Tuesday, March 20, 2007

They agree to disagree

It's an instant impasse on the US attorney's flap:

Earlier Tuesday, White House counsel Fred Fielding met with members of the House and Senate Judiciary committees to discuss conditions under which Rove and Miers would be interviewed.

Fielding said the two would speak to lawmakers in private and not under oath. He indicated he was not prepared to negotiate in the matter.

Shortly before Bush addressed reporters, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy emerged from the meeting with Fielding to say he would not accept the White House's offer.
Dr. Taylor, who has been following the case closely, grudgingly admits the firings were "legal" but that the "whole situation continues to stink." I'm inclined to think that White House officials should testify under oath but without the glare of C-Span cameras which always turn politicians on both sides of the aisle into grandstanding jerks.

Extra - The lawyer types at Powerline write there's "no reason to give an inch."

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

So, how's that whole "restoring honor to the Oval Office" thing looking?

Anonymous said...

Bush should have known that firing eight of his own appointees for performance reasons (or any reason at all) would look bad, because... I dunno,it just does.

Anonymous said...

Face facts. The job performance of those attorneys simply didn't measure up to the Rumsfeld-Tenet-Michael Brown standard of Presidential approval.

Anonymous said...

Tony Snow, 1998:

"Evidently, Mr. Clinton wants to shield virtually any communications that take place within the White House compound on the theory that all such talk contributes in some way, shape or form to the continuing success and harmony of an administration. Taken to its logical extreme, that position would make it impossible for citizens to hold a chief executive accountable for anything. He would have a constitutional right to cover up.

"Chances are that the courts will hurl such a claim out, but it will take time.

"One gets the impression that Team Clinton values its survival more than most people want justice and thus will delay without qualm. But as the clock ticks, the public's faith in Mr. Clinton will ebb away for a simple reason: Most of us want no part of a president who is cynical enough to use the majesty of his office to evade the one thing he is sworn to uphold the rule of law.''