Story here. Mainly about that Niger yellowcake, but also about possible attempts to circumvent the Presidential Records Act by relying on the RNC server for Admin e-mails, and using federal agencies to conduct partisan political activities.
Rice, as secretary of state, would be the highest-ranking Bush Admin official asked to testify since the 2006 elections, higher even than Gonzalez. Will W invoke “executive privilege” to stop this? Will he succeed?
If she does testify, what might she say?
I don’t recall.
I love watching Miss Rice squirm in her seat! Yes, Condi, indeed, what was the name of that presidential daily briefing?
Huh? What 2003 Iranian letter? I don’t remember anything like that…
More story here. I believe that refusing a subpoena usually gets a “contempt of Congress”, which is similar to “contempt of court”. Be interesting to watch, no?
I guess that means this winds up in the courts . . . the question is, how fast can they speed it through?
She wants to send a letter instead and avoid all those pesky questions, the ones with the difficult answers. How convenient. Although, I suppose it isn’t any worse than being subjected to an hour’s worth of “I don’t recall”.
From what I’ve read, the courts are likely to refuse to hear this because it’s a political situation. Besides which, contempt of Congress is prosecuted by…drum roll, please…the US Attorney for Washington, DC, who is at the moment Jeffrey Taylor, a hand-picked “loyal Bushie”. The prosecution of contempt of Congress is at the discretion of the DoJ. Convenient, no?
It’s a constitutional question which only the courts have the authority to decide.
“Now let them enforce it.”
Too busy, she needs more shoes.
Man she looks like Baroness Bathory in Applecider’s link.
No. Congress has the power of “inherent contempt”. They can actually send the Sergeant of Arms out to arrest someone, drag them before Congress, and imprison them if they refuse to comply.
Now, usually Congress uses the Justice Department for matters like this. But there’s nothing in the Constitution that says they have to. If they find someone in contempt they have the authority to enforce it entirely on their own.
More information here and here.
The process was used 85 times up to 1934. It hasn’t been used since, but it’s still there.
That’s very interesting. I note (after having been without internet access over the weekend) that Kagro X over at Daily Kos has a diary up asking “Does Your Delegation Know About Inherent Contempt?”. I think I may have to send a few e-mails…