Posted on 03/21/2007 8:17:35 AM PDT by bamahead
WASHINGTON (AP) - A House panel on Wednesday approved subpoenas for President Bush's political adviser, Karl Rove and other top White House aides, setting up a constitutional showdown over the firings of eight federal prosecutors.
By voice vote and without dissent, the House Judiciary subcommittee on commercial and administrative law decided to compel the president's top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the firings.
The White House has refused to budge in the controversy, standing by embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and insisting that the firings were appropriate. White House spokesman Tony Snow said that in offering aides to talk to the committees privately, Bush had sought to avoid the "media spectacle" that would result from public hearings with Rove and others at the witness table.
"The question they've got to ask themselves is, are you more interested in a political spectacle than getting the truth?" Snow said of the overture Tuesday by the White House via its top lawyer, Fred Fielding.
"There must be accountability," countered subcommittee Chairwoman Linda Sanchez, D-Calif.
The committee rejected Bush's offer of a day earlier that his aides could to talk privately to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, but not under oath and not on the record.
Would he fight Democrats in court to protect his aides against congressional subpoenas?
"Absolutely," Bush declared.
"Our reasonable offer that Mr. Fielding presented to Congress yesterday is our reasonable offer and nothing has changed during the 12 hours since Mr. Fielding spoke to the Congress," White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said Wednesday. "If they are truly serious about wanting to obtain the facts, they have right in front of them the opportunity to do that."
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.myway.com ...
deplicate thread.....60 seconds too late.
Yep...60 seconds late.
"There must be accountability."
For what?
Gonzalez, however, is not in the galaxy as Ashcroft. W traded down on that deal.
Voice vote and without dissent - where were the Republicans?
These Congressional Democrats are a bunch of cowards, more concerned about preserving their positions on Capitol Hill than anything else. Don't give in to them.
Their main gripe is apparently that these U.S Attorneys will actually investigate Democrats. How unfair. What a constitutional usurpation.
And for all you "real conservatives" who want the Democrats investigated all the time, you ought to be happy that the Adminstration is trying to do that. And you should be fighting the Democrats who want to prevent it.
"There must be accountability."
When are the Democrats going to be held accountable? Leaky Leahy, for one. Time to fight these bastards.
tae it to the courts and take it Very slowly, so slowly that it takes till the end of the term...
Where's the probable cause?
Exactly. Time to take some lessons from the Clinton War Room. Stretch it out... delay... change the subject...act morally indignant...send out minions with talking points.
the republicans wer hiding again...they are political cowards of an Olympic level.
It is why we lost in November and why we will lose again in 08...
We select and maintain chicken republicans.
There are five Republicans on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. I don't know how many were there for this, but the names are Chris Cannon, Jim Jordan, Ric Keller, Tom Feeney, and Trent Franks.
Game ON !! I look forward to the President's Response....
"the republicans wer hiding again...they are political cowards of an Olympic level."
The RINOs and the "true conservatives" have the White House surrounded. Incapable of focusing on the Democrats. With an opposition like this, the Democrats don't have to do anything.
Have there been any laws broken in the firings? It sounds like the only issue has been the reason given for firing the attorneys. Can't they be fired for anything? If they were told it was for performance and those issues were documented, does it really matter if previously dismissing them for political reasons had been discussed?
Do I just not get it?
I'm lost - are you talking about the US Attorneys who replaced the eight fired ones?
Excuse me, but we just had a U.S. Attorney spend three years investigating a Republican administration, and come up with one perjury charge. But investigating Democrats would be partisan? The Democrats live in an alternative universe. They believe their party's propaganda.
Have there been any laws broken in the firings? It sounds like the only issue has been the reason given for firing the attorneys. Can't they be fired for anything? If they were told it was for performance and those issues were documented, does it really matter if previously dismissing them for political reasons had been discussed?
Do I just not get it?
Laws were not broken until Alberto's deputy AG lied to Congress about the reasons why they were fired.
It's infuriating, because they didn't have to give a reason. So why fabricate one? It just doesn't make any sense. That's why Gonzales has to go - the man is flat-out incompetent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.