The House Judiciary sub-committee approved subpoenas for White House chief political adviser Karl Rove, Harriet E. Miers, the former White House counsel, and other aides. This means that they will need to, under oath and on the record, answer for their roles in the dismissal of U.S. Attorneys (USA) within the Justice Department.
Initially, an offer was made of having Rove "testify" behind closed doors without having to be sworn in, nor having the dialog taken as record. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (Dem-VT) called b-s on that.
The issue at hand behind this is a tiny provision in the Patriot Act that gives the President the authority to fill empty capacities with attorneys of his choice, without requiring Senate approval. This suggests that Dubya was attempting to circumvent Congress, which happens to now be under Democrat control, in order to push his agenda. Rove and Miers were both directly and/or indirectly involved making use of this loophole, most likely at the behest of Dubya. This latter comment is just my non-fact based, anti-strategry, coming-from-the-gut take on the whole matter.
O, the hypocrisy of it all. Some Republicans are saying that the subpoenas are politically motivated.
Will Rove actually testify? Will he flounder and sing like a birdie about how he was just following orders? It's too early to say at this point. At this point, I'm just hoping that these officials show some integrity and take some accountability for their actions. Am I hoping for too much? Perhaps, but once you stop expecting elected officials to represent your interests in a truly legal manner is the day that we forsake our wonderful democratic country and the lifestyle it supports.
I will say that I feel better about using my tax dollars in pursuing this matter, as opposed to those used to investigate and potentially impeach another President, who happened to lie about getting a blowjob. Somehow, when I compare the two, I just don't think these are apples to apples.
Initially, an offer was made of having Rove "testify" behind closed doors without having to be sworn in, nor having the dialog taken as record. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (Dem-VT) called b-s on that.
The issue at hand behind this is a tiny provision in the Patriot Act that gives the President the authority to fill empty capacities with attorneys of his choice, without requiring Senate approval. This suggests that Dubya was attempting to circumvent Congress, which happens to now be under Democrat control, in order to push his agenda. Rove and Miers were both directly and/or indirectly involved making use of this loophole, most likely at the behest of Dubya. This latter comment is just my non-fact based, anti-strategry, coming-from-the-gut take on the whole matter.
O, the hypocrisy of it all. Some Republicans are saying that the subpoenas are politically motivated.
“The only purpose of the subpoenas is to the fan the flames and photo ops of partisan controversy,” said Representative Chris Cannon of Utah, the senior Republican on the subcommittee.Um...what do you call terminating USAs with false pretense, then going behind Congress's back to fill the ranks with those loyal to the administration and its agenda? This may all be within the bounds of approved legislation, but there's also the spirit of the law to consider here.
Will Rove actually testify? Will he flounder and sing like a birdie about how he was just following orders? It's too early to say at this point. At this point, I'm just hoping that these officials show some integrity and take some accountability for their actions. Am I hoping for too much? Perhaps, but once you stop expecting elected officials to represent your interests in a truly legal manner is the day that we forsake our wonderful democratic country and the lifestyle it supports.
I will say that I feel better about using my tax dollars in pursuing this matter, as opposed to those used to investigate and potentially impeach another President, who happened to lie about getting a blowjob. Somehow, when I compare the two, I just don't think these are apples to apples.
Want to check out what sfgate.com visitors have to say about it? Go ahead and vote on their poll on their landing page. Check it out soon, as it'll most likely change by tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment