2006-11-07 08:12:27 · 9 answers · asked by Paul I 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
It would be a breach of security. They could have asked him about confidential information.
2006-11-07 08:14:03 · answer #1 · answered by ItsJustMe 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
That would be a top selling CD if it had happened. Could you imagine Bush, alone, under oath with none of his handlers or puppeteers with their hand up his butt. Hopefully, his eventual trial for crimes against the United States and the Constitution will provide us with that sort of entertainment
2006-11-07 16:34:43 · answer #2 · answered by iknowtruthismine 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The breach of security thing was part of it. Also he said he sent the people who knew more than he did to talk to the commission so he didn't feel that he needed to be there just repeating what people like condi and donald had already said.
2006-11-07 16:16:44 · answer #3 · answered by jimmytownnative 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Whether he testified or not, it wouldn't make much of a difference anyway. He still didn't know what's going on. So it didn't matter.
2006-11-07 17:40:27 · answer #4 · answered by FILO 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
oooohh, another conspiracy theory in the making? please, there was nothing sinister in it. clinton refused at first and had to be made to comply. bush didn't and shouldn't have to, its a breach of security and the questions were all answered. it was just a ploy by the left to try and intimidate and embarrass the right. immature and silly but there you have it.
2006-11-07 16:21:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
He was not as dumb as liberals wish to believe he is he knew what you liberals were after,to take something he might have said and turned it against him to take the blame off of clinton for his mistakes.
2006-11-07 16:38:11 · answer #6 · answered by truckman 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
oh puhlease....clinton lied under oath and now this....the nine eleven commision officially put it to bed months ago...MOVE ON bunky.
2006-11-07 16:15:27 · answer #7 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why should he? Bush thinks he's above the law so why should he trouble himself with our pesky concerns?
2006-11-07 16:22:18 · answer #8 · answered by wineboy 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
take a wild guess
2006-11-08 15:27:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋