The latest from the Bush administration is pretty astonishing:
Bush administration officials unveiled a bold new assertion of executive authority yesterday in the dispute over the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, saying that the Justice Department will never be allowed to pursue contempt charges initiated by Congress against White House officials once the president has invoked executive privilege.
Basically, the administration is boldly saying he'll never let his "loyal Bushies" investigate his activities.
Legal experts are taken aback. Congress' only action -- which is also its best option -- is to use its inherent contempt powers, which allows it to hire its own special counsel. Mark Keiman details other possible steps, including seizure of documents, and arrest of administration officials by Congress' Seargeants-at-Arms, or cutting off funding for the DoJ and other administration bureaucracies. |
| There are roadblocks. Kossak Kagro X reminds us, should this come to the SCOTUS, that when the Reagan White House thwarted a similar attempt, now Chief Justice John Roberts helped craft the strategy. That's why Tom Wright thinks the Bush administration is pursuing the issue this way: to get Congress' investigations into the courts, and thus --"fatally"? -- slow the march to impeachment, or to derail it altogether. (There are those who think Bush's delay tactics are for more sinister reasons. Brrr.)
And folks are indeed clamoring for impeachment. And why not? After all, the President is now threatening to make this kind of executive authority precedent. And Republican lapdogs who now protect their President at all costs, will no doubt feel differently about executive privilege under a Hilary Clinton presidency, yet the precedent will be there to fold. That is, any sane self-preserving member of Congress should want impeachemnt.
Yet...what about those 66 Senate votes?
Mark Kleiman thinks the GOPers will be forced to realize impeachment is the way to go:
And I suspect that a combination of institutional self-respect and electoral self-preservation will lead a substantial number of Republicans to desert the President. They've been looking for an excuse, and he just handed it to them.
I agree with Publius on this one, though. I don't think Congressional Republicans will oppose the President. They have neither the stones to oppose the kool-aid base nor the vision or integrity to do the right thing. Don't believe me? I think Red State's streiff pretty much represents the kind of idiocy you'll hear:
I think the current kerfuffle over the firing of a a handful of presidential appointees is one of the most disgraceful, superficial, and childish acts by Congress since the October Surprise investigation instigated by the aptly named Gary Sick. The president can fire appointees because he is displeased with their hair color or choice of snack foods. This isn't a news flash to anyone who's familiar with that system.
To these *sshats, it's all a big game. It doesn't matter what the actual issue is or its outcome as long as you win. In this world-view, anything the Democrats do must be viewed as political jockeying, pure and simple. It's what the Republicans would do, after all.
And remember, it's these people who questioned your patriotism and accused you of treason because you doubted the President's word on WMDs or his strategy in Iraq or his use of warrantless wiretapping, kidnapping, and torture. But it's pretty obvious now that they don't know the meaning of patriotism.
Still, I don't think we should let Republican loyalty to party over country and principle deter us from seeking impeachment. These people in the end do want to remain in obvious. Once the details come out, voting to preserve the President will prove to be an electoral albatross for years to come. |
