Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

President Illegally States He Will Defy Congressional Subpoenas

Ref The President has illegally stated he will oppose subpoenas. He has expressed intent, and his stated policy not to comply with the Subpoenas. This is an illegal decision and has no basis in law.

The mandatory hold over provision has been documented.

Contrary to the White House's assertions, Miers and Rover are liable for any questions they refuse to provide under oath. If they refuse to cooperate, or the President blocks the Subpoenas they are violating the Constitution, laws of the land, and have impermissibly obstructed Congress.

Congress may make adverse inferences about their alleged complicity in illegal warfare, obstruction, illegal retaliation, witness tampering, and other Grave Breaches of the Geneva Conventions.

Ref Nixon's 3rd Article of Impeachment complained of Nixon's refusal to produce papers or cooperate with inquiry.

* * *

1. The President cannot prevent Congress from asking questions and compelling witnesses to appear under penalty of perjury. Whether they are arrested, or refuse to promise to affirm the truth of their statements is meaningless. They can be lawfully arrested.

2. Adverse inferences can be made. The OPM, White house counsel's office, and Rove have been specifically mentioned. OPM has specifically included information in the e-mails that only Miers can clarify. The error was for the OPM to document this illegal plan to retaliate.

3. It is meaningless what the President says. DoJ OPR was blocked. this President’s idea of investigating the leak of Valarie Plame's name was to do nothing.

4. This President has two options: Comply with the subpoena; or face a war crimes tribunal that shall enter into evidence his refusal to assent to the Constitution. Adverse inferences may be made by a war crimes tribunal.

5. All staff counsel communications once released, referenced, or commented on means all issues related to the US Attorney firings are not protected by any claim of executive privilege. The privilege only applies on issues unrelated to illegal activity. Contrary to the Department of Justice absurd claims in the FISA court, Reynolds and ORCON prohibit the classification or privilege for things that are substantially related to illegal activity. Once anything has been disclosed, even inadvertently, the President has no power to compel anyone to close the door of the burning barn. The horses have left.

6. All Questions, discussions, and other things related to these matters are outside any protection. Congress may lawfully review any matter. Any witness who refuses to cooperate may be lawfully prosecuted for obstructing an official inquiry.

7. The allegations on the able include: Conspiracy to block investigations into war crimes; unlawful retaliation against prosecutors for their efforts to enforce the law; illegal use of DOD and CIA contractors to crate sham corporations to funnel money back to the GOP to manipulate the voters; and unlawful retaliation, witness tampering, and obstruction of justice in re a Congressional investigation. This does not include the Title 28 and Title 50 exception reports; and the alleged conspiracy these DOJD staff counsel are complicit in re alleged war crimes, prisoner abuse, FISA violations, and other things.

8. The President knows fully well his office and staff are well aware of the mandatory holdover after 4 year. There is no required removal, but the opposite. His staff has publicly commented on this, they have signed their name. Any claim that he US attorney service at the pleasure of the president is meaningless when taken in light of the mandatory holdover.

9. Even if we accept that this supposed US Attorney removal was related to the 2004 election, it defies reason that in 2007 the US Attorneys are being removed for a decision that supposedly occurred in 2004 with the end of the first time.

9. The President has offered nothing new. He provides no proof to warrant belief. He offers nothing to inspire confidence in his leadership. The GOP has a problem and mess that lies at their feet. It is their job to clean this up, and show the DOJ Staff are competent. The e-mails show they are not able to do simple things.

10. The issues before us are well handled under the US Code. US Attorneys who have engaged in illegal activity can be disbarred; and DoJ Staff counsel who are complying with war crimes may be adjudicated for war crimes. There has been no compelling evidence offered by DoJ Staff counsel to suggest they have a credible defense on the DOJ IG issues in re illegal use of NSLs. These issue relate to illegal use of NSA data for rendition, prisoner abuse, and unlawful violations of Geneva. These are serious war crimes.

11. The US Attorney ranking system defies logic. The best Asst. US Attorney under this "system" received marginal ratings. This rating system is the subject of a review.

12. It is not permissible for the judiciary to act as a circuit breaker to make interim appointments. The Founders wanted the Senate and President alone to wrestle over who would be the US Attorneys. DOJ Has absurdly argued that it is the Asst US attorneys who do the real work; the logical conclusion is that the Asst. US Attorneys should also be confirmed by the Senate because of the DOJ Staff assertion of their importance. Either DOJ Is making a frivolous argument; or they are making excuses to let the Judiciary allow the Senate and President avoid a confrontation over what this President, White House staff and DOJ Staff counsel started: Illegal warfare, war crimes, and grave breaches of the Supreme Law.

13. Under no circumstances should this President be allowed to interfere with Congress. Whether Rove or Miers do or do not cooperate has no bearing on whether sate officials and attorney generals may or may not enforce the Constitution. The States have the power to require all US officials to provide an enforcement mechanism. This President, Rove, and Miers have arguably engaged in illegal activity to thwart that enforcement mechanism. The States are permitted to lawfully prosecute a sitting President; and bring charges against Miers and Rove for their alleged involvement with illegal efforts to violate the States guarantee to an enforcement mechanism.

14. Foreign fighters are also permitted under the laws of war to take military action as did the US in Yugoslavia. If the President chooses to assert that he is above the law and not responsible to Congress and will not answer questions, then foreign fighters are permitted under the laws of war to make adverse inferences and take his refusal to cooperate as a tacit admission that he alone is blocking full US government compliance with the laws of war. NATO entered Yugoslavia; other nations may lawfully enter the United States militarily, and engaged in the minimal level of military force to lawfully subject all DOJ Staff counsel complicit with this activity, and render them to The Hague. It remains to be seen whether the Military Commissions Act providing full reimbursement for all war crimes tribunal defenses is valid. Arguably no DOJ Staff counsel should be rewarded for not having fully asserted their oath to enforce Geneva.

15. The President has two lawful options: He may either resign; or he may cooperate with lawful Congressional inquiry fully. Any other assertion of power may be reasonably interpreted to be evidence of his refusal to cooperate with Congress, and evidence of his refusal to fully embrace the Geneva Convention requirements that the US government fully enforce the Conventions, all laws, and remain in compliance with all treaty obligations: That includes an enforcement mechanism for Geneva violations.

16. There is no statue of limitations. The evidence DOJ has provided is the tip of the iceberg. Anything this President does is not because he is a nice guy; but because he has no other option. His agreement with anything is not anything the DNC should take as a compromise; or something the DNC should give him. This President is gradually understanding that he has no option. Any Congressional agreement to not take testimony from Rove or Miers under oath; or deny We the People of a transcript shall be reasonably concluded to be evidence that Rove, Miers, and the President do not wish to be held accountable for the lawful inquiry and testimony. There is no reason to ask Rove and Miers any question. They have well demonstrated they should be impeached and removed from office.

19. The way forward is for the State Disciplinary Boards to review each name on the DoJ data submittal and being disbarment proceedings against each staff counsel listed for alleged conspiracy to use illegal methods to relate against prosecutors attempting to fully assert their Attorney Standards of Conduct.

20. Any agreement by Congress with anyone to accept any evidence that is not under oath, with full access to We the People is not a reasonable assertion of 5 USC 3331 oath of office requirement by Members of Congress. Ayn agreement to less than full, public testimony under oath amounts to immunity which is not needed and shall not be recognized as having any lawful force. There are other methods which can be used to compel Rove and Miers to fully comply or face immediate arrest and imprisonment. The error was for Rove to ask a question and involve himself in an alleged plot to relate against US Attorneys who attempted to enforce the Geneva Conventions and identity which sham companies were funneling money to the GOP so they cold expand their illegal warfare.

31. The rule of law shall prevail. Miers and Rove shall fully support this Congress and this Constitution; or they shall be forced through law to Assent to This Constitution. They have no choice. Cooperate, or jail time. It is not reasonable to offer anyone immunity when there is amble open evidence which has not been adequately discussed, explored, or examined. We the People do not need any more evidence. It is the job of Rove and Miers to make the case that they should not be impeached and rendered to The Hague. They have failed to make a fair showing that they are not engaging in illegal rebellion against the US Constitution.