Congress has the authority to hold someone in contempt, U.S. District Judge John Bates said

WASHINGTON - Congress was trying to be diplomatic when it brought an unprecedented lawsuit to settle its subpoena fight against the White House, a lawyer told a federal judge Monday. After all, lawmakers could've just arrested the president's former lawyer for refusing to testify.

The judge's response?

Maybe they should have.

Congress has the authority to hold someone in contempt, U.S. District Judge John Bates said. Did it really need to go to court?
~snip~

Bates suggested that the two sides might still settle the dispute before he rules, avoiding a final court showdown altogether.

That hinted at one option the judge has that could pre-empt his own ruling: He could order both sides to negotiate further and, if nothing came of it, Bates could just put the case on a shelf until the end of the year. When the new Congress begins its term in 2009, the subpoenas essentially vanish and the case would be moot.

more:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080623/ap_on_go_co/congress_contempt


I think they should follow the judges lead and hold them in contempt and arrest them both.

saying all along. They can arrest them, and try them! What kind of bullshit ideas will Nancy P. come up with to avoid any confrontation? Maybe down on her knees again!

time to round up the usual suspects : - )

He commands a force of 2300 capital police officers.

Terrance William Gainer


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/14/AR2006111400992.html

The Congress ceeding their authority to the judiciary over a dispute with the executive branch. They need no ones permission or seal of approval to hold someone in contempt or arrest them for that contempt. NO ONE! What a bunch of cowards Congress is trying to get the judiciary to do their dirty work for them.