Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinner
This is a non-story and a non-scandal and will go away very soon, and to say this is not like what Clinton had done is complete bullshit. Clinton set the standard by requesting resignations within 10 days. Clinton also fired at least two US Attorneys who were working on corruption cases involving high profile Democrats, one of them being himself.
There is not even a hint of Clinton’s actions in what the Bush (43) Justice Department has done.
----The White House is attempting to protect a very important Constitutional principle, that of the Separation of Powers. By that doctrine, the President is not obliged to reveal the inner workings of the Executive Branch as it relates to the deliberative process within the White House or between the White House and the various government departments. But by releasing select e-mails and documentation as it has done, the White House undermines its own argument.----
It would have been better if President Bush had explained the principle of Separation of Powers, characterized the matter from the White House’s perspective, cited previous precedent, called this a non-scandal, chided the Democrats, and moved on. There should have been no offer of cooperation beyond testimony from the Attorney General. There should have been no release of internal White House documents and e-mails. If the White House thought that it was going to make the Democrats appear to be unreasonable in their requests for information, it has misjudged both the way in which the press will report on this story and the way that the general public will receive it.----
|
bunk.
notice the Prez has yet to explain why the USA's were fired? because he can't - this is very much a real story and it is exactly what it appears to be: USA's were fired for either not going after Dems or going after Repbulicans. notice the e-mails released, from just last month, where officials are scrambling around to figure out how to explain the firings. at issue is the integrity of the Justice Department, and whether White House aides orchestrated a pre-emption of Justice Department business when investigations (or lack thereof) became politically inconvenient for them.
what's even more striking is that, in the midst of two unfinished wars and a host of other unresolved issues (Katrina, health care, climate change, immigration, homeland security etc etc), the Prez chooses to bring the country to a screeching halt over this. he could resolve it by simply having his aides testify truthfully under oath, as any witness should, as one would expect any honest person to do, as the public should be able to expect from an elected official's tax-payer funded staff. so why won't he? not because of some vague presumption of consitutional power - it's because the actions of his people won't be able to withstand public scrutiny.