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 ...
Thanks for setting this straight. Everyone seems to want to jump on the wimpy Republicans, but as Rush as said, the Republicans have ABSOLUTELY NO power in the House. Dems make the rules and walk in lock-step, especially these judiciary committees, which are full of libs.
You are right...Sanchez is a nitwit...but she chairs a subcommittee???
They TRUSTED Conyers...obviously, since they did vote with him...but Conyers has said twice that HE doesn't consider Fielding's offer legitimate..because Rove and Miers would NOT be in open and under oath.
So..if the Reps did vote for this..like has been reported..then they are STUPID.
I truly hope the White House's response is, "Go pound sand up your nose!".
Well..they "voted" not roll call..and yet the press reported it as unanimous, no???
I heard NO's...
That was a sham of a hearing ... though I'm glad the pubbies said what they did
I sure am glad that C-span showed the replay...because it sure didn't go the way I got the impression from the news accounts.
Yep and the pubbies called it what it is .. a witch hunt
Well I'm off to make more beds before Gore's Senate hearing starts
The Republicans were no doubt hiding under their desks.
Yeah, LOL! What a bunch of losers.
Mo...I just reread the article at the top of this thread.
It says that the resolution "passed by voice vote without dissent"...
We now know that is NOT TRUE...damn the press.
Trent Franks is a 100% rock solid Republican from my old district in Arizona. I wonder what's going on... the old proxy voting schemes from pre 1994?
Can you imagine how powerful the Republican Party would be if the MSM gave us 50% favorable coverage. We've got to get some conservatives in the journalism schools.
This article is lying
There was a lot of dissent from the Republicans .. I just watched the hearing
> I hope their ONLY response to EVERY question is:
> "I plead the Fifth on the grounds that my answers might incriminate me."
> Then we can sit back and watch the Dimmie's heads explode right there on C-Span. :-)
The Fifth is for the guilty. It will certainly appear that way if they do it, and most people find it is the weasel's way out of trouble. What are Miers and Rove guilty of? Nothing. Let the Dims heads explode when the truth is revealed to them... like sodium in water, Dims can't co-exist with the truth.
Can Harriet Miers continuously respond by saying, "I cannot answer that on the grounds of lawyer/client confidentiality." ??
Read the amended report in post 29. The reporterette changed her story. It's the DBM again!
No, the reporterette changed her story (the first story lied about "without dissent"). See post 29 above.
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.