We've been hearing for years that if someone has nothing to hide, they shouldn't be at all concerned with warrantless wiretaps of their phone conversations, or random searches of their bags or of police entering their home without a warrant.
So the question is, if Bush has nothing to hide why can't Rove and Miers testify under oath? Aren't they just public servants who work for the people? Or does Bush consider himself and his people above the law? And if that's true, wouldn't a Democratic president also be above the law?
Seems awfully inconsistent to me.
2007-03-21 06:42:56 · 2 answers · asked by wineboy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Ahhh they HATE it when their own "crap" is used against them.
2007-03-21 06:48:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
that's named historic precedent. Sitting presidents do no longer enable their staffs to testify under oath. in case you do the study your will discover that they have got all, invoice Clinton secure, used government Privilege in this form. that's disingenuous to attempt to make this related to the Bush administration. i beg you to make the attempt to do the study, quite than in keeping with Anti-Bush speaking factors,
2016-12-15 05:32:23 · answer #2 · answered by keetan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋