This makes Bush look even more guilty...

w1z4rd

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
52,146
Reaction score
8,340
Location
127.0.0.1
President George W. Bush's failed attempt to pass comprehensive immigration reform may prove he's not much of a consensus builder on Capitol Hill, but when it comes to playing rough with Congress, he clearly knows what he's doing. Bush stiff-armed the House and Senate judiciary committees Thursday, dispatching his lawyer to assert executive privilege and tell them he won't comply with their subpoenas for documents in the case of the fired U.S. attorneys. Backed by letters from the Justice Department's top lawyers, Bush effectively told Congress to go to hell.
Related
Inside the Scandal At Justice

Five months after eight U.S. Attorneys were fired, Congress is beginning to uncover how deeply politics shaped the department
The Executive Privilege Showdown

There could be one if Congress rejects the White House's offer to interview aides in private over the U.S. attorneys firings. Would the president's argument win out?
Flashback: The Nixon Challenge

There's nothing new there. Even when Republicans were in control on Capitol Hill, Bush's hallmark was a jaunty disregard for the legislative branch. And he's hardly the first President to claim the privilege: Clinton successfully asserted executive privilege several times, as did George H. W. Bush and many others before them. But a senior administration official speaking to reporters today said Bush is prepared to go a step further, instructing two former members of his staff now outside government not to comply with subpoenas to testify either.

Bush's lawyers were asked on the conference call with reporters for examples of other presidents using executive privilege to keep people who were not current employees of the executive branch from testifying before Congress and couldn't immediately come up with one. Eventually they pointed to a case from the 1950s when President Dwight D. Eisenhower exempted former President Harry Truman from complying with a Congressional subpoena.

The Democratic Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, said Bush was engaging in "Nixonian stonewalling" but there's a method to the White House's approach. Legally, Bush may be stretching executive privilege by claiming it allows him to prevent private citizens from responding to a Congressional subpoena, but politically he's just playing hardball.

"The White House is taking a strong stand on this to convince the Senate that they are deadly serious about protecting private conversations between the President and his staff," says Ken Duberstein, who was Reagan's chief of staff in his second term.

With executive privilege as ill-defined as it is, much of the battle between Congress and the White House is a protracted negotiation. Bush's move ups the bidding: the Democrats thought they'd set up a fight over administration documents and now they've got a fight over testimony by former members of the administration, too. And even though Bush might lose the testimony battle if it ever gets to court, by then the end of his term will be in sight.

This is the second time the administration seems to have outmaneuvered Congress over the U.S. Attorneys' investigation. The previous play was to offer off-the-record conversations between top aides, including Karl Rove, and the Congressional committees, but only without a transcript — a stance Bush's lawyer reasserted Thursday. That was an offer the Democrats couldn't accept, but it let the administration claim it was negotiating in good faith, and it bought Bush several months.

Bush's hardball play with Congress does have one potential downside. For now, most Americans aren't paying close attention to his battle with Congress over the U.S. attorneys. But if they do, and it starts to drive his numbers below their already record lows, pressure could mount on Bush to defuse the conflict. At a certain point, 2008 candidates on the Hill and the presidential campaign trail will start looking at the president less as a lame duck and more like an albatross.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1638663,00.html

This is starting to remind me of African politics.
 
That's ok - just more ammo for his inevitable impeachment.
 
Heh, there's other stuff which is FAR more africanesque.

Bush recently signed an executive order allowing him to declare a state of emergency as he sees fit without needing to consult anyone else.

All he has to do is declare one little state of emergency and it's goodbye elections. And there's nothing anyone can do about it - legally.
 
That's ok - just more ammo for his inevitable impeachment.

bwana, do you really think his impeachment is inevitable? There's been talk, but I'm not sure that there is the will to back that up, especially late in his second term.

I mean, its not like he's done something truly horrific like Bill Clinton did* :eek:.


__________________________________________________________________
*For all we know, anyway.
 
He is about 100 times worse than Clinton so I am guessing Chiskop is using sarcasm :D
 
We may yet have a united states of africa - America is rapidly becoming more african.
 
Perhaps inevitable was just wishful thinking - I guess it depends on how much he pisses off congress.
bwana, do you really think his impeachment is inevitable? There's been talk, but I'm not sure that there is the will to back that up, especially late in his second term.
 
Hmmm nothing new going on here. A hostile Congress butting heads with the President. Just a leftingwing rag ranting about it a bit.

As for Clinton his refusial to deal with Islamic extremism resulted in 9/11 and many other related problems. So yeah you could say he lied and people died :o
 
Hmmm nothing new going on here. A hostile Congress butting heads with the President. Just a leftingwing rag ranting about it a bit.

As for Clinton his refusial to deal with Islamic extremism resulted in 9/11 and many other related problems. So yeah you could say he lied and people died :o
Ag please. Willful ignoring of security alerts and terror briefings equals TREASON (by bush, condi, cheney and the rest of that *sick* bunch.)

rice ignored terror alerts
 
Last edited:
Old hat

This the same old stuff in American politics. Rough play like this has been happening ever since Jefferson and Jackson.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X