How do they spin this without it being obvious that they're being dishonest?President Bush set the stage for a political and legal showdown with Congress when he vowed Tuesday that his top aides will not testify under oath before congressional committees on the scandal involving the firing of eight U.S. attorneys.
Democrats immediately rejected Bush's offer to allow Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove and other aides to be interviewed privately, saying any testimony must be in public and under oath.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Not under oath
I don't understand the brazenness of this administration. Does anybody really doubt that, if you refuse to testify under oath, you're planning to lie? Take a look at the excerpt from an article called "Bush refuses to let aides take oath on firings":
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
New policy: Anonymous posts must be signed or they will be deleted. Pick a name, any name (it could be Paperclip or Doorknob), but identify yourself in some way. Thank you.