Senate Panel OK's Subpoenas For Key Aides
Senate Panel OKs Subpoenas for Key Aides
WASHINGTON - A Senate panel, following the House's lead, has authorized subpoenas for White House political adviser Karl Rove and other top aides involved in the firing of federal prosecutors.
The Senate Judiciary Committee, by voice vote, decided to authorize the subpoenas as Republicans and Democrats sparred over whether to press a showdown with President Bush over the ousters of eight U.S. attorneys.
Democrats angrily rejected Bush's offer to grant a limited number of lawmakers private interviews with the aides with no transcript and without swearing them in. Republicans counseled restraint.
A House Judiciary subcommittee authorized subpoenas in the matter Wednesday, but none has been issued.
Democrats said the move would give them more bargaining power in negotiating with the White House to hear from Bush's closest advisers.
"We're authorizing that ability but we're not issuing them," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said of the subpoenas. "It'll only strengthen our hand in getting to the bottom of this."
Republicans countered, however, that subpoenas were premature.
"I counsel my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, to work hard to avoid an impasse. We don't need a constitutional confrontation," said Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the panel's top Republican.
Even as Democrats derided the White House's offer, Bush spokesman Tony Snow maintained that lawmakers will realize it is fair and reasonable once they reflect on it.
"We're not trying to hide things. We're not trying to run from things," he said. "We want them to know what happened."
Democrats, however, called Bush's position untenable.
"What we're told we can get is nothing, nothing, nothing," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the Judiciary chairman. "I know he's the decider for the White House—he's not the decider for the United States Senate."
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, fighting for his job amid the prosecutor furor, vowed he would not step aside and promised to cooperate with Congress in the inquiry.
"I'm not going to resign," Gonzales told reporters after an event in St. Louis.
"No U.S. Attorney was fired for improper reasons," he added.
Story Here
Leahy urges former Gonzales aide to testify voluntarily
Showdown Looms in Attorney Firings Probe
After Honeymoon, the Fight
Bush Warns Dems to Take Offer in Firings
Pat Buchanan: Rogue Congress: If the Senate and House judiciary committees issue subpoenas for Karl Rove and other White House aides to testify to their roles in the firing of the eight U.S. attorneys, President Bush should defy the subpoenas. He should accept the contempt citations and fight it all the way to the Supreme Court.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why is this still an issue? President Bush has the authority to fire these Attorney's for whatever reason whenever he want's. They serve at the Pleasure of the President. Clinton fired 93 of them and not one peep out of anybody, but Bush does it and it's a National Disaster. Alberto Gonzales isnt going to resign and President Bush isnt going to fire him so why must the Democrats waste our Taxpayer money and time on all these needless investigations? If the Democrats want to play hardball with the President I guess they will have it. I guess the Honeymoon is over. Bush tried to be nice, but the Democrats made it almost impossible. Now if they issue supeonas for this crap, whatever they want from the President will get Veto'd and everything the President want's from the Dems will get blocked until the President finds a way to get around them and almost nothing will be accomplished for the rest of Bush's term in office. Thank You Democrats and thank's alot for you idiots that voted for them. The Dems better relish this opportunity they have to be the Majority party, because this party will be over in 2 years.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Special Note From Ollie North
Tied In Knots
By Oliver North
March 23, 2007
"If the new majority in Congress wants to tie the Bush administration in knots with investigations and a flurry of subpoenas, they can surely do so."
That's what I wrote in this column on Nov. 10, 2006, just days after Democrats captured control of both houses of Congress. It wasn't prophecy -- just experience. As a staff member for President Ronald Reagan's National Security Council, I recall what it was like when congressional liberals decided to do all in their power to bring down a Republican president. Their goal wasn't "legislative oversight" or "Congressional inquiry" but to undermine a conservative commander-in-chief and distract executive branch personnel from carrying out presidential directives to prevent the spread of communism in Central America.
Out here in this Rocky Mountain home to the U.S. Air Force Academy and thousands of Afghanistan/Iraq War veterans at Fort Carson, most of those serving today are too young to remember the "Evil Empire" or what it was like for Reagan to contend with a hostile, liberal-dominated Congress. But that doesn't stop them from wondering, "What the devil is going on in Washington -- and you guys in the media? Doesn't anybody back there realize we're fighting a war? "
Those are the words of a young officer as we were making arrangements to shoot interviews here for an upcoming episode of FOX News' "War Stories." I didn't have the heart to tell this brave warrior that he's an eyewitness to American politics and press at their worst -- all done to damage George W. Bush and provide partisan advantage to his opponents. The war in which this officer served is apparently of little consequence to the majority on Capitol Hill -- except as a means of gaining leverage in the 2008 elections. For the masters of the mainstream media, bad news from the battlefield is front page in the papers and the lead story for any broadcast. Now that the tactical situation is improving, there is little or no news from Iraq.
Back in Washington, congressional leaders and their lackeys in the Fourth Estate are salivating over the prospect of subpoenas flying to compel presidential aides to testify before committees on Capitol Hill about the Bush administration's decision to fire eight federal attorneys. Set aside that this is every president's prerogative -- or the fact that Bill Clinton fired all 93 U.S. attorneys with nary a peep from the potentates in the press.
Hyperventilated rhetoric is routine on Capitol Hill, but describing a president's exercise of executive privilege as a "constitutional crisis" is inane. Yet Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard Dean describes the imbroglio as "George Bush's Watergate." It's all hogwash -- but that won't stop attention-starved solons like Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., from rushing to any open microphone with his latest take on the "standoff." The masters of the media are no better. For a week now, White House spokesman Tony Snow has been peppered with questions about whose "head will roll." The feeding frenzy is enough to make one long for more coverage of Anna Nicole Smith.
Rest Of Story Here
WASHINGTON - A Senate panel, following the House's lead, has authorized subpoenas for White House political adviser Karl Rove and other top aides involved in the firing of federal prosecutors.
The Senate Judiciary Committee, by voice vote, decided to authorize the subpoenas as Republicans and Democrats sparred over whether to press a showdown with President Bush over the ousters of eight U.S. attorneys.
Democrats angrily rejected Bush's offer to grant a limited number of lawmakers private interviews with the aides with no transcript and without swearing them in. Republicans counseled restraint.
A House Judiciary subcommittee authorized subpoenas in the matter Wednesday, but none has been issued.
Democrats said the move would give them more bargaining power in negotiating with the White House to hear from Bush's closest advisers.
"We're authorizing that ability but we're not issuing them," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said of the subpoenas. "It'll only strengthen our hand in getting to the bottom of this."
Republicans countered, however, that subpoenas were premature.
"I counsel my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, to work hard to avoid an impasse. We don't need a constitutional confrontation," said Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the panel's top Republican.
Even as Democrats derided the White House's offer, Bush spokesman Tony Snow maintained that lawmakers will realize it is fair and reasonable once they reflect on it.
"We're not trying to hide things. We're not trying to run from things," he said. "We want them to know what happened."
Democrats, however, called Bush's position untenable.
"What we're told we can get is nothing, nothing, nothing," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the Judiciary chairman. "I know he's the decider for the White House—he's not the decider for the United States Senate."
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, fighting for his job amid the prosecutor furor, vowed he would not step aside and promised to cooperate with Congress in the inquiry.
"I'm not going to resign," Gonzales told reporters after an event in St. Louis.
"No U.S. Attorney was fired for improper reasons," he added.
Story Here
Leahy urges former Gonzales aide to testify voluntarily
Showdown Looms in Attorney Firings Probe
After Honeymoon, the Fight
Bush Warns Dems to Take Offer in Firings
Pat Buchanan: Rogue Congress: If the Senate and House judiciary committees issue subpoenas for Karl Rove and other White House aides to testify to their roles in the firing of the eight U.S. attorneys, President Bush should defy the subpoenas. He should accept the contempt citations and fight it all the way to the Supreme Court.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why is this still an issue? President Bush has the authority to fire these Attorney's for whatever reason whenever he want's. They serve at the Pleasure of the President. Clinton fired 93 of them and not one peep out of anybody, but Bush does it and it's a National Disaster. Alberto Gonzales isnt going to resign and President Bush isnt going to fire him so why must the Democrats waste our Taxpayer money and time on all these needless investigations? If the Democrats want to play hardball with the President I guess they will have it. I guess the Honeymoon is over. Bush tried to be nice, but the Democrats made it almost impossible. Now if they issue supeonas for this crap, whatever they want from the President will get Veto'd and everything the President want's from the Dems will get blocked until the President finds a way to get around them and almost nothing will be accomplished for the rest of Bush's term in office. Thank You Democrats and thank's alot for you idiots that voted for them. The Dems better relish this opportunity they have to be the Majority party, because this party will be over in 2 years.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Special Note From Ollie North
Tied In Knots
By Oliver North
March 23, 2007
"If the new majority in Congress wants to tie the Bush administration in knots with investigations and a flurry of subpoenas, they can surely do so."
That's what I wrote in this column on Nov. 10, 2006, just days after Democrats captured control of both houses of Congress. It wasn't prophecy -- just experience. As a staff member for President Ronald Reagan's National Security Council, I recall what it was like when congressional liberals decided to do all in their power to bring down a Republican president. Their goal wasn't "legislative oversight" or "Congressional inquiry" but to undermine a conservative commander-in-chief and distract executive branch personnel from carrying out presidential directives to prevent the spread of communism in Central America.
Out here in this Rocky Mountain home to the U.S. Air Force Academy and thousands of Afghanistan/Iraq War veterans at Fort Carson, most of those serving today are too young to remember the "Evil Empire" or what it was like for Reagan to contend with a hostile, liberal-dominated Congress. But that doesn't stop them from wondering, "What the devil is going on in Washington -- and you guys in the media? Doesn't anybody back there realize we're fighting a war? "
Those are the words of a young officer as we were making arrangements to shoot interviews here for an upcoming episode of FOX News' "War Stories." I didn't have the heart to tell this brave warrior that he's an eyewitness to American politics and press at their worst -- all done to damage George W. Bush and provide partisan advantage to his opponents. The war in which this officer served is apparently of little consequence to the majority on Capitol Hill -- except as a means of gaining leverage in the 2008 elections. For the masters of the mainstream media, bad news from the battlefield is front page in the papers and the lead story for any broadcast. Now that the tactical situation is improving, there is little or no news from Iraq.
Back in Washington, congressional leaders and their lackeys in the Fourth Estate are salivating over the prospect of subpoenas flying to compel presidential aides to testify before committees on Capitol Hill about the Bush administration's decision to fire eight federal attorneys. Set aside that this is every president's prerogative -- or the fact that Bill Clinton fired all 93 U.S. attorneys with nary a peep from the potentates in the press.
Hyperventilated rhetoric is routine on Capitol Hill, but describing a president's exercise of executive privilege as a "constitutional crisis" is inane. Yet Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard Dean describes the imbroglio as "George Bush's Watergate." It's all hogwash -- but that won't stop attention-starved solons like Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., from rushing to any open microphone with his latest take on the "standoff." The masters of the media are no better. For a week now, White House spokesman Tony Snow has been peppered with questions about whose "head will roll." The feeding frenzy is enough to make one long for more coverage of Anna Nicole Smith.
Rest Of Story Here
posted by Marie's Two Cents | 1:09 PM
3 Comments:
This is a made up scandal. There is no "there" there. What's the point? The answer is; there is no point. The democrats have nothing else to do but make things up to do because they have no agenda and no plan and if they do have one nobody but a very tiny vocal minority of left wing loonaticks agree with them.
Jenn,
You are so right there is no point, there is no "There", there, this is total Lunacy.
Clinton can fire Attorney's, but Bush cant? PLEASE!!!
These Democrats are dumbasses, and after the shit they just pulled today with the Troop funding I am convinced now more than ever they are out for themselves, dont give a rats ass about anybody but themselves, and are completely insane!
Anon,
Since when are the Democrats trying to pretend anyone is innocent? They are the ones wanting Gonzales head on a platter. For the same thing Clinton did, it's ok for Clinton to fire US Attorney's but not Bush? Give me a break!
Maybe they werent investigating William (Frozen Assests) Jefferson fast enough? Remember him the Democrat from Louisiana who got caught with 90,000 dollars in his freezer of bribe money form Nigeria?
Or maybe they werent investigating all the voter fraud that took place in '04 fast enough. You must remember, the Democrats registered dead people, illegal aliens, convicted felons, etc..etc.. to vote?
Get real!
Post a Comment
<< Home