“As the letter from the Acting Attorney General explained in considerable detail, the assertion of Executive Privilege here is intended to protect a fundamental interest of the Presidency: the necessity that a President receive candid advice from his advisors and that those advisors be able to communicate freely and openly with the President, with each other, and with others inside and outside the Executive Branch.” Dubya invokes executive privilege again in response to the Leahy/Conyers letter of a week ago, prompting further outrage among congressional Dems and increasing the likelihood of a protracted legal standoff. “Speaking on the floor of the Senate Monday afternoon, Leahy blasted what he called ‘the White House disdain for our system of checks and balances.’ ‘What is the White House trying to hide by refusing to hand over this evidence?’ he said.”
Tag: Congress
Leahy/Conyers: Not so Fast.
“We had hoped our Committees’ subpoenas would be met with compliance and not a Nixonian stonewalling that reveals the White House’s disdain for our system of checks and balances…The veil of secrecy you have attempted to pull over the White House by withholding documents and witnesses is unprecedented and damaging to the tradition of open government by and for the people that has been a hallmark of the Republic.” In a “barbed” letter to the administration, Judiciary Committee Chairmen Conyers and Leahy demand that Dubya explain his rationale for executive privilege (which he invoked earlier in the week to thwart subpoenas concerning the persecuted prosecutors case.) Thus far, the White House has described the letter as “another overreach.“
Shields Up.
“‘This is a further shift by the Bush administration into Nixonian stonewalling and more evidence of their disdain for our system of checks and balances,’ said Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. ‘Increasingly, the president and vice president feel they are above the law.'” The Dubya administration invokes executive privilege to thwart the recently-issued congressional subpoenas for info pertaining to the persecuted prosecutor scandal. Instead, Dubya has offered Miers and Taylor for untranscribed private interviews (not under oath), an offer Spineless Specter, among others, thinks the Dems should take. “[C]onstitutional scholars cautioned that this area of law is so unsettled that it is impossible to predict the outcome if the matter ends up in court.”
Felled at the Border.
“A lot of us worked hard to see if we couldn’t find a common ground. It didn’t work…I had hoped for a bipartisan accomplishment, and what we got was a bipartisan defeat.” Harding had the Washington Conference, Nixon had China and the FAP…but it looks like there’ll be nothing to dilute Dubya’s dismal standing in the history books. Arguably his last chance for a positive domestic accomplishment shattered to pieces when the Senate voted 53-46 against closing debate on the bipartisan immigration reform bill. “The outcome was a major blow to Bush, dealt largely by members of his own party…Republicans on both sides acknowledged the immigration fight had riven the GOP.“
Signs of Trouble.
“‘At least it makes clear the signing statements aren’t solely for staking out a legal position, with the president just saying, “I don’t have to do these things, but I will,”‘ Fein said. ‘In fact they are not doing some of these things. You can’t just vaporize it as an academic question.‘” Also in the administration malfeasance department, a new study by Congress’s Government Accountability Office finds that more often than not Dubya has been ignoring the laws he’s flagged in signing statements as not in tune with his imperial mood. “‘The administration is thumbing its nose at the law,’ said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), who requested the GAO study and legal opinion along with Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.). ‘This GAO opinion underscores the fact that the Bush White House is constantly grabbing for more power, seeking to drive the people’s branch of government to the sidelines,’ Byrd said in a joint statement with Conyers.”
DC-9 (to 1).
The people of Washington D.C. take another step toward full citizenship after the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee votes 9-1 in favor of voting rights for the District. “Virginia’s Sen. John Warner (R), cast the dissenting vote, but in an encouraging sign for advocates, three Republicans voted in favor of giving the District a full voting member in the House: Susan Collins of Maine, George Voinovich of Ohio and Norm Coleman of Minnesota.”
Prison Stripes for Scooter (and likely Jefferson.)
“I think public officials need to know if they are going to step over the line, there are going to be consequences…[What Libby did] causes people to think our government does not work for them.” A sadly necessary Capitol corruption update: As you no doubt heard, earlier in the week Scooter Libby was sentenced to thirty months in jail for his lies and evasions in the Valerie Plame case. (Libby has asked for a delay of the sentence, which probably won’t happen. And E.J. Dionne evaluates GOP sentiment for a pardon here — for now, the White House remains mum on the subject.) Meanwhile, on our side of the aisle, pretty obviously corrupt Democratic rep William Jefferson, he with the thousands of dollars stashed in the freezer, is indicted on 16 counts of racketeering, money laundering, and obstruction of justice, mostly involving bribes offered and taken from West African business and political officials. Jefferson is fighting the charges, but the House — wisely — has already moved against him, opening an ethics inquiry into him and setting the stage for his expulsion.
Friends to the Immigrant?
The big news last Friday: Dubya and the Senate came to a deal on immigration reform, although the compromise — supported by Democratic Senators Kennedy, Feinstein, and Salazar as well as Republicans such as McCain, Graham, and Martinez — faces some major implementation issues and potential fire from both sides of the issue. Among the critics: Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama: “Without modifications, the proposed bill could devalue the importance of family reunification, replace the current group of undocumented immigrants with a new undocumented population consisting of guestworkers who will overstay their visas, and potentially drive down wages of American workers.“
“The Other K-Street.”
“Congressional Republicans have been renowned — and often criticized — for harnessing the clout of special-interest groups and lobbyists to advance their agenda…After the 2006 elections, left-leaning groups now conduct their own, similar meetings to advance the Democrats’ cause.” The WP delves into the new Democratic tinge of the K-Street lobbying world. Hmm. Well, I guess I’ll take a left-leaning lobbyist over a right-leaning lobbyist any day of the week and twice on Sunday, but I would hope the Pelosi House keeps this new K-street bunch at further remove than did their predecessors. Both Democratic reps and liberal interest groups have displayed their reluctance to commit to real campaign finance and lobbying reform in the past when the tide’s swinging their way, and I fear, once the cash starts flying around in earnest, that this liberal-leaning slope will get just as slippery in very short order. You don’t wear the ring, people. You destroy the ring.
Digging Deeper…
“I continue to hope that the Department will cooperate with the Committee’s investigation, but it is troubling that significant documents highly relevant to the Committee’s inquiry have not been produced.” On the prosecutorial front, Patrick Leahy subpoenas Karl Rove’s e-mails (or at least what’s left of them), and the Justice Department begins its own inquiry into Monica Goodling, to ascertain whether political bias played a part in her hiring decisions. The plot thickens…