If, as many conservatives have been claiming, Congress doesn't have the right?

Question

to force any member of the Executive Branch to testify under oath... how did Clinton get impeached?

Answer 1

the supreme court has ruled that executive privilege is allowed, but under very narrow parameters. The administration will have a hard case to prove. The real question is, If you have nothing to hide, why not swear an oath?

Answer 2

Not the same thing. Impeachment is a process where the President appears before the entire Senate with the Chief Justice of SCOTUS sitting as the judge to determine probable guilt. If that official is successfully impeached, then a Federal Court will decide whether or not to pursue criminal charges.

Appearing before a Congressional committee is an investigation (much like a Grand Jury) to discover whether or not a crime may have been committed. What the Conservatives fail to mention is invoking Executive Privilege has been tested in the Supreme Court, which basically has ruled that it only applies for purposes of national security or where there is no cause to believe a crime has been committed. This case, as i see it , concerns smearing the reputations of the US Attorneys involved & Obstruction of Justice. The Supreme Court will decide who is right. By the way, I believe Nixon, Reagan , & Clinton were all unsuccessful in their bids to invoke Executive Privilege.

Answer 3

The conscum of this country are in serious denial.

However, because of the political game, the Democrats aren't going to impeach the President right now because they don't want to take blame for the inevitable collapse from the pullout of Iraq. They want the Iraq mess ended before they proceed to yank Bush out of office.

The reason why Bush doesn't want any of his conscum drones to testify under oath is because he knows damn well that he is guilty as sin. Bush is trapped and he knows it. If he pulls the troops, he and Cheney are both out of office on asses. If his drones are made to testify, the truth will come out and there will be nothing stopping him from being impeached and most likely imprisoned for war crimes. The 5th Amendment doesn't apply when each and every single one of them is guilty.

If the President is impeached this will be the end of the Bush Administration. This time the Senate will not clear the charges. This time, the president will be thrown out of office.

Answer 4

Well Clinton testified before a special prosecutor.
But apparently many people are overlooking the fact that Bush has already waived executive priviledge by saying that he would allow his people to appear in Congress at all.
He doesn't have any executive priviledge to require that they not take oaths and records not be kept.
Claiming executive priviledge means that he refuses to let his people appear before Congress at all.
Something else that people might not be aware of. Bush is trying to get Congress to agree that they will not recall his people. So if they go in and flat out lie, but it isn't proven until later, they are off scott free.
This is not a national security issue and there shouldn't be any reason to keep this hidden from the people. Unless they have something to hide.

Answer 5

The Congress of the United States was the paramount concern of the Founders. They made it the subject of Article I of the United States Constitution. The Executive Branch comes second: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/united_stat...

In fact, when it comes to deploying its Executive power, which is dear to Bush's understanding of the presidency, the President's team has been planning for what one strategist describes as "a cataclysmic fight to the death" over the balance between Congress and the White House if confronted with congressional subpoenas it deems inappropriate. The strategist says the Bush team is "going to assert that power, and they're going to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court on every issue, every time, no compromise, no discussion, no negotiation."

The Supreme Court has held that the congressional power of inquiry "is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function." As a tool of this inquiry, both Houses of Congress authorize their committees and subcommittees to issue subpoenas to require the production of documents and the attendance of witnesses regarding matters within the committee's jurisdiction. If a witness from the administration refuses to testify by invoking the Fifth Amendment, Congress can vote to force testimony by granting the witness either partial or full immunity.

"The issuance of a subpoena pursuant to an authorized investigation" is "an indispensable ingredient of lawmaking." To be legitimate, a congressional inquiry need not produce a bill or legislative measure. "The very nature of the investigative function -- like any research -- is that it takes the searchers up some 'blind alleys' and into nonproductive enterprises. To be a valid legislative inquiry there need be no predictable end result."

Answer 6

If you think that is interesting... watch Comedy Centrals Daily Show w/Jon Stewart. In particular the one with his guest former UN Ambassador John Bolton, and see how he defends Bushes actions and berates Congress (Democrats) who want Rove, and Meir's to testify about the US attorney firings. Then watch Christopher Titus Tour.

I think those shows have important things to say about how America is under attack from the inside out. Starting with Bushes illegal war, illegal wiretapping without warrants, lying about what he knew and when he knew it. Those to me seem to be breaking the law too. And why is it the majority of Presidents since Nixon seem to have the CRSS (Can't Remember Sh*t Syndrome)?

Besides this illegal and criminal act is much more severe then what Clinton did. Clinton lied about his sex life (big whoop) - Bush lied to Congress and the people of America get the USA into a war. Where is Ken Starr now??

Answer 7

Clinton didn't get impeached for lying to Congress.

He was impeached for lying to a Grand Jury.

Also, the right of Congress to compel administration members to testify under oath while investigating criminal matters, is not in doubt.

But the right of Congress to compel administration members to testify under oath for purely political matters is under doubt.

As someone said on TV today, Bush should have just told Congress, to mind your own business.

And told them, if they think any law was broken, to inform him.

This case is weird, if Rove testified and told Congress under oath, that he personally wanted the prosecutor's fired cause he didn't like them, there is nothing Congress could do about it.

US Attorneys work for Bush, and serve at his pleasure, if he wants to remove or replace them, thats his right.

The whole thing is kind of pointless, no one is saying anything was done illegally, unethically or irmorally.

Answer 8

People are having conveniently short memories. Cons squeeled with glee when the head of the executive branch was called to testify under oath. Now they protest you can't do that. Double standard? It looks like one.

Answer 9

Do a search on Executive Privilege and everything will become clear.

Clinton invoked executive privilege and then "negotiated" the terms of his testimony before a grand jury rather than having the matter go through the courts.

Answer 10

Other witnesses, not in the white house were called. Also, having a privilege doesn't mean you can't waive it.

However, I think the President's staff is definitely subject to subpoena power, and I don't say that just because our current President is Bush. I also think testimony should be protected if classified topics are discussed.