The impeachment drive gains steam Update Bush denies Congress access to aides
Bumped
Update 7/9 10:42am: The latest volley in the battle over executive privilege…
President Bush invoked executive privilege Monday to deny requests by Congress for testimony from two former aides in connection with the firings of federal prosecutors. The White House, however, did offer again to make former counsel Harriet Miers and one-time political director Sara Taylor available for private, off-the-record interviews.
In a letter to the heads of the House and Senate Judiciary panels, White House counsel Fred Fielding insisted that Bush was acting in good faith and refused lawmakers’ demand that the president explain the basis for invoking the privilege. The latest move in the separation of powers fight between the legislative and executive branches came as members of Congress began returning from their Fourth of July recess. An atmosphere of high tension accompanied the resumption of work as a fight also loomed there between majority Democrats and some key Republicans and Bush over his Iraq war policy.
In his letter regarding subpoenas the Judiciary panels issued, Fielding said, “The president feels compelled to assert executive privilege with respect to the testimony sought from Sara M. Taylor and Harriet E. Miers.” “You may be assured that the president’s assertion here comports with prior practices in similar contexts, and that it has been appropriately documented,” the letter said.
Fielding was responding to a 10 a.m. EDT deadline set by the Democratic chairmen, Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, for the White House to explain [its] privilege claim, prove that the president personally invoked it and provide logs of which documents were being withheld. As expected, Fielding refused to comply.
Update 7/9 9:34am: Congress returns, ready to battle Bush
Update: Cindy Sheehan returns: “Cindy Sheehan, the soldier’s mother who galvanized the anti-war movement, said Sunday that she plans to run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks.”
***
First, a flashback. Remember this headline:
Democrats Won’t Try To Impeach President
By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 12, 2006; Page A06Seeking to choke off a Republican rallying cry, the House’s top Democrat has told colleagues that the party will not seek to impeach President Bush even if it gains control of the House in November’s elections, her office said last night.
And remember this one:
A Democrat-controlled House wouldn’t impeach, Pelosi says
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco has told her caucus that the idea of impeaching President Bush isn’t in the cards if the party takes over the House in November’s elections.
Pelosi, who Republicans have charged intends to lead an impeachment effort, dismissed the idea when she spoke Wednesday morning at a closed-door caucus of the House’s 201 Democrats. Pelosi also restated her opposition to the idea of censuring Bush over his decision to invade Iraq in March 2003.
“We want oversight and checks and balances,” Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said she told the caucus. “That certainly isn’t being done in this Congress (under Republican control). Impeachment was never her interest.”
Promises, promises. Let’s fast-forward:
MoveOn Puts Impeachment Back on the Table
Poll: Impeachment talk gains steam after Libby move
Blacked Out by the Corporate Media, Impeachment Advances
US Rep. Johnson Joins 10 Others on Cheney Impeachment Bill
Impeachment pied piper John Conyers, enraged by President Bush’s commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence, will hold hearings next week to examine presidential pardons. (He’s come along way from those make-believe hearings in 2005.) Make no mistake: Conyer’s tilling the political soil for his impeachment drive:
“Yes, we’re going to review all of them, including Clinton’s, Bush one, Bush two, we’ll go back as far as they want,” Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said in an exclusive interview with FOX News Radio. Conyers added that the Nixon pardon would also be covered in the review.
“We’ll be doing the research. We won’t need to review each and every one of them but the whole idea is to examine to what use this part of our criminal law is being put and whether it’s being used adequately or are there other changes necessary,” he said.
Conyers said he doesn’t think President Bush acted outside his constitutional authority in commuting Libby’s 2 1/2-year prison sentence, but he questions the use of that authority.
Those who can, govern. Those who can’t, “question authority.” If there was any doubt before, there is no more doubt now: The nutroots Congress is ascendant. Nancy Pelosi’s true colors will show.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- PAXALLES
- The TIW Blog » Blog Archive » The Momentum of the Impeachment Drive
- Keith Burgess-Jackson » Impeachment
- Bill's Bites
- Right Wing Nut House » AMERICA, THE HYSTERICAL
- Free In Idaho! » Blog Archive » Run, Cindy, Run
- Laughable Moment of the Day : The American Pundit
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
- Moonage Political Webdream » Blog Archive » Talk about a no-win election
- Pajamas Media
- Contra-Mundum » Malkin on Politicians
- Pirate’s Cove » >>Americans Never Quit » Congress Going To Work Hard To Fail
- Run Cindy Run! « Mark’s Soap Box
- Michelle Malkin » It’s official: Cindy’s on her way to Washington
- Contra-Mundum » Pensées
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Impeachment, John Conyers, Nancy Pelosi
Pundit & Pundette
» States in dire straits
Sister Toldjah
» Josh Marshall: Sarah Palin is “probably mentally unstable”Sister Toldjah
» A resolution honoring Michael Jackson? Are you kidding me?Stop The ACLU
» Radical Obama: Anti-American MilitarismRiehl World View
» Pali-mania Strikes The Right Blogosphere!
This is nothing more than “I know you are but what am I!” Seriously. The Republicans impeached Clinton and the Democrats were bitter about it. Now they’re trying to impeach Bush in a childish act of revenge.
I don’t like Bush either and his recent CAIR-pandering may make him well-deserving of the honor, but this is beyond childish.
I don’t even know why I turn the news on anymore.
I was hoping Cindy Sheehan would stay the Hell away from everybody.
Oh Boy, beyond the sound barrier again.
There must a barrier of sound between these elected representatives of the people and the words of the people. Is it erected around the beltway like a sound attenuator, a wall to keep non European ideas and sounds out?
It would seem that the main agenda of Pelosi et al is to reverse the will of the electorate.
They waste our time and resources on impeachment because Willy C was impeached, and disgraced. Forget the idea that you can’t embarrass one with no class.
They seem intent on rewriting our history; even modern history. Al Gore had written his concession speech by the time his handlers told him to ’shut up al, we’re not finished counting yet’. This in the spirit of ‘it doesn’t matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes’.
The fact is, the people who hate President Bush, hate Cheney more. So this is another attempt at obfuscation. The real question is what are they trying to do behind this smoke screen?
Were they elected to pursue their agenda or were they elected to further the wishes of their constituents?
The ‘Royals’, (it would seem this includes all within the beltway, even the 4th estate, (or are they now the 5th column)) have decided they know better than us mere unwashed sources of revenue. Didn’t we throw these fools out over two hundred years ago? Who let them back in? Or did they just walk across the ‘border’ unchallenged?
Look at it like this. As long as the likes Conyers are kept busy there are not attending to
runningruining the country. The less congress does the better off we are. Let them look into this and look into that, it will go no where, just waste time.Bush became irrelevant, actually he chose to be a lame duck by his behavior and stupid and/or lack of firm decisions.
Whatever happens to him, it doesn’t matter anymore.
The only thing Bush might be useful for, if he choses to be relevant and if the circumstances allow it (before his term expires), is to pick a Conservative to replace any potential retired Liberal Supreme Court Justice.
Other than that, I really don’t give a damn about Bush. He not only threw himself in History’s trash, but also is dragging the Republican Party with him.
If the Republicans lose the 2008 elections, it will be because of George W. Bush. Because of Iraq, immigration, etc.
People will not forget that Bush was Republican and how the Republican Congress screwed up while in power.
People will be more willing to give the Communists full power than to hand again the White House to a Republican, at least not in the near future.
Of course, I wish the opposite would happen, although I have a lot of reservation about the Republican candidates (including Thompson and Gingrich -although they didn’t officially announce it).
Oh no, Mother Sheehan raises her head once more. I thought she was going away?
Ya know, she can’t be any worse than Pelosi.
Let the Dems impeach and investigate all they want, let them emote and argue and grandstand. They vent their spleen to distract from their impotence.
Let them strut and fret their hours upon the stage. There’s is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and furry, signifying nothing.
In other words… who cares if they do all of this stupid crap, they aren’t actually getting anthing done. The only legislation they have gotten passed is an increase in the minimum wage. They do these things out of pettiness, frustration and a desire to keep their base distracted from the fact that they can’t manage to get anything done.
You got it - the only grounds the Dims have is a driving passion for “Tit for Tat” revenge.
Ugly little twerps. On top of that, with Clinton leading the way, they all abandoned any pretense of self-restraint they ever had. It’s like a stampede of rank idiocy.
May I please add one more:
CONFUSION TO THE ENEMY! AMEN!
“Bring it on!” — George W. Bush!
Actually, assuming that the behavior of the Dims is nothing more than vindictive spleen venting and therefore irrelevent is dangerous thinking. If we were in a political vaccum in which only decisive action counts that might be true, but we live in a world in which perception translates into reality; call it propoganda, whatever you will, but the constant drumbeat of “Republican lawbreakers” constantly shouted by willing accomplices in the media will have tremendous effects on the 08 election, and with the Hillary-monster ready to pounce from the shadows and Pelosi and Reid ready to send her insane legislation to sign - and she will - this substantially effects the world out kids will grow - or not grow - up in. This is not “irrelevent spleen-venting”. This actually is extremely serious to anyone who holds even moderately conservative values.
On the light note, of course, I feel like dancing at the thought of Sheehan challenging Pelosi. With 08 coming up, Pelosi needs to move to the right politically, even in her district, but to keep the base Sheehan will drive her to the left. Now thats fun!
Ugh. Why did Sheehan come back? Didn’t she say she had a family to take care of? One that had been greatly neglected as of late? I knew she would resurface, and living without the attention would be hard, but I thought she would at least wait a little longer.
I just can not figure out how anyone can support a woman who does not even have the intestinal fortitude (or ovaries about her) to defend her fallen son. I read one interview where she argued that her son was “trespassing” when he was killed — implying that the murderers who killed him were just innocent people defending their land. Bull. She makes me want to vomit.
What WE THE PEOPLE need is the one thing we will never get … TERM LIMITS FOR CONGRESS … I figure 12 years in the senate and 8 years in the house is more than enough to qualify as what the founding fathers called “CITIZEN” representation … there was never a thought to someone making a “LIFELONG PROFESSION” of government … would not totally end but would at least lessen the money influence on congressmen if they couldn’t run for the office again after serving the maximum number of years I have suggested … AS for those that like to bring up the Constitution not invoking limits … remember … it also did not place limits on serving in the Presidency …
Why do you defend Bush when he gave us the conservatives and base Republicans the finger? This is the time to show our president our appreciation for doing nothing to further the conservative cause for the last six years.
Hah! Gotcha! Why can’t she? Boxer is worse, so I don’t see why someone else couldn’t be worse too.
Obviously the writer is unaware that that work is being done by Mexicans for cash under the table.
You don’t bring charges against someone just because you don’t like him or her!! Jeez! Your Gestapo/Stalinist tendencies are showing! Do you not know what impeachment is?!
I agree. They are just not very good at this game because it won’t distract; it will cause the modicum of intelligent people who actually voted for these idiots to realize that they’re not going to do anything about the war or anything else they promised they would do. Then again, if we’re talking about intelligent liberals who can put 2 and 2 together, that’s only about a half of one percent. But if they don’t think all of this will come back to hurt them like a rain of hellfire down on President Hillary - they’re sadly mistaken.
Indeed. I suspect the person you’re responding to was just parroting articles printed in the MSM this morning, and really does not know what impeachment is/is for.
Again, MM displays here superb ability to raise a non-issue. Bush is not going to be impeached any time soon. As much as Conservatives believe, Democrats are not controlled by far leftists, like Cindy Sheehan. If they were, the spending bill for the troops would not have passed both houses, but it did, didn’t it with Democratic support.
Also Foxforce, yes it is wrong to bring charges against someone you don’t like. But, in a parlimentary system, Bush would be out of office because the Parliment (Congress) would give him a vote of no confidence.
And Speakup, Bush’s enemy combatants detention program was found to be unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court last term.
They is both totally rabid - it ain’t good.
But this is NOT a parliamentary system. Congress isn’t a Parliament.
And the Dims LOST the election to get to have their party in the EXECUTIVE Branch - and our Executive isn’t picked by the LEGISLATIVE Branch.
And the Dims are NOT the House of the Monarchy of the USA.
Liberals in Congress:
*Baby-voice* “Wahhhhh - wahhhh! You impeached Bill Clinton so now we get to impeach George Bush! Wahhhhh! Wahhhh!”
Pathetic.
Really pathetic.