Were the Democrats bluffing when they wanted open hearings on the judge firings? If so, their bluff was called.A defiant President Bush warned Democrats Tuesday to accept his offer to have top aides speak about the firings of federal prosecutors only privately and not under oath, or risk a constitutional showdown from which he would not back down.
In return the Democrats said they would start authorizing subpoenas as soon as Wednesday for the White House aides.
In a late-afternoon statement at the White House, Bush said he would fight any subpoena effort in court.
Bush finally decided to stand up to the Senate Democrats. He is not willing to let them grandstand and publicly bash the Bush Administration, which is the only reason this was started in the first place.
This whole judge firing is just a partisan ploy as reported here. The Senate Democrats know the media will make this sound like another Watergate, yet when Bill Clinton had Janet Reno fire all 93 federal prosecutors there was hardly a ripple because the media reported it as if it was the proper thing to do.
Bush is a ‘lame duck’ president but that's no reason he should allow Schumer et al to make him into a ‘dead duck’ which is their real intent.
Link
A picture of my cave
..
..
