What is up with Condosleezbag's subpeona?

[garybeck]

It's been 2 months since

4/25/2007
WASHINGTON — Democratic-controlled congressional committees investigating the Bush administration voted Wednesday to issue subpoenas to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the Republican National Committee, and voted to grant immunity for a top Justice Department official who refused to testify about the firing of eight U.S. attorneys.

The House oversight committee voted 21-10 to issue the subpoena to Rice to compel her to testify on what she knew about the Bush administration's claim, now discredited, that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa.

"The days of diverting our eyes from the hard questions are over," said committee chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif.

Are those days really over? Wasn't there a deadline or specific date she was supposed to testify? Anyone know what's up with that?

[Kagemusha]

1. She didn't show up, that's what.

And crickets chirped.

[garybeck]

2. So Waxman was bluffing?

[Kagemusha]

4. Well, no. Actually just now I saw a thread a little downstream here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1160177

This seems to be the current state of affairs.

Pretty Byzantine, don't you think?

[garybeck]

6. yeah, but that's for Attorneygate, not Niger-Uraniumgate.

I think for Attorneygate, they're saying that "if" they don't show up, they will consider contempt charges. with Niger-Uranium, the horse is already out of the barn. Sleezbag didn't show up. So the time for Contempt is NOW.

[Kikosexy2]

11. But she just ...

bought a new pair of gorgeous peach colored Prada pumps...how divine!(eyes rolling)...

[Phredicles]

3. Thanks for bringing this up - I've been wondering myself.

Mr. Waxman is my representative, and I've been voting for him since I moved into his district in 1994. This is the first time I've been disappointed with him, but it's a very big disappointment if he won't follow through with this. Disappointing, and inexplicable.

[Kagemusha]

5. See this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1160177

It's not often that such things need to be followed through on to this extent and the process for doing so seems a bit twisted in the present context. But it seems Waxman is literally examining his options.

As I like to do, I must remind that Congress is not a drive-thru, even when it's bringing the hammer down. Its hammer comes down hard, not swiftly.

[Phredicles]

8. Does that June 28 deadline include all subpoenas issued so far?

I ask because there's no specific mention of the subpoena on Rice, and the article is talking about Conyers and the Justice Dept. investigation.

[garybeck]

9. that's my question also.

all the articles about these contempt charges refer only to Attorneygate. No mention of the Rice subpeona.

[Kagemusha]

10. Well, since I've read Rice skipped out on her testimony date...

It all comes down to the same thing. Regardless of who comes first, if the administration is going to defy subpoenas to testify - not make legal arguments, but just flatly defy them - Congress has to threaten, and if necessary, follow through on criminal contempt charges to get its way. Doesn't matter who's first as long as everyone knows Congress is serious about it... IMHO.

The thing is, the practical difficulties are the same as in the Attorneygate cases cited...

Edit: Maybe my eyes deceived me or maybe the edit to the original post took out something on Rice. I thought there was some connection to Rice's case but if it was there, it's gone now O_o Apologies.

[MiniMe]

7. They gave her a chance to come in voluntarily

The hearing was set for a few weeks ago, but the committee posponed it for a few weeks, I don't remember the reason. It was rescheduled for 6/19, and that is when she refused to appear. So now the question is will the house charge her with comtempt of Congress.

[garybeck]

12. a subpeona is voluntary?

her not showing up for the subpeona is a violation. it was not voluntary.

[Kagemusha]

13. They gave her a chance to come in voluntarily before that.

That's generally how it works. Voluntary > subpoena > contempt. And you get plenty of chances to 'come to Jesus' as long as you deliver the goods.

[garybeck]

14. well lets just hope that the next step comes because if it doesn't

i will be very disappointed in Waxman.

[Kagemusha]

15. We'll see!

I can understand him not rushing but, it's up to him to deliver.

[MiniMe]

16. You are right, it was under subpeona

but they did delay the date. They gave her a chance to come in voluntarily before the subpeona was issued. I didn't type that right.