Waxman: Fitzgerald's Investigation Not "A Substitute for a Congressional Inquiry"

http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20060613135012-88495.pdf

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1067&Issue=Disclosure+of+CIA+Agent+Identity

For those who say Congressman Waxman hasn't had anything to say on this since 2004, please see the above.

Please also see: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15657198/

When contacted yesterday, the Committee staff indicated that the Chairman plans to show appropriate deference for the currently-pending criminal trial.

Unless the Chairman's thinking has evolved since the letter that appears as the first link above, I think it is reasonable to expect movement on this, very soon after the Scooter Libby jury comes back with a verdict (and while the issue is still hot in Americans' minds).

- Dave

There is much being revealed in the trial which isn't being fully discussed.

"I’m going to have an interesting time because the Government Reform Committee has jurisdiction over everything,” Waxman said Friday, three days after his party’s capture of Congress put him in line to chair the panel. “The most difficult thing will be to pick and choose.”"

KnR'd!

The foreign press seems to be awakening to Waxman, now, too, judging by the uptick in foreign press stories about him and his activities.

- Dave

to discuss his findings about Rove & about the best way to proceed with regard to the committee's handling of Rove. I wonder if that meeting took place & if Waxman was told to wait until after the Libby trial to deal with Rove, considering Waxman's letter is dated before he was granted chairmanship & could schedule a hearing whenever he so chooses.

... would probably be deemed "the most appropriate" level of contact at this point.

A question that some in DC have quietly begun to ask: will Waxman invite Fitzgerald himself to testify, after the conclusion of the Libby trial?

- Dave

I'm so glad they're not rushing in with immunity grants.

-Hoot

to any congressional committee or investigator that wants it. Just the first few days of the trial have been very illuminating of these things we thought, and suspected, but didn't know for sure all these months.

It's only going to get more and more ugly for the administration and all those who supported/support it.


It's beginning to
look
a
lot
Like
FITZ MAASSSSS
Everywhere you
GOooooo!

Yippeeeeeeeeeeee!

... would probably draw a GOP filibuster in the Senate.

; )

- Dave

http://icreport.loc.gov/icreport/2toc.htm

Ugh.

- Dave

Then I opened your link and said: "Ugh", then laughed out loud.

... but if Fitzgerald were to follow that model, and probe deeply into the much more consequential lies, I think Congress would have plenty of impeachable info.

- Dave

Did you see the following story:
"The Bush administration has taken a series of steps in recent weeks that appear to be setting the stage for a military confrontation with Iran. Congressional leaders have been raising red flags. “I’d like to be clear,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said last week. “The president does not have the authority to launch military action in Iran without first seeking congressional authorization.” Recent comments made by Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) explain why Congress’s resistance is so vital.

In an interview in GQ Magazine, Hagel reveals that the Bush administration tried to get Congress to approve military action anywhere in the Middle East — not just in Iraq — in the fall of 2002. At the time, Hagel says, the Bush administration presented Congress with a resolution that would have authorized the use of force anywhere in the region:

HAGEL: Finally, begrudgingly, sent over a resolution for Congress to approve. Well, it was astounding. It said they could go anywhere in the region.

GQ: It wasn’t specific to Iraq?

HAGEL: Oh no. It said the whole region! They could go into Greece or anywhere. Is central Asia in the region? I suppose! Sure as hell it was clear they meant the whole Middle East. It was anything. It was literally anything. No boundaries. No restrictions.

GQ: They expected Congress to let them start a war anywhere in the Middle East?

HAGEL: Yes. Yes. Wide open. We had to rewrite it. Joe Biden, Dick Lugar, and I stripped the language that the White House had set up and put our language in it.

Asked about his vote in support of the final Iraq war resolution, Hagel told GQ, “Do I regret that vote? Yes, I do regret that vote.”



http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/24/hagel-iraq-resolution :kick:

Thank you, Mr. Waxman.

; )

- Dave

he is not going to let go -

:)

... that he's assembled.

- Dave

"There’s the response to Hurricane Katrina, government contracting in Iraq and on homeland security, decision-making at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration, and allegations of corporate profiteering, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., told the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce."

“I’m going to have an interesting time because the Government Reform Committee has jurisdiction over everything,” Waxman said Friday, three days after his party’s capture of Congress put him in line to chair the panel. “The most difficult thing will be to pick and choose.”

should the crime of the century be hidden behind federal court doors
and then we have to wait for the news hearing it secondhand

I want to see these people under oath

Pretty Please Waxman Pretty Please!!!

... will be augmented by video of their committee testimony. I'd wager hard money on it.

- Dave

Keep up the good work, sir! :thumbsup:

... ran this item quoting him this week on Bush's "energy policy" (or lack thereof): http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-energy24jan24,1,2599732.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

- Dave

about an article in todays Atlanta Journal/Constitution for a great article about Waxman. Notice who the person who calls him 'scariest' is affiliated with.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=64378&mesg_id=64378

On edit:Sorry got the atribution wrong.Time mag called him that.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1562974,00.html

"Iraq will get new attention with Waxman in power. This week he plans to send a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld demanding information on Halliburton's $16 billion contract to provide services to troops there. Waxman's staff has been poring over the fine print of that deal for more than two years, and is convinced that much of the money is slipping between layer upon layer of subcontractors."

- Dave