Judiciary Committee Meeting on Contempt
July 25th, 2007 by Jesse LeeUPDATE: The Committee has approved the report recommending to the House that Miers and Bolten be cited for Contempt of Congress. The vote was party-line.
At 10:15, the Judiciary Committee will hold a “Meeting to Consider: a Resolution and Report Recommending to the House of Representatives that Former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten be Cited for Contempt of Congress.” Yesterday Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers prepared a 52-page memo “that for the first time alleges specific ways that several administration officials may have broken the law during the multiple firings of U.S. attorneys.”
Watch the meeting live via committee webcast or on C Span 3.
Chairman John Conyers gives opening remarks:
Chairman Conyers: “Let me begin by saying that today the Committee will consider a report recommending that the House cite Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten for Contempt of Congress. It is not a step that, as Chairman, I take easily or lightly, but it is one that I believe necessary, not only to allow us to gain an accurate picture of the facts surrounding the United States Attorneys controvery, but to protect our Constitutional prerogatives as a co-equal branch of government.” |
Subcommittee Chairwoman Linda Sánchez gives opening remarks:
Chairwoman Sánchez: “I was troubled to read a letter received late last night from the Office of Legislative Affairs indicating that the Administration will direct the DC US Attorney not to prosecute contempt cases if the full House were to pass resolutions before us today. Given what we have learned in this controversy, the time is long past that this administration end its manipulation of US Attorneys for partisan political gain. That being said, the central question before the Committee today is whether private citizens or Executive Branch officials can simply ignore Congressional subpoenas by asserting extreme theories of executive privilege and immunity. Members on both sides of the aisle should answer that question with a resounding ‘No.’” |
Rep. Adam Schiff (CA-29) speaks on the contempt that Miers and Bolton have, in fact, shown for the Congress, and rebuts opposition criticisms:
Rep. Schiff: “It would be one thing if the Administration witnesses came before this body and said on a particularlized basis that ‘I can’t answer this question’ or ‘I can’t submit this document’ because of a claim of Executive Privilege backed up by a letter from the President. That would be one thing. It would be another thing if a witnesses came into this committee room and said ‘I refuse to answer any question, I refuse to provide any document’ with a claim of Executive Privilege. But it is yet even another thing for the Administration to take this position that with respect to a former Administration official: ‘I won’t even come into the Congress, I won’t even show up. I have that much contempt for the institution of Congress, I won’t even come.’ The audacity of that takes your breath away.” |
Rep. Brad Sherman (CA-27) rebuts opposition criticisms:
Rep. Sherman: “But it’s fine for a president to assert Executive Privilege. What’s wrong is for a president to fail to negotiate in good faith, to offer something as silly as an off the record, no sworn testimony discussion, and then to tell us we can’t go to court and get a judicial determination of the boundaries of executive privilege because he controls the prosecutors. Imagine if this was an investigation of, say, arson or some other crime, and we were told we can’t have the investigation because the victim has no evidence pointing to any one. So you interview the victim and if they don’t have documentary proof that a suspicious fire is a crime, well you can’t investigate any further.” |
The vote:
The Committee votes to approve the report recommending to the House that Miers and Bolten be cited for Contempt of Congress on a party line vote. |