http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/90394/

QUOTE

We want to make clear that the Subcommittee will convene as scheduled and expects Mr. Rove to appear, and that a refusal to appear in violation of the subpoena could subject Mr. Rove to contempt proceedings, including statutory contempt under federal law and proceedings under the inherent contempt authority of the House of Representatives.Your letter states that Mr. Rove will not attend the hearing because he is “obligated” to disregard the subpoena as a result of the White House’s claim of immunity for former advisors. In fact, precisely the opposite is true. As a private party, Mr. Rove is “obligated” to comply with the subpoena issued to him and, at the very least, appear at the July 10 hearing.

I don't recall... That's not how I remember it... You'd have to ask____... Vicious liberal lies...

Just predicting a few of the "informative" answers he's likely to give

THIS IS THE ONLY WAY I WANT TO SEE KKKKARL....

Yeah, but someone has to ENFORCE the contempt citation and Bush's Justice Dept. will not.

I used to think one of the best reasons for me to vote for Obama was that he might appoint someone liked John Edwards AG and that they would actually GO AFTER THESE BUSH ADMIN. CRIMINALS and prosecute them, but since Obama's new position on FISA, I don't think he's going to make any of them accountable.

They're going to get away with it folks. I think Obama may actually be instrumental in getting the other Dems off their backs. Afterall, he doesn't want any bad blood with republicans so that they go after him for anything they can trump up.

It's all bullshit, and they're all cowards and liars.

Wounds fester until ya clean em out! IMO this country will never heal until the Bastids Pay!!

After the court threw out the case and said the House had to use it's own resources it may be time we saw this guy go into action:

Wilson (Bill) Livingood, a thirty-one year veteran of the United States Secret Service, was elected Sergeant at Arms of the United States House of Representatives on January 4, 1995 for the 104th Congress, and subsequently re-elected through the current Congress. Wilson Livingood is the thirty-sixth person to hold this post since the House of Representatives first met in New York City in 1789. Livingood attended Michigan State University and was a member of Sigma Alpha Epsilon.

The problem here is, the criminals are appointing the sheriff. This is why OK corral took place. Johnny Beham was in the pockets of the Clantons. He was the sheriff and looked the other way as these criminals stole cattle from the Mexican side of the border. Wyatt Earp risked being labeled a "Vigilante" while hunting the criminals down and killing them one by one. In history, there is always someone that comes along and rights the wrongs. Unfortunately it does not make up for the destruction the criminals cause. Who ever cleans up this mess, will go down as a hero in our history books.

I think I saw Harry Reids balls for sale on E-Bay ...

It will be, as usual, all talk, no action from the WIMPocrats.

I thought I heard last week that the Democrats would accept Rove's appearance as not to be under oath and also not to be on transcript for the record. So, even if Rove showed up, it would simply be a secret chat session that doesn't hold Rove binding for anything ..... not that he'd admit anything incriminating anyways. It's all show.

It has reached the point with these phony huff & puff routines that I would much prefer they didn't even bother. Because it gets more and more embarrassing when these Judiciary Committee characters are tacitly told to go to hell and are all but laughed at.

You're kidding me! I didn't know he had a set!

So what's the point? What a fukin waste of time if they believe anything Herr Rove will say when not under oath!

They are either EXTORTED (oper. Brownstone)...bought off and happy...or frightened at the thought that WELLSTONE GOT WHACKED, and FBI joined in that conspiracy.

What can they do...when FBI is this corrupt and dedicated to so many political assasinations of their political enemies?

I have no doubt that Sergeant at Arms Wilson Livinggood is an honorable man. I do not know the correct answer to this question. But if someone were to total all the square acreage directly under the House of Representatives Sergeant at Arms jurisdiction, the number of 23 acres sounds about right. The only exception that I am aware of is in regards to actual House members. I believe that the Speaker of the House can have members rounded up from anywhere in the lower 48 (along with Alaska and Hawaii). As an institution, Congress has NO direct law enforcement abilities. They are the Legislative branch. They have the power to write laws and they have the power of the purse. Law enforcement clearly falls under the Executive branch. This is for the simple reason that you don't want whomever is writting the laws being the same agency that enforces the laws. Bad conflict of interest that is addressed by the separation of powers in the U.S. Constitution.

I also believe that it is a mistake to assume that any future U.S. adminstration headed by President Obama will automatically take Congress's side on this issue. A future President Obama may be cutting his own Presidential throat by conceding to Congressional wishes. One thing that we learned in 1994 was that it is no longer a given that the Democratic party will always have a majority vote in the House. That myth has been broken. While 2008 is looking to be a banner year for the Democratic party, there are no guarantees in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016.

This is going to go to court. The third branch of Government will only very reluctantly be drawn in. The Judicial branch will loudly proclaim the whole time to the other two branches "Do you really .......... I mean really ......... want the Courts involved? We might not find in your favor, House of Reps. We might not find in your favor, White House. We might not find in your favor, Senate. The Judicial will make clear to all parties involved that if they absolutely insist, they'll get an answer. Just be prepared if it isn't one that you like. Legal precedent will be set. There is no guarentee that the other two branches wil even like the ruling. Both parties may be unhappy over it. It's a big high stakes gamble.

Would a future President Obama want to weaken power of the office of the Presidency in order to advance the power of his party? I think it is a mistake to assume that he would automatically do so. The million dollar question is this. Would a future Attorney General (appointed by President Obama and confirmed by the Senate) really fight to bring Administration officials before Congress for questioning anytime Congress decides that it has the right to do so?

Best Regards,

Very good summation and dead on.

It is amusing to me to watch the continued obsession with taking down this administration at any cost.

I'm so glad we amuse you!

I admit...we are a bit obsessed with our Constitution and its destruction. Silly us!

My comments were general in nature and not pointed at anyone in particular.

I don't doubt the sincerity in your passion. What I find amusing are the repeated efforts being put forth in congress that are for show only.

I go back to Kucinich's reading of his 35 articles of impeachment. He must know that he has absolutely no chance of getting these articles of impeachment acted on.

And then there are the repeated attempts to subpoena past and present White House officials. These attempted subpoenas are for show only, as those issuing the subpoenas must know the White House will never give in. I really don't think Congress or the White House would like the judicial branch to step into this one, just as IVEATCH so eloquently stated.

It's very much like watching the Republicans with their backroom neocons take down America and foreign nations at any cost.

That is a reasonable sounding summation. But does appear to be contrary to what is currently already happening in the case in which Congress attempted to file suit in the Harriett Meirs case. In that situation U.S. District judge John Bates has said that Congress should not be attempting to resolve the issue of dodged subpoenas through the courts, but should instead be using the powers granted them under the Constitution to enforce their own subpoenas. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080623/ap_on_...ngress_contempt

Personally, I'd like to see Bush and his entire support network take an SUV ride over a cliff. I think just wanting to see justice done is rather mild. We used to hang traitors, ya know?

Many a brave and selfless American has lost both life and limb to defend the nature of that "piece of paper" the Right Wing so despises.
Justice is elusive, gotta push it to the extremes. We will never stop until it's done or we're dead.

Dug up some new information regarding the possible jurisdiction of Congress and the Sergeant at Arms of either House or Senate. Rather than "spam" it all over the board I'll just link you to this discussion - http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/index...ic=4026&hl=