Bush makes history!
- added May 10, 2008
- 30 responses
-

-
-
-
- muckraker
- added this
-
-
- related topics
-
- News and Politics (21613)
- Politics (16411)
- Bush (997)
- History (565)
- Republican (296)
- George W. Bush (187)
- White House (141)
- Supreme Court (82)
- Accountability (31)
- excutive privilage (1)
"If there's one thing Congress and the Bush administration can agree on, it's that they've got a fight of historic proportions on their hands.
The House Judiciary Committee is demanding documents and testimony from President Bush's closest advisers about the firing of federal prosecutors.
When the White House refused, the Democrat-led committee went to court. Lawyers called the president's actions the most expansive view of presidential authority since Watergate.
Late Friday night, the Bush administration responded with court documents of its own, similarly steeped in history. Lawyers called the lawsuit unprecedented. Citing George Washington and Grover Cleveland, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, they said these types of clashes get resolved without going to court.
"For over two hundred years, when disputes have arisen between the political branches concerning the testimony of executive branch witnesses before Congress, or the production of executive branch documents to Congress, the branches have engaged in negotiation and compromise," Justice Department lawyers wrote.
The idea the Congress can't order the president or his advisers to do something is a principle known as executive privilege. That privilege isn't spelled out in the Constitution and courts are rarely asked to decide exactly what it means. And when they have been asked, judges have tried to avoid getting too specific.
"Never in American history has a federal court ordered an executive branch official to testify before Congress," lawyers for the White House wrote.
That makes for a murky area of law and the Bush administration is urging U.S. District Judge John D. Bates not to tidy it up. The ambiguity fosters compromise, political solutions and the kind of give and take that the Founding Father envisioned, attorneys said.
Clearing it up "would forever alter the accommodation process that has served the Nation so well for over two centuries," attorneys wrote.
Congress wants to know whether the Bush administration fired several U.S. attorney for political reasons. That controversy contributed to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resigning last year.
The Judiciary Committee subpoenaed former White House counsel Harriet Miers to testify and demanded documents from President Bush's chief of staff, Josh Bolten.
The White House argues that the hiring and firing of presidential appointees is strictly the business of the executive branch. The administration has offered to let White House officials discuss the matter privately with Congress but objects to formal testimony under a subpoena.
Congress says it has tried negotiating and is left with no other options but a court case. The Bush administration countered in court documents Friday that, if Congress really wants to put up a fight about this, the Constitution offers plenty of ways for lawmakers to dig in their heels.
Congress can block presidential appointments until its demands are met, attorneys said. And since Congress controls the government's purse strings, it can cut off funding for the Executive branch agencies.
The stakes are high in a court fight.
Bush, who has prided himself on taking strong views on presidential authority, risks a legacy as the president who forever diminished that power in disputes with Congress. Congress risks having its subpoena authority — one of its most powerful oversight tools — permanently curtailed".
WASHINGTON
By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
The House Judiciary Committee is demanding documents and testimony from President Bush's closest advisers about the firing of federal prosecutors.
When the White House refused, the Democrat-led committee went to court. Lawyers called the president's actions the most expansive view of presidential authority since Watergate.
Late Friday night, the Bush administration responded with court documents of its own, similarly steeped in history. Lawyers called the lawsuit unprecedented. Citing George Washington and Grover Cleveland, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, they said these types of clashes get resolved without going to court.
"For over two hundred years, when disputes have arisen between the political branches concerning the testimony of executive branch witnesses before Congress, or the production of executive branch documents to Congress, the branches have engaged in negotiation and compromise," Justice Department lawyers wrote.
The idea the Congress can't order the president or his advisers to do something is a principle known as executive privilege. That privilege isn't spelled out in the Constitution and courts are rarely asked to decide exactly what it means. And when they have been asked, judges have tried to avoid getting too specific.
"Never in American history has a federal court ordered an executive branch official to testify before Congress," lawyers for the White House wrote.
That makes for a murky area of law and the Bush administration is urging U.S. District Judge John D. Bates not to tidy it up. The ambiguity fosters compromise, political solutions and the kind of give and take that the Founding Father envisioned, attorneys said.
Clearing it up "would forever alter the accommodation process that has served the Nation so well for over two centuries," attorneys wrote.
Congress wants to know whether the Bush administration fired several U.S. attorney for political reasons. That controversy contributed to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resigning last year.
The Judiciary Committee subpoenaed former White House counsel Harriet Miers to testify and demanded documents from President Bush's chief of staff, Josh Bolten.
The White House argues that the hiring and firing of presidential appointees is strictly the business of the executive branch. The administration has offered to let White House officials discuss the matter privately with Congress but objects to formal testimony under a subpoena.
Congress says it has tried negotiating and is left with no other options but a court case. The Bush administration countered in court documents Friday that, if Congress really wants to put up a fight about this, the Constitution offers plenty of ways for lawmakers to dig in their heels.
Congress can block presidential appointments until its demands are met, attorneys said. And since Congress controls the government's purse strings, it can cut off funding for the Executive branch agencies.
The stakes are high in a court fight.
Bush, who has prided himself on taking strong views on presidential authority, risks a legacy as the president who forever diminished that power in disputes with Congress. Congress risks having its subpoena authority — one of its most powerful oversight tools — permanently curtailed".
WASHINGTON
By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
-
He is criminal. He has lied to the American public, he has violated our Constitution, he is responsible for the deaths of a million Iraqis and helping the Fed undermine the American economy.
Impeach he and Cheney and let them enjoy the fruits of their efforts.
They have indeed made history, and it's a history WE the People will get to see for sometime.-
-
-
-
- VoyagerFilms
- 2 months ago
-
-
and nothing will happen, because he has the title "President". it's sad, we protect what should be punished. so essentially, we're allowing this bullshit. he should be made an example out of, they all did enough damage to our country, respect, constitution, and purity, that they deserve to be hung.
if the founding father were alive, they'd probably start a civil war to clean up the corruption and mess w/ our gov't.-
-
-
-
- Wessagusset_Oracle
- 2 months ago
-
-
Touchy subject. Ears are everywhere. On the real though. I think this is only scraching the surface of what the Bush admistration is gulity of .perpatrating against not only the American public but the world. Why this is allowed to continue points to a very real problem in the way things are run. We as a people reserve the right to elect the people we see fit to run our country. To often are the people cut out of government after a president gets elected. When someone in such an imporant position commits as many crimes as our current president has and is allowed to remain in office tells me that the power of government has been systematicly stolen from the peoples hands and has been transferd to individuals who have no business anywhere near it. Let us learn from what is happening right now in our government, and refuse to allow our future leadership to abuse and profit from misinforming the public. We as a people have a right to soul ownership of the hand that controls the government. it was created by we the people. It belongs to we the people. It has become something of our curropt leaders creation and must be brought back under control of the American people. Only WE THE PEOPLE can accomplish this great task. We can say that in our time when the government threatend to steal controll from the hand of the creater, we stood our ground and maintained what our forfathers created to aid the people in running the country. No more lies, no more deceit just honest leadership for the good of not only America, but for the world. This task falls on all the willing. Change starts with one. We can all be that one. If not us the future stands no chance I will not be responsible for that.
-
-
-
-
- natedawson
- 2 months ago
-
-
"Clearing it up "would forever alter the accommodation process that has served the Nation so well for over two centuries," attorneys wrote."
True...it would make it harder to do the kind of harm that has been continually done. It might uncover even more lies, and we can't have that, can we?
-
Well Bush isnt really doing anything anyways to help the country. Why not make a little history instead.
-
IMPEACH ALL THEM ALL!!!
This is OUR country and we need to take it back! -
right on!
-
He should be on Amerca's Most Wanted.
-
-
-
-
- keithponder
- 2 months ago
-
-
look on the brightside, at least he makes us look smarter.
-
-
-
-
- DilonTodBakerpoetic
- 2 months ago
-
-
I believe there was a state that was going to vote on wheather or not to arrest Bush for war crimes if he ever came to their state. I dont know how far that got.
-
Let's not forget that this beloved country was found "FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE," which means that WE THE PEOPLE have every right to overthrow this megalomaniac government that has become.
Let's not blame Bush, we have no one but ourselves to blame. WE THE PEOPLE voted him in again, WE THE PEOPLE allowed him to go to war, rid of Habeous Corpus, pass the Patriot Act and say the Constitution is just a "God damned piece of paper."-
-
-
-
- Midnight_DevilX
- 2 months ago
-
-
Executive privilege? That sounds like something NIXON said when he was being coerced to testify IN A JUDICIAL COURT. It sucks to see history repeating itself.
-
-
-
-
- Adumbration
- 2 months ago
-
-
midnight...this is true "we the people" are the govenment, but we are a representative government so of course politicians are going to say one thing to get into office and another when they are in it.
-
Do we really get the government we deserve?
-
I agree with impeaching them all but to go the next step and jail them as well. The city in Vermont has the right idea.
-
I wish they would not put his face on these stories, the sight of him gives me the creeps and make me want to do and say things that my religion forbids. This scum makes me sick.
-
his face...
-
-
-
-
- keeshii768
- 2 months ago
-
-
Wow! How can you destroy the same constitution you are put in office to protect? All presidents should hold theirselves accountable for every decision they make. If you are blind you cant see the crap that bush has done to protect himself and his cronies from prosecution. Please people lets get informed about the canidates! Lets vote for someone who is honest and intelligent , not someone who has a good speech writer or says they like the food at the local diner. Thats the only way to save or country.
-
-
-
-
- Jtonio4823
- 2 months ago
-
-
Of course he's made history! He'll be remembered as the guy who kept America away from Gore, Kerry, and Obama for too long.
-
-
-
-
- MissJonaLyn
- 2 months ago
-
-
All the commentators that have responded this far miss the point. These are political appointments by the executive branch. Of course they have every right to get rid of any prosecutor they do not like. It's absurd that anyone assumes one of the other branches of government even has the authority to interfere with this process. If the administration had forced anyone to commit a crime under federal law they could be prosecuted. Nothing like that has happened.
-
The only way this idiot will make history is to be recognized as the least liked and most inept and out of touch commander in chief this nation has ever known.He is an embarrassment to all Americans and the sooner he is gone the better for all of us.
-
-
-
-
- squilla1123
- 2 months ago
-
-
Blackwater and it's kind were borne of executive privilege. I can assure you that Nixon had nothing on GWB when it comes to stomping all over Law and his loyalists will stop at nothing to keep it that way. They are constantly redifining Evil.
-
Four more months! If we last that long.
-
The way that the Bush administration is really stone walling this might hint that there is something in there that they are really embarrassed or scared about.
I say take legal action against the numb nut if that is what it takes to get an honest answer out of him.-
-
-
-
- Varex_Sythe
- 2 months ago
-
-
THIS IS FASCISM TO THE FULLEST DEGREE THESE PEOPLE JUST GET IN A POSITION OF POWER AND DO WHAT THE HELL THEY WANT WE AS SO CALLED AMERICANS ARE SO IGNORANT TO THINK THAT THEY ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT US THE PEOPLE
"ONE OF THE THREE BIGGEST LIES EVER TOLD IS HI WERE FROM THE GOVERMENT AND WE WANT TO HELP YOU" YOU GUESS WHO SAID THAT. HE WHO HAS THE POWER MAKES THE RULES........... DON'T FORGET THAT FALL IN LINE OF THE PECKING ORDER-
-
-
-
- HEALTHYCONSCIOUS
- 2 months ago
-
-
I am not in favor of Bush, but I think that we give up our right to appear as innocent from having anything to do with the mess going on in the country. We elect and re-elect people that fill our interests for the country with empty promises. We are doing the same thing this year.
The only candidate I saw that was actually a valid candidate to speak for the rest of us is Ron Paul. No one pays much attention to him though, because candidates like Obama speak so often about all the stuff we want to hear. Even Bush got into office talking about how he wanted a humble foreign policy. Bush is not the first, he will not be the last.-
-
-
-
- wrenntanner
- 2 months ago
-
-
Ron Paul is so a third party candidate that's why he didnt make a big impact. The Republicans are shuting him down.
-
Well, we all know that there is only two ways to get attention in politics, you're either Republican and Democrat. That is one of the biggest problems we have in our politics. Who could ever do anything progressive as president, when you have to conform your ideas to an entire group of people's standards? Besides, in these parties they are all backed by the same people and they are all sleeping with each other.
-
-
-
-
- wrenntanner
- 2 months ago
-
-
ditto Kieth Ponder. In fact there is a Spanish lawyer based in Madrid by the name of Baltazar Garzon who want to try him in an international court for crimes against humanity.-
-
-
-
- Mr_Costello
- 2 months ago
-
-
wrenntanner and muckraker, great points! Ours is a nation of sheep, mind-numb and trained to think in sound bites. The Republicrat machine marches on.
-
"Never in American history has a federal court ordered an executive branch official to testify before Congress," lawyers for the White House wrote. "
Never before in American history has the United States been under the control of such an utterly corrupt and incompetent Administration. -
1. he makes us look STUPID simply because of the fact that he managed to become president. Not once, but TWICE.
2. since when is there an executive privilege above the other branches? Last I thought the entire system of checks and balances was based on the idea that all branches are EQUAL.
I'm still appalled by the fact Democrats are so WEAK. The republicans have the audacity to attempt to impeach a president for lying about his sexual experiences which in my opinion is none of anyones' business but his, the wife and the other woman in question. Yet the democrats cant stand up and impeach Bush for lying amongst MANY other things when his lying led to a war. Like the fact Bill cheated on Hilary could ever have caused any real national problems. He should've been impeached way before he was even inaugurated.
Login/Registration is required to add a response.
