NationStates Jolt Archive


Anybody would think that they had something to hide...

Cahnt
28-01-2006, 15:25
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1540626
WASHINGTON, Jan. 25, 2006 —*The Bush administration says some key White House officials and documents are off-limits to congressional investigations into the failures of the Katrina disaster.

Democrats, like Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, are fuming.

Lieberman is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which is conducting the investigation.

"A lot of federal government employees who we've interviewed, they've been told by the White House that they can't answer any questions about communications they had with people at the White House," Lieberman told ABC News. "Now, that's stonewalling. For the administration to simply tell people in the federal government they can't talk to our investigators about any of the conversations they had with people at the White House is unacceptable."


The White House said it is cooperating, providing Congress thousands of pages of documents and making more than 120 officials available. But it said some of the president's closest aides must be able to freely offer advice without fear their positions will be made public.

"Now, the issue you bring up goes to separation of powers issues," said White House press secretary Scott McClellan during a White House briefing. "The president believes that Senator Lieberman ought to have the right to confidential conversations with his advisers just like all presidents have asserted they ought to have that same right. That's what this is about. That's the bottom line here. "

A separation of powers showdown appears to be brewing, with Lieberman threatening to pursue subpoenas to force the White House to comply.

The White House could invoke executive privilege, a legal position often upheld in the courts.


Beware the Public Debate

But Lanny Davis, the former White House counsel for the often-embattled Clinton administration, said the public's right to know may trump a strong legal argument.

"I can remember a dozen times or more where Congress served the Clinton White House with subpoenas for documents where we had every constitutional right to say no, and we did, and we fought, and we delayed, and we were accused of cover-up, and we gave in," Davis said.

White House critics plan to use the president's own words against him. They point to his national address in New Orleans in the days after Katrina.

"The United States Congress also has an important oversight function to perform," said Bush during a televised address from New Orleans' Jackson Square. "Congress is preparing an investigation, and I will work with members of both parties to make sure this effort is thorough."

But some complain that pledge of cooperation apparently only goes so far — at least for now.

ABC News' Pierre Thomas filed this report.
Jeruselem
28-01-2006, 15:31
Bush and company have far too many skeletons in the closet. :)
Randomlittleisland
28-01-2006, 15:53
But they wouldn't hide stuff, he's the President!:rolleyes:
BogMarsh
28-01-2006, 15:56
But they wouldn't hide stuff, he's the President!:rolleyes:

It's entirely legal, I suppose. At least I assume he read the secret Executive Order legalising it before he signed it.
Though I suppose he might be 'disgusted' later...
Teh_pantless_hero
28-01-2006, 16:29
Some Congress people need to go on tv and call Bush on all his shit, I don't mean C-SPAN, I mean real tv.

Maybe they should get a PR guy to do it, it won't be too hard to get one better than McClellan.
Randomlittleisland
28-01-2006, 17:05
It's entirely legal, I suppose. At least I assume he read the secret Executive Order legalising it before he signed it.
Though I suppose he might be 'disgusted' later...

Legal doesn't always mean right
Dontgonearthere
28-01-2006, 17:17
Legal doesn't always mean right
Isnt politics lovely?
BogMarsh
28-01-2006, 17:23
Isnt politics lovely?


That's why he is BOUND to be disgusted later on... anyone remember Abu Ghraib?
First: Legalise
Second: claim you are disgusted.

Have your cake and eat it too.
Vetalia
28-01-2006, 17:30
I would do the exact same thing if I were in office; why let people know what happened when it very well could hurt you politically? If you're able to make documents and officials off limits, why wouldn't you if you benefit politically from keeping information silenced?
Rotovia-
28-01-2006, 17:30
But the Bush Administration has been a beacon of public trust, thus far!
BogMarsh
28-01-2006, 17:33
But the Bush Administration has been a beacon of public trust, thus far!

I suppose that's why I voted against him.
Twice.
Let's hope it wont have to be 3 times.
( the Administration does have a tad of a record of ignoring Constitutional niceties ).
Cahnt
28-01-2006, 17:39
Legal doesn't always mean right
Since when has Bush given a monkey's about what's legal?
BogMarsh
28-01-2006, 17:42
Since when has Bush given a monkey's about what's legal?

Oh, he does. He spends a lot of time and energy into making certain whatever he does is legal, as long as it's him doing the legal stuff, and not anyone else.
Kinda Sensible people
28-01-2006, 18:16
Some Congress people need to go on tv and call Bush on all his shit, I don't mean C-SPAN, I mean real tv.

Maybe they should get a PR guy to do it, it won't be too hard to get one better than McClellan.

I've always felt sorry for poor McClellan. Not much, but some. He's had to defend so many things in his official role that were practically undefensable. It must be an endlessly frustrating job.

At least he doesn't have to worry about it affecting his future career. After all, I'm sure there's a lobbying firm out there ready to hire him right now. :rolleyes:

I'm interested as to what it is that they so dearly want to keep hidden. Is it connected to current scandals, or is it a scandal in it's own right?
Rotovia-
28-01-2006, 18:53
I suppose that's why I voted against him.
Twice.
Let's hope it wont have to be 3 times.
( the Administration does have a tad of a record of ignoring Constitutional niceties ).
To deny Bush a third term is un-American and un-patriotic, pink, liberal, god-hating, commi, terrorist, slandering, America-hating, treasonous, decent, aimed at undermining the American way!

Good luck! ;)
Teh_pantless_hero
28-01-2006, 19:01
I've always felt sorry for poor McClellan. Not much, but some. He's had to defend so many things in his official role that were practically undefensable. It must be an endlessly frustrating job.
Are you kidding? He is amateur PR. You see the PR guy for that one football player that was pissing everyone off? That guy knew what he was doing.
Bobs Own Pipe
28-01-2006, 19:36
To deny Bush a third term is un-American and un-patriotic, pink, liberal, god-hating, commi, terrorist, slandering, America-hating, treasonous, decent, aimed at undermining the American way!

Good luck! ;)
You forgot to mention 'downright evil'. No fitted lasers for your sharks, I'm afraid Rotovia. :(
Sel Appa
28-01-2006, 20:51
Some Congress people need to go on tv and call Bush on all his shit, I don't mean C-SPAN, I mean real tv.

Maybe they should get a PR guy to do it, it won't be too hard to get one better than McClellan.
Grass-roots organizations also need to get on TV to tell Congressmen that America wants to hear them say that.