When an American refuses to respond to a subpoena, that American has committed a crime, correct?

Question

You know darn well if you refused to turn over docuents in response to a subpoena, your butt would be held in contempt of court.

Where is Bush's punishment???

rhs: Nice try, but your argument effectively invalidates the impeachment process. So that means Clinton got screwed.

Jeffrey: The President is not immune to the law. Sorry. Nice try.

It is appalling how many people don't even know what the subpoenas are for. They are for the WIRE-TAPPING program, not the fired attorneys.

READ, people.

Answer 1

If these documents pertain to national security issues, the President could claim that it would jeopardize the nation's security to have the documents entered into public record and refuse to release them. I am not sure what the law is in the context of classified documents or documents pertaining to issues of national security. I would have to suspect that it is within the President's executive privilege to retain documents pertaining to issues of national security, even if those documents are subpoenaed.

If this was not the case, we would probably be talking about the impeachment proceedings of President Bush rather than trying to find some scrap to try to charge him with a crime. Since the court that issued the subpoena has not taken further legal action, I would have to assume that the President is acting within his power to withhold documents that pertain to issues of national security.

Answer 2

No, as chief executive he has the right to refuse the subpoenas. The legality of the request will be handled in the courts. It could go all the way to the Supreme Court before a decision is made as to whether he must turn over the documents or not. The same thing happened with the Clintons during the Whitewater scandal. The Clintons just said, "We can't find the papers", rather than saying they wouldn't produce them. When the court demanded that they produce the papers, they said "Oh, here they are, laying on the dining room table. How could we have overlooked them before?"

Answer 3

The problem is that the President is not just any citizen. He does have certain privileges and immunities that go along with his office, among these is the Executive privilege of Watergate Fame. The President is within his rights to assert his privilege, and to seek a ruling by the Federal Courts as to exactly how far his privilege goes. Remember also, should the Courts decide that he is in contempt, the Federal Courts can and will issue a Writ of Mandamus to
compel production of the documents in question.

Answer 4

What crime? and what punishment? We're talking about the President of the United States. So what? if a few attorney's got fired. I got let go after 20 years of service, that doesn't mean I did wrong. So what? if everyone in this country believes there's corruption in the white house? Just because you have to eat crow doesn't mean there's something wrong with the operator. Apparently everyone's idle mind means the devils workshop. Assuming that everytime there's a change in the white house things are going to change in the nation. Well, the answer to your question is no. Same stuff, different day. So's everything else in life. So in the interest of all americans, please senate, congress and people. There's more to life than to waste, fraud and abuse and stop whynning.

Answer 5

If the subpoena was lawfully issued, yes. But the separation of powers limits the ability of any one branch of the government to meddle in the affairs of another, and the Constitution is quite clear about one thing: the officers of the government serve at the pleasure of the President, and the Congress has nothing to do with it.