| Page 4 of 5 < > |
Warming Trend
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
"Let's be honest. Presidential advisors testify all the time. They don't have the same responsibilities vis a vis Congress as members of the executive departments. But they can and do testify. There's only one reason why you agree to 'talk' to Congress unsworn, in private and without a transcript: because you want to be able to lie or dodge questions in a way that's too embarrassing to do in public."
Power Line's John Hinderaker is firmly in Bush's corner:
"Kudos to President Bush for standing up to the Democrat bullies on the Senate Judiciary Committee. The last thing he should do is accord any credibility to their hyperpartisan 'investigation' of the firings of a handful of U.S. attorneys."
Americablog's Joe Sudbay, ah, is not:
"Liars. The Bush Administration is filled with pervasive liars. They've been lying for six years -- and they've gotten away with it. Think about what Bush said: His staff can talk to Congress, but not under oath. No one in America could get that deal. Most of us wouldn't think that telling the truth is a bad thing. But, most of us don't work for George Bush."
Dick Polman isn't buying:
"Well, it may not shock you to learn that, once again, the president was speaking at odds with factual reality. He says he is 'worried' that he would set a precedent if he allowed his top aides to testify in public on Capitol Hill about the purge scandal, but he need not worry -- because the truth is that dozens of White House aides, extending back to the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration, have testified in public on Capitol Hill. Bush's defiance only makes perfect sense if one ignores American history, or prefers to remain clueless about it.
"Here are some names to consider: Samuel Berger, Lanny Breuer, Lloyd Cutler, Lisa Caputo, Charles Easley, W. Neil Eggleston, Mark Gearan, Deborah Gorham, Nancy Heinreich, Carolyn Huber, Harold Ickes, Joel Klein, Evelyn Lieberman, Mark Lindsay, Bruce Lindsay, Capricia Marshall, Thomas McLarty, Cheryl Mills, Bobby Nash, Stephen Neuwirth, Dimitri Nionakis, Beth Nolan, John Podesta, John Quinn, Charles Ruff, Jane Sherburne, Clifford Sloan, Patty Solis, George Stephanopoulos, Patsy Thomasson, Margaret Williams. Those people were all Clinton White House aides; at least 10 of them were entrusted to give Clinton legal advice. Yet all of them, at one time or another, testified before Congress."
Slate now has a Gonzo-Meter on the AG's chances of getting dumped. The latest reading: 55 percent.
The body's still warm, but the Nation's John Nichols is already criticizing some possible successors:
"The serious talk about who will take over for Gonzales focuses on former Solicitor General and veteran Washington fixer Ted Olson; Larry Thompson, a former US attorney for the northern District of Georgia and led the Southeastern Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force before serving as Deputy Attorney General under John Ashcroft during President Bush's first term; and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who as a U.S. Attorney in New Jersey and a judge on the United States Court of Appeals before being named an assistant U.S. Attorney General under Ashcroft.
"That's a dubious trio.


