Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tecoyah
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...tarr050698.htm
As it would seem those supporting Bush, generally revert to comparing the misdeeds of Bill Clinton as a defense, I ask them to make this comparison in good faith. Personally, I fully agreed with the court ruling, and felt he had no right to block the investigation (whitewater) though I kinda giggled over the Lewinsky scandal. Clinton was denied executive privilege, just as Nixon was before him when the investigation became serious.
Please explain why it is that you can support one mans privilege.....and not the others.
Hmmm....33 views and not a single comment. Could it be that those continuously bringing up Clinton to defend Bush are speechless?
Somehow....I doubt it very much.
|
I have no problem with Congress pursuing criminal charges and investigations against members of a Presidential administration or the President. Congress has a legitimate role to play. However, I am not surprised when the President, Clinton, Bush, whoever, puts up a fight. I expect it.
In a test of wills, he who has the strongest convictions will win. I don't want to hear members of Congress acting like children-saying the President isn't playing fair. They need to find their "balls" and do what they think needs to be done, or shut up.
The Congressional investigations of Clinton were partisan politics at its worst (at least in my lifetime). Democrats have not reached that level with Bush, perhaps they need more time.