Other Presidents have allowed Executive branch employees to testify under oath before Congress, but George Bush shouldn't have to. Why is he different?
2007-03-21 05:43:42 · 10 answers · asked by rollo_tomassi423 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Bush has always though he was above the law. He took an oath, after all, to protect and defend a document he called a GD piece of paper. If he has that much disregard for the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, how much can he have for laws under it?
2007-03-21 05:49:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Presidents, all the way back to Jack Kennedy, have protected their Executive Branch employees. They testify under oath, but they don't have to be subpoenaed. That's what Pres. Bush is referring to, and you DO owe him the courtesy of his title, which is Mr. President until he dies.
2007-03-21 05:49:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No he isn't, and he's never acted in a manner to indicate he believes himself to be so, unlike his predecessor.
He will not allow them to do so in this instance, because there is no evidence, nothing but speculation regarding some alleged wrong-doing that never happened.
It seems to any objective observer that the Dems and their media accomplices are playing partisan games with this, instead of acting in the best interest of the country.
2007-03-21 05:55:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Legally No.
Auctuality ...YES.
He has the right to wreck 2 submarines, lose a plane spying in china, gift billions to halliburton, read goat books as america burns, refuse to investigate his crimes, refuse to swear in on 911 investigations, withhold due process, invade countries for oil and isreal. And to fly his turkey dinner to "my ranch' on a.f. one for $200k because he needs his vacation, and he actually seems to have the right to STEAL 2 elections.
Hard to believe this bonker who couldn't make a mayonaise sandwich w/o daddys cia help can get away with it. Harder still to believe we true Americans eat his sloppy messes.
2007-03-21 06:25:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
what law did he break do you just listen to liberal dribbling? how old are you? your key word is allowed not have to beside he could of caned them all Clinton " get it any way i can" did ya didn't hear any grumbling then did ya
2007-03-21 05:50:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No law was broken here. Not even the democrats are claiming there was.
2007-03-21 05:47:15 · answer #6 · answered by webbrew 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Have allowed... that is they key phrase right there.
2007-03-21 05:49:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He's not, Clinton did the same thing!
2007-03-21 05:48:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
He's more guilty in so many more ways.
2007-03-21 05:50:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, but he thinks that he is.
2007-03-21 05:46:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋