Former prosecutors challenge White House immunity claim

[laststeamtrain]

Source: McClatchy Newspapers

Former prosecutors challenge White House immunity claim
Marisa Taylor | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: May 29, 2008 07:31:08 PM

WASHINGTON — Twenty former U.S. attorneys, both Republicans and Democrats, urged a federal judge Thursday to intervene in a constitutional battle over whether two White House officials should be forced to testify before Congress about the firings of nine U.S. attorneys.

The former top prosecutors, including two who served under President Bush, argue in court papers that the judge should reject the Bush administration's assertion of blanket immunity for presidential chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers in the congressional investigation.

Democrats in the House of Representatives say they were forced to sue in March, more than a year after they launched the probe, because the administration has refused to allow Miers and Bolten to provide crucial information about the reasons the prosecutors were fired. The case also could determine how former presidential adviser Karl Rove responds to a subpoena in a related congressional investigation.

The lawsuit accuses administration officials of injecting partisan considerations into the firing decisions and making "questionable or outright false statements" in subsequent explanations to Congress.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/38916.html

[Mnemosyne]

1. Accessories to treason, imho. n/t

[mwb970]

6. They are absolutely treasonous, you've got that right.

It's obvious now that this administration is rotten to the core. Crooks, liars, traitors, a truly sorry lot. The wheels of justice are turning, if slowly, and by God we will hold these unimaginably awful people to account.

[Seabiscuit]

10. And the penalty for treason is...

the same sentence the Bushistas passed on the 1K or so Katrina victims who never saw their homes, NO, or for that matter, anything else ever again.

[liam_laddie]

12. IIRC in the late 18th century...

treason was punishable by hanging until near dead, cut down, disemboweled and maybe limbs removed. Ah, the good ol' daze...effective deterrent, I'd bet.

[Mnemosyne]

20. I dream of the Hague.

Those wheels need some lube! :hi:

[msongs]

2. unfortunately congressional democrats are STILL afraid of bush nt

[truthisfreedom]

3. Scared to death of the implied dirt that bushco has on them as a result of post-911 illegal wiretaps

and other electronic surveillance.

[robinlynne]

5. We can give the Democrats immunity and/or a much shorter sentence.

[tanyev]

17. Pre-9/11 illegal wiretaps.

9/11 just gave them a handy excuse to justify it.

NSA Domestic Surveillance Began 7 Months Before 9/11, Convicted Qwest CEO Claims

By Ryan Singel October 11, 2007 | 7:20:59 PMCategories: NSA
Did the NSA's massive call records database program pre-date the terrorist attacks of 9/11?

That startling allegation is in court documents released this week which show that former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio -- the head of the only company known to have turned down the NSA's requests for Americans' phone records -- tried, unsuccessfully, to argue just that in his defense against insider trading charges.

Nacchio was sentenced to 6 years in prison in 2007 after being found guilty of illegally selling shares based on insider information that the company's fortunes were declining. Nacchio unsuccessfully attempted to defend himself by arguing that he actually expected Qwest's 2001 earnings to be higher because of secret NSA contracts, which, he contends, were denied by the NSA after he declined in a February 27, 2001 meeting to give the NSA customer calling records, court documents released this week show.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/nsa-asked-for-p.html

[tomp]

23. that's pretty close to treason right there--

that any sworn officer of the government would allow such violation of the constitution, especially while soldiers are dying, in order to avoid personal tribulation.

[midnight]

4. That's right. The former top prosecutors, including

two who served under President Bush, argue in court papers that the judge should reject the Bush administration's assertion of blanket immunity for presidential chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers in the congressional investigation.

[Supersedeas]

7. when will Bar Associations start standing up and taking a position for the rule of law

[Mojorabbit]

8. The worm is turning.....n/t

[frog92969]

9. Yeah, they mentioned Rove.

[orleans]

11. okay...and who appointed the judge, and what side of the political aisle

does s/he stand on?

[diane in sf]

13. Good, the prosecutors come from both parties and include a lot of disgruntled Repugs

[maddezmom]

14. Former prosecutors side with Congress in White House subpoenas

Former prosecutors side with Congress in White House subpoenas
Friday, May 30, 2008MARY ORNDORFF News Washington correspondent
WASHINGTON - Birmingham lawyer Doug Jones is one of several former federal prosecutors who sided Thursday with Congress in its battle to hear testimony from White House employees about problems at the Justice Department.

The House Judiciary Committee sued in federal court after President Bush claimed his former legal counsel Harriet Miers and chief of staff Josh Bolten are covered by executive privilege and shouldn't be forced to testify. The committee is investigating allegations of partisanship in the Justice Department that began with the firing of several U.S. attorneys under former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The group of former prosecutors who filed written arguments with the Washington, D.C., court Thursday were appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents over the years and said they are not advocating a partisan agenda.

It is a matter of the utmost importance to ensure that Congress can conduct a complete investigation to determine whether White House officials have injected, or attempted to inject, partisan considerations into a process that must be rigorously insulated from such considerations," their lawyer wrote.

more:http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1212135419120590.xml&coll=2

[INdemo]

15. This could go all the way to the SCOTUS

and with the majority of Justices being conservative does anyone think they would rule against this administration? I dont think so.....

[DCKit]

16. Yeah, the SCOTUS is listening...

the opposition is overwhelming. Even Roberts and Scalia will cave whenever they know the political winds are blowing the other way.

Even Supreme Court Justices can be impeached, and I can think of five I'd like to see gone.

[LynnTheDem]

18. What are you again trying to hide, George W. bUsh?

One cover-up attempt after another. How typically rightwing.

[AlbertCat]

21. Tutti!

What are they hiding? EVERYTHING. They've been doing as they damn well please since they wormed their way in the White House. No one's been in charge for 8 years. It's been willy nilly.....except when Cheney steps in to orchestrate (or have his stooges do it)some little matter. No one works at the State Dept. with Condie any more, y'know. There are a lot of unfilled positions there and everywhere in this cocktail party of an administration. The USA has been at war for years now.... with no government. The Bushies might as well be private contractors.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

19. Good. Rachet it up -nt

[leeroysphitz]

22. Why won't CONGRESS challenge the White house immunity claims??? n/t