It sure must be something bigger then a little BJ in the oval office. Bush refusing to let his aides testify is tantamount to admitting guilt in this case. Shame on him.
2007-07-12 04:59:07 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Clinton knew the difference between President and Dictator. Someone please explain it to Bush.
2007-07-12 05:01:34 · answer #1 · answered by Diminati 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Exactly! Clinton may have had trouble controlling himself sexually but he was willing to admit when he made mistakes. Bush believes himself to be above the law and he is unwilling to admit his mistakes. I think he truly believes that the ends justify the means. And his transgessions deal with things that are much more serious than getting a BJ in the Oval Office...
2007-07-12 12:13:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
In 1998 Clinton ordered his aides not to testify about Monicagate. It went to court. Clinton lost.
2007-07-12 12:01:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
You young children are a riot.....LOL........
No matter what PRESIDENT BUSH says or does, the liberals are there to question him......Why does MR BUSH always have to be wrong to you people...........
This is how bad you have become.. I was talking to a LIBERAL friend of mines 8 year old son. He informed me that all teachers lie, that books you read are not true because you dont know the people who wrote them. And that the government lies about the war.........EIGHT YEARS OLD...damn.......
I personally give this country, the United States of America, no more than 25 years and it will cease.....
Good job.............
2007-07-12 12:26:52 · answer #4 · answered by olsage 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Gee, Clinton lies, lets them testify. Bush does not let them testify so would it be that he is telling the truth?
2007-07-12 12:06:52 · answer #5 · answered by pokerfunman 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Clinton tried to stop his aides from testifying and invoked executive privilege. He lost his case and Bush probably will too.
2007-07-12 12:03:13 · answer #6 · answered by Truth is elusive 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
There is such a thing as executive priviledge, which extends to the President's staff. This allows his staff to give him advise without fear of it becoming public. All Presidents over the years have fought to protect executive priviledge.
2007-07-12 12:04:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush is hiding behind Mommie's dress tail.
2007-07-12 12:02:17 · answer #8 · answered by Mustbe 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Something much worse then a BJ.
2007-07-12 12:01:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Please don't use Clinton as an example, and I won't remind you what flop of a president he was. Thanks
2007-07-12 12:02:38 · answer #10 · answered by rosi l 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋