Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rove, Conyers reach deal on testimony

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
JohnWxy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:26 PM
Original message
Rove, Conyers reach deal on testimony
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/rove-conyers-reach-deal-on-testimony-2009-03-04.html


By Susan Crabtree
Posted: 03/04/09 06:24 PM
Former White House adviser Karl Rove and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers have agreed to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, ending a months-long legal separation-of-powers battle between Congress and the administration.

Rove and Miers will not testify in public but in transcribed depositions under penalty of perjury. Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), who chairs the Judiciary panel, reached an agreement with Rove and Miers Wednesday.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tularetom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. WTF kind if deal is THAT?
Rove thumbs his nose at Conyers and Conyers says OK.

This is total bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. rove pretends to cave...look out for some more "stern letters"? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosco T. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. what part of "under penalty of perjury" don't you understand?
All they have to do it catch them in a lie... one lie.. and it doesn't say the transcripts won't be made public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-04-09 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. You make a good point that the "under penalty of perjury"
but what about transparency?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC