What The Fuck Is Chimpy Afraid Of?

[Hardrock69]

What the fuck!!!

The monkey is going crazy ordering people to DEFY LEGAL CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS!!!

He is obviously trying to hide a TRUCKLOAD of fucking shit that would get him and his organ grinder Dickless Cheney drawn and quartered, impaled, burned to death and then buried alive!!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad:

WHAT THE FUCK IS TAKING CONGRESS SO LONG TO TAKE THAT GODDAMNABLE GENOCIDAL TRAITOR OUT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

I know what it will take.

1. A thread was posted posing the question "Would Cheney and themonkey be impeached if they murdered someone?"

2. Pay close attention now.

One of these days soon, somebody is going to defy themonkey and testify before Congess.

themonkey will have a temper tantrum, and that someone will wind up dead.

THEN we will see what happens.

You know damn well these NeoCon asslickers will murder anyone that is viewed as a threat to their "power".

Shit....it is not just the NeoCon shitbags either!!!

A whole fucking raft of motherfuckers were taken out during the Clinton years!
:eek:

Do NOT EVER become friends or business associates with The President of The United States. If you know too much, and the President or his henchmen get too paranoid, you will have a mysterious car crash, suddently commit suicide, or be on an airplane that conveniently falls out of the sky.

Read the following, and marvel at the NEW HITLER!!! SIEG HEIL!!!


WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush ordered his former White House counsel, Harriet Miers, to defy a congressional subpoena and refuse to testify Thursday before a House panel investigating U.S. attorney firings.

The White House contends that ex-counsel Harriet Miers has "absolute immunity" from congressional subpoenas.

"Ms. Miers has absolute immunity from compelled congressional testimony as to matters occurring while she was a senior adviser to the president," White House Counsel Fred Fielding wrote in a letter to Miers' lawyer, George T. Manning.

Manning, in turn, notified committee chairman John Conyers, D-Michigan, that Miers would not show up Thursday to answer questions about the White House role in the firings of eight federal prosecutors over the winter.

Conyers, who had previously said he would consider pursuing criminal contempt citations against anyone who defied his committee' subpoenas, revealed the letters after former White House political director Sara Taylor testified Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Taylor said she knew of no involvement by the president in the firings of the U.S. attorneys.

She irked senators by refusing to answer many questions from a panel investigating whether the firings were politically motivated. She said she was bound by Bush's position that White House conversations were protected by executive privilege.

Conyers said of Miers, Bush's former White House lawyer, "As a former public official and officer of the court, Ms. Miers should be especially aware of the need to respect legal process, and we expect her to appear before the committee tomorrow as scheduled."

Fielding said the Justice Department had advised the White House that Miers had absolute immunity from compelled congressional testimony.

"The president has directed her not to appear at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday, July 12, 2007," Fielding wrote.
Don't Miss

Across the Capitol a Senate committee spent Wednesday grilling a second reluctant Bush aide about the White House role in the firings.

Unlike Miers, Taylor showed up and haltingly tried to satisfy both the subpoena compelling her testimony and Bush's executive privilege order not to reveal internal White House discussions.

"I did not speak to the president about removing U.S. attorneys," Taylor said under stern questioning by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont., the Senate Judiciary Committee's chairman. "I did not attend any meetings with the president where that matter was discussed."

When asked more broadly whether Bush was involved in any way in the firings, Taylor said, "I don't have any knowledge that he was."

She quickly found out what Miers might have already known: It's almost impossible to answer some questions but not others without breaching either the subpoena or Bush's executive privilege claim.

"I have not done a great job at that," Taylor said of the predicament at one point. "I have tried."

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, said that may not be enough to protect her from a contempt citation.

"There's no way you can come out a winner," said Specter, the panel's senior GOP member and also its former chairman. "You might have been on safer legal ground if you'd said absolutely nothing."

As for the prospects of pursuing a criminal citation for contempt of Congress, Leahy said, "That's a decision yet to be made."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/11/fired.prosecutors.ap/index.html


SIEG HEIL!!!

http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/bush_nazi.jpg

[Hardrock69]

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration says the president's immediate advisers are absolutely immune from having to appear before Congress, but legal scholars say the issue isn't that clear cut.

The question grew more pressing Wednesday as President Bush ordered former White House counsel Harriet Miers to defy a congressional summons in the controversy over the administration's dismissals of federal prosecutors.

The Democratic chairmen of the Senate and House judiciary committees have said they would consider introducing contempt of Congress citations against any subpoena recipients who resist.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., could begin that process as early as Thursday if Miers ignores her subpoena and skips his hearing, based upon the White House's assertion of executive privilege.

An argument that Miers has to testify "is certainly as tenable as that she doesn't," University of Texas law professor Sanford Levinson says.

"If I were advising the congressional committees, what I would want to argue is that they have evidence that she was involved in what might have been criminal acts; that is, subordination of civil service hiring to unlawful considerations," Levinson said.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said the White House "could not have picked worse ground" on which to fight executive privilege.

Many of the communications involve political operatives outside the White House; the White House already has offered to disclose the information and simply refused to do so under oath or with a transcript, and the issue is not in the sensitive areas of national security or diplomacy.

Legal scholars say it's unlikely the White House and Congress are bound for a head-on collision.

"We've been here many, many times before. This is not out of the ordinary," said Viet Dinh, the former assistant attorney general for legal policy during Bush's first term. "For me, the only surprising thing is he's waited this long to finally exert executive privilege."

No president has gone as far as mounting a court fight to keep his aides from testifying on Capitol Hill, but court is just where the battle could end up absent the usual negotiated agreements of the past.

President Ford testified on Capitol Hill about his pardon of former President Nixon.

President Clinton's aides testified in the Whitewater investigations launched by congressional Republicans.

This dispute over Democratic claims that the firings were politically motivated has been simmering for months but the issue of executive privilege — how much information lawmakers can force presidents to disclose — is as old as the nation. Ever since George Washington refused to release his War Department correspondence, the executive and legislative branches have tussled over their authority.

"Ms. Miers has absolute immunity from compelled congressional testimony as to matters occurring while she was a senior adviser to the president," White House Counsel Fred Fielding wrote in a letter to Miers' lawyer, George T. Manning.

On Wednesday, another former White House aide under subpoena, onetime political director Sara Taylor, tried to answer some questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee but not others without breaching either the subpoena or Bush's claim of executive privilege.

Both Taylor and Miers still face possible contempt citations.

Fielding based his advice to Bush on a Justice Department memo this week that quoted former officials — from former Attorney General Janet Reno to the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing as an assistant attorney general — as saying the president and his immediate advisers are absolutely immune from congressional subpoenas.

The Democrats shot back that those documents referred only to White House advisers currently serving. Miers and Taylor left the White House earlier this year.

Contempt citations are rare. Since 1975, 10 senior administration officials have been cited but the disputes were all resolved before getting to court.

The political resolution of such disputes has sometimes favored the White House, such as when President Eisenhower kept officials from testifying at Sen. Joe McCarthy's hearings. Other times, Congress wins, such when Nixon reluctantly let aides testify about the Watergate break-in.

Louis Fisher, a Library of Congress expert on presidential powers, has said the dispute over the fired prosecutors is not one that's likely bound for the federal courthouse.

The law is unsettled in the area. A 1974 Supreme Court decision held the president could not withhold the Watergate tapes from federal prosecutors. But the high court made it clear it wasn't getting into whether presidents may refuse demands from Congress.

Both sides benefit from such uncertainty because it forces political concessions.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070712/ap_on_go_co/fired_prosecutors;_ylt=A0WTcVfoHpZGpWgADBeMwfIE