Pelosi on judicial contempt proceedings and the election calendar
- Genre: Blues
- Length: 7:10 minutes (1.64 MB)
- Format: Mono 22kHz 32Kbps (CBR)
There's an AP report out that covers a hearing in District Court regarding the House's suit that would compel the attorney genereal to enforce the House subpoenas against Josh Bolton and HArriet Miers (in case you've forgotten, they refused to show up for hearings regarding the US Attorney purge scandal).
The article ends thusly (Bates is the Bush-appointed judge that is hearing the case):
Bates suggested that the two sides might still settle the dispute before he rules, avoiding a final court showdown altogether.
That hinted at one option the judge has that could pre-empt his own
ruling: He could order both sides to negotiate further and, if nothing
came of it, Bates could just put the case on a shelf until the end of
the year. When the new Congress begins its term in 2009, the subpoenas
essentially vanish and the case would be moot.
Well... I anticipated exactly such an eventuality last March on a conference call with Pelosi. You can listen to the audio above; relevant excerpts follow:
Stark: Will you follow this through the change in
the administrations if it’s still in the courts at that time? And why
didn’t you guys considered inherent contempt using your own powers to
compel people to appear?Pelosi: You mean arrest them and put them in the little jail cell that’s in the basement of the capital?
Stark: Sure.
Pelosi: [chuckles]
[goes on to recite the procedural history]
...
[a series of non-direct answers to the general question of whether
or not the prosecution of the subpoenas will outlast the change in
administrations]Stark: But if the court case extends into 2009, you can't tell us if you will continue to prosecute the subpoenas?
Pelosi: Absolutely.
Stark: You will?
Pelosi: Absolutely. I mean this is about the
Congress of the United States. We can’t say that this is important for
a Republican President, but not a Democratic President....
We might as well just shred the Constitution and forget about taking
the oath of office if we’re just going to do it for a Republican
President and not a Democratic President. Same thing with FISA – I
don’t want a Democratic President having the authority George Bush
wants and I don’t want a Republican President having the authority.
They shouldn’t have the authority, period.
- Login or register to post comments
- Download audio file
- 2656 downloads
- 21 plays










buried lede
what's she going to do to get 4th amendment back?
David Swanson
david@davidswanson.org
http://www.davidswanson.org