Bush denies subpoena request

[deathknight]

This ought to be good for some good daily show moments. What are y'all's thoughts?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19480518

[ednos]

roflcopter

Politics for the win.

[AMosely]

I like how it's Congress' fault for bringing them 'down this unfortunate path' - as if the White House really expects everyone - the public and the government -to let them do whatever they want and never ask questions.

It'll be fascinating to see what they are witholding. My guess is that there's not all that much in the documents, and that this is purely an egotistical persuit of executive priviledge. I can hear the approval ratings of both branches of government circling the drain.

[TheFeniX]

Originally Posted by AMosely

as if the White House really expects everyone - the public and the government -to let them do whatever they want and never ask questions.

Actually, they do.

[AMosely]

Originally Posted by TheFeniX

Actually, they do.

So it seems!

[Switchcraft]

I think Bush should take some advice from Mosely and demand every congressman provide him with every e-mail and notes from every phone call they've ever made regarding any decision ever. You know, for transparency.

[Kerostasis]

Indeed.

There's always two sets of rules for situations like this: The rules we play by, and the rules everyone else should play by. Taken individually, they may even both seem to be perfectly reasonable, but what is unreasonable is the blatant double-standard: In this case demanding full transparency in all decisions made by the opposition party, while leaving all your own decisions cloaked in secrecy.

[deathknight]

The issue isn't about Congress it's about Bush. And the fact he blatantly flouts the law and the constitution and makes up his own rules as he goes along. And I for one hope that Congress has enough backbone to stand up to him and take it as far as needed. There is no reason for him not to release the information as this is a quasi-criminal investigation. He is only doing it for one of two reasons: 1) it will implicate him in the firing of federal employees for political reasons, a crime and therefore an impeachable offense, or 2) he thinks he is above the law.

But if I were Congress, I'd just use the Bushian explanation that it is an on-going investigation and they can't release info about it.

[xTYBALTx]

God, I love split government. This is the first time in six years that our rulers are doing something useful.

[ScratchMonkey]

Originally Posted by xTYBALTx

God, I love split government. This is the first time in six years that our rulers are [not] doing something [damaging].

Fixed.

"No man is safe when the legislature is in session."

I went hunting for a cite for the quote and found this nice piece of detective work:

http://cltg.org/cltg/barbara/2003/03...or%20quote.htm

[Switchcraft]

Originally Posted by deathknight

The issue isn't about Congress it's about Bush. And the fact he blatantly flouts the law and the constitution and makes up his own rules as he goes along. And I for one hope that Congress has enough backbone to stand up to him and take it as far as needed. There is no reason for him not to release the information as this is a quasi-criminal investigation. He is only doing it for one of two reasons: 1) it will implicate him in the firing of federal employees for political reasons, a crime and therefore an impeachable offense, or 2) he thinks he is above the law.

But if I were Congress, I'd just use the Bushian explanation that it is an on-going investigation and they can't release info about it.

Yeah, "quasi-criminal" meaning what? That it's being conducted as if some imaginary law has been broken, and Congress is the new FBI?

Let's say it turns out that they were fired for political reasons? Then what? Do they get their jobs back, because they only are allowed to be fired for political reasons at the start of a presidential term?

But if it turns out they weren't fired for political reasons (not that I have any reason, ever, to believe the Dem Cong will accept that it could ever possibly be wrong) then we want to give Congress the power to not only second-guess every action ever taken by the Executive but to then be able to summon, at will, any Executive Branch employee and all of their work product? Great. Now any time Congress gets mad they can just summon ALL Executive personnel, every day, in perpetuity. "Oh, you want to veto this bill? We will now cease all Executive operations by subpoena power until you capitulate."

[deathknight]

I guess your right, we should just throw out the illusion of separation of powers because it can be abused for political reasons. And if you didn't read earlier, you can't fire a federal prosecutor for political reasons ever. Doesn't matter when you want to do it. They serve the citizens of the US. They don't serve the president, they are just nominated by him. That's the point. They were fired because they wouldn't play politics and investigate democrats for voter fraud because, according to them, they didn't believe there was any evidence. I'm sick and tired of Bush deciding what is best for us and breaking the law. I mean how many times can one man screw up and break the rules before he gets what is coming to him?

[Switchcraft]

If they can't be fired for political reasons, ever, then why can their resignations demanded at the start of new presidential tenure?

[Pokerface]

Originally Posted by Switchcraft

If they can't be fired for political reasons, ever, then why can their resignations demanded at the start of new presidential tenure?

Not to rain on that parade TOO much (as the general political nature of the attorneys leaving remains) but a demanded resignation is still a resignation and not a firing. It's expected and it's commonplace, but it sticks on the voluntary side by being a resignation and not a firing.

[Switchcraft]

Either way, I'm still struck by the fact that Congress got so upset when the FBI raided Jefferson's office. Being caught on tape accepting bribes? Not worth having another branch have access to your office. Being in the Bush Administration? WHAT ARE YOU HIDING?