Bush directs defiance of order to testify
Claims of executive privilege mean ex-aides won't explain roles in firing of attorneys
By Jesse J. Holland
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - President Bush, again claiming executive privilege, directed former aides Monday to defy congressional subpoenas ordering them to explain their roles in the firings of U.S. attorneys over the winter.

White House Counsel Fred Fielding insisted that Bush was acting in good faith in withholding documents and directing Fielding's predecessor, Harriet Miers, and Bush's former political director, Sara Taylor, not to testify before congressional committees this week.

Fielding renewed the White House offer to let Miers, Taylor and other administration officials meet with congressional investigators off the record and with no transcript -- an offer congressional Democrats have rejected.

As a result, a showdown looms in which lawmakers could hold the subpoenaed officials in contempt of Congress.

Here are questions and answers about the process of contempt of Congress:

Q: What is contempt of Congress, and why would Congress want to use this power?

A: Congress can hold a person in contempt if he or she obstructs proceedings or an inquiry by a congressional committee. Congress has used contempt citations for two main reasons: to punish someone (1) for refusing to testify or refusing to provide documents or answers, or (2) for bribing or libeling a member of Congress.

What is the process for holding someone in contempt of Congress?

A: The procedure can start in either the House or the Senate. The two chambers do not work together on contempt citations. It takes only one chamber to refer a person to be prosecuted for contempt.

It takes a majority vote for the citation to move to the full House or Senate. There, it must be debated by the full chamber like any other resolution. It is subject to the same filibuster and procedural rules as any other resolution. It takes a majority vote to be approved.