Panel OKs subpoenas in attorney probe(postponesWH advisors including Rove, Kelley and Miers)

[maddezmom]

Panel OKs subpoenas in attorney probe By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer
1 minute ago



WASHINGTON - The Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday cleared the way for subpoenas compelling five Justice Department officials and six of the federal prosecutors they fired to tell the story of a purge of U.S. attorneys that has prompted demands for the ouster of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The voice vote to authorize the panel to issue subpoenas amounts to insurance against the possibility that Gonzales could retract his permission to let the aides testify voluntarily, or impose strict conditions.

The committee also postponed for a week a vote on whether to authorize subpoenas for President Bush's top aides who were involved in the eight firings, including political adviser Karl Rove, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and deputy White House Counsel William K. Kelley.

The committee approved subpoena power for key Justice Department officials involved in the firings: Michael Elston, Kyle Sampson, Monica Goodling, Bill Mercer and Mike Battle.



more;http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070315/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/gonzales_prosecutors;


Subpoenas could target White House, Justice officials
POSTED: 1422 GMT (2222 HKT), March 15, 2007
Story Highlights• Senate Judiciary chairman says he may subpoena White House staffers
• New Hampshire's Sen. John Sununu urges dismissal of attorney general
• President says he's "not happy" about mistakes surrounding attorney firings
• Sen. Patrick Leahy suspects administration won't stonewall subpoenas

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said he doesn't care what the White House and Justice Department think of his subpoenas -- he wants answers.

~snip~

Justice Department officials initially told Congress the removals were performance-related, which prompted an outcry from the fired lawyers.

The administration later admitted one of the fired prosecutors had been removed to make way for a former aide to Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, but said the remainder were fired over management concerns and policy disagreements.

"I'm surprised that they're saying that there's no politics involved, and we're still 2½ weeks away from April Fool's Day," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-New Hampshire, chairman of the Senate panel. "How can they possibly stand there with a straight face and say that's not politics? Of course it's politics."

more:
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/15/fired.attorneys/index.html?section=cnn_latest

[robinlynne]

1. why postpone the WH? to get the testimonies separately?

[gratuitous]

2. I'd like it to happen faster

But there is a rhythm and a procedure to these things. Start with the small bites, and the big bites (the masterminds of these schemes squatting in the White House) might just take care of themselves. Build the case so that the only people who can possibly defend Gonzales and his overlords are the kool-aid backwash.

[Raven]

3. I wondered the same thing but

maybe you start with the little fish and work your way up...they all will have to stick to the same story to survive this.

[maddezmom]

4. procedure as they were added late, here's a link

Subpoena vote set for tomorrow.“The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to vote Thursday on whether to authorize subpoenas to 14 current and former administration officials,” including Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, former Gonzales aide Kyle Sampson. “Since Rove, Miers and Kelley were just added to the schedule for Thursday’s committee meeting, panel rules allow any member to postpone consideration of the subpoenas for one week.” Will any senator give cover to Rove and Miers? March 14, 2007 10:17 pm | Comment (44)

Filed under:
Posted by Nico March 14, 2007 10:17 pm


http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/14/subpoena-vote-set-for-tomorrow/#comments

[rodeodance]

6. OK, thanks for the post.

[rodeodance]

5. umm.. seems to they will get only HALF the story??????

[maddezmom]

7. they'll vote again next week for the others

wonder if the repubs will hold back?

[maddezmom]

8. Schumer statement

From Schumer:
Today, at the Senate Judiciary Committee markup, authorization for subpoenas was approved for several Department of Justice officials: Mike Elston, Kyle Sampson, Monica Goodling, Bill Mercer, Mike Battle. Republican members of the committee blocked the authorization for subpoenas for White House officials, namely Harriet Miers, Karl Rove, and William Kelly. Schumer released the following statement:

“This is the worst crisis at the Department of Justice that I have seen in my time in the Senate. It is a crisis of confidence, a crisis of credibility, and a crisis of management. And ridding the Department of one bad actor doesn’t begin to rid the Department of the taint of this scandal. That is why every day more and more Senators have joined me in my call for Alberto Gonzales to step down. Beyond a change in the top, we should also be doing everything we can to get correct and candid answers from the Department, once and for all. The sooner we do that, the sooner public confidence can be restored. And it won’t be a moment too soon. Today’s authorization for subpoenas gets us a major step closer.

“It is regrettable that members of the minority blocked subpoenas for some of the White House players. They should be joining in our efforts to get to the bottom of this.”

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2007/03/senate-judiciary-committee-issues.html

[calimary]

9. That's the way, uh-huh, uh-huh, I like it, uh-huh uh-huh!

No. I LOVE it.

BTW - I wrote a column about it, elsewhere here, for your consideration...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3163069

----

BTW - do we have names of those republi-CON Senators who voted to block the subpoenas?

[badgerpup]

17. How are they going to get around this?

"Republican members of the committee blocked the authorization for subpoenas for White House officials, namely Harriet Miers, Karl Rove, and William Kelly. "

These are the putative 'people' we need put under oath and waterboarded made to testify.

Not that being under oath would probably make any difference in their 'testimony'...but when one lies under oath there's usually some kind of consequence...even if one IS a republican.

[Roon]

10. Panel OKs subpoenas in U.S. attorney probe

WASHINGTON - The Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday cleared the way for subpoenas compelling five Justice Department officials and six of the federal prosecutors they fired to tell the story of a purge of U.S. attorneys that has prompted demands for the ouster of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The voice vote to authorize the panel to issue subpoenas amounts to insurance against the possibility that Gonzales could retract his permission to let the aides testify voluntarily, or impose strict conditions.

The committee also postponed for a week a vote on whether to authorize subpoenas for President Bush's top aides who were involved in the eight firings, including political adviser Karl Rove, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and deputy White House Counsel William K. Kelley.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17627463/

[chiffon]

11. Now....Let's play HARDBALL!

[bearfan454]

12. fucking eh nt

[chefgirl]

13. OMG...This is hugh!!!11!

I would give my left tit to see KKKarl be forced to testify. I'm series!!!11! :woohoo:

Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!Oh Please!

-chef- (who doesn't believe for a second that it will happen)

[Tyler Durden]

14. Now that would be "unbalanced," wouldn't it?

Sorry. I just had to say it. Regarding the "left one," of course.

[chefgirl]

15. Ok fine,

You talked me into it...I'll give the right one too IF they force him to testify. :evilgrin:

-chef- (who sure hopes she's right about it never happening)

[ClayZ]

16. WHOOOOT K and R

[wryter2000]

18. Awwww-right!

Now this is starting to feel like Watergate.

I think it's important to start with the small fry. Remember Alexander Butterfield dropping the bomb that Nixon was taping everything in the Oval Office? We wouldn't have gotten that by going to Nixon first.

Plus, hearing from the fired USA's first is important. Let them tell their stories, and then you can confront the higher ups with the facts while you have them under oath. (That sounded so good, I think I'll say it again. Under oath.)