SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
Back in May, I requested an interview with Congressman John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and received a quick “yes” from his office. I was told that conducting the interview by e-mail would be quicker than waiting for a meeting with the congressman, so I sent over a list of six questions as requested. Since then, I have asked repeatedly for the promised replies and was assured that they would be forthcoming. My most recent request was sent to Melanie Roussell, a spokeswoman at the Judiciary Committee, on July 23rd. She apologized for letting “this slip through the cracks” and said she would “follow up . . . later today.” That’s the last I’ve heard, and as it’s now been four months since I made the original request I’ve decided to just go ahead and post the questions that I was told Congressman Conyers would be happy to answer. Several, as you’ll see, have been overtaken by events.
If the congressman would like to reply I’d be happy to fill in the blanks.
If President Bush wants Attorney General Gonzales to remain on the job and the Senate’s vote of No Confidence doesn’t produce his resignation, will the Judiciary Committee seek to impeach him?
When Monica Goodling testified, she was asked a single question about her dealings with Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, and she gave a brush off answer. Does the committee plan to follow up on this angle? Does the congressman believe that Rove and/or Miers are important figures in this story?
Is President Bush (and/or Vice President Cheney) guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors in regard to leading the country into the war in Iraq?
Polls show that impeachment of President Bush is supported by a notable section of the public. Why isn’t impeachment on the table? Have the Democrats decided for political reasons that impeachment should not be pursued? Was the congressman pressured by the party leadership to steer clear of the topic, as has been reported?
Some watchdog groups criticized the congressman for opposing a measure in the ethics bill that would have extended the revolving door ban to two years? Why did the congressman oppose that step –especially at a time that the public appears to be so cynical about political corruption and supportive of stricter ethics rules?
The congressman has announced that he will hold hearings on climbing gasoline prices. What’s the biggest factor behind the rise in prices?
More from Ken Silverstein:
Commentary — November 17, 2015, 6:41 pm
The Clintons’ so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich family friends.
The new docudrama The People v. O. J. Simpson: American Crime Story (FX) isn’t really about Orenthal James Simpson. It’s about the trials that ran alongside his — those informal, unboundaried, court-of-public-opinion trials in which evidence was heard for and against the murder victims, the defense and the prosecution, the judge, the jury, and the Los Angeles Police Department, to say nothing of white and black America. History has freed us from suspense about Simpson’s verdict, so that the man himself (played here by Cuba Gooding Jr.) is less the tragic hero he seemed in the mid-Nineties than a curiously minor character. He comes to the center of our attention only once, in Episode 2, at the end of the lengthy Ford Bronco chase scene — which in real life was followed by a surreal cavalcade of police cars and media helicopters, as well as an estimated 95 million live viewers — when Simpson repeatedly, and with apparent sincerity, apologizes for taking up so much of so many people’s time. It is an uncannily ordinary moment of social decorum, a sort of could-you-please-pass-the-salt gesture on a sinking Titanic, in which Simpson briefly becomes more than just an archetype.
Amount an auditor estimated last year that Oregon could save each year by feeding prisoners less food:
Kentucky is the saddest state.
An Italian economist was questioned on suspicion of terrorism after a fellow passenger on an American Airlines flight witnessed him writing differential equations on a pad of paper.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
“Matt was happy enough to sustain himself on the detritus of a world he saw as careening toward self-destruction, and equally happy to scam a government he despised. 'I’m glad everyone’s so wasteful,' he told me. 'It supports my lifestyle.'”