So just what is it that Bush has to hide from Congress that he won't allow his minions to speak under oath?

Question

Authority without Accountability--is that what you want??

Sir Charlez--this "lad" is all over the story and has been all over GWB since day one--you want opinoins from a knowing source--ask and you shall receive!

Bush is too afraid to put his party Karl on the stage for he knows the questioning is not limited to this particular atrocity--one of many--and perjury by a Bushite leads to jail--ie Libby.

Answer 1

What he has to hide is that he, like Nixon, has a black ops group. He, like Nixon, considers any critic an enemy to be attacked by any means, legal or not. He, like Nixon, thinks he can hide from Congress by invoking Executive privilege.

He, like Nixon, will find out that doesn't work. No Supreme Court will allow that serious a subversion of the checks and balances the authors of the Constitution created.

What he is revealing is a total inability to learn from history. Now we have to ask ourselves which of his fixers will cop a plea and make a deal?

History repeats itself. Gerald Ford, please call the White House.

Answer 2

I think he is trying to protect himself, Rove and Cheney for war crimes. I think they knew damn well they didn't have enough evidence of WMD's so they concocted this whole mess of a war based on shaky grounds. Remember when Condaleeza had to testify......thats when the republicans still controlled congress but the table has turned now. The Plame incident and all of it ties in together. The democrats are just trying to unveil the whole picture. It's a conspiracy.

Answer 3

I would say that we are about to find out. Ever since the Republicans lost the gavel in the House, they are beginning to be held accountable. And its only going to get more interesting over the next two years. They have LOTS to hide.

Answer 4

Whatever it is, it's beginning to look like it was discussed sometime between November 15th and December 4th. Apparently the 3000 pages of Judicials e-mails that were turned over just suddenly STOP on November 15th, and don't start again until the 4th--and it can't just be Thanksgiving, because other government work was getting done.

Presidents before now have allowed their aides to testify under oath, with transcripts, in public. I don't know why this one thinks he should be different.

Answer 5

The Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President, no time limit. This is just a subterfuge to make the Liberal base think the committee and the Democrats are doing something productive when they aren't

Answer 6

Really? Authority without accountability. Hmmm. OK. Then why isn't Ted Kennedy in jail for allowing a girl to drown when he was drunk driving and went off a bridge with her in the car? Why isn't Bill Clinton in jail for committing perjury? If you want Republicans to be held accountable then you should also want Democrats to be held accountable.

Answer 7

Bush is in big trouble. Nixon didn't get away with it and Bush wont either.

Answer 8

This does not have one thing to do with ACCOUNTABILITY.

The dems want to put Bush`s so called minions on the stand so they can pick apart that they say in hopes that one will forget to say some thing or forget and tell it in a different way so they can charge them with lying under oath.

Answer 9

He has a whole darn lot to hide. He and his family are into some VERY dark things. More light will be shed upon them in time, the sooner the better.

Answer 10

What I'd really like to know is this: What's to stop someone from lying "under oath"??