Quote:
Originally Posted by skyguy79
Your question seems retorical to me, or at least a very hard one to find an answer for. If I'm wrong and/or if Richie doesn't give you an answer, please do provide us with the answer for him.
As for the president's representative, they could be on the hook as you indicated. But where does the buck stop? Is the President not the chief executive, responsible for everything that happens in the White House adminiatration just as the president of most any corporation or any past president of the US? If not then we're in more trouble in this country than any of us previously thought!
|
Oh really? Then why wasn't Bush tried for war crimes or held responsible for Abu Grahib? Why wasn't LBJ tried for the same thing? Why wasn't Reagan tried for the Iran-Contra deal - no, Ollie North took the fall for that.
If the President PERSONALLY made a decision to ignore the subpoena, then you 've got the goods on him.
The reason I haven't "answered" Rickie's question is because I don't have all the facts. Or, more precisely, I don't have ENOUGH of the facts to the point that I'd feel comfortable making a leap.
So far, what I've seen is that the President's legal team seems to have dropped a ball - though I can't find any evidence of 'the other side' jumping all over it. It screams to me that there's more to this than meets the eye - but in which partisan direction, I have no idea.