After all the calls of Executive Privelege, and all the moves to block Congress from sifting through the administration’s very dirty laundry, it is beginning to look like the White House’s gambits are slowly running short.

Just a couple of hours ago, we have learned that Congress has passed a contempt resolution against Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolton. Of course this has the administration spinning and flailing away to as it desperately tries to halt Congress on it’s path to truth, with each attempt painting the White House as more and more guilty looking.

Aside from dodging legal persecution, what possible justification could the White House have dodging so much?

Indeed, a report released today by chairman John Conyers Jr. explicitly states that there is evidence of wrongdoing:

The memorandum says the probe has turned up evidence that some of the U.S. attorneys were improperly selected for firing because of their handling of vote fraud allegations, public corruption cases or other cases that could affect close elections. It also says that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and senior Justice aides “appear to have made false or misleading statements to Congress, many of which sought to minimize the role of White House personnel.”

In addition, the memorandum asserts repeatedly that the president’s top political adviser, Karl Rove, was the first administration official to broach the idea of firing U.S. attorneys shortly after the 2004 election — an assertion the White House has said is not true.

This would be far from the first time that Bush’s closest political advisor, Karl Rove, has found himself in the sights, and the White House has made it clear from day one that they will block any and all attempts of Congress to attempt to prove his guilt, nor the guilt of anyone that has had a hand in the politically motivated firings of US Attorneys. Indeed as early as last week the White House cited a 1984 DoJ legal opinion that would protect it’s ability to protect officials that have come under fire.

But Congressional Democrats are ready for that one too:

In the memorandum, the Democrats provide the first legal justification for countering the White House’s view, saying that the 1984 legal opinion “does not apply here.” For one thing, the Democrats contend, Bush has not invoked the privilege properly because he has not furnished a signed statement or “privilege logs” specifying the documents being withheld. In addition, the memo says, “there is not the slightest indication” the 1984 opinion would apply to a former executive branch official, such as Miers.

Bush has come under fire a lot for his apparent disdain for the rule of law, most noticeably in recent times for his commutation of the prison sentence of former Dick Cheney aide, I. Scooter Libby. But that is small potatoes.

We have evidence of a crime, we have suspects, and we have witnesses. And yet, the White House is itself obstructing justice at every step of the way. If this were not the executive branch of the nation, the perpetrator would be itself tried and convicted and jailed for a long time.

But President Bush believes he is above the law. He believes that contempt of court is not something that he and his staff are capable of, nor subject to. In this White House, perjury is not a big deal, and justice is only to be selectively meted out, most definitely not to the powerful. This is not the behavior of a democratically elected leader, but of a dictator who refuses to obeys the laws he has sworn to uphold and protect.

If that doesn’t spell impeachment out to you, I have no idea what does. We were ready to impeach a president for getting a blowjob, but we’re willing to let someone walk after making the US Constitution his personal toilet?

That is the kind of damage he has done to this country.

(h/t memeorandum)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook