I Told You. Bush IS Fighting Back.

Hey folks,

Happy Hump day. Yeah I know I missed yesterday. Sorry about that. But I’m here today. I will be posting another "Behind The Opn Screen" this weekend. Maybe even with a surprise or two. But that’s then. Today, I have two "I told you so’s" {Smile}

First, remember this from Monday?

"It is also the beginning of a new chapter in the continuing saga of the war at home. It seems that Bush has had enough. Also I said, "Finally, President Bush is starting to say enough of this garbage. In essence he is saying "I AM the President and Commander and Chief. You are not. We WILL do things my way."

WELL, look at this headline yesterday in Bloomberg "Bush Administration Fights Back on Prosecutor Firings"

March 20 (Bloomberg) -- The Bush administration sought to quell the controversy over the firing of eight federal prosecutors by giving Congress e-mails that show the U.S. attorneys were the target of complaints and had policy disputes with officials in Washington.

Besides all that, they work for the President. He can fire or hire any of them. Even all of them. Just ask Bill Clinton.

Then as a compromise, President Bush has requested that Rove and others talk to Congress. According to Reuters,

The White House offered on Tuesday to make President George W. Bush's senior political adviser, Karl Rove, available to congressional investigators but rejected Democratic demands he testify under oath regarding the firings of U.S. attorneys.

In a letter to relevant members of Congress, White House counsel Fred Fielding made clear he was not offering Rove and other aides to give sworn testimony as had been requested.

"Such interviews would be private and conducted without the need for an oath, transcript, subsequent testimony or the subsequent issuance of subpoenas," Fielding wrote.

That is to try to make some sort of peace. He is offer them to tell what happened. But there is NO CRIME. No corruption. The Bush Administration has to give Congress permission to talk to the people involved. See folks, there is this annoying little thing call separation of powers. More on that in a second.

If there is ANY doubt that Bush is starting to fight back, this article by the AP basically lays it to rest.

President Bush warned Democrats Tuesday to accept his offer to allow top aides to testify about the firings of federal prosecutors only privately and not under oath, or risk a constitutional showdown from which he would not back down.

That is because he IS the President. OK, Bush is the President, the Federal Prosecutors are at the discretion of the President. They work for HIM. Congress is trying to change that, with what would be un-Constitutional. Just like the war. He IS the Commander and Chief. There is only one. HIM, not Congress. That is why the are trying to change that. Which would be un-Constitutional.

It’s like you are the boss of Wal-Mart. You chose to, for whatever, fire someone, and Target tells you, you have to explain to THEM why. You get the point. But the President IS getting serious.

"We will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants," Bush said in a statement from the White House. "I proposed a reasonable way to avoid an impasse."

He added: "There's no indication ... that anybody did anything improper."

But they do not care about law. They do not care about those attorneys, the war, the American people, nor this country. All they care about is getting Bush. Why did noone say anything when President Clinton fired all 93? This would include one that was investigating HIM. One investigating an associate of the Clintons, and then hired "White House" friendly people to take their spot? I guess it is only "wrong" if your last name is Bush.

Oh, and a side note. Another I told you so. According to The Washington Post.

House Democratic leaders today locked down two critical Democratic converts -- one liberal, one conservative -- for their massive emergency war spending bill that would set deadlines for the removal of U.S. troops from Iraq. But top Democrats conceded they still have not secured enough votes to pass the measure.

Any questions?
Peter

Sources;
Bloomberg-Bush Administration Fights Back on Prosecutor Firings
AP-Bush warns Democrats to accept his offer
Reuters-Rove offered for unsworn testimony
The WP-House Democrats Still Short Votes to Pass Iraq War Spending Bill

Another One Bites The Dust and Other "Shockers"

Hey folks,

GOOD Friday morning to you.

It has happened again. AP reported last night, GOP turns back Iraq pullout plan.

Democrats aggressively challenged President Bush's Iraq policy at both ends of the Capitol on Thursday, gaining House committee approval for a troop withdrawal deadline of Sept. 1, 2008, but suffering defeat in the Senate on a less sweeping plan to end U.S. participation in the war.

The Democrats are impotent by some of their own party. The MMD {Mass Media Drones} can say whatever they want. But in truth, the new leadership, has done NOTHING. As a side note, it was The President telling them to get to work on the Immigration Bills. Maybe he felt sorry for them. It is also something that he feels strongly about. It MAY even get passed.

In the Senate, after weeks of skirmishing, Republicans easily turned back Democratic legislation requiring a troop withdrawal to begin within 120 days. The measure set no fixed deadline for completion of the redeployment, but set a goal of March 31, 2008. The vote was 50-48 against the measure, 12 short of the 60 needed for passage.

Senate Democrats promptly said they would try again to force a change in Bush's policy beginning next week when they begin work on legislation providing money for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Blah, blah, blah. I told you folks, vote after vote, investigation after investigation. Most of it they KNOW will fail before they even start. Like the investigation and hearing about the fired US Attorneys. Clinton fired 93 at once. Bush tried to work with all. He fired eight, YEARS after he took over. Plus they serve the President. He has n\done nothing illegal. Nothing was said about Clinton firing 93 at once. Now you have their {LWL} own lawyers telling the truth, there was NO laws broken. This is just more waste of time.

Then you have the President FINALLY starting to address this mess. AP also reported yesterday, Bush prods Congress on supporting troops

President Bush on Thursday challenged lawmakers to prove their support for troops in Iraq by agreeing to more war spending without attaching a timeline for withdrawal or any other conditions.

Bush used a fundraising speech for House Republican candidates to push back on Democrats opposed to his Iraq plans.

He said,

"Some in Congress are using this bill as an opportunity to micromanage our military commanders, or to force a precipitous withdrawal in Iraq, or threaten vital funding for Iraqi security forces to fund projects that have nothing to do with the war on terror," Bush said at a dinner hosted by the National Republican Congressional Committee.

"I believe that members of Congress were sincere when they say they support our troops, and now is the time for them to show that support," the president said. "Our men and women in uniform are risking their lives."

This is all true. It took VP Cheney to get the thing rolling, but it seems that Bush is starting to face this ongoing attack from the LWL.

I love this one. Hillary flip flops AGAIN. According to the NYT, Clinton Says Some G.I.’s in Iraq Would Remain

WASHINGTON, March 14 — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a "remaining military as well as political mission" in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qeada,deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military.

I’m almost out of time, but this one is priceless. "If I get elected, I will end this war." Before that, it was, "I support the President. I voted for this war." A few days ago "Bring our troops home NOW!" Today?

"It would be far fewer troops," she said. "But what we can do is to almost take a line sort of north of — between Baghdad and Kirkuk, and basically put our troops into that region, the ones that are going to remain for our antiterrorism mission, for our northern support mission, for our ability to respond to the Iranians, and to continue to provide support, if called for, for the Iraqis."

I don’t get it. Maybe more on this article on Saturday. But this IS who this people are. Obsessed, hate filled, hypocritical, do nothing flip flopers. Go figure.

Peter

Sources;
AP-Senate GOP turns back Iraq pullout plan
AP-Bush prods Congress on supporting troops
NYT- Clinton Says Some G.I.’s in Iraq Would Remain