Who is President Bush trying to fool . . .?

Question

when he offers Rove and Miers but not under oath? Is he really going to try to say that the scandal doesn't go deeper if he's not willing to give the American people any legal assurance that they're not lying?

I'm mostly wondering what he could possibly be thinking.

And to respond to one of you, yes, I would like a real answer to it. And I would prefer no outright, overly-generalized Republican bashing. It gets in the way of me taking you seriously. Use reason and facts, not invective.

You don't want to become like those lying snakes.

So, someone has said that he doesn't want another Scooter Libby thing. The obvious solution to that is to not allow them to lie under oath. Is there something I'm missing?

Answer 1

The irony is if we had a President we respected he might have a valid arguement. Anyone coming in to the White House to advise or inform the President should be able to do so without thinking their opinion may become a public scandal. However we also should be able to trust the President will have the integrity know the difference between good and bad opinions....

Answer 2

He's trying to maneuver his way out of a messy situation and those who support him willingly blind themselves to the facts and the media conveniently do not tell the public all the facts.

Such as- Presidential Privilege has only been tried twice in US history.

First by Nixon in Watergate. Which was to cover up the illegal acts. And he LOST his case for Presidential Privilege.

Second by Clinton. Which was to cover up his improper acts with Monika and lying about it. And he DROPPED his attempt to use Presidential Privilege.

So if Bush has nothing to hide. Then let Rove and Miers testify under oath.

Answer 3

After Scooty Libby's experience of being convicted of lying under oath into an investigation of a non-crime, what decent leader would allow a situation for the potential for the same to happen to two more?

He doesn't have to send them at all. Sending them without obligation to testify under oath puts Congress in their place. To do otherwise would embolden an already out of control pack of loonies.

Answer 4

Rove and Miers must be investigated before a proper forum and be under oath when they give their testimonies so that the people will know that they are telling the truth.

Answer 5

He is thinking if they are backed into a corner with an incriminating question they can answer it in a deceptive way (the republican way) and not risk persecution.
I think they should be treated the same way they are treating Americans under the Patriot Act. The republicians are the true terrorist and they are getting away with murder, and looting.

Answer 6

Obviously, no one involved with this question wants an honest answer. Bush is guilty of everything from accidentally passing gas in public to zipper problems that require a new set of pants according to you! ROFLMAO

Answer 7

I am shocked he would be foolish enough to make this offer at all. If he didn't want them to testify under oath and for the record, why offer to send them at all? It defies all logic.

Answer 8

he isn't trying to fool anyone. It's the Democrats and the media playing the fooling game.

Answer 9

He's not thinking of executive priviledge, because he already waived that when he agreed to let his people appear before Congress.
He has no claim to executive priviledge when it comes to taking an oath and not keeping congressional records.

Answer 10

He is thinking this: If I force this into the courts, it will remain there for more than two years. Therefore, I will have covered up any wrongdoing until AFTER I'm out of office.

He is, truly, the WORST and MOST CRIMINAL president ever.