Sorry but my opinion is yes, of course.
Let's get something straight, Clinton fired all of those US attorneys when he entered office. Thats what every president does when he first takes office. That isn't out of the ordinary.
What Bush did was fire these 8 people in the middle of his own term because he didn't agree with them politically. Nobody does that. The attorney generals are not supposed to be "Faithful Bushies".
If Bush wasn't hiding anything he wouldn't mind his advisors to testify under oath.
All of you Patriot Act junkies will agree with that no?
2007-03-22 03:56:31 · 15 answers · asked by Rick 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Susi, are you not listening to the news? It's all over even Fox news. Will you make me go to the trouble of finding links, or maybe just answer my question.
2007-03-22 04:01:19 · update #1
I LOVE IT!!!
The Bushies have nothing to defend themselves on this topic so they're just bashing Liberals.
F A N T A S T I C !
2007-03-22 04:02:36 · update #2
Susi:
First link I found on this story, please get up to date:
http://www.ldnews.com/columns/ci_5495000
2007-03-22 04:05:18 · update #3
The best way to put it (without accusing anyone of a crime or an impropriety) is that Bush was trying to micro-manage the prosecutions - to make sure certain Democrats were prosecuted, and certain Republicans were not. US Attorneys who did not go along with the program were fired: so they could be replaced with more complaint appointees, and as a warning to current US Attorneys.
2007-03-22 04:01:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes he does but that is normal for any president. There are things that you can not know because you'd go off half ****** and start some kind of rage if you knew.
I was in the US Marines and I had an H-4 security clearance which is rather high and what I knew 30 years ago and if you knew just a little of what I knew back then, I'd have to kill you and that is just a drop in the bucket of the things the government is keeping from you. You are one person but there are many like you and you might end up killing other people if you knew1/10th of the things you are not allowed to know.
So your answer is yes but so much of it is for your own good.
2007-03-22 11:40:23 · answer #2 · answered by Kevin A 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I doubt that Bush is hiding anything. He is standing by the descision of the person that he put in charge of the attorneys. He has made it possible for Congress to speak to them (off the record and not under oath and is willing to make all the written records available to them) which is a reasonable thing to offer. Congress wants to put them under oath so that they can "satisfy" themselves that what was done was necessary and not some political maneuvering. I am sure that there was some political motivation and putting them under would make them say it and then congress would make it look like that was ALL there was to it instead of the fact that they were substandard and pathetic excuses of our justice system.
2007-03-22 11:04:28 · answer #3 · answered by kerfitz 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Your spot on--Kudo's to those of us that deliver the Progressive point of view.
Have you seen Tony Snow"Job" at any of the press conferences lately. Talk about a wordsmith. Those 3000 e-mails may be a good faith attempt to clear this up, but it's the substance--not the quantity the truthseekers are after. Three thousand e-mails they submitted for those three weeks of activity, and yet there is a large gap in e-mails that were sent between the timeframe of Nov. 15th to Dec. 4th. The last e-mail prior to Nov. 15th has to do with Kyle Sampson asking Harriet Miers what the President's feelings are---and then---zzzzzz--silence. WE WANT ANSWERS---AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE!!
2007-03-22 11:09:13 · answer #4 · answered by scottyurb 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush Has Nothing To Hide Because He Don't Haft To .
He Has The Lord On His Side, that is all he needs
SORRY IF THE TRUTH HURTS
Read your bible you will understand;
2007-03-22 16:16:59 · answer #5 · answered by Bonnie W 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Personally - as a retired Attorney I would certainly not trust any politician to "Testify" to something unless it would be under Oath.
Other wise they could just Lie their *** off - and care less and get away with it!
It all comes down to accountability!
Would you trust a Liar to be accountable for their actions?
I certainly wouldn't!
ROFLMAO!
2007-03-22 11:08:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes, of course, now he is hiding his huge benefits obtained from the oil companies, now exploiting the oil in Iraq. Also other companies around the world. He is cheating his country and other countries.
2007-03-22 11:58:31 · answer #7 · answered by jaime r 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just business as usual at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave...
2007-03-22 11:04:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I couldn't agree with you more. Of course he has LOTS to hide.....but I think the truth is seeping out. To bad more people can't see how they are being deceived.
2007-03-22 11:01:00 · answer #9 · answered by TexasRose 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Do Democrats have something to hide. Actually they have to hide their core ideolgy because they know that the country will relegate them to minority status if that ever got out. So they have to go scandal mongering.
2007-03-22 11:00:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋