Leahy subpoenas Rove re attorney firings. Another constitutional showdown?!

[BrainGlutton]

Story here:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Thursday issued a subpoena for top White House adviser Karl Rove to compel him to testify about the firing of several U.S. attorneys.
“The evidence shows that senior White House political operatives were focused on the political impact of federal prosecutions and whether federal prosecutors were doing enough to bring partisan voter fraud and corruption cases,” Leahy said. “It is obvious that the reasons given for the firings of these prosecutors were contrived as part of a cover-up and that the stonewalling by the White House is part and parcel of that same effort.”

Leahy issued the subpoenas, one to Rove and one to White House aide Scott Jennings, after consulting with Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the committee’s ranking member.

“The Bush-Cheney White House continues to place great strains on our constitutional system of checks and balances,” Leahy added. “Not since the darkest days of the Nixon administration have we seen efforts to corrupt federal law enforcement for partisan political gain and such efforts to avoid accountability.”

Leahy gives Rove one week to appear.

Strong stuff. But Rove has been invited (not subpoenaed) to testify about this before, and he refused to do so publicly, on the record or under oath. Assuming his position has not changed, he will invoke EP and refuse to show. Then, as with Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten, they can issue contempt citations, which must be referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, unless they dust off the “inherent contempt” power.

Where is all this heading?

[marshmallow]

Not much of a showdown if the administration can do whatever it wants and the Congress doesn’t mind.

[BrainGlutton]

@marshmallow

Not much of a showdown if the administration can do whatever it wants and the Congress doesn’t mind.

Congress minds, obviously. The question is what they have the power to do about it – a question this Admin appears to be determined to keep out of the courts.

[marshmallow]

I’m sorry, BG. You’re right, the Congress does mind and would not like to see a continuation of its decline as an organ of government – a process which started long ago. Now is the time to stop it, to stand up and demand accountability.

I’m sure they will write an extremely angry letter, posthaste!

[World_Eater]

I’m not sure they have any other option except inherent contempt. There has been a lot of hair splitting over the obligation of a US attorney to bring contempt charges before a grand jury.

Would be neat to see the Sergeant-at-Arms go drag Myers and Rove in by the scruff of the neck.

[phouka]

So, who is currently the Congressional Sergeant at Arms, and does he have any idea what kind of crap year he’s in for?

[Zoe]

What is “inherent contempt” and how does that different from turning this over to the U.S. Attorney for D.C.?

Does the U.S. Attorney serve Myers and Bolton with contempt citations or does he convene a Grand Jury or both?

[kaylasdad99]

@Zoe

What is “inherent contempt” and how does that different from turning this over to the U.S. Attorney for D.C.?

Does the U.S. Attorney serve Myers and Bolton with contempt citations or does he convene a Grand Jury or both?

Since the U.S. Attorney serves at the pleasure of the President, he does what the President tells him to do (in this instance, sit on his hands).

As for 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.)

The question arises as to what facilities would be used to imprison a convicted wrongdoer.

[BrainGlutton]

@phouka

So, who is currently the Congressional Sergeant at Arms, and does he have any idea what kind of crap year he’s in for?

The House Sergeant at Arms is Wilson Livingood (there’s also one for the Senate).

[Spoke]

I think if Congress has any hope of reclaiming some of the power it has mindlessly ceded to the presidency over the past few years, it is going to have to gather its gonads and use its contempt power. Empty threats are just making Congress seem impotent.

[BobLibDem]

How does the Sergeant at Arms arrest someone? Does he have the use of the Capitol Police? And suppose the Secret Service says “no, you may not enter the White House to arrest Karl Rove”. Could we have a shootout?

[BrainGlutton]

Well, Rove was a no-show. Jennings appeared but wouldn’t say much.