Tom DeLay accepted campaign contributions from corporations – which could not be spent on political campaigns in Texas - then sent them to another organization in Washington, then got the same amount back and spent it on campaign contributions. And indicted him. A Federal prosecutor in California picked up on a newspaper story about Congressman Cunningham selling his house for a $700,000 instant profit to a defense contractor and got a guilty plea to bribery. Jack Abramoff, lobbyist and fixer to the Republican stars, has been indicted for a $60 million fraud in Fort Lauderdale, Florida in a deal to buy a fleet of gambling ships. His associate, Michael Scanlon, has been indicted by a Federal prosecutor on conspiracy to commit bribery and has agreed to testify.

Subpoena power.



Keith’s Barbeque Central

i read this article yesterday, thought about posting it, and decided it would get about 5 responses on DU ... we are a strange bunch that way ...

think about this - if you were going to define a system of government, would it be more important to give subpoena power to the minority party or to the majority party ?????

it seems to me, that if one party controls both the executive branch and the Congress, it would be more important to give subpoena power (and the right to call hearings) to the minority party ... wouldn't this be the right way to ensure a system of checks and balances??

in today's absurdly partisan climate, it is clearly undemocratic to allow the republican-controlled Congress the power to deny hearings and subpoenas ... they've backed up just about everything bush has wanted ... and it's not the Democrats who are hurt by this madness; it's the American people ...

the next time the Democrats gain control, they should remember this important lesson ...

btw, the right way to handle these powers is to allow either party the right to call hearings and issue subpoenas unless 60% or more vote against the request for hearings or subpoenas ...

thanks for raising this critically important topic ...

ability to issue subpoenas.

Stuff like this I sometimes double post here & articles & editorials. Depends on the topic too. You're taking pot luck when you post anyway. If we're gonna have an impeachment, & that is necessary, something needs to be done.It can be done if Dems take back both houses & maybe before. Some repubs have even mentioned Impeachment now.



Keith’s Barbeque Central

Keith’s Barbeque Central

<snip>

The only way the investigations will happen, the only way we will know if an impeachment is warranted, is if the Democrats regain control of at least one house of congress.

Now is the time to begin. To organize. To find people to support. To fight over the platform and the issues and then unite to achieve the best we can get. To raise money. To make plans. To work at the state level, to fight for favorable districts and to fight for reliable voting machines and to make sure voters get registered. To figure out how to make sure the vote is legitimate. So we can win and make sure it’s not stolen.

The next federal election cycle is less than a year away. Every house seat, every senate seat, is critical.

Now is the time to begin.

<snip>

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1223-29.htm

(ed to add link for snip)

The have-mores could demand it.
The bulk of the military could demand it.
The sincere fiscal Republicans could demand it.

Fuggedabout the born-agains and the Limbaugh crowd.