committee chairman

This is absolutely priceless:

Two House Republicans have cast votes as members of the 112th Congress, but were not sworn in on Wednesday, a violation of the Constitution on the same day that the GOP had the document read from the podium.

The Republicans, incumbent Pete Sessions of Texas and freshman Mike Fitzpatrick, missed the swearing in because they were at a fundraiser in the Capitol Visitors Center. The pair watched the swearing-in on television from the Capitol Visitors Center with their hands raised.

Not only is this a violation of the Constitution, but the fundraising on Capital grounds is also a violation of House Rules. Think that’s enough? Well wait…there’s more! Pete Sessions sits on the House Rules Committee.

But it gets even better than that. Now the GOP leadership is trying to change the rules after the fact:

Republicans, led by Rules Committee chairman David Dreier, are now looking to draft a rule to allow the pair's TV oath to count, but it would have to be approved by unanimous consent, and there's no sign Democrats, who are looking to slow down next week's planned vote on a repeal of President Obama's health-care plan, are willing to play ball.

NPR:

"The Salahis' testimony is important to explain how a couple circumvented layers of security at the White House on the evening of a state dinner without causing alarm," Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, the committee chairman, said in a statement released by his committee last night. "If the Salahis are absent from tomorrow's hearing, the committee is prepared to move forward with subpoenas to compel their appearance."

Subpoena? Please. What Thompson should do is simply revoke the invitation of the Salahis to testify, then they will show up….er “crash” the hearing.

Of course the White House thinks their study is not credible:

The White House possesses no archived e-mail messages for many of its component offices, including the Executive Office of the President and the Office of the Vice President, for hundreds of days between 2003 and 2005, according to the summary of an internal White House study that was disclosed yesterday by a congressional Democrat.

The 2005 study -- whose credibility the White House attacked this week -- identified 473 separate days in which no electronic messages were stored for one or more White House offices, said House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.).

This goes hand in hand with the White House saying that they don't believe any emails are missing. So then they are just ignoring the law and rulings from the court? That sounds like either a misdemeanor or a high crime to me.

This is a really interesting story that is thankfully gaining attention. Halliburton announced this weekend that they will be moving their corporate headquarters from Houston, Texas to Dubai. There are a lot of questions surrounding this move - the biggest on their taxes. Halliburton generates a large portion of their income from U.S. contracts and will now pay far less taxes to the U.S. Our new Democratic Congress does not seem very happy about it either:

Time’s Karen Tumulty comments on Halliburton’s plan to move its headquarters from Houston to Dubai: “Is this about tax breaks? Getting beyond the reach of congressional subpoenas? And what about all that sensitive information that Halliburton has had access to? At a minimum, reincorporating in Dubai would mean that Halliburton will be paying less taxes to the U.S. Treasury, even as it collects billions from government contracts.” She also reports, “Henry Waxman is already planning to hold a hearing on this, an aide tells me.” 

Patrick Leahy has also been vocal on this move:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) told ABC News it was “an insult to the U.S. soldiers and taxpayers.”

There should be great concern with this move. Halliburton does a lot of support work for our troops. Should we let this work be handled by a company located in Dubai? This has the same stink on it that the ports deal had.

That is precisely what the administration, the GOP and its mouthpieces would say if a Democrat was talking about this:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter said Thursday he is considering legislation to cut off funding for the Bush administration's secret domestic wiretapping program until he gets satisfactory answers about it from the White House.

"Institutionally, the presidency is walking all over Congress at the moment," Specter, R-Pa., told the panel. "If we are to maintain our institutional prerogative, that may be the only way we can do it."

Specter said he had informed President Bush about his intention and that he has attracted several potential co-sponsors. He said he's become increasingly frustrated in trying to elicit information about the program from senior White House officials at several public hearings.

The amendment amounted to a warning to the White House from a powerful but frustrated Senate chairman.

Now I agree with Specter's assessment of the situation but I can not agree with him making it. The problem is that Specter is playing politics on this. When he had Gonzalez before him to testify he should have sworn him in. Instead he turned a blind eye to our Constitution and put faith in his "party", the party of corruption. In turn there are now numerous questions from Gonzalez's session that are unclear and possibly answered falsely. If Specter means what he is saying then he will reopen those hearings, call all the top officials from the DOJ and NSA in and swear every single one in. Wake up - this is only the very basis of our nation we are talking about.

While the AP spent tonight reporting on the passing of the Patriot Act as a major victory for Republicans, the Washington Post was busy getting an article ready for tomorrow's print edition. That article talks about a House GOP effort to block the Dubai ports deal:

Efforts by the White House to hold off legislation challenging a Dubai-owned company's acquisition of operations at six major U.S. ports collapsed yesterday when House Republican leaders agreed to allow a vote next week that could kill the deal.

Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) will attach legislation to block the deal today to a must-pass emergency spending bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A House vote on the measure next week will set up a direct confrontation with President Bush, who sternly vowed to veto any bill delaying or stopping Dubai Ports World's purchase of London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steamship Co

Attaching this to the Iraq and Afghanistan funding bill is an excellent move. Bush vows to veto and legislation blocking the ports deal but will he do it when it also means vetoing the funding for his wars? This will definitely set the stage for a show down between the White House and both sides of the aisle in Congress on this very important issue.

Of course tomorrow can always bring something new and I can almost hear it now. They will try to spin this into being partisan politics that is to blame on the Democrats. Not sure how yet but they will find a way.

One of the most powerful committees in Congress is the House Appropriations
Committee. The chairmen of the committee must hold the highest ethical standards
because the influence of bribery and greed is so great. This is what lead to the
conviction and downfall of Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, the former committee
chairman.

So who will be a good ethical person to replace the disgraced Congressman
from California? How about Tom Delay. You might think I am joking but this is no
joke. As Delay highlighted in his speech Saturday when he announced he would not
seek to retain his position as Majority Leader:

I will continue to serve my constituents and seek re-election to a 12th
term representing Texas' 22nd district while I work to clear my name of the
baseless charges leveled against me. I will also be reclaiming my seat on
the Appropriations Committee when the second session of the 109th Congress
convenes later this month.

Read full letter

here.

So the man who is already indicted for fraud, facing a highly probably
indictment in the Jack Abramoff scandal, involved in another investigation
involving bank fraud and also being looked at for possible connections in the
Duke Cunningham scandal is now going to be put in charge of this committee. Why
not release the thieves out of jail and make them all police officers? Perhaps
O.J. Simpson should hold marriage counseling classes or Michael Jackson open up
a day care.

The corruption with these Republicans will not stop even when it is being
exposed. The only way to put an end to it is by force and that force comes in
the form of votes. Vote everyone of them out of office in disgrace.