Is Bush trying to hide something? What would be regretable?
2007-03-20 23:22:28 · 12 answers · asked by mark [mjimih] 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
TE vandetta?
Not if their proven Right and thee subpeona'd are found guilty of manipulating judgeships for political gain. the difference is that the Prez usually replaces all of them at the BEGINNING of his tenure to start fresh. Bush picked 8 in order to protect his cronies in the near future. The thing is this whole thing is so transparent a 2 year old could see thru it. we're dealing with a very pathetic president.
2007-03-23 06:50:10 · update #1
jay;
1.
it's not a crime to yank fed attorny's UNLESS they are pulled during an investigation that involves congressmen. As the Indianapolis attorney was in the middle of...
2.
The bug a boo is bc they are doing this mid way thru for political reasons instead all of them at the beginning of the Prez term in order to have a clean start so to speak
3.
have you even looked. They have passed all kinds of legislation so far. The 109th congress, under the Rebulicans, was the worst, laziest, most devisive war monguoring in history
2007-03-28 23:22:38 · update #2
Interesting. The only time GWB has regret is when he and or someone in his administration is under suspension of wrong doing.
2007-03-20 23:39:08 · answer #1 · answered by DEMMY 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I am willing to bet you would be screaming if the District Attorney of Washington D.C. held hearings on Congress because the thought Nancy Pelosi may have committed a crime of some sort and had as much proof as I have presented here.
The Democrats are holding hearings to determine if any law has been broken in firing some attorneys who have agreed to serve at the "pleasure of the President". There is not one shred of evidence that a law has been broken. They want to hold hearings to see if it has happened. They want to hold a trial before any evidence is found.
I believe they are doing this backward. First, get the evidence that a law has been broken, then hold hearings to see if the evidence holds up, then convict if true. Not convict, then review the evidence.
Do you think it is time for the Democrats to understand it is time for them to stop trying to send every member of the White House to jail and maybe do some governing?
Half the Congress should be fired for waisting time and money on goose chases. They should be paying attention to the American People and do their jobs.
2007-03-29 05:27:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why else would he be trying with the news media make the dems look bad if they try to get to the truth.
In the past every time a President has tried to stop investigations it has led right to them and their wrong doing. Nixon, Clinton, for two.
We need to add to the constitution that these type of things that all info requested is turned over immediately, or you go to jail for a very long time. Destroying also get long jail terms, helping hide, or any thing else involvement will get long jail time, including the president immediately, with no pardon possible.
As long as the public wants to allow them to be on a different level, above the law, and avoid being convicted by hiding, destroying, or lying than us that we have to just allow it to happen.
Time for a change.
2007-03-21 09:58:43 · answer #3 · answered by allen w 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He has done so many despicable things while prez, WHY can't he be kicked out of office? Nixon was, Clinton almost was and he didn't do anything that would affect the nation badly! I don't want to give him another chance to screw us.
19 months is just too long.
2007-03-25 16:01:47 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Generally speaking, politicians make it a point to remind one another in public how important it is that the non criminalization/non penalization of their cast is what eventually makes the world go round, thus must be preserved at all cost
2007-03-29 05:27:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am certain that we have all had regrets in one way or another. As a person who has been in a position of leadership, I am able to say there are times when hindsight is best. However, on the whole, I believe our president is an honorable, and just man who loves his country and is trying, with the assistance of his advisers, both Republican and Democrat, to do the best he can for his country.
2007-03-21 06:34:39 · answer #6 · answered by Moody Red 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
considering its the presidents legislative right to hire and fire federal prosecutors at will, what hes trying to do is to protect the constitutional integrity of the office from the pelosi ites...wheres the mystery here?
2007-03-21 06:31:35 · answer #7 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Democrats to Bush : " Bring it on!"
lets see his presidency unravel even further.
What I think Bush is doing is trying to avoid accountablilty.
This fool does not have many options now and is headed for a major confrontation.
2007-03-21 06:30:27 · answer #8 · answered by planksheer 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
It would be regrettable because it will show that the Democrats have a political vendetta.
2007-03-21 06:35:37 · answer #9 · answered by TE 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
"Pathetic" does not even begin to describe our dictator. He is the biggest terrorist in the world.
2007-03-27 16:57:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋