Rice Signals Rejection of House Subpoena

uscitizen

uscitizen

Villified User
Rice Signals Rejection of House Subpoena

Apr 26, 8:48 AM (ET)

By MATTHEW LEE

(AP) U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice addresses the media ahead of NATO's foreign ministers...


OSLO, Norway (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday she has already answered the questions she has been subpoenaed to answer before a congressional committee and suggested she is not inclined to comply with the order.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070426/D8OO9VVG1.html

Interesting how some consider themselves above the law....
 
uscitizen said:
Rice Signals Rejection of House Subpoena

Apr 26, 8:48 AM (ET)

By MATTHEW LEE

(AP) U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice addresses the media ahead of NATO's foreign ministers...


OSLO, Norway (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday she has already answered the questions she has been subpoenaed to answer before a congressional committee and suggested she is not inclined to comply with the order.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070426/D8OO9VVG1.html

Interesting how some consider themselves above the law....
Click to expand...
Actually this is a Constitutional Powers question. Bush made it clear he was willing to fight subpoenas of his advisors. Not just willing, he believes it is a violation of the separation of powers.

Personally I'm willing to allow for a decision by the courts on it. It is how the government was designed to work with separations, and checks and balances.
 
The courts decided long ago. Or was the clowntoon administration just screwed by the Republicans ? This is merly a delaying/political tactic by the bushies.
 
Bullshit US.... if Congress is calling on her to testify on the same shit she testified on before, then it is well within her and the admin's rights to fight this. If they have something new to cover, that is another story. But Congress has indicated they want to re-hash the same pre-war intel regarding the yellow cake etc... that she already testified to under oath.
 
New developments have come up since then. Same subject but I expect different questions. What does she have to hide ? Isn't it her duty to see justice is performed ?
 
"New developments have come up since then. Same subject but I expect different questions. What does she have to hide ? Isn't it her duty to see justice is performed ?"

As I said, if it is something new, that is another story. Is there something new regarding the pre-war intel that I am unaware of? If so, please enlighten me.
 
As for her duty... her duty does NOT include standing in front of Congress answering the same questions as before just because they are on a witchhunt.
 
uscitizen said:
The courts decided long ago. Or was the clowntoon administration just screwed by the Republicans ? This is merly a delaying/political tactic by the bushies.
Click to expand...
Each President tries to protect the powers of the Executive. It is constantly worked in such cases. It is how the process works.

It always annoys me when people use the ignorance of the Process of Checks and Balances to get the ignorant masses all upset.
 
Superfreak said:
"New developments have come up since then. Same subject but I expect different questions. What does she have to hide ? Isn't it her duty to see justice is performed ?"

As I said, if it is something new, that is another story. Is there something new regarding the pre-war intel that I am unaware of? If so, please enlighten me.
Click to expand...

Umm for some reason Congress has not confided in me. We voted them in htere, let them do their job.
Only right wing wingnuts seems to know what congress has planned.
 
US... Yes, let them do their job. I have no problem with that. Unless they abuse their power.... which unless they explain themselves better, seems to be EXACTLY what they are doing.
 
So congress has to explain themselves but the WH does not ?
This battle has been fought many times, why is it even being discussed ?
 
I did not say that the WH doesn't have to explain their actions.

But to answer your question.... yes, Congress has to explain what questions they have on the subject that are new. Otherwise they are just wasting everyones time with a dog and pony show.

It is also the right of the executive branch to check the power of the legislative branch... if need be, they can take it to SCOTUS for a ruling. At which SCOTUS would likely ask Congress to show why this is relevant again. (ie... is there something of value that was previously missed?)

Congress in no way has complete power to where they can just subpeona people over and over again on the same shit.
 
uscitizen said:
So congress has to explain themselves but the WH does not ?
This battle has been fought many times, why is it even being discussed ?
Click to expand...
Because, as I stated earlier, each side loves to use the ignorance of the system of checks and balances of the masses against them for political gain. It's a long-standing operational political move, it's happened regularly in the past and will again in the future. I will watch the system play itself out.
 
Same here Damo. I have been saying just wait and see a lot in recent years and have been mostly right. But wrong a couple of times...
 
i don't trust ANY hearing that took place under republican control....they all were TOO MUCH in LOCK STEP with the administration and had no insentive to find any truth in any issue in my political opinion! :D
 
Yeah how many subpoena's did the repubs issue investagting Clowntoon?
Seems like I don't recall the Clowntoon administration whining and fighting subpoenas like this. I could be wrong though.

Anyone else recall the study the study showing that whiney children grow grow up to be Republicans ?

I loved that one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top