White House Stonewalls Firings Probe

Bush Tells Former White House Counsel To Stay Away From House Hearing On Attorney Firings

(CBS/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.

"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-Mich., 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.

Conyers said of Miers, Mr. 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.

Taylor told senators she never talked to President Bush about the firing of U.S. Attorneys and doesn't think he had anything to do with the decisions, but she wouldn't answer most of the panel's specific questions, citing the president's directive not to, reports CBS News' Bob Fuss.

"I did not attend any meetings with the president where that matter was discussed," Taylor said under stern questioning by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy.

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

Taylor, who left the White House eight weeks ago for reasons she said were unrelated to the firings, was treading a rough line between obeying Mr. Bush's order not to reveal internal White House deliberations and responding to a congressional subpoena compelling her to do so. Her lawyer, Neil Eggleston, sat at the witness table to advise her.

"I'm trying to be consistent and perhaps have not done a great job of that," Taylor said. "I have tried."

The committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Arlen Specter, said that may not be enough to protect her from a contempt citation for failing to answer many of the committee's questions.

"There's no way you can come out a winner," said Specter, R-Pa. "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 only, "That's a decision yet to be made."

The exchange was part of proceedings that were as much about the ongoing dispute over what information the White House can keep secret as it was about the stated topic — the firings over the winter of eight U.S. attorneys.

Loyal to Mr. Bush even outside the White House, Taylor said she was trying not to answer questions that might violate the president's claim of executive privilege. At one point she reminded the committee that as a commissioned officer, "I took an oath and I take that oath to the president very seriously."

[lars008-2009]

are the demonic-rats against the constitution??? YES!!!

hahahahaha

good thing our founding fathers set our country up with 3 separate but EQUAL branches of government...

what part of 3 separate but EQUAL branches of government don't you understand skippy...

it's not congress runs everything...

it works... and it makes for good theater...

hahahahaha

[homespunlady]

At one point she reminded the committee that as a commissioned officer, "I took an oath and I take that oath to the president very seriously."

Has ANYBODY considered that this woman MAY HAVE been TELLING THE TRUTH about taking an oath to the President separate and over and above her oath to uphold the Constitution???
Sometimes under duress people DO tell the TRUTH without knowing the implications of what they say. Why ASSUME she meant the SAME oath past aides have taken. What's to say that George HASN'T implemented a shadow government OUTSIDE the official one.
Can someone ASK her THAT question?

[infidel_us]

George "Stonewall" Bush.......you go, boy!!!! Tell Conyers to kiss your presidential arse!!! The "do nothing" dem congress; they can't lead, they can't solve problems.....all they can do is be dingle-berries on the president's arse.

14% and likely falling. Keep up the good work!

[weareone2]

lars008
What you and others don't understand, is that the Republicans have lied so much, that we don't pay attention to anything you say.

[lars008-2009]

ARE PRESIDENTS ABOVE THE LAW???

wow, the president says he has the right to perjury????

President to Senate: Perjury is my right...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_199901/ai_n8836610

PARDONS FOR SALE PARDONS FOR SALE

PARDONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT CLINTON
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm

My Reasons for the Pardons
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/18/opinion/18CLIN.html?pagewanted=all&ei=5070&en=66ba82eaf117b24b&ex=1183521600

In a bone-chilling chapter of her new book "The Final Days," late heroine-author Barbara Olson warned that ex-president Bill Clinton's pardons of terrorists who had repeatedly bombed buildings in New York City "send a signal" that the U.S. isn't serious about fighting terrorism.
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/olson.htm

should presidents pardon terrorists???

Bill Clinton pardons controversy
FALN Pardons of 1999
On August 11 1999, Clinton commuted the sentences of 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group that set off 120 bombs in the United States usually in New York City and Chicago, convicted for conspiracies to commit robbery, bomb-making, and sedition, as well as for firearms and explosives violations.
http://www.answers.com/topic/bill-clinton-pardons-controversy

[lars008-2009]

are the demonic-rats against the constitution??? YES!!!

hahahahaha

good thing our founding fathers set our country up with 3 separate but EQUAL branches of government...

what part of 3 separate but EQUAL branches of government don't you understand skippy...

it's not congress runs everything...

it works... and it makes for good theater...

hahahahaha

[lfitts1]

"I took an oath and I take that oath to the president very seriously."
No she did not take an oath to the President,
"She took an oath to uphold the Constitution"
The oath was to the American people, this nation, not to someone who thinks he is the United States of America's personal dictatorship..
Posted by adventurepa

But since they have changed the governmental structure into a nazi style neo con dictatorship these people think tehy have only sworn allegience to the 'idiot in chief'--another reason to impeach the whole crew

[antoniof123]

I wonder if the GOP realizes that it is no longer about them but about country. If they don't step up to the plate it will be too late for everyone.

[pepperp1]

What was Scooter's prison inmate number prior to being paid off by Bu$h to keep his mouth shut?
Posted by Terrapin78 at 10:38 AM : Jul 12, 2007

Oh come on the lying and perjury could not be the only crimes the felon Libby committed he may well have been lying throwing sand in the umpires eyes to cover up other crimes he committed and he can still serve time on those maybe he can reserve the number he got for future use on 09.

[pepperp1]

No matter what happened while Clinton was in office, he never put the National Security at risk..

Posted by liberalme

Look your wasting your typing the righties can not assess the difference between a *** Clinton received 8 years ago and the Bush national security blunder of invading a country that was no threat to the United States, based on false intelligence, killing tens of thousand of their women, children and men, 3,607 of our US soldiers dead, 27,000 of our solider wounded 60 percent for life, spending 10 billion every month a projected total of 2 Trillion, the *** you see is dirty and immoral and far out ways any outrage of the killings of tens of thousands of innocent people who were not faux moral values Christians like themselves.

[likeitis5050]

Our society has lost the "backbone" that our founders had.

Not lost...just not fed up enough yet. When we get more fed up than we are scared we will take it back. Right now we have a country divided, thanks to the 'divide and conquer' tactics of this administration that wants to guilt people into following Bush by declaring anyone not in his corner is a terrorist. (Only real Americans think like him, you know.) Many are sick and tired enough but not enough are sick and tired. Bush is a cancer and for some the treatment has been started and they will be fine. For too many others, they still refuse to even see and doctor even as it eats away at them. These people will be the part of the herd thinned out because they are too weak to run with the rest of us. Good riddance.

[terrapin78]

I can't wait to see inmate numbers for Meirs and Taylor.

What was Scooter's prison inmate number prior to being paid off by Bu$h to keep his mouth shut?

[clestes-2009]

lastdance2,

Ignore lars008 and mudrose. They are stupid and not worth your time. They never have facts to support their opinions and only try to atagonized you with flamboyant and emotional statements to try to draw you off the facts which they KNOW they cannot produce.

lars008 has had his dumb posts removed from pages because he kept posting the same dumb post over and over.

Just stick to what you want to say, back it up with facts and don't even read thier posts. It is just not worth the time to read them.

I stopped reading their posts months ago. I do not waste my time with their drivel and that is all the post, DRIVEL!

[clestes-2009]

Take this to court!!! To back off now and give dubya a victory would tell him that is is OK to stonewall a Congressional subpoena!!

Everyone who thinks this is a bad idea, call your rep, email John Conyers and tell them you want those two witnesses to be COMPELLED to show up.

I am sick of Bush doing whatever he feels like and thinking he can break any law without punishment!!!!

[lastdance2]

Re : lars008

Go Away ! ! !

Lastdance

[micma-2009]

Placing oneself above the law is not an "executive privilage".

[lars008-2009]

ARE PRESIDENTS ABOVE THE LAW???

wow, the president says he has the right to perjury????

President to Senate: Perjury is my right...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_199901/ai_n8836610

PARDONS FOR SALE PARDONS FOR SALE

PARDONS GRANTED BY PRESIDENT CLINTON
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm
My Reasons for the Pardons
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/18/opinion/18CLIN.html?pagewanted=all&ei=5070&en=66ba82eaf117b24b&ex=1183521600
In a bone-chilling chapter of her new book "The Final Days," late heroine-author Barbara Olson warned that ex-president Bill Clinton's pardons of terrorists who had repeatedly bombed buildings in New York City "send a signal" that the U.S. isn't serious about fighting terrorism.
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/olson.htm
Bill Clinton pardons controversy
FALN Pardons of 1999
On August 11 1999, Clinton commuted the sentences of 16 members of FALN, a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group that set off 120 bombs in the United States usually in New York City and Chicago, convicted for conspiracies to commit robbery, bomb-making, and sedition, as well as for firearms and explosives violations.
http://www.answers.com/topic/bill-clinton-pardons-controversy

[liberalme]

No matter what happened while Clinton was in office, he never put the National Security at risk, and that is what this is all about. Clinton did lie about having an affair---Bush, on the other hand, has lied and cheated about everything he's done since illegally occupying the White House.
I will never believe he ever got "voted in".
God old Jebbie and Kathryn Harris got him in the first time, and I would venture to guess, Diebold and Ohio got him in the second time.

This regime in the White House don't have an honest, spiritual bone in their bodies.

They'd have to climb a ladder to get to the gutter.

[lars008-2009]

are the demonic-rats against the constitution??? YES!!!

hahahahaha

good thing our founding fathers set our country up with 3 separate but EQUAL branches of government...

what part of 3 separate but EQUAL branches of government don't you understand skippy...

it's not congress runs everything...

it works... and it makes for good theater...

hahahahaha

[grumpas]

Are you libs still beating this dead horse?
Posted by didntinhale

Yeah! Just like you petty Republican's did when you wanted Clinton out of office. You went after him like a pack for hungry wolves ripping your prey apart for 8 years he was in office. If one tactic didn't work on to another. It wound up costing the taxpayer millions to play your sick little games. Until you finally succeeded in degrading yourselves and dragging him before Congress about the infantile charge of having an affair. While rest of the world laugh at you for being so utterly pathetic and petty! You couldn't find any wrong doing elsewhere so you have to delve into his personal life. That was when I decided Republican's weren't my kind of people anymore!