Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Serious Implications Of President Bush's Hiring A Personal Outside Counsel

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 01:04 PM
Original message
Serious Implications Of President Bush's Hiring A Personal Outside Counsel
Edited on Thu Apr-06-06 01:05 PM by quiet.american

Remember this from John Dean? --


The Serious Implications Of President Bush's Hiring A Personal Outside Counsel

Friday, Jun. 04, 2004


Recently, the White House acknowledged that President Bush is talking with, and considering hiring, a non-government attorney, James E. Sharp. Sharp is being consulted, and may be retained, regarding the current grand jury investigation of the leak revealing the identity of Valerie Plame as a CIA covert operative.

(Plame is the wife of Bush critic and former ambassador Joe Wilson; I discussed the leak itself in a prior column, and then discussed further developments in the investigation in a follow-up column.)

This action by Bush is a rather stunning and extraordinary development. The President of the United States is potentially hiring a private criminal defense lawyer. Unsurprisingly, the White House is doing all it can to bury the story, providing precious little detail or context for the President's action.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Bush explained his action by saying, "This is a criminal matter. It's a serious matter," but he gave no further specifics. White House officials, too, would not say exactly what prompted Bush to seek the outside advice, or whether he had been asked to appear before the grand jury.

Nonetheless, Bush's action, in itself, says a great deal. In this column, I will analyze what its implications may be....

Rest of John Dean article


Later that month, CNN reports....
Bush interviewed in CIA leak probe - President joined by Jim Sharp, his personal attorney


Thursday, June 24, 2004

This is the first time Bush has been questioned in a criminal investigation involving his administration.

Bush was not under oath for the interview, which took place in the Oval Office for about an hour and 10 minutes and was conducted by Patrick Fitzgerald and "members of his team," according to the White House.

The president was joined by Jim Sharp, a personal attorney whom he retained for this case.

The White House would not say when the president hired Sharp, saying only that it was "recently."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is significant...
It was clear even then that something was deeply wrong. The real crime here is that they have managed to bury this until now. This really should have all come out before the elections last November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. In Bush's own words, this was a criminal matter. That means
the excuse that a pResident can declassify the classified cannot apply here. Bush, himself, considered this criminal.

(Had he declassified it, he wouldn't have considered it criminal, would he?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Good point, good question. :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Does anyone else remember
that Patrick Fitzgerald visited Bush's attorney shortly before announcing indictments against Libby?

>Bush was not under oath for the interview, which took place in the Oval Office for about an hour and 10 minutes<

I wonder why there was no oath.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC