Fight over White House subpoenas heads to court

[malaise]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/23/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4201271.shtml
<snip>
The Judiciary Committee issued subpoenas last year to Bolten and Miers as part of the panel's investigation into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006. Judiciary Committee Democrats are seeking information from on the White House's role in the firings, but President Bush, asserting executive privilege, has refused to make senior aides available for questioing under oath by congressional investigators or turn over a "privilege log" of documents being withheld.

House lawyers argue that, in refusing to allow Bolten and Miers to even appear before the Judiciary Committee in order to assert executive privilege, the Bush administration is seeking to expand presidential power in a dramatic fashion, one that cannot go unchallenged by Congress

Carl J. Nichols, the principal deputy associate attorney general, will argue the case for the White House. The Justice Department, representing Bolten and Miers, claim that the president has "absolute immunity" in resisting subpoenas issued to top aides.

[Clovis Sangrail]

1. utter bullshit

If they think they've got information that's shielded by executive privilege let them show up and claim it as each question is asked.
Anybody else that refused to show up after a subpoena would be tossed in jail.

[malaise]

2. Yep

What happens if the court says no?