Reply With Quote
That's what I was going to say. If you are a party loyalist then vote 'em out in the primary.
Another day, another round of obstruction of justice and any accountability by the current administration by Senate Republicans...
ReutersThe U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee voted on Thursday to hold two top aides to President George W. Bush in contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate in its probe of fired federal prosecutors.
On a largely party-line vote of 11-7, the Democratic-led panel sent contempt citations against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove to the full Senate for consideration.
As with many of Bush's battles with the Democratic-led Senate, the president may ultimately prevail since his fellow Republicans may be able to block the citations with a procedural hurdle.
Bush has claimed executive privilege to protect aides from complying with congressional subpoenas demanding do ents or testimony in an investigation into the firing last year of nine U.S. attorneys. The committee has rejected his privilege claim as unfounded.
In a recent Roll Call column I argued that, until the White House complies with the Judiciary Committee subpoenas, Congress should refuse any further appropriations to pay senior advisers in the Executive Office of the President who are not serving in advice-and-consent positions. As I there stated, “Congress decided under President Franklin Roosevelt to fund a generous staff of senior confidential advisers to the president to help him conduct the affairs of state. It is fair to tell his successors that they may not use these resources to deprive Congress of information genuinely relevant to a good-faith investigation of possible executive branch wrongdoing.”
We have been brought to the current impasse because the Bush White House ignores the reality that a successful separation of powers system depends upon inter-branch norms of mutual accommodation, as well as each branch’s principled assertion of its cons utional prerogatives. The past seven years have escalated the assault on those norms that has become all too routine since the Reagan Administration. As a result, and paradoxical though it may seem, any successful return to a “rule of law” ethos between the elected branches now requires Congress to back its legal arguments with political muscle.
Link
Just another reason, among a mul ude of good reasons to vote each and every Republican legislator out of office in 08....
Dan wrote a Roll Call column? Dan is Professor Peter Shane of Moritz College of Law, Ohio State University?
I provided a link, what do you want?
It's not a big deal, but I found the post confusing because it certainly appeared that the paragraph beginning "In a recent Roll Call column . . . " was your own thought, since it wasn't quoted. Given that you quoted some material but didn't quote that passage, I wondered if maybe you had outed yourself.
apparently representing others' work as your own is a forum pasttime
Well dan, so what? They want get their way. Presidential
privilege.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
