CONYERS IS DA' MAN!!! Gonzo Probe Becomes A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION!!

Do yourself a favor and read this post on Kos before you bash Conyers. I know, we're all frusrtated and think Justice is moving glacially (actually, relatively speaking it's actually moving along pretty quickly!), but Conyers knows what he's doing. We ARE a nation of laws, and Justice MUST be pursued w/in in that framework, as frustrating as it is to us. Conyers is BRILLLIANT and METHODICAL and wants these bastards just as much if not MORE than any of us. He knows what he is doing and just took a MAJOR step towards Justice. Read this post on Kos, and if you want to continue to bash Conyers after this then you are hopeless and probably trolling.

Conyers Outfoxes Bushie in Contempt Showdown

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/26/01945/0694

good news!

on her radio show.

And DU has to repeat everything she sez, or else!

Cuz some single sourced blog said so!

:sarcasm:

It's just unbelievable.

BTW nice pic. Although I'm not a fan of Jarmuch.

n/t

by people who should know better. Unbelievable is right.

great picture of Jim & Tom!

:hi:

that he's responsible for slavery and every war of the 20th century, to boot! Or something....

:evilgrin:

What up, Minxy?

How are you, NS? :hi: Surviving the soggy oppressive weather?

I'm savoring every delicious minute of today's news cycle. Subpoenas! Perjury! Contempt of Congress! Oh mah stars, where's my fainting couch. :-)

I'm no robot. I can see positive things both people are doing.

Go Cindy Sheehan
Go John Conyers!

Go Justice!

Even when the going gets rough, we're all in this together.

running against Pelosi. If she was running as a dem challenger I would support her in that too. Conyers clearly has a plan...and it appears to be damn smart and I never have nor never will distrust his motives. He is one of the few who has been standing up to corrupt power.

One should't be blinded by hero worship.

Don't fight your own damn allies.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

:-)

exercising their Constitutional rights doesn't seem to have crimped John Conyers' style any...

It's the Knee-Jerk Cindy-Haters who are selling Conyers short. I'm sure that Sheehan appreciates the good Conyers does as much as I do but we still have the right and duty to keep the pressure on our friends since it does no good to try to pressure our "enemies"...

I have to like it. What a fucking stupid backwards effort.

Thank goodness.

It also guarantees I have the right to criticize those fools.

:hi:

n/t

Can you spell it out?
What does the distinction of it being a "criminal proceeding" have on Bush's order?

Congress will prosecute this?
Who is the judge/jury?
What powers does Congress have if Gonzo is found guilty?

The article says Congress can take "legislative measures". Are they going to make a new law that says it's against the law to break existing laws?

I feel I'm missing something.

Bush/Gonzalez forbidding investigation against Gonzalez is the POINT!!! Then Bush is guilty of obstruction of justice. The fact that Gonzalez is the target means that the decision gets kicked up to Bush's desk. Gonzalez can't take the heat for not investigating himself.

n/t

The Conyers report will state that they are now investigating a potential criminal matter. There has already been a supreme court ruling that executive privilege cannot be used to obstruct the investigation of a criminal matter. If Bush tries it, then he is himself obstructing justice.

Let's say Bush asserts executive privilege in a criminal matter (I feel he is likely to do this - nothing's stopped him so far). What then? What power does Congress have in criminal matters?

I don't know the answer to that, but I'm sure Conyers and Leahy do...;)

http://www.uscapitolpolice.gov/home.php

Our mission is to protect and support the Congress in meeting its Constitutional responsibilities.

"The agency has 1,700 members as of 2007"

<clip>

"The USCP has exclusive jurisdiction within the United States Capitol Grounds and has concurrent jurisdiction with other police agencies in an area of approximately 200 blocks around the complex."

More than enough to cover 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Capitol_Police


I suggested in another thread that it would be really easy to augment the Capital Police with a bunch of returned Iraq Veterens Against the War who would be GLAD to bust gonsalez, bush, cheney, et. all...

It's been covered here, on Randi's show, and on (I believe) Olbermann with the same Jonathan Turley.

The House of Representatives can order the Sargeant at Arms to get the DC police to arrest Meirs, et al. and drag her/them into the House to stand trial there. No DOJ involvement at all. Then, off to jail she/they goes/go until this Congress is dissolved in 2009.

Added on edit: The Congress can go to court to compell their cooperation. This article cites Supreme Court precedent (and I've added US v. Nixon) that executive privilege won't stand up.

I'm torn between hoping it doesn't happen because they'll decide to comply with the law, and hoping it does happen so this administration can finally come to an end.

We have to get to the bottom of this investigation. I guess the only remaining question is will it be kicking and screaming, or cooperating? Given this administration's pension for secrecy, I suspect it will be kicking and screaming.

Pat Leahy said so yesterday ..... The President is not allowed to give an order
that breaks the law and obstructs justice .... it would be an impeachable act.

WOULD THEY PUT IMPEACHMENT BACK ON THE FUCKING TABLE?????

:hi:

dg

bet on it!! Hell, I'll bet you on it, if you want! :kick:

With:
Contempt charges against Meirs & Bolton
Censure by Feingold of Bush & Cheney
Perjury charge(s) against Gonzales

You can bet impeachment is going to be back on the table.

Karl Rove was using the U.S. attorneys as "button men." This
is why the stone walling.

What Nancy & company need to understand this is about the rule of law
and holding these crooks accountable .... we had a coup in 2000 and
scores of crimes since then ..... it is not about the 2008 election.

What am I missing?
Why is this order different?

read the article and you will understand that.

We're not here to do your homework for you.

The article (and discussion afterward) spell it out very, very clearly.

:loveya:


:woohoo: a little HOPE for a change!! :applause:

:hi:
I read the article. Twice.
I'm literate and have a BS in psych...and it's STILL confusing. :shrug:

Some of you guys are better at this than others...
and I very much appreciate those who are willing to sort through all the verbiage and boil it down to the gist for the rest of us. :yourock:

What is it with people that have a better handle on some issues, having absolutely no tolerance for others "not up to their speed".. so they think. Arrogant and nasty. Gees, I'd rather be someone asking the questions than someone like you who are so nasty in NOT answering them.

You win, you know everything and looked everything up yourself. You've never read anything you didn't understand and have to ask a question. You are WONDERFUL and you are Nasty. Messed up.

It's people like you here that make it it's ugliest sometimes. Proud of yourself, the Almighty?

Damn. Oh and btw, you forgot to look up what "nice" means. Or do WE need to do YOUR homework for YOU???

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Ok Net Nanny. Buh bye.

Whether Gonzo will be criminally prosecuted is up to the Bush Justice Department and Bush, or a subsequent administration. I think its a bit of a misnomer to call what Conyers is doing a criminal investigation, since Congress has no power to prosecute for anything but contempt.

Where the fact that Conyers is investigating criminal activity may make a difference is down the road. Here's the scenario I'm hoping for:

1.Judiciary Committee votes for contempt against Meirs and Bolten (done)
2.Full House votes for contempt
3. Bush orders Justice Department to not criminally prosecute
4. Congress is smart enough not to start a long losing court battle against Bush to try to make the US Attorney prosecute.
5. Congress goes for inherent contempt, attempting to enforce the law on their own.

If all this happens, and inherent contempt proceedings begin, at some point, I'm not sure if its before or after inherent contempt proceedings, the White House will go to the courts to stop the inherent contempt proceedings. Bushies will file habeas corpus on behalf of Meirs and Bolten. The Bushies will also sue the Sergeant At Arms. In court, the Bushies will claim, among other things, that Congress had no right to demand the information subpoenaed in the first place because it was covered by executive privilege.

Executive privilege means that White House communications undertaken in an attempt to help the president carry out his duties are private, and can't be easily subpoenaed. Just like attorney/client privilege, there are situations where the courts can't pierce confidentiality. However, there are exceptions where those who engaged in the private conduct can be forced to answer questions. In the case of Congress wanting information from the White House, the burden is on Congress to persuade the courts that the need for information outweighs the need to keep confidentiality.

For the purpose of this balancing, its helpful to be able to argue that the conduct being looked into is criminal. It also helps to say the information is needed to decide on new legislation. That better establishes the needs of Congress. The best way to establish this need would be to start an impeachment inquiry against Gonzales.

So, after all that, the only time the latest paper by Conyers would make a legal difference would be in court if Bush is challenging Congress based on executive privilege. Many things would have to happen before this could get to that point. One other possibility is a lawsuit by Congress against the White House. Executive privilege could come up there.

Politically though, what Conyers is doing is dynamite. Hopefully Congress is going to war with Bush, and the allegations of criminality establish that Bush is covering up criminal behavior. I'm hoping that if we have a war, Bush will do crazy things and break the law. The great majority of the public will conclude that Bush is like Nixon and is making himself a dictator. At that point, with the public squarely behind impeachment, I believe Bush could be successfully impeached.

I wonder why Conyers needs to use all the "may have's" and "appears" when making "allegations". One makes an allegation that a crime was committed, not that a crime appears to have been committed.

This is how I think "allegations" should be worded:
1. The decision to fire or retain some U.S. Attorneys may have been based in part on whether or not their offices were pursuing or not pursuing public corruption or vote fraud cases based on partisan political factors, or otherwise bringing cases which could have an impact on pending elections;

2. Department officials appear to have made false or misleading statements to Congress, many of which sought to minimize the role of White House personnel in the U.S. Attorney firings, or otherwise obstruct the Committee's investigation, and with some participation by White House personnel, and

3. Actions by some Department personnel may have violated civil service laws and some White House employees may have violated the Presidential Records Act.

a few brilliant lawyers. Conyers is one of the BEST. Gonzo appears to be one of the worst. They're messin with the wrong dude now.

Conyers is a man of rare brilliance! Read his report!! It's a thing of beauty. He's got them cornered.

Conyers versus Gonzo in a law smackdown. Conyers will float like a butterfly and sting like a bee.

:applause:

That is the best news I have read in quite some time!!

Thank you for posting that.

Conyers closing in from the House and now the Senate investigation!!

Looks like the Dems are going to methodically take out Gonzo.

can't really be an Attorney General if your not an Attorney... no??

Not that AGAG was ever truly either.

Great idea! That would be done by the Bar Association in the state where he's a member. Probably Texas.

Good enough to post twice!

If any of you ever have the opportunity to meet him, as I had the great honor to do, he is a man who when your in his presence, you have the feeling that he really and genuinely cares about you and has such a kind heart. He also is incredibly smart and what can be perceived as a "slow" mannerism (both in his speech and demeanor) is a person who doesn't rush to things, thinks things out and strikes when he's put it all out there.

For any of those who have every doubted Conyers, know that he has been thinking about the things we have all been losing sleep over for the last six years and putting things together in a way that will have all bases covered.

He's brilliant...and this being a criminal investigation brings it in to a whole new category...

Trust me....the White House is not a pleasant place to be today....The Chimp is probably throwing things right now as I type....

These guys are capable of doing anything.. ie: Striking Iran to divert attention and any other number of things...

ww

These were the headline links they used:

- U.S. General: Terror Attack Could 'Happen Any Day,' Need to Prepare for Nuclear Threat

- Special: Bin Laden Targets 7 U.S. Cities: NY, D.C., Vegas, More

- Special: Terror 'Chatter' Extremely High, Prepare Your Family

- Experts Praise TSA's Airport Security Warning

- Special: 6 Days of Hell: the Coming War With Iran

- Important: Homeland Security Has Advised Every Family to Have an
Emergency Radio and one not dependent on electric outlet power.

Sounds like something is being planned, but I'm not so sure it's a foreign group planning it. Anybody seen Dick lately?

Hey, don't blame me that I get 'Newsmax' dumped into my email. My MIL signed up and used my email address. I think she did it to tick me off but now I'm afraid to click on 'unsubscribe'.

keeping this tidbit in their back pocket for if/when congress got moving on their criminality.

My two-cents. Everybody get under your desk!

:kick:

More reason the impeach the bastards ASAP, and it would send a clear message to the Saudi terror masters. Time is of the essence.

He prolly saw how this could evolve.

I am tickled to death!!!! :bounce:

Those who whine and snivel and want the Burger King method are either not making the effort to learn how LAWS work, behaving like two-year-olds, or they are 'probably trolling'

Thanks for the post. Gives one a better understanding of process and a whole lotta ammo to smack down the whiners.

:applause:

How are ya? This made my morning! The Dems are making serious moves this week! They are coming at Gonzo from BOTH sides now, the House and Senate and it seems they are going to SUBPOENA ROVE!!! :woohoo:

All in good time. It's coming.

:patriot:

of executive priviledge and can still result in contempt, inherent contempt, impeachment (hopefully concurrently...now), or other charges (Hatch Act) that the special prosecutor may deem appropriate.

Not looking good for Gonzo. Of course, all of these are pardonable or commutable except for impeachment and inherent contempt.

This does seem like a big step in the right direction.

I have held my tongue on Conyers despite some of my recent reservations about him. His history & service to the country earned some extra trust in placing faith in him. I have been hoping that Conyers (and other Congressional & Senate leaders) have been keeping their cards close to their chest in their next moves on the Bush administration.

This can't be happenning this way, because Conyers is a DLC shill who's being paid off by Big Oil! He is only telling us what we want to hear, just like he's always done!

If anyone doesn't get it, heavy :sarcasm: was used here.

Well, this development will certainly be a Keith Olbermann Countdown must-see-tv moment for all of us tonight!

-85% jimmy

who will fly away home because the Democrats voted NO to impeachment. Gonzo et al are just feed for the chickens.

I guess the MSM decided not to cover it.

:eyes: as usual

It didn't even mention US v. Nixon, in which the Court ruled that Nixon did have executive privilege but that privilege was trumped by a criminal case.

From the article: "In the present case, where there is clear evidence of wrongdoing leading to the White House, where the information is important for considering possible legislative changes, where the Committee has sought to obtain the information elsewhere and has sought to obtain a reasonable accommodation, and where there is no overriding issue of national security, it is clear the Committee's oversight and legislative interests should prevail." Emphasis mine.

It may look glacial, but Congress has made a better case for extreme measures by trying the usual avenues, first.

Randi had a legal expert on yesterday who said that the investigations into BushCo will go into the next administration. It's not going to go away when he leaves office. There's time to get them.

And the beauty of that is, he won't be able to pardon them.

I hadn't thought of that. It gets better and better! :yourock:

My boss is going to wonder why I'm wearing a s**t-eating grin.

Prison after office is even preferred rather than now. Precisely because of the commutation/pardon possibilities. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Gonzo, & Shrub. Imprison them all. It is the only way to preserve our constitution and restore our democracy. Dethrone the rule of men and restore the rule of law.

I hope the next administration (or Congress, if not this one) re-opens 9/11 investigation to get to the full truth behind the murders of 3000 Americans, near-million Iraqis, and 3600+ and counting American soldiers.

It feels a lot like Watergate, with methodical investigations that finally tripped an avalanche.

Recommend

Criminal proceedings will get us minnows. While that is preferable to nothing, it's not the end of our problems. I however will look with interest and hope some of these political appointees will learn a harsh lesson.

And now We the People are going to find out the truth about Bush and his crooks.

From the article:



Heh heh heh.

Thank you, Beetwasher.

The puppets in the executive branch will just be doing more minuets. The larges of congress has priorities and the satisfaction of public interests and concern often ranks lower than who fills their campaign chest. It is easy to learn when you are getting lip service or mockery and when the actual paid for service that was supposed to delivered is set in front of you. The congress is being chided into this dog and pony but real substance will just get short circuited. It reminds me of the crap the went on with Iran-Contra. They all PLAYED it real serious and everything, but when poppy was leaving he just cleaned house with the ole pardon pen.

Kabuki theater gets old after a while, ya know :shrug:

plan to read more later.

:hi:

In the meantime, a US Air Attack will most likely occur in Pakistan to route out al Q & Taliban. That will occur a few days before Congress is back and blanket the Corp. News Media.

IMHO

Peace

to be accessible to the people they represent.

Subpoenas
Congressional rules empower all its standing committees with the authority to compel witnesses to produce testimony and documents for subjects under its jurisdiction. Committee rules may provide for the full Committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the Chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas.

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States, 365 U.S. 399 (1961), the Congressional committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas to be "legally sufficient." First, the committee investigation of the broad subject area must be authorized by its Chamber; second, the investigation must pursue "a valid legislative purpose" but does not need to involve legislation and does not need to specify the ultimate intent of Congress; and third, the specific inquiries must be pertinent to the subject matter area which have been authorized for investigation.

The Court held in Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund, 421 U.S. 491 (1975) that Congressional subpoenas are within the scope of the Speech and Debate clause which provides "an absolute bar to judicial interference" with such compulsory process. Under that ruling, Courts generally do not hear motions to quash Congressional subpoenas; even when executive branch officials refuse to comply, the Courts tend to rule that such matters are "political questions" unsuitable for judicial remedy.


Procedures
Following the refusal of a witness to produce documents or to testify, the Committee is entitled to report a resolution of contempt to its parent chamber. A Committee may also cite a person for contempt but not immediately report the resolution to the floor. In the case of subcommittees, they report the resolution of contempt to the full Committee, which then has the option of rejecting it, accepting it but not reporting it to the floor, or accepting it and reporting it to the floor of the chamber for action. On the floor of the House or the Senate, the reported resolution is considered privileged and, if the resolution of contempt is passed, the chamber has several options to enforce its mandate.


Inherent contempt
Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited for contempt is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subject to punishment that the House may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment reasons, imprisonment for coercive effect, or release from the contempt citation.)

Concerned with the time-consuming nature of a contempt proceeding and the inability to extend punishment further than the session of the Congress concerned (under Supreme Court rulings), Congress created a statutory process in 1857. While Congress retains its "inherent contempt" authority and may exercise it at any time, this inherent contempt process was last used by the Senate in 1934, in a Senate investigation of airlines and the U.S. Postmaster. After a one-week trial on the Senate floor (presided by the Vice-President of the United States, acting as Senate President), a lawyer who had allowed clients to rip up subpoenaed documents, William P. MacCracken, a lawyer and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics, was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment. <1>

MacCracken had filed a petition of Habeas Corpus in federal courts to overturn his arrest, but after litigation, the US Supreme Court ruled that Congress had acted constitutionally, and denied the petition in the case Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 (1935). <2><3>

Presidential pardons appear not to apply to civil contempt procedures like the above, since it is not an "offense against the United States" or an offense against "the dignity of public authority." <4>


Statutory proceedings
Following a contempt citation, the presiding officer of the chamber is instructed to refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia<5>; according to the law it is the "duty" of the U.S. Attorney to refer the matter to a grand jury for action.

The criminal offense of "contempt of Congress" sets the penalty at not less than one month nor more than twelve months in jail and a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $1,000. Those penalties are enforced upon conviction, even if the Congress which initiated the contempt citation has expired.

The statutory procedure has generally been used by Congress since 1935. While the law pronounces the duty of the U.S. Attorney is to impanel a grand jury for its action on the matter, some proponents of the controversial unitary executive theory believe that the Congress cannot properly compel the U.S. Attorney to take this action against the Executive Branch, as the U.S. Attorney is a member of the Executive Branch who ultimately reports to the President. To allow Congress to force the President to take action against a subordinate following his directives would be a a violation of the separation of powers and infringe on the power of the Executive branch. Others who believe in a more common interpretation of the US Constitution believe that, under Article II of the US Constitution, the principal duty of the President is to execute the law, and if the law specifies a duty on one of the President's subordinates, then the President must "take care" to see that the duty specified in the law is executed. To do otherwise would be not be faithfully executing the law, and thus be unlawful, unconstitutional, a violation of the separation of powers, and ultimately impeachable. The courts have been reluctant to decide this question, claiming it is a "political question" for resolution by the elected branches of government.

Setting the pieces on the board in the proper position...getting ready to strike...

...or curl into fetal position.

Keep an eye on MIC Cheney...let's see what dastardly thing he's tempted to pull. We already know his commitment to protecting America's secret assets.

Time for more polls.

This is very encouraging news. :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

Great reporting -- thanks for keeping us up to date --

The investigation "has uncovered serious evidence of wrongdoing by the department and White House staff," Conyers says.

The memorandum says the probe has turned up evidence that some of the U.S. attorneys were improperly selected for firing because of their handling of vote fraud allegations, public corruption cases or other cases that could affect close elections. It also says that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and senior Justice aides "appear to have made false or misleading statements to Congress, many of which sought to minimize the role of White House personnel."

In addition, the memorandum asserts repeatedly that the president's top political adviser, Karl Rove, was the first administration official to broach the idea of firing U.S. attorneys shortly after the 2004 election -- an assertion the White House has said is not true.

In one of more than 300 footnotes, the Democrats point to a Jan. 6, 2005, e-mail from an assistant White House counsel that says that Rove "stopped by to ask . . . how we planned to proceed regarding U.S. attorneys, whether we were going to allow them to stay, request resignations from all and accept only some of them, or selectively replace them, etc."<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072402311.html?hpid=topnews

:kick:

if not MORE than any of us" I think we should say that he and we want our Constitution, Bill of RIghts, and Balance of Power. Yes, the bastards did it, but the goal is not just getting even. The goal is very serious. So figure of speech is trumped by our country's preservation.

just a few days ago he was a traitor and those who supported him were pummeled...

:D

living in a black and white world...

He comes across as a real gentleman and a genuinely nice guy.

I'm hoping as the game is racheted up and the criminal stakes become more of a factor, if some of the people who are in the know will start to provide new evidence to Congress. It's been a relatively easy game for the WH and their minions, but things are really starting to heat up and the stakes for those with no real vested interest in protecting the criminals might start to have 2nd thoughts. Perhaps will start seeing some of those RNC e-mails start to suddenly materialize?

This guy's a shark among sharks...

The Democrats are setting an impeachment trap. Bush thinks he is more secure with Gonzalez in the Attorney General's slot. However, once he blocks investigations against the Attorney General he will be guilty of obstruction of justice. The key is sidestepping Gonzalez who could legally shield the President by making HIM the target of the investigation.

If Bush wants to serve out the rest of his term, he will fire Gonzalez and replace him with someone who can investigate Gonzalez.

so that's what we're reduced to, investigating attorney's firings. This is obviously a cowards' move that will lead to fucking nothing. NOTHING, except to continue fooling the fools who want to believe Democrats are 'tough'.

Why isn't Conyers investigating REAL Bush crimes, like the reason he invaded Iraq? Or why he outed Valerie Plame? Or why he spied on Americans illegally?

I know why, because that would get Bush in REAL trouble and Neocon Nancy, Reid and Coward Conyers don't want that. Shame on all of you for cheering these Bush enablers.

I don't bash Dems - I may not agree, but unless they've done something so egregious that they should no longer be called Dems - I stick with them.

Conyers IS brilliant!