If he has nothing to hide, then what is his problem with testifying under oath?
2007-03-21 09:47:48 · 12 answers · asked by Josh S 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
We have a separation of powers clause in the US Constitution. Mr. Rove is a chief adviser to the President. He does not have to testify under oath. "Never do anything you don't have to do" is a good rule to live by.
This issue is just another bit of bashing of the President, by left wing loony liberal Democrats.
2007-03-21 10:01:23 · answer #1 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He might to boot have refused, that is as plenty certainty as they are going to get out of Rove if he's not placed under oath. that is surely ridiculous. that is like admitting you're actually not likely to tell the certainty interior the 1st place! in case you won't be able to answer the questions under oath, then what? we are meant to take the be attentive to the likes of an guy like Karl Rove? Yeah, "have confidence me." the conceitedness of the two one in each of them is conscious no bounds. the large ingredient is that a guy via the final call of Sampson, Rove's precise aide, has caved and has mentioned he's in a position to take an oath and tell the info approximately all of this mess. Will they end him? They actually can in the event that they want, whether that is going to in basic terms upload to the thought of corrupt practices via this administration.
2016-10-19 06:57:42 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry, but do you mean what is Karl rove's objection to allowing Bush to allow Karl rove to testify?
Karl Rove: Bush's Brain.
Or in Biblical terms: The prophet of the Beast.
To find out why our country is in a spiraling demise watch these FREE GOOGLE VIDEO's:
"Freedom to Fascism"
"The Road to Tyranny"
"9/11 Revisited"
"Loose Change"
"Terrorstorm"
"Dark Secrets: Inside the Bohemian Grove"
2007-03-21 09:55:17 · answer #3 · answered by Christian Paragon 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The same reason Bush has never testified under oath for anything. They want to keep all those crooked skeletons in the closet.
2007-03-21 09:59:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because the Democrats are angry with Karl Rove and they want to hang him no matter what. The Democrats blame Rove of helping the Republicans win or steal the elections that brought Bush to the White House the first time. They are after his skin and they would do anything to get at him.
2007-03-21 09:53:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It's amazing how easily people gave up their rights to allow the government to listen to our phone conversations and get in our computers because we had nothing to hide, and now they can't testify under oath.
2007-03-21 10:05:46 · answer #6 · answered by Jose R 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In two words "Scooter Libby". Why would Rove or any body else from now on in, go for swearing under oath for political witch hunt?
Not for any body seeing Senator Schumer demanding answers.
2007-03-21 09:59:56 · answer #7 · answered by Sgt 524 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
good question.
a bit of a double standard here.
The argument for the illegal wiretapping of american citizens was, if they have nothing to hide, there should not be a problem.
Now, that the US Congress wants to investigate potential abuses of power, now all of sudden privacy is an issue.
2007-03-21 09:56:24 · answer #8 · answered by Jack Chedeville 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No doubt, why would they be concerned if they weren't hiding corruption. Scooter Libby using the defense he hadn't done anything wrong got him 4 Federal felony's.
2007-03-21 09:52:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because anything and everything he says, he is accountable and prosecutoriable for (is that a word? it is now....). I have no doubt his double-speak will land him in trouble, and we'll have another circus like the Clinton impeachment.
2007-03-21 09:58:07 · answer #10 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋