Subpoenas!

Yes…

WASHINGTON – A House panel on Wednesday approved subpoenas for President Bush’s political adviser, Karl Rove and other top White House aides, setting
up a constitutional showdown over the firings of eight federal
prosecutors.

By voice vote, but with some “no” votes heard, the House Judiciary
subcommittee on commercial and administrative law decided to compel the
president’s top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their
roles in the firings.

6 thoughts on “Subpoenas!

  1. John H. Farr says:

    But they have NOT served subpoenas! Everyone this morning is getting this wrong. The committee only voted to authorize them. No Bush aide has been served any subpoenas and may never be. We’re not there yet.

  2. scout prime says:

    Well I didn’t say they were served but your point is very true. We’ll see what happens next heh?

  3. pansypoo says:

    so, it’s
    are you being served?
    yes, you will.

  4. MapleStreet says:

    Funny. The conservative retort to the massive invasions of citizen privacy by the governement – that is, “If you have nothing to hide you wouldn’t mind them investigating.”
    Now Shrub calls this a “fishing expedition”. Why does he not say, “I have nothing to hide so go ahead”? Why then is it OK to do “fishing expeditions” with massive data mining of private citizen’s personal data and illegal wiretaping???????????

  5. Robert Earle says:

    I have a semi-serious question:
    If I understand what Tony Snow is saying, it is that when somebody appears before Congress, they are already obliged by law to tell the truth, so requiring them to be sworn in doesn’t really get the Democrats much of anything they are not already getting from the White House offer (putting aside the questions of public-private, and transcripts, etc.)
    So if that is the case, if Snow is right on this point, then why does Congress *ever* bother swearing in any of its witnesses? Is there any significant difference in the punishments, or difference in the burden of proof, or some other significant difference, between “lying to Congress” and “perjury”?

  6. Via says:

    They haven’t actually served them yet, they are holding them as bargaining chips. I am not encouraged by this.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: