MSNBC: Bush will back Gonzales and talk about the contents of Fielding’s offer

[sabra]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17702224/

<snip>

The president is to make a statement on the matter at 5:45 p.m. ET, after he returns to the White House from his trip to Kansas City. Senior officials told NBC News that Bush will back Gonzales and talk about the contents of Fielding’s offer.

[Skidmore]

1. Trying to bargain with the citizenry. Thinks he can bypass Congress

and the press and appeal to his adoring fans out here.

[BuyingThyme]

2. This might backfire very nicely.

What is the comparable Nixon move?

[rodeodance]

6. yes, it may----as people--even Conservatives Repugs are lathered up.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Maybe bush will say, "I am not on crack!"

[BuyingThyme]

12. Yes, this might be the denial moment.

Next comes the firing of the AG.

I think you've got it.

[truebrit71]

15. When Nixon offered transcripts of the oval office tapes...

..rather than handing them over...

Then they considered letting ONE person listen to the tapes but no notes...

And, eventually he was forced to turn them over (minus 12 minutes or so)

Precedent does not look good for Smirky McChucklenuts....Gonzo will be gone soon, Meiers and Lard-Butt will be forced to talk UNDER OATH and THEN the impeachments can begin...

We are getting down to the short-strokes folks, and it is gonna be one helluva show!!

[Supersedeas]

17. too bad the GOP/Media Establishment shills dare not make the comparison

[rodeodance]

3. Well, Chuck--------get that supena NOW.

[global1]

4. I Wonder How * Will Put His Foot In His Mouth This Time? ..... nt

[ProgressiveFool]

8. well, apparently he was off taking about

"terriers and barrifs" in a speech about trade policy earlier today...

[Raven]

5. He better be careful because people are not going

to have any patience with an Executive Privilege argument. Most folks are going to wonder who these guys don't want to promise to tell the truth.

[wake.up.america]

7. What does this mean? Rove can lie and get away with it? Nothing new!

[rodeodance]

9. oh, come now--just cause there will be no transcript or no oath, that does

not mean Rove will not be honest.


te he.

[louis-t]

10. Again, the more he talks, the more trouble he finds.

Keep talkin', stupid.

[Beetwasher]

13. Oh, This Oughta Be Classic! "Trust Us!"

n/t

[stevedeshazer]

14. He really is crazy.

Fielding's offer is nothing short of absurd.

Leahy and Conyers won't go for this, and neither will the public.

As someone who remembers Watergate, this is the modern version of the Saturday Night Massacre.

That dog won't hunt.

[gratuitous]

16. "Offer"

Not under oath, no transcript, closed session. Think they're trying to hide something? People with something to hide have usually done something wrong, I recall Dubya saying earlier in his administration. Does that still hold true?

I really want to hear the Bush apologists explain this one. Why would someone refuse to testify under oath if they're all good Christian men, plain-talkers and straight-shooters who always tell the truth?

I've also noticed that some of the coverage lately has hinted around that Bush might be having to address some of this because of his low ratings in the polls. We know that can't possibly be true, because Bush doesn't read the polls or act in accordance with them, because he's such a grown up. I wonder why the media would report such a blatant fabrication as that Little Lord Pissypants is suddenly all interested in the polls?