Comments on: Bush Likely to Prevent Aides’ Testimony

By: Patrick Sperry

Patrick Sperry — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:48:29 +0000

Precisely Fred. This is yet another example of the President’s lack of leadership IMO.

By: TexasFred

TexasFred — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:50:01 +0000

BZ, absolutely correct, he should have taken immediate control and gotten all around it, and made it nothing more than an official presidential order, and then it really is a ‘tempest in a teacup’…

By: Bloviating Zeppelin

Bloviating Zeppelin — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:24:08 +0000

I agree with you Fred, but for a different reason. In my opinion, both Bush and Gonzales have handled this incorrectly from the very get-go.

The Political Line should have been: “Not just yes, but hell yes, we fired the USAs. As President it is my privilege do vacate every position absent cause if I wish. This was done, in an even more sweeping style, under the previous administration. Every USA serves at my pleasure, and it was my pleasure to install persons I choose for reasons I determine.”

By: Kurt P

Kurt P — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 23:53:04 +0000

Hereâ€™s the only thing about the whole smelly mess that bothers me, IF the Bush administration truly has done nothing wrong, and had nothing to hide, why is the president invoking â€˜executive privilegeâ€™ and not allowing his aides to testify??

Scooter Libby?

By: Basti

Basti — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 18:25:20 +0000

The Dem’s would be wise not to push this issue. If a ‘precedent’ is set it could come back and bite some future Dem POTUS in the ass.

I’m thinking this will end up in the USSC’s lap and they will rule in favor of the POTUS. It’s the way things have been done in this nation since day one and that’s why we are actually a republic and not a democracy. (In a true democracy you would have full disclosure)