Judge could rule on contempt charges in June

[Lone_Star_Dem]

Source: The Hill

The House could get a ruling before the August recess on whether White House officials must testify about the U.S. attorney firings.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates on Friday scheduled a hearing on motions in the case for June 23, after which he could rule on whether former White House counsel Harriet Miers must testify before Congress and whether the White House must produce documents in the case.

Bates’s ruling settled a fight about scheduling that started this week after the House went to court to enforce its contempt citiations against Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten.

The House, worried that it might not get a ruling before Bush leaves office, wanted to speed up the case. The Bush administration says there’s no need to rush.

Read more: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/judge-could-rule-on-contempt-charges-in-june-2008-03-21.html

[wordpix]

1. "no need to rush"---b/c BushCo is running out the clock. Can this case be pursued after

BushCo retires?

[ladywnch]

5. I believe it can. He can be impeached after leaving office so I would

expect this can be pursued.

[nykym]

7. I have a question.

If he is impeached after he leaves office does that nullify all the signing statements and executive privileges and so on?

[ladywnch]

8. I really don't know but I would think privilege would be blown away

signing statements......uh......I think they would still be valid. I believe they can be overturned by the next President regardless of impeachment. It requires specific action but can be done.

[bluestateguy]

2. Kick the can

And if he rules in favor of thh House, then here come the appeals, and more months of paper-pushing.

[aquart]

3. LOL.

I guess there's nothing to that old Justice delayed is justice denied? Which is why our Bill of Rights insisted on a "speedy trial."

Yeah. No "need to rush." Once again, the constitution is trashed.

[Preston120]

4. The Best Defense is a Good Offense!

I would prefer to have the administration defending itself in court than to have them conducting another attack on another sovereign state. Who knows we might force them to give another pardon to a crook, not to mention the lost of there law license here or there. The Bush Administration needs to come to some kind of Justice.

[emperor124]

6. The problem with the supreme court...

Is that they really have no way to enforce their rulings. They can wave their fists at the executive branch all they'd like, but aside from a few Federal Marshals, they don't have many personnel to carry out their will.