Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Exec privilege only counts on Republican-numbered days

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
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 08:15 AM
Original message
Exec privilege only counts on Republican-numbered days
Bush decrying "a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants" calls to mind the scene in Love and Death where the dying herring merchant praises his wife Sonja (Diane Keaton) for her faithfulness — and the room erupts with uncomfortable fumfering, coughing, and the rattling of teacups.

Yes folks, it's subpoena time in Washington, and to these nostrils it smells as sweet as cherry blossoms.

But those who live in glass houses...

You know, the president could solve a lot of this problem if he wouldn't hide behind executive privilege, if he'd just come out and tell the American people the truth.

— Tony Snow re: Bill Clinton (1998)


.. are busy constructing stonewalls:

...the White House and its allies have put up a fight, arguing that presidential advisers have historically not testified in front of Congress:

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow: Well, as you know, Ed, it has been traditional in all White Houses not to have staffers testify on Capitol Hill. (3/13/07)

White House Counselor Dan Bartlett: I find it highly unlikely that a member of the White House staff would testify publicly to these matters. (3/13/07)

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH): No, I think you’re violating a precedent there that should not be violated.... I believe that under the separation of powers, there are limits to the extent to which Congress can subpoena or demand testimony from those who were closest to the president. (3/15/07)


But in reality, there is no such precedent. According to the Congressional Research Service, under President Clinton, 31 of his top aides testified on 47 different occasions. The aides who testified included some of Clinton’s closest advisors....

In contrast, between 2000 and 2004, Bush allowed only one of his closest advisers, then-Assistant to the President for Homeland Security Tom Ridge, to appear in front of Congress. He has also refused three invitations from Congress for his aides to testify, a first since President Richard Nixon in 1972. Clinton did not refuse any.


In the world of IOKIYAR journalism, you can be sure that no one but us dirty hippies will say "It was open season on Clinton for a blowjob, and these guys want executive privilege over politicizing the justice system, illegal wiretapping, and lying us into war!? What the fucking fuckity-fuck?"

C'mon Brit Hume, at long last have you no sense of what-the-fucking-fuckity-fuck? No, I didn't think so.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. Clinton Advisors Who Gave Testimony Before Congress (per Huffington Post)
1. Sandy Berger
2. Lloyd Cutler
3. W. Neil Eggleston
4. Lisa Caputo
5. Mark Gearan
6. Harold Ickes
7. Bruce Lindsey
8. John Podesta
9. Clifford Sloan
10. George Stephanopoulos
11. Margaret Williams
12. Joel Klein
13. Thomas McLarty
14. Beth Nolan
15. Deborah Gorham
16. Carolyn Huber
17. Evelyn Lieberman
18. Capricia Marshall
19. Bobby J. Nash
20. Stephen Neuwith
21. John Quinn
22. Jane Sherburne
23. Patti Solis
24. Patsy Thomasson
25. Charles Easley
26. Lanny Breuer
27. Cheryl Mills
28. Dimitri Nionakis
29. Charles Ruff
30. Nancy Heinreich
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well, that was different...
... because it was about a trumped-up sexual harassment case that was thrown out of court, about a supposed scam (where the Clintons *lost* money), and about some incomprehensible complaint about the White House travel office.

All of those were clearly much more important than firing attorneys unless they fudged the law for your political ends, illegal wiretapping, and lying us into war.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"
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 Wed May 01st 2024, 10:09 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