Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
They must be taking a cue from the Bush administration, which didn't bother to show up for supoenas either.
I know Rove ignored one at first, but I can't find anything where the Bush White House did. Link?
Oh please.
Not only did they ignore supoenas, they refused to take any oaths when they did testify and they classified just about everything secret.
That and they redacted an entire chapter from the 9/11 commission report that implicated the Saudis as responsible.
the WH is not denying there are other documents related to the situation.Sooo... just out of curiosity... How many Documents are there? 85K seems like a hell of a lot of documents.
To put it the way a Conservative did a few posts ago.
Commission: We want to see all internal Documents pertaining to Solyndra.
WH: OK... let us dig 'em up.....(Time passes by)..... Ok, here ya go... 85K pages of stuff... have at it.
(Commission scours over the documents with a fine tooth comb and finds nothing)
Commission: No... We meant your real Birth Certif..... er, I mean All of the Documents!
WH: We gave them to you
Commission: You are refusing to cooperate!
They claimed executive privelage.
That was the smoking gun.
Why do you feel the need to spin the truth?
Curious....
Do you not care to fidn out if the WH did, in fact, make this loan knowing it was a very risky venture?
Furthermore...are you not at all curious to know as to why the taxpayer, for the first time in history was lowered to a second position on the assets?
White House Misses Deadline for Solyndra Subpoena
The White House on Thursday missed the noon deadline for responding to the Republican-approved subpoena issued last week demanding the White House turn over "all documents" pertaining to the Solyndra loan guarantee.
But while White House aides earlier told Fox News there are no plans to produce more documents on the bankrupt solar panel firm until Republicans agree to narrow the scope of their request, House Republicans issued a statement saying they expect some response from the White House by the end of the day.
Read more: White House Misses Deadline For Solyndra Subpoena | Fox News
White House spokesman Eric Schultz noted Thursday that the administration has produced more than 85,000 pages of documents to date, including 20,000 pages the day before the vote on the subpoena
Read more: White House Misses Deadline For Solyndra Subpoena | Fox News
If the WH had nothing to do with the Solyndra debacle then why would they possess 85 thousand pages of documents???? to date?????
Time for Republicans to wait eh?
the WH is not denying there are other documents related to the situation.Sooo... just out of curiosity... How many Documents are there? 85K seems like a hell of a lot of documents.
To put it the way a Conservative did a few posts ago.
Commission: We want to see all internal Documents pertaining to Solyndra.
WH: OK... let us dig 'em up.....(Time passes by)..... Ok, here ya go... 85K pages of stuff... have at it.
(Commission scours over the documents with a fine tooth comb and finds nothing)
Commission: No... We meant your real Birth Certif..... er, I mean All of the Documents!
WH: We gave them to you
Commission: You are refusing to cooperate!
They claimed executive privelage.
That was the smoking gun.
Why do you feel the need to spin the truth?
Curious....
Do you not care to fidn out if the WH did, in fact, make this loan knowing it was a very risky venture?
Furthermore...are you not at all curious to know as to why the taxpayer, for the first time in history was lowered to a second position on the assets?
as far as the loan... Whatever.... I don't give a shit. We need Green technology and there are going to be risks, failures and setbacks before we see the final rewards.
As to the second part... I've seen you say that over and over again. Explain to me what you mean. For the first time in history???? Really? You want to go there when the CEO's on Wall Street got their overblown bonuses for running their businesses into the ground and the taxpayers are STILL losing their homes? How soon we forget.
the WH is not denying there are other documents related to the situation.Sooo... just out of curiosity... How many Documents are there? 85K seems like a hell of a lot of documents.
To put it the way a Conservative did a few posts ago.
Commission: We want to see all internal Documents pertaining to Solyndra.
WH: OK... let us dig 'em up.....(Time passes by)..... Ok, here ya go... 85K pages of stuff... have at it.
(Commission scours over the documents with a fine tooth comb and finds nothing)
Commission: No... We meant your real Birth Certif..... er, I mean All of the Documents!
WH: We gave them to you
Commission: You are refusing to cooperate!
They claimed executive privelage.
That was the smoking gun.
Why do you feel the need to spin the truth?
Curious....
Do you not care to fidn out if the WH did, in fact, make this loan knowing it was a very risky venture?
Furthermore...are you not at all curious to know as to why the taxpayer, for the first time in history was lowered to a second position on the assets?
as far as the loan... Whatever.... I don't give a shit. We need Green technology and there are going to be risks, failures and setbacks before we see the final rewards.
As to the second part... I've seen you say that over and over again. Explain to me what you mean. For the first time in history???? Really? You want to go there when the CEO's on Wall Street got their overblown bonuses for running their businesses into the ground and the taxpayers are STILL losing their homes? How soon we forget.
White House Misses Deadline for Solyndra Subpoena
The White House on Thursday missed the noon deadline for responding to the Republican-approved subpoena issued last week demanding the White House turn over "all documents" pertaining to the Solyndra loan guarantee.
But while White House aides earlier told Fox News there are no plans to produce more documents on the bankrupt solar panel firm until Republicans agree to narrow the scope of their request, House Republicans issued a statement saying they expect some response from the White House by the end of the day.
Read more: White House Misses Deadline For Solyndra Subpoena | Fox News
White House spokesman Eric Schultz noted Thursday that the administration has produced more than 85,000 pages of documents to date, including 20,000 pages the day before the vote on the subpoena
Read more: White House Misses Deadline For Solyndra Subpoena | Fox News
If the WH had nothing to do with the Solyndra debacle then why would they possess 85 thousand pages of documents???? to date?????
Time for Republicans to wait eh?
Curious...
Are you not interested in finding out if, in fact, the WH made this loan knowing it was a very risky investment?
Furthermore, are you not at all interested in finding out why the taxpayer was downgraded to a subordinate second position on the assets...something that has never been done before?
The problem is... How can you call it "ignoring a subpeona" when they turned over all of those pertinent documents. The real issue is the GOP beating a dead horse and playing this out in the court of public Opinion...
Funny how when it's a Conservative(Cain), it's considered dirty pool with you guys.
I know Rove ignored one at first, but I can't find anything where the Bush White House did. Link?
Oh please.
Not only did they ignore supoenas, they refused to take any oaths when they did testify and they classified just about everything secret.
That and they redacted an entire chapter from the 9/11 commission report that implicated the Saudis as responsible.
I'm talking strictly about ignoring subpoenas at the moment, as that was the topic initially under discussion in the OP I commented on. I am not disputing anything else you just said, mind you. I am simply asking if there were cases where the Bush White House ignored a lawful subpoena, as the Obama White House appears to be doing now.
Time for Republicans to wait eh?
Curious...
Are you not interested in finding out if, in fact, the WH made this loan knowing it was a very risky investment?
Furthermore, are you not at all interested in finding out why the taxpayer was downgraded to a subordinate second position on the assets...something that has never been done before?
I guess you chose not to explain this, but just repeat it.
Like I said... where was the Taxpayers' Position during the Wall Street Bailouts?
Time for Republicans to wait eh?
Curious...
Are you not interested in finding out if, in fact, the WH made this loan knowing it was a very risky investment?
Furthermore, are you not at all interested in finding out why the taxpayer was downgraded to a subordinate second position on the assets...something that has never been done before?
I guess you chose not to explain this, but just repeat it.
Like I said... where was the Taxpayers' Position during the Wall Street Bailouts?
EDIT: Sorry. I see you did address this, probably as I was posting... my bad
Oh please.
Not only did they ignore supoenas, they refused to take any oaths when they did testify and they classified just about everything secret.
That and they redacted an entire chapter from the 9/11 commission report that implicated the Saudis as responsible.
I'm talking strictly about ignoring subpoenas at the moment, as that was the topic initially under discussion in the OP I commented on. I am not disputing anything else you just said, mind you. I am simply asking if there were cases where the Bush White House ignored a lawful subpoena, as the Obama White House appears to be doing now.
Well it wasn't a one time thing. They did it alot.
Lawyer: Bush told ex-staff to ignore subpoena - politics - msnbc.com
Judge Rules Bush Advisers Cant Ignore Subpoenas - NYTimes.com
Once you have an established precedent, it's extremely difficult to make the case that sort of behavior doesn't apply here.
Oh please.
Not only did they ignore supoenas, they refused to take any oaths when they did testify and they classified just about everything secret.
That and they redacted an entire chapter from the 9/11 commission report that implicated the Saudis as responsible.
I'm talking strictly about ignoring subpoenas at the moment, as that was the topic initially under discussion in the OP I commented on. I am not disputing anything else you just said, mind you. I am simply asking if there were cases where the Bush White House ignored a lawful subpoena, as the Obama White House appears to be doing now.
Well it wasn't a one time thing. They did it alot.
Lawyer: Bush told ex-staff to ignore subpoena - politics - msnbc.com
Judge Rules Bush Advisers Cant Ignore Subpoenas - NYTimes.com
Once you have an established precedent, it's extremely difficult to make the case that sort of behavior doesn't apply here.
White House Misses Deadline for Solyndra Subpoena
The White House on Thursday missed the noon deadline for responding to the Republican-approved subpoena issued last week demanding the White House turn over "all documents" pertaining to the Solyndra loan guarantee.
But while White House aides earlier told Fox News there are no plans to produce more documents on the bankrupt solar panel firm until Republicans agree to narrow the scope of their request, House Republicans issued a statement saying they expect some response from the White House by the end of the day.
Read more: White House Misses Deadline For Solyndra Subpoena | Fox News
White House spokesman Eric Schultz noted Thursday that the administration has produced more than 85,000 pages of documents to date, including 20,000 pages the day before the vote on the subpoena
Read more: White House Misses Deadline For Solyndra Subpoena | Fox News
If the WH had nothing to do with the Solyndra debacle then why would they possess 85 thousand pages of documents???? to date?????
Time for Republicans to wait eh?
the WH is not denying there are other documents related to the situation.
They claimed executive privelage.
That was the smoking gun.
Why do you feel the need to spin the truth?
Curious....
Do you not care to fidn out if the WH did, in fact, make this loan knowing it was a very risky venture?
Furthermore...are you not at all curious to know as to why the taxpayer, for the first time in history was lowered to a second position on the assets?
as far as the loan... Whatever.... I don't give a shit. We need Green technology and there are going to be risks, failures and setbacks before we see the final rewards.
As to the second part... I've seen you say that over and over again. Explain to me what you mean. For the first time in history???? Really? You want to go there when the CEO's on Wall Street got their overblown bonuses for running their businesses into the ground and the taxpayers are STILL losing their homes? How soon we forget.
and as for risks failures, etc...
I agree.
However...if you were going to invest a large sum of money...and you reviewed the papaerwork...and all indications are that the company was going out of business within a year....and other analysts told you the same thing...
Would you still invest the money or would you look for a better "green technology" investment?
Sooo... just out of curiosity... How many Documents are there? 85K seems like a hell of a lot of documents.
To put it the way a Conservative did a few posts ago.
Commission: We want to see all internal Documents pertaining to Solyndra.
WH: OK... let us dig 'em up.....(Time passes by)..... Ok, here ya go... 85K pages of stuff... have at it.
(Commission scours over the documents with a fine tooth comb and finds nothing)
Commission: No... We meant your real Birth Certif..... er, I mean All of the Documents!
WH: We gave them to you
Commission: You are refusing to cooperate!
as far as the loan... Whatever.... I don't give a shit. We need Green technology and there are going to be risks, failures and setbacks before we see the final rewards.
As to the second part... I've seen you say that over and over again. Explain to me what you mean. For the first time in history???? Really? You want to go there when the CEO's on Wall Street got their overblown bonuses for running their businesses into the ground and the taxpayers are STILL losing their homes? How soon we forget.
and as for risks failures, etc...
I agree.
However...if you were going to invest a large sum of money...and you reviewed the papaerwork...and all indications are that the company was going out of business within a year....and other analysts told you the same thing...
Would you still invest the money or would you look for a better "green technology" investment?
I understand what you are saying... and I do wonder why. Perhaps there was something promising that his advisers, or he himself noticed... I don't know.
Guess we won't know either... executive privilege and all. And BTW... Executive Privilege has been going on since 1796. In fact... Bushie was the king of Executive Privilege.....
President George W. Bush first asserted executive privilege to deny disclosure of sought details regarding former Attorney General Janet Reno,[2] the scandal involving Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) misuse of organized-crime informants James J. Bulger and Stephen Flemmi in Boston, and Justice Department deliberations about President Bill Clinton's fundraising tactics, in December 2001.[8]
Bush invoked executive privilege "in substance" in refusing to disclose the details of Vice President Dick Cheney's meetings with energy executives, which was not appealed by the GAO. In a separate Supreme Court decision in 2004, however, Justice Anthony Kennedy noted "Executive privilege is an extraordinary assertion of power 'not to be lightly invoked.' United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1, 7 (1953).
"Once executive privilege is asserted, coequal branches of the Government are set on a collision course. The Judiciary is forced into the difficult task of balancing the need for information in a judicial proceeding and the Executives Article II prerogatives. This inquiry places courts in the awkward position of evaluating the Executives claims of confidentiality and autonomy, and pushes to the fore difficult questions of separation of powers and checks and balances. These 'occasionfor constitutional confrontation between the two branches' are likely to be avoided whenever possible. United States v. Nixon, supra, at 692."[9]
Further, on June 28, 2007, Bush invoked executive privilege in response to congressional subpoenas requesting documents from former presidential counsel Harriet Miers and former political director Sara Taylor,[10] citing that:
The reason for these distinctions rests upon a bedrock presidential prerogative: for the President to perform his constitutional duties, it is imperative that he receive candid and unfettered advice and that free and open discussions and deliberations occur among his advisors and between those advisors and others within and outside the Executive Branch.
On July 9, 2007, Bush again invoked executive privilege to block a congressional subpoena requiring the testimonies of Taylor and Miers. Furthermore, White House Counsel Fred F. Fielding refused to comply with a deadline set by the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain its privilege claim, prove that the president personally invoked it, and provide logs of which documents were being withheld. On July 25, 2007, the House Judiciary Committee voted to cite Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten for contempt of Congress.[11][12]
On July 13, less than a week after claiming executive privilege for Miers and Taylor, Counsel Fielding effectively claimed the privilege once again, this time in relation to documents related to the 2004 death of Army Ranger Pat Tillman. In a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Fielding claimed certain papers relating to discussion of the friendly-fire shooting implicate Executive Branch confidentiality interests and would therefore not be turned over to the committee.[13]
On August 1, 2007, Bush invoked the privilege for the fourth time in little over a month, this time rejecting a subpoena for Karl Rove. The subpoena would have required the President's Senior Advisor to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee in a probe over fired federal prosecutors. In a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, Fielding claimed that "Mr. Rove, as an immediate presidential advisor, is immune from compelled congressional testimony about matters that arose during his tenure and that relate to his official duties in that capacity...."[14]
Leahy claimed that President Bush was not involved with the employment terminations of U.S. attorneys. Furthermore, he asserted that the president's executive privilege claims protecting Josh Bolten, and Karl Rove are illegal. The Senator demanded that Bolten, Rove, Sara Taylor, and J. Scott Jennings comply "immediately" with their subpoenas, presumably to await a further review of these matters. This development paved the way for a Senate panel vote on whether to advance the citations to the full Senate. "It is obvious that the reasons given for these firings were contrived as part of a cover up and that the stonewalling by the White House is part and parcel of that same effort", Leahy concluded about these incidents.[15][16][17][18]
As of July 17, 2008, Rove is still claiming executive privilege to avoid a congressional subpoena. Rove's lawyer writes that his client is "constitutionally immune from compelled congressional testimony."[19]
No... I am not blaming BOOOOOSH. I am just saying that because it's a President that you don't like... you guys are doing the same thing that the Libs who "KNOW" Cain harrassed those women.
It's the exact same thing that Conservatives have been doing since that dreadful day in November 2008, when they found out Obama was going to be President.
What part of "all" of the associated documents does the WH not understand?
Sooo... just out of curiosity... How many Documents are there? 85K seems like a hell of a lot of documents.
To put it the way a Conservative did a few posts ago.
Commission: We want to see all internal Documents pertaining to Solyndra.
WH: OK... let us dig 'em up.....(Time passes by)..... Ok, here ya go... 85K pages of stuff... have at it.
(Commission scours over the documents with a fine tooth comb and finds nothing)
Commission: No... We meant your real Birth Certif..... er, I mean All of the Documents!
WH: We gave them to you
Commission: You are refusing to cooperate!
With all due respect, Steel? Document "dumping" is the oldest legal trick in the book. You wait as long as you possibly can and then you give your adversary a mountain of documents through which they then have to sift looking for relevant material while you sit back and chuckle your ass off because you never included anything that was damaging in the documents you released. You then announce to the media that you are cooperating fully in the investigation as evidenced by the 85,000 pages you just handed over. Then when your opposition realizes that you gave them nothing but chaff and asks for ALL relevant material, you accuse them of wanting the Sun, the Moon and the Stars and paint them as unreasonable.
Sooo... just out of curiosity... How many Documents are there? 85K seems like a hell of a lot of documents.
To put it the way a Conservative did a few posts ago.
Commission: We want to see all internal Documents pertaining to Solyndra.
WH: OK... let us dig 'em up.....(Time passes by)..... Ok, here ya go... 85K pages of stuff... have at it.
(Commission scours over the documents with a fine tooth comb and finds nothing)
Commission: No... We meant your real Birth Certif..... er, I mean All of the Documents!
WH: We gave them to you
Commission: You are refusing to cooperate!
With all due respect, Steel? Document "dumping" is the oldest legal trick in the book. You wait as long as you possibly can and then you give your adversary a mountain of documents through which they then have to sift looking for relevant material while you sit back and chuckle your ass off because you never included anything that was damaging in the documents you released. You then announce to the media that you are cooperating fully in the investigation as evidenced by the 85,000 pages you just handed over. Then when your opposition realizes that you gave them nothing but chaff and asks for ALL relevant material, you accuse them of wanting the Sun, the Moon and the Stars and paint them as unreasonable.
And you KNOW this is what's going on as a fact? Or is it opinion?
