Comments on: White House Won’t Allow Rove, Miers To Testify

By: Think Progress » O’Donnell Tells Leahy: ‘You’re Going To Get The Truth From Karl Rove’

Fri, 23 Mar 2007 15:03:36 +0000

[...] prosecutor purge. Instead, it has offered closed door “interviews” with no oath and no transcript. The House and Senate Judiciary Committees have rejected that offer and authorized subpoenas of [...]

By: Bobby

Bobby — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:49:12 +0000

Aren’t these the same dingleberries that made the secret service testify against President Clinton. Do the Democrats have the balls to stand up to the Nazi’s in Washington.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/05/22/lewinsky.scandal/

By: Lora

Lora — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 06:15:48 +0000

Add to Kate Henry’s question in #308, Hey, Trolls: Didn’t you guys always defend warantless wiretapping by saying something like “Why worry if you’ve done nothing wrong?” Well, if Miers, Rove, etc. have done nothing wrong, why should they worry about testifying under oath and/or with transcripts?

By: Kate Henry

Kate Henry — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 05:25:31 +0000

Correct me if I am wrong, but the last I heard Harriet Miers no longer worked for Bush so I can’t see how he can refuse to allow her to testify. Subpoena her. And Subpoena Rove while you are at it. And if Bush puts up a fight, then fight back.

Tell me trolls, why would you object to Rove and Miers testifying under oath if they did nothing wrong?

By: Raymond Funamoto

Raymond Funamoto — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:37:53 +0000

FAT-F*CK Rove and “Haggy” Miers BETTER BE UNDER OATH AND IF THEY LIE—-THEY WILL BE CRUCIFIED, ALONG WITH CHIMPya, FRANKENCheney(whose screws, nuts, bolts BEING LOOSE LANDED HIM IN BED REST TODAY) and the REST of Bushland Uber Allies!!!!!
THE RULE OF LAW OF THE LAND CANNOT BE STOPPED AND WILL RUN ROUGHSHOD OVER THE NAZI-FASCIST Fuhrer HITLER CHIMPya W. Bush and HIS BANANA REPUBLIC, SO QUIT YA PETULANT OUTBURSTS AND “DRY-DRUNK” CHILDLIKE NARCISSISTIC SOCIOPATH TANTRUMS, CHIMPya—-YA DON’T SCARE OR INTIMIDATE ANYBODY WITH YA PATHETIC BULLYING AND THREATS, YA COWARDLY VARMINT AND GALOOT! I’LL KICK YA SORRY ASS RIGHT INTO The Hague, YA CREEP!!!!!

By: Marie

Marie — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 01:22:28 +0000

Katy and big papa
I think we have done the right thing – I have written my two senators, Schumer, Leahy and Reid on this matter.
They have to know how strongly the Dems feel about this issue.

By: Mr. Evil

Mr. Evil — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:26:59 +0000

#278 Flake-O: Trust me, they didn’t “lose” $8 billion. We just don’t know where it went.

By: Electric-Escape.net

Electric-Escape.net — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 23:22:30 +0000

White House Wonâ€™t Allow Rove, Miers To Testify…

Testify under oath? Are you crazy?!…

By: big papa

big papa — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:59:21 +0000

Comment by katy #299

Sorry katy,

…just get’s so BORING agreeing with everyone…

…your phone # sure got me fired up…

…called my state’s Senators AND Conyers’ office…

…left a message…

…sure wish we had us some intelligent trolls though…

…sh***t I forgot…

…no such thing…

By: Uncle Ho

Uncle Ho — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:47:00 +0000

howsad; I can get you a copy of Mao’s little red book easy if you want. just let me know, I have a few extra copies.

By: Uncle Ho

Uncle Ho — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:38:14 +0000

interviews in secret, not under oath, no transcripts, no notes, no recordings. WTF ARE THEY TRYING TO HIDE?

By: katy

katy — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:32:53 +0000

oh, i meant to add…
most of the responses i got were fairly postitive…
conyers office especially – SUBPOENAS, and he insists on an OATH…

here is a list of senate judiciary members:
http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm

By: Lora

Lora — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:28:07 +0000

most of this(SIC) liberlas(SIC) still carry Mao Tsung(SIC) little red book, they love it and worship over the Constitution.
their supposed love for the Constitution is but a rouse(SIC) to get uneducated people on their side.
Comment by howsad

You tell of a little red book but can’t even get the name of its author right–not to mention your other spelling errors. Yes, you do sound so educated!
BTW, you already lose any argument when you make such a ridiculous sweeping statement. I’ve been to China, and the little red book isn’t even carried around there any more–let alone by some of the American liberals here who were born after or just children when Mao Zedong died in 1976. Howsad it must be to be as biased as you are.

By: katy

katy — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:27:23 +0000

just heard this news while driving home… got here and in between listening to AAR and reading some of these links, i’ve been calling the senators on the judiciary and also john conyers office to say:

THEY MUST TESTIFY … UNDER OATH … NO EXCEPTIONS.

ROVE AND MEIRS, ALL OF THEM, THEY MUST BE UNDER OATH.

8 6 6 . 2 2 0 . 0 0 4 4

*
btw… i started reading these comments at 200ish…
WAY to much troll poop around…
i guess that’s part of life here, but it’s so annoying stepping around it all…

a little “talon sharpening” is fine, but i’d sure like to see that “denied attention” theory tried out too… i do what i can…
…

By: Sharon

Sharon — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:26:59 +0000

Thank’s Ben Dover, you are a dear and I intend to call the number you listed…Blessings

By: ForTruth

ForTruth — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:25:55 +0000

Actually Flaco,

Most Presidents have had some type of addictive tendencies. Yes Clinton was addicted to sex. Your boy, alcoholic. Kennedy, well, yes.

It seems America loves to put addicts in the WH. We are a dysfunctional country.

By: Flaco

Flaco — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:24:12 +0000

Yep
Flako, Oz

I knew it!

By: Flake-O

Flake-O — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:17:02 +0000

Haggard was a gay meth using adulterer blasphemer ERGO Flaco is a gay meth using adulterer blasphemer.

Flaco is a gay meth using adulterer blasphemer ERGO Patrick 1 is a gay meth using adulterer blasphemer.

That is your LOGIC Flaco, now cut the crap out and debate logically or trot off to the sparkle box and get your daily fix of stupidity.

By: Flake-O

Flake-O — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:13:59 +0000

Democrats are they not addicted? Comment by Flaco

Addiction doesn’t care what political Ideology one follows babbling buffoon. Why do you allow some pundit to reverse your logic? If one Democrat is an addict then all Democrats are addicts correct?
If then one CON is an addict then all CONS are addicts correct?
If Haggard was gay then all CONS are gay.
If Teddy Kennedy drove drunk then all democrats drove drunk
If Cheney drove drunk then all CONS drive drunk.
If Foley was immoral then all CONS are immoral.

Do you see how you have been brainwashed by your stupid little sparkle box with its insane groupthink idiocy?

Can you use that brain of yours to think beyond a word or a name of a group?

By: RUCerious

RUCerious — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:10:35 +0000

Once upon a time, in a far away land

There was a country whose leaders were wise, fair and kind..

the end.