Lets keep this in perspective-I am 100 percent behind the surveilance aspects of the patriot act. If you don't have anything to hide.........................
2007-03-22 09:35:13 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Because they did not violate any laws, and the testimony is a waste of time for Congress and the people.
2007-03-22 09:39:08 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 4⤊ 4⤋
The basis for it is the tenant of separation of powers between the three branches of government. It would be similar to the president ordering members of congress up to the white house and demanding to know the private conversations between members of congress. Never happen because of separation of powers. The congress continuously pushes the envelope on this in attempts to push the limits of its powers. Appointments of Fed attorneys by the executive branch are completely within the perview of the President and and the Justice department. Congress has nothing to do with it. These attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president and can be hired and fired at will. No reason has ever needed to be given. Every president has these powers and doesn't need to consult with congress. The Congress has chosen to intrude into this territory-some say for strictly political purposes. They have issued subpoenas which will be ignored as they are believed to be unlawful and the fight may go all the way to the supreme court where I predict Congress will loose unless the constitution changes in the meantime. The Congress says they have the right to inquiry which is true. However, that right does not include invading the executive branch with demands for internal information which is considered privileged. Nor can the Congress invade the Supreme Court and demand to know internal communications between the justices concerning a case before it. These things are not done and the congress is challenging that supposition. The question is not what someone has to hide. It is the principle involved that is at the heart of the issue. If Congress is to allowed to overreach on this matter, what other things will they attempt to do in the name of inquiry. Nothing unlawful has occurred as the executive branch has a perfect right to hire and fire as they please for whatever reason they determine to be valid. Congress has never had the authority to abridge this tenant of separation of powers.
2007-03-22 18:10:15 · answer #2 · answered by Rich S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am 100% against any part of the patriot act because it is not about protecting us from terrorists...it is about taking our freedoms away: and I also believe that if his people didn't have plenty to hide, they certainly wouldn't mind testifying under oath! These are two completely different issues with completely different motives, but they are all about the furthering of the new world order agenda, and controlling the people. *sm*
2007-03-22 21:49:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Though technically the firings themselves were not illegal, Bush aides testifying would probably uncover things that are. There are allegations of legislators applying illegal pressure on Federal prosecutors. These hearings will show how the administration has politicized the Justice Department by prosecuting Democrats and giving Republicans a pass. The current Republican slogan is "I didn't do anything illegal." Some things can be legal though not necessarily moral.
2007-03-22 16:55:45 · answer #4 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Oh goody! Someone else who thinks that spying illegally without due process is A-OK!
Did the recent debacle with the FBI illegally abusing its power under that cherished PA of yours jar any "revelations" yet?
2007-03-22 19:34:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide ... H. Himmler 1938. Interesting that you would pick a quasi-quote from the man that would one day run the most dreaded intelligence organization of the 20th century, the Gestapo.
Bush has been keeping secrets for the last 6 years, this is nothing new but it is very concerning.
2007-03-22 16:47:44 · answer #6 · answered by Alan S 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Because there is no crime to be investigated, and the Dems are hoping to pull another "Scooter Libby" type of trial - he was convicted of perjury when he testified about no crime at all.
It's funny (as in awful) how the people who say "why won't they testify, if they have nothing to hide" scream the loudest when defendants confess to the police voluntarily.
2007-03-22 16:42:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
First of all they went on record already saying that they fired 8 attorneys for poor performance. And now Congress has their evals. that show they were exceeding standards or excellent performers. Get the poopy drift?
2007-03-22 16:54:30 · answer #8 · answered by andy r 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because it's a political pony show, and even people who don't like George Bush or Republicans in general can see that.
It's interesting that you enjoy being spied on by the government. My take on it is, "If you don't have anything to hide, it's okay to hide anyway." I own my life. Thanks.
2007-03-22 16:42:02 · answer #9 · answered by Zombie 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Of course, bush is making it look like there is something to hide. Have you ever noticed we tend to suspect guilt when someone refuses to take a lie detector test even though it's inadmissable in court?
My guess is that he's got way too much to hide. The republicans are in for a helluva ride!
2007-03-22 16:41:53 · answer #10 · answered by katydid 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Because the firing of the attorney's that serve him is completely justifiable and he refuses to succumb to the defeatocrats BS for a change!
They (dems) refuse to do their job, They can't fix any problems so they just keep on making more and more!
They don't stand for anything and won't stand up for anything~
2007-03-22 16:47:16 · answer #11 · answered by Classic96 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋