Lawyer: Bush told ex-staff to ignore subpoena

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Jul 8, 2007.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #1
    Get this. Ex-White House aide wants to answer a subpoena to testify before Congress, Bush sends her a letter telling her to ignore the subpoena, and because she still admires Bush, she's likely to say, "Okay."

    MSNBC

    This is some kinda crazy. Bush is stonewalling with that idiotic "executive privilege" claim, and when Congress finds someone who's not on Bush's staff anymore, it still looks like Dubya will find a way to stop her.

    This is gonna set up an interesting confrontation, because unless I'm wrong, Congress can punish her if she refuses, since the White House can offer her no protection.

    And you have to wonder, if she wants to obey the subpoena, whether she has anything to say that could harm Bush anyway.
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    they won't. i read something yesterday (can't find it now) that said reid drafted a letter to the House, saying the fight between congress and the WH shouldn't be fought via a sara taylor proxy.

    all i'm hoping is that congress doesn't back down from the WH. i don't give a rat's ass about left vs right or dem vs GOP anymore, i want my gov't to be balanced again. this unitary executive **** has got to stop.
     
  3. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #3
    I was a poly sci major during Watergate. Executive Privilege was a huge story then. What eventually became the deciding factor was, EP could not be used to frustrate the investigation, and prosecution of a crime. Archibald Cox, and later Leon Jaworski, both successfully argued this position. Jaworski was even successful in getting an 8-0 decision, from the Supreme Court, that a sitting President could be sued. So, EP is not a slam-dunk in GW's favor.

    The question will be whether congress can get charges filed, so they can force testimony. I think the first thing they need is an independent Special Prosecutor. Judith Miller would have been a perfect target for an investigation during the Libby trial. That woman is as dirty as it gets. Yet, there are so many good targets for investigation, and some people are beginning to talk.
     
  4. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #4
    Only 18 months to go and I'm sure that more than a few of them realize that the chance of evading Congress in January 2009 will be exceedingly slim. Especially now when they know they have a good chance of being pardoned.
     
  5. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #5
    Ugg,

    You are right, of course. I am reminded of one of my favorite political cartoons. It is from the Watergate era. It shows Nixon at the head of a long dining table, dressed as a King. In front of him is a large pie, and Dean, Haldeman, Mitchell and the rest are dressed as winged burglars flying around. The caption reads, "And when the pie was opened, the birds began to sing...."

    Besides the situations you have alluded to, I think there may be an even more fruitful group to come forward, indeed some already have. These are the career government employees who have hitherto been silent, or have largely been ignored by the corporate media.

    Contrary to popular belief, only a small group of public employees hold 'exempt' positions. In other words, jobs which you serve at the discretion of the President. Most jobs are civil service. You cannot just rid yourself of these people. Yet, they know considerably more than what their political appointees realize.

    Immediately following the 9/11 attack, most Americans were bouncing off the walls in total confusion and fear. We had not suffered a foreign attack on our soil since 1812. It is remarkable that we had gone through so many wars, and had been virtually unscathed. Wars have always been fought on other people's lands. Now America had to come to grips with what life is like in the rest of the world. We have generations of citizens who have never even had a relative go to war, let alone have to see it for themselves first-hand.

    I know war, and I know fear. You cannot read about it or watch a movie about it, and really know it. You can only know it by experiencing it. Too many Americans wanted something done. They wanted to feel safe again. The WH used their fear to sell this bloody war, erode our civil liberties, and create the foundation for a neocon dictatorship.

    Fortunately, there were enough people who could deal with their fear and move on. They began to feed truthful information to those interested in learning it. But, they had to be careful. The 'winds of war' were blowing at hurricane force. Few people in the media were willing to do anything except get out of the way.

    The house (of cards) that the neocons built is beginning to crumble. The corporate sponsors are still twisting arms in the network media. But, stories are beginning to come out, and they are not all on the 'back pages' anymore. One can almost sense that no single network wants to be seen as being 'out on a limb'. It is like they are walking slowly, hand-in-hand. It is still a BS deal, but there is some hope that if a major story did surface, it could break on the networks.

    I think we are just scratching the surface for what the WH has been up to. Just knowing what we do, there is sufficient reason to call every federal agency on the carpet. If that dam breaks, watch the career federal employees come forward.
     

Share This Page