Attorney Firing, Executive Privilege, and Contempt of Congress

House OKs contempt citations against Bush aides
Los Angeles Times
By Richard B. Schmitt, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
February 15, 2008

The vote targets Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten and former Counsel Harriet Miers, who failed to answer subpoenas in the U.S. attorney firing case. Republicans stage a walkout.
....

The panel was investigating the 2006 firings of nine U.S. attorneys, which Democrats think was politically motivated. The controversy later contributed to the resignation of Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales.

...

Only twice since the Watergate investigations of the mid-1970s has the full House voted to hold an administration official in contempt of Congress. Both cases stemmed from congressional investigations of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Reagan administration.

Usually, disputes about congressional access to documents and testimony are resolved through negotiations. The White House has agreed to make officials available for interviews in the U.S. attorney case. But lawmakers have said the conditions attached -- the White House has insisted the interviews be done privately without a transcript -- are unacceptable.

"If the House Democrats try to bring a civil case in federal court, they will be met with opposition at the courthouse door and at every step of the way," Perino said, adding: "We are confident that the administration will prevail against this unprecedented and wholly unwarranted vote of contempt."

This story echoes a couple of elements of the Watergate incident. One is the firing of attorneys (the Saturday Night Massacre) and the assertion of executive privilege.

Further background on these recent events can be found here