Conyers Responds to RNC on Subpoena,

[MagickMuffin]

Alerts White House of Potential Ruling on Immunity, Privilege Claims

Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Commercial and Administrative Law (CAL) Subcommittee Chairwoman Linda Sánchez sent a letter to the White House notifying the administration that the CAL Subcommittee will meet on Thursday at 1 p.m. in 2141 Rayburn to consider the validity of the White House's executive privilege claims, as they did last week concerning Harriet Miers. Conyers sent a separate letter to the RNC regarding its outstanding subpoena.

The RNC sent a letter to Conyers today explaining that the White House is claiming executive privilege concerning documents in the RNC's possession and they are requesting more time to determine which specific documents to withhold. In his response, Conyers agreed to allow more time but made clear that it would not be proper for the RNC to withhold documents unilaterally based on White House objections and that he expects the RNC to provide a document specific privilege log of those items for any withheld documents.

“I am hopeful that even at this late date the White House will opt for the path of cooperation and negotiation rather than confrontation," Conyers said. "Whatever choice they make, we will pursue our duty to get to the truth in this matter.”

"This committee respects the importance of executive privilege as a safeguard for internal deliberations on the legitimate creation of policy, but it cannot be used as a blanket protection to avoid Congressional oversight as authorized by the Constitution," Sánchez added. "I am hopeful that the White House will move beyond its entrenched position to work with Congress on this important investigation."

http://judiciary.house.gov/newscenter.aspx?A=835

Since when DID the RNC become a part of the executive branch?!?!? :shrug:

I'm just making a wild guess here but I would have to wager 2001...

[shraby]

1. Will there be any coverage of Thursday's meeting? n/t

[ThomWV]

8. I wouldn't be suprised to find it on C-Span 3

Sometimes they don't announce until the last moment.

[NMDemDist2]

2. yanno, it's funny, I really thought Waxman would be the one to watch this year

but Conyers is SMOKIN!!!!!!


:yourock:

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. He needs to go back to working on impeachment

Then he would really be smokin.

[NMDemDist2]

4. what the heck do you think he's doing??

he has to prove corruption to even think about starting impeachment hearings

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Pelosi called him off

He backed off about 6 months ago.

[L. Coyote]

5. View Live Webcast = Meeting to consider the Executive Privilege claims

By Direction of the Chairman
Thursday 07/19/2007 - 1:00 PM
http://judiciary.house.gov/Schedule.aspx

Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
Meeting to consider the Executive Privilege claims asserted by White House Counsel in response to the subpoena for the production of documents issued to Joshua Bolten, White House Chief of Staff, or appropriate custodian of records.

1:00 EDT, 2007.07.19
http://boss.streamos.com/real-live/judiciary/17223/56_judiciary-coj_2141_070212.ram

ALSO expect interesting news after these:
Senate Judiciary Committee
Wednesday - 7/18/07 - EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETING
Thursday - 7/19/07 - EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETING

[pat_k]

7. Yep. . . January 6, 2001 to be precise.

The day the Constitution went into breach. The day Congress failed to reject -- or even to OBJECT TO -- the illegitimate Florida electors.

The horrors of our national nightmare began with that failure.

Our so-called "leaders" have had many opportunities to redeem themselves. To date, they have stubbornly refused.

[L. Coyote]

9. Indeed. Why did Congress fail to challenge Florida?

[pat_k]

10. As with their refusal to impeach, they invoked. . .

. . .a handful of excuses that were completely without legitimacy.

Some of the excuses were "old standbys" (e.g., "Can't win; won't fight"). Others were situation specific.

Some Senators/Reps claimed they needed a court finding of fraud to object, which is absurd. If we were willing to rely solely on the courts when it comes to ensuring our President is legitimately elected, we wouldn't have charged each and every Sen/Rep with the duty to count only the electoral votes they judge to be legitimate on January 6th (see tag line). They can't escape their duty by appealing to the failure of the courts. We put them in the loop as a backstop against such failures.

(And now, with impeachment, we hear similar excuses based on the mistaken notion that impeachment is a legal process, when it is in fact a 100% political process. More on that http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/20">here)

Some said "Yeah, we know there was fraud, but we can't prove it would have changed the result." Another http://january6th.org/stop_stolen_elections_now.html#notion4">ludicrious meme.

Some claimed they couldn't object because Gore conceded. But the election was not Gore's to concede. The People are the ONLY stakeholders that matter.

An election is a survey, not a contest. Its purpose is to measure an objective reality -- the will of the people; not the desires of the candidates. Therefore, an election is never really a candidate's to concede.

Unless and until the electorate as a whole is confident that their election has provided all with equal access and accurately counted all votes; the consent of the governed has not been adequately measured or justly expressed.

And, finally, perhaps the worst of all, which we heard from Biden and Kerry on Meet the Press on January 7th, "Nobody asked us."

Of course, when duty demands action, nobody should have to "ask." But what is so horrible is that they WERE "asked." If the number of "requests" reported by the Members of the House who stood and called for a Senator to join them are any indication, they all got scores of calls, faxes and letters. I know for a fact that Biden and Kerry each got at least three letters because I footed the bill for 900 letters that three of us sent to all the Dems and selected Repubs in the 108th Congress on December 20th.) Apparently they consider us to be "nobody." (Makes you wonder what "somebody" they had in mind.)

Unfortunately, the repeated failure of our Democratic leaders to fight when principle demands it are rooted in a number of http://january6th.org/saving-ourselves.html ">self-defeating tendencies we have on "our side."

[Vadem]

11. Hi Pat! .... Nice to see you again!.....

:hi:

We did a lot of good research into the black box voting issues! Funny--it is still unresolved!

[pat_k]

12. Hiya!

:hi:

The fight for believable elections may not be won, but it's been great to see the speed with which it's grown since 2004. Back then it seemed like most of the establishment was determined to "move on" and "put the election behind us." Many of those folks have joined the fight and I firmly believe that their efforts made it possible for the Dems to win control of Congress. (And there's been a shift in the public at large too. Don't see many people anymore who question the fact that Bush stole the WH in 2000.)

Impeachment has taken a front seat for me these days, but whether or not we can make impeachment a reality, the http://january6th.org/">January 6th project is going to need a push as 2008 approaches. Looking forward to working together again in the future!