Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nixon Ignored Subpoenas Too

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
davidswanson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:36 AM
Original message
Nixon Ignored Subpoenas Too
Edited on Thu Jun-14-07 09:36 AM by davidswanson
By David Swanson

Condoleezza Rice is refusing to comply with a subpoena to appear before Congress. The Justice Department is refusing to produce subpoenaed documents. Harriet Miers and Sara Taylor will almost certainly refuse to comply with subpoenas to appear. Dick Cheney has said that if he is subpoenaed he will not testify. Karl Rove has made his refusal to obey the law so clear that Congressional Committees that have approved subpoenas for him are afraid to actually issue them. The White House has shamelessly indicated that it does not intend to start obeying any of these subpoenas anytime soon.

The Bush-stacked courts appear to be a venue insufficiently friendly to the Constitution to enforce compliance with subpoenas. Holding the subpoenaed individuals in "inherent contempt" of Congress and instructing the Capitol Police to sieze them for a trial on Capitol Hill would work if we weren't talking about a Congress afraid of its own shadow. But these are not the only options. It's important to remember that President Richard Nixon's White House refused to comply with subpoenas as well. The House Judiciary Committee approved three articles of impeachment against Nixon, leading to his rapid departure from the Washington swamp. This was Article 3:

"In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, knowledge or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In refusing to produce these papers and things Richard M. Nixon, substituting his judgment as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives. In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office."

You're damn right such conduct warrants impeachment and trial. And it's coming.

On Wednesday, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, Chair of the Out of Iraq Caucus and member of the Judiciary Committee, joined Congresswomen Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey, the two Co-Chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, as well as Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, Chief Deputy Whip and a member of the Steering and Policy Committee, and Congress Members Yvette Clarke, William Lacy Clay, Albert Wynn, and Dennis Kucinich in cosponsoring Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney (H. Res. 333).

Waters and Kucinich spoke about this effort. Here's a video: http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/23615

Here are details on the bill and what it's going to take to impeach Cheney and Bush: http://impeachcheney.org


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well if there is an upside to this, it could be a constitutional fight
like never before. At least I hope we don't back down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stubtoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Time for a serious white-house cleaning.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. Excellent post. The comparisons to Nixon ring true.
Any time a Repuke tries to compare Wee George to Reagan I always bring up the Nixonian aspect (although Nixon knew a lot more about baseball).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. But in those days, there were some GOP on the Hill who defended the Constitution
instead of kowtowing to the bully Cheney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
4. A 5th Rec for RULE OF LAW!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rudy23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
6. Do you think the DLC will let Democrats "rock the boat" before the '08 election?
I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. If they fail to impeach, they'll be watching, shocked, as they lose the WH
. . .and control of Congress -- just as they did when they refused to impeach Reagan and Poppy Bush. They were sure that the WH was theirs for the taking as long as they didn't "rock the boat" then too. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=142357&mesg_id=142901">"It's like Deja vu all over again")

Failure to impeach is already driving their approval through the floor. (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-pelosi12jun12,0,7184922.story?coll=la-home-center">Approval of Congress lowest in a decade, 6/12/07 LA Times)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1003456">Impeach to Win. Refuse, You Lose.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rudy23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. I completely agree. We're playing it waaaaay too safe, and overconfident.
It's kind of like a football team that tries to start running out the clock in the third quarter with a slim lead.

We are just so confident that we can't lose this thing, it's scary. The DLC advisers seem to understand zilch about human nature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. The DLC advisers seem to ignore the lessons of history too (Nixon).
Someone should "remind" them.

B4 it's too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. "Reminding" is like a game of "Whack a Mole" (or "Whack a Rationalization")
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 12:21 PM by pat_k
When most of the staffers appear to be about 10 years old, lack of historical perspective is not too surprising. Clinton's impeachment is ancient history for people who were 11 when it was happening.

Of course, most of the so-called "leadership" were Members of the 100th Congress -- the Congress that failed to impeach Reagan and Poppy, so they have no excuse.

But it's not just a failure to recall history. Group think is a truly powerful thing. The pervasive, asinine, irrational beliefs that pervade their insular world are never challenged. Those beliefs are products of social and interpersonal dynamics. It's gonna take some direct, face-to-face, human intervention to knock down the house of cards.

The bottom line is that they are just people. They don't want to make another horrible mistake like their failure to oppose the Authorization to Use Military Force. They want to be saved, even if they don't know it yet.

Just posted something on the subject in another thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=34242&mesg_id=34717
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
7. K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
9. If refusal to comply with Congressional subpoenas isn't an impeachable offense
we may as well just tear up our Constitution and ask Bush and Cheney to re-write for us a new Constitution for the "post 9-11" era.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. so Congress can pass the new 'Constitution'
w/out reading it?

dp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
12. We must restore law and order to our government. It is tantamount to our Republic surviving.
There is no doubt that Bush and Nixon are inextricably linked through time with their attitudes toward the law, but this argument was settled a long time ago.

No man is above the law.

Not a President, not a Senator, not a Governor, not a Mayor, not a bricklayer, not a pauper.

The very foundation of our system of justice requires that all men be treated equally under the law.

Under the law.

Not above the law.
There are no special favors, fees, duties, or promissory notes one can sign that will offset the balance of justice.
Justice will prevail.
It must.
For without equal justice for all, our republic is doomed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC