Bush cited as breaking ‘no comment’ policy

Dec. 15, 2005

WASHINGTON - The White House on Thursday defended President Bush’s decision to insert himself into Tom DeLay’s legal case, saying Bush was employing "presidential prerogative" when he declared the former House majority leader was innocent of criminal charges in Texas.

On Wednesday, Bush was asked during an interview on Fox News Channel whether he believed DeLay was innocent. "Yes, I do," Bush replied.

DeLay, R-Texas, was forced to step down as the No. 2 House leader in late November after he was indicted on a state charge of conspiracy to violate election laws. A second grand jury indicted him on charges of conspiracy to launder money and money laundering. The initial charge has been dismissed, but a judge has let stand the later charges.

"We don't typically tend to get into discussing legal matters of that nature. But in this instance, the president chose to respond to it," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "Call it presidential prerogative."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10486164/from/RSS/


So it's okay to comment about Delay's guilt or innocence, but Bush still can't talk about who leaked Plame's ID because there's an ongoing investigation?

lock, stock & vote fraud.

BTW it DeLay's turn in the barrel tonight.

junior sez a lot of dumb things, but this one is a gasser that will out the Harriet Mires and Bernard Kerik, (NYC Police Commioners) and Rafael Palmeiro. God! the list can go on forever, but ya got the idea, eh?

Or how about Presidential PRIORITY ! :hide:

active cases I guess.

:evilgrin:

force the door.

Someone should try, and try with all their might.

Every day. Make Scotty hit the Ho-Hos...make him a nervous wreck. Tag-team him, plague him, torture him, if you will.

Their is no longer any reason to accept this: "The WH does not comment on on-going investigations."

on the part of the shrub. 'presidential perogative' my foot.

now they're (as usual) saying it's okay.

he's a liar and a fool and an embarassment

I wonder how often and in what ways he flaps his royal gums to visiting foreign leaders and what cats he lets out of the bag.

Or maybe they don't give him access to any important information.

comination to the lock on the liquor cabinet is about all he needs to know.

asshole

YET. Yet is a keyword. :evilgrin:

He can't talk about the CIA leak case without possibly perjuring himself, so he continues to hide behind the presidential seal.
He doesn't want to talk about it. He just wants it to go away just like he wants Cindy to go away. Both are still waiting for him.

The shrub lies about everything :rofl:...think anybody will even pay attention to this?

...supeonea the SOB to testify in the CIA Leak case. He'll either settle the whole thing or you'll be able to charge him with the same things that you charged Skooter with.

when the investigation first began.

I don't believe the "interview" was under oath.

for a Grand Jury investigation. That was what got Martha Stewart in trouble, she lied to the FBI investigators.

all of it is considered under oath.

I've always wanted to see him eat those words "I don't testify".

When bush does it it's OK. Sure, it might be something we crucified Clinton for six years ago. But when bush does it he's doing it in the name of Jeebus.

with this perorgative on occasion. The usual suspects always do. Probably precedes a pardon as a sign of rescue to an ally who knows too much.

Do we actually want the Delay thing to slow down in the hopes that there will not be anything to pardon him for while bush is still in office? The thought of him walking makes me sick.

Doesn't he have to be convicted before he can be pardoned? Otherwise he'd have a get out of jail free card.

even before they are convicted. I believe that is what Gerald Ford did for Nixon and I believe, Bush Sr. pardoned some of the Iran/Contra folks before they were convicted.

Georgie will pardon all these guys and the right will say, well, Clinton did it...when there were far fewer and less controversial ones.

Fitz can take the lead from that other prosecutor (I forget which) and since these guys have been pardoned, compelled them to testify against the blivet or the vice-blivet. Since they've been pardoned they cannot invoke their 5th amendment (rights because they no longer apply). The blivet cannot pardon himself.

After all, if Mr. Bush knows something that would lead to Mr. DeLay's exoneration, isn't it his duty to come forward with that information?

{Snicker}

I just typed "if Mr. Bush knows something". {Guffaw}

is signalling his future pardon for that ugly has been gas bag delay. * thinks he's innocent so when the jury says guilty * will just pardon him.
does a pardon wipe out the record? Can delay go back to the senate leadership if * pardons him? Is he then deemed innocent?

Ugly Ugly Ugly Ugly people running this country.

"Heavens to Mergatroid", instead he's employing his presidential pierogies...:bounce:

comment when he wants to, ignore the question when he doesn't. And the MSM lapdogs woof nary a bark.

remember when they say "innocent" they mean "innocent of breaking a law".

They get around the whole guilt thing by rewriting the laws to protect the guilty.

When you say "do you torture"

They say, "we don't do anything illegal"

That is not the same thing.

at being a hypocrite!!!! Bastard.

Oops, that's his line.

surely Laura has a dictionary.

of all charges. He is presumed to be innocent. But that will change about one hour into jury deliberations.