'Hairy Legs' Pelosi's Witch Hunt Continues - House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt!

P

Patriot Games

Guest
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14/72788.html

House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt

Thursday, February 14, 2008

WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President Bush's
confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into whether
a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.

Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.

The vote was 223-32 to hold presidential chief of staff Josh Bolten and
former White House counsel Harriet Miers in contempt. The citations charge
Miers with failing to testify and accuse her and Bolten of refusing
Congress' demands for documents related to the 2006-2007 firings.

Republicans said Democrats should instead be working on extending a law -
set to expire Saturday - allowing the government to eavesdrop on phone calls
and e-mails in the United States in cases of suspected terrorist activity.

"We have space on the calendar today for a politically charged fishing
expedition, but no space for a bill that would protect the American people
from terrorists who want to kill us," said Rep. John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, the
minority leader.

"Let's just get up and leave," he told his colleagues, before storming out
of the House chamber with scores of Republicans in tow.

The White House said the Justice Department would not ask the U.S. attorney
to pursue the House contempt charges. However, the measure would allow the
House to bring its own lawsuit on the matter.

It is the first time in 25 years that a full chamber of Congress has voted
on a contempt of Congress citation.

The action, which Democrats had been threatening for months, was the latest
wrinkle in a more than yearlong constitutional clash between Congress and
the White House.

The administration has said the information being sought is off-limits under
executive privilege, and argues that Bolten and Miers are immune from
prosecution.

Democrats said they were acting to protect Congress' constitutional
prerogatives.

If Congress didn't enforce the subpoenas, said Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland,
the No. 2 Democrat, it would "be giving its tacit consent to the dangerous
idea of an imperial presidency, above the law and beyond the reach of checks
and balances."

Republicans argued that there had been no evidence of wrongdoing in the
prosecutors flap, and called the vote a waste of time that would actually
damage Congress' standing.

"We don't have evidence that we can give to the U.S. attorney. What we're
giving to him is the desire to continue a witch hunt which has produced up
to today zero - nothing," said Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah.

Under former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Justice Department officials
consulted with the White House, fired at least nine federal prosecutors and
kindled a political furor over a hiring process that favored Republican
loyalists.

Bush's former top political adviser, Karl Rove, has also been a target of
Congress' investigation into the purge of prosecutors, although Thursday's
measure was not aimed at him.

Fred Fielding, the current White House counsel, has offered to make
officials and documents available behind closed doors to the congressional
committees probing the matter - but off the record and not under oath.
Lawmakers demanded a transcript of testimony and the negotiations stalled.

The White House blasted Democrats for scheduling action on the contempt
measures instead of moving to extend the eavesdropping law.

"The American people will find it baffling that on a day that House leaders
are trying to put off passing critical legislation to keep us safer from the
threat of foreign terrorists overseas, they are spending scarce time to
become the first Congress in history to bring contempt charges against a
president's chief of staff and lawyer," said Dana Perino, the White House
spokeswoman.

The contempt debate sparked an unusually bitter scene even in the fractious
House. Democrats accused Republicans of marring the Capitol memorial for
their fallen colleague Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., by interrupting it with a
protest vote. GOP leaders shot back that it was Democrats who were
responsible for dishonoring Lantos, by calling the House into session for
the contempt debate before the service had ended.

It's not clear that contempt of Congress citations must be prosecuted. The
law says the U.S. attorney "shall" bring the matter to a grand jury.

The House voted 259-105 in 1982 for a contempt citation against EPA
Administrator Anne Gorsuch, but the Reagan-era Justice Department refused to
prosecute the case.

The Justice Department also sued the House of Representatives in that case,
but the court threw out the suit and urged negotiation. The Reagan
administration eventually agreed to turn over the documents.

The last time a full chamber of Congress voted on a contempt of Congress
citation was 1983. The House voted 413-0 to cite former Environmental
Protection Agency official Rita Lavelle for contempt of Congress for
refusing to appear before a House committee. Lavelle was later acquitted in
court of the contempt charge, but she was convicted of perjury in a separate
trial.

On Thursday, three Republicans joined 220 Democrats to support the contempt
resolution, including Rep. Walter B. Jones of North Carolina, presidential
candidate Rep. Ron Paul of Texas and Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest of Maryland,
who was defeated this week in a primary. One Republican, Rep. Jon Porter of
Nevada, voted "present."
 
Patriot Games wrote:
> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14/72788.html
>
>
> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>
> Thursday, February 14, 2008
>
> WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President Bush's
> confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into
> whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.
>
> Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.



Ever notice how Bush touts accountability for others, and executive
privilege for himself?
 
"timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
news:ZuydnZDt1tloVijanZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comcast.com...
> Patriot Games wrote:
>> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14/72788.html
>>
>>
>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>>
>> Thursday, February 14, 2008
>>
>> WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President Bush's
>> confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into
>> whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.
>>
>> Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.

>
>
> Ever notice how Bush touts accountability for others, and executive
> privilege for himself?


Wake up kiddo. The executive branch owes no more accountability to congress
than the congress does to the executive branch. That's why they call it a
co-equal branch of government. How stupid do you think it would be if the
President tried to hold congress in contempt? Geez, where do you kids come
from? Didn't anybody younger than 60 go to civics class?
 
"Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1999@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:de1c029e-5952-47cc-aeca-eaf16901c1b6@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 15, 11:14 am, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@America.com> wrote:
>> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14...
>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt

>Uh...Patriot...ever get the feeling that your side isn't exactly,
>shall we say...winning?


We stopped winning a while ago.

We know its over.

Good luck with what you 'won.'
 
"timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
news:ZuydnZDt1tloVijanZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comcast.com...
> Patriot Games wrote:
>> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14/72788.html
>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>> Thursday, February 14, 2008
>> WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President Bush's
>> confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into
>> whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.
>> Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.

> Ever notice how Bush touts accountability for others, and executive
> privilege for himself?


You mean like when Bubba Clinton negotiated the terms under which he went
before Starr's grand jury instead of answering a subpoena directing him to
appear?

Like that?
 
Patriot Games wrote:
> "timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
> news:ZuydnZDt1tloVijanZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Patriot Games wrote:
>>> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14/72788.html
>>>
>>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>>> Thursday, February 14, 2008
>>> WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President Bush's
>>> confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into
>>> whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.
>>> Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.

>> Ever notice how Bush touts accountability for others, and executive
>> privilege for himself?

>
> You mean like when Bubba Clinton negotiated the terms under which he
> went before Starr's grand jury instead of answering a subpoena directing
> him to appear?
>
> Like that?
>


Why did he appear before that grand jury under oath instead of running
away and hiding like Bush? Why didn't he insist that only his
subordinates testify, not under oath, not even on the record, in secret,
like Bush?

This comparison is not turning out well for Bush.
 
"timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
news:Ba6dna28JZfPYCjanZ2dnUVZ_vrinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Patriot Games wrote:
>> "timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
>> news:ZuydnZDt1tloVijanZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> Patriot Games wrote:
>>>> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14/72788.html
>>>>
>>>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>>>> Thursday, February 14, 2008
>>>> WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President Bush's
>>>> confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into
>>>> whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.
>>>> Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.
>>> Ever notice how Bush touts accountability for others, and executive
>>> privilege for himself?

>>
>> You mean like when Bubba Clinton negotiated the terms under which he
>> went before Starr's grand jury instead of answering a subpoena directing
>> him to appear?
>>
>> Like that?
>>

>
> Why did he appear before that grand jury under oath instead of running
> away and hiding like Bush? Why didn't he insist that only his
> subordinates testify, not under oath, not even on the record, in secret,
> like Bush?


That's pretty simple. He wasn't near as smart as Bush.
 
..
On Feb 15, 3:44 pm, Jerry Kraus
<jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You know, Patriot, the thing I like about you is
> that you are both honest and intelligent. And
> you have a lot of courage.


"Courage"?!?!

Mr. Kraus, are you insane?

Here's an example of Patriot Games' "courage" in
his own sick words:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics/msg/d58d4080f29b19d1

On Apr 3 2007, 8:52 am, "Patriot Games"
<Crazy_Bast...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> "WillieJ" <medfordfa...@yahoo.com> wrote --
> > You must have gotten you ass kicked by a
> > black guy one time.

> -
> Nope, not once.
> But growing up in south Florida in the 40s and 50s
> I damn sure guarantee you I threw some fine
> boot-beatings on more than a few ******s.


I won't even get into this ****ing asshole bigot's lack of
"honesty" or "intelligence".

Patriot Games is a hate-filled, cowardly bully. Nothing
more and a lot, lot less.

-Tom Sr.
 
"Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1906@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d45584f9-d4ad-4ad6-a3ef-bdb745d2ed42@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 15, 2:38 pm, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@America.com> wrote:
>> "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:de1c029e-5952-47cc-aeca-eaf16901c1b6@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> On Feb 15, 11:14 am, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@America.com> wrote:
>> >>http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14...
>> >> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>> >Uh...Patriot...ever get the feeling that your side isn't exactly,
>> >shall we say...winning?

>> We stopped winning a while ago.
>> We know its over.
>> Good luck with what you 'won.'

>You know, Patriot, the thing I like about you is that you are both
>honest and intelligent. And you have a lot of courage. We have those
>things in common. Perhaps, if we exchanged family backgrounds and
>life experiences, we would exchange attitudes. It is an interesting
>question.
>I agree, that we will require luck and skill to improve the situation
>of the U.S. It is currently a total mess!


Its really NOT that big a mess.

But, as you will see, when you claim that a mess exists and the American
people give you a shot at cleaning up that mess YOU MUST CLEAN UP THAT MESS.
 
"timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
news:Ba6dna28JZfPYCjanZ2dnUVZ_vrinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Patriot Games wrote:
>> "timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
>> news:ZuydnZDt1tloVijanZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> Patriot Games wrote:

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14/72788.html
>>>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>>>> Thursday, February 14, 2008
>>>> WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President Bush's
>>>> confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into
>>>> whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.
>>>> Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.
>>> Ever notice how Bush touts accountability for others, and executive
>>> privilege for himself?

>> You mean like when Bubba Clinton negotiated the terms under which he
>> went before Starr's grand jury instead of answering a subpoena directing
>> him to appear?
>> Like that?

> Why did he appear before that grand jury under oath


Because HE was the DIRECT SUBJECT of the investigation.

> instead of running away and hiding like Bush?


Bush is NOT the DIRECT SUBJECT of this investigation.

> Why didn't he insist that only his subordinates testify,


Because THEY are the DIRECT SUBJECT of the investigation.

> not under oath, not even on the record, in secret, like Bush?


Because NO criminal charges have been filed.

> This comparison is not turning out well for Bush.


According to Polling you're wrong.
 
<lorad474@cs.com> wrote in message
news:a37c89b3-ec3a-4c9a-8388-7756eee8c77e@o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 15, 9:14 am, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@America.com> wrote:
>> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14...
>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt

>And they should be held in contempt of congress.
>When little presidential minions refuse to report to the
>representatives of the citizens of the United States..
>That is called a violation of the Law, the Constitution, and the
>inherent right of the citizens of the US to be apprised of the
>functioning of the US government.


And they probably insulted your parentage!

If this WAS NOT a Witch Hunt CRIMINAL CHARGES would have ALREADY been filed.

This has always been 100% bullshit.

And THIS is one of the reasons why the American public is holding Congress
in contempt.
 
"Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1999@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eb740ba7-205e-40d0-811a-86c75812a640@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 16, 10:41 am, "Patriot Games" <Patr...@America.com> wrote:
>> "timeOday" <timeOday-UNS...@theknack.net> wrote in message
>> news:Ba6dna28JZfPYCjanZ2dnUVZ_vrinZ2d@comcast.com...> Patriot Games
>> wrote:
>> >> "timeOday" <timeOday-UNS...@theknack.net> wrote in message
>> >>news:ZuydnZDt1tloVijanZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comcast.com...
>> >>> Patriot Games wrote:

>> http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/House_Holds_Bush_Confidan/2008/02/14...
>> >>>> House Holds Bush Confidants in Contempt
>> >>>> Thursday, February 14, 2008
>> >>>> WASHINGTON -- The House voted Thursday to hold two of President
>> >>>> Bush's
>> >>>> confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into
>> >>>> whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.
>> >>>> Angry Republicans boycotted the vote and staged a walkout.
>> >>> Ever notice how Bush touts accountability for others, and executive
>> >>> privilege for himself?
>> >> You mean like when Bubba Clinton negotiated the terms under which he
>> >> went before Starr's grand jury instead of answering a subpoena
>> >> directing
>> >> him to appear?
>> >> Like that?
>> > Why did he appear before that grand jury under oath

>> Because HE was the DIRECT SUBJECT of the investigation.
>> > instead of running away and hiding like Bush?

>> Bush is NOT the DIRECT SUBJECT of this investigation.
>> > Why didn't he insist that only his subordinates testify,

>> Because THEY are the DIRECT SUBJECT of the investigation.
>> > not under oath, not even on the record, in secret, like Bush?

>> Because NO criminal charges have been filed.
>> > This comparison is not turning out well for Bush.

>> According to Polling you're wrong.

>The contempt citations by the Congress are, effectively, criminal
>charges. A judge may, conceivably, acquit the defendants. But, I
>doubt it.


No such thing. There is no such thing as "effectively" being criminal
charges.

No, LONG before a Judge has an opportunity to acquit a Grand Jury must be
established and summonned and THAT is NOT a legal requirement.

> They should have shown up for the hearings. They could
>always have taken the fifth, and refused to testify. Meiers and
>Bolten are, unquestionably, in contempt of Congress.


No they aren't. Congress should file criminal charges or stop their Witch
Hunt.

>Bush may pardon
>them. In which case, Congress can simply subpoena them again, and, if
>they again refuse to show, up, cite them from contempt again.


No, if they are charged and convicted and then pardoned they CANNOT be
re-charged.

>What you are failing to perceive, Patriot, is that Bush is abusing
>Executive Privilege to a dangerous extent, and trying to turn himself
>into a tinhorn dictator.


No, the Dems are trying to legitimize a Witch Hunt. If they have evidence
enough to file charges then file charges, otherwise move on.

>Someone beyond Meiers and Bolten is going
>to prison over this. Probably Alberto Gonzalez. Everybody hates
>him. Even the Republicans.


There will be no charges filed.

There will be no contempt citation.

Nobody will go to prison.

This whole thing will disappear.

To the embarassment of the Dems.
 
Back
Top