Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) joined forces with fellow GOP hypocrite, Trent Lott, who has condemned the Clinton White House for invoking a right to executive privilege. However, both Hatch and Lott have defended W's need for executive privilege in the course of investigations on the firings of US Attorneys. So they need to make a choice: they are either saying that Clinton was bad to use it so Bush is also bad to use it or it is alright for Bush to use it, so it was also alright for Clinton use it -- which is it?
Yesterday, yet another Republican Senator engaged in hypocritical partisan politics by defending the Bush Administration's stonewalling of the Senate investigation into the politically-motivated firings of eight US Attorneys.
In 1999, Senator Orrin Hatch threatened to go to court if the Clinton Administration cited executive privilege during a congressional investigation and said that such tactics amounted to "stonewalling."
But, yesterday, on "Meet The Press," Hatch defended the Bush Administration's tactics and their use of executive privilege in the current investigation over US Attorneys.
"With regard to the White House, you're talking about the top advisers to the president. The president has indicated that he's going to invoke executive privilege ... And, of course, the Democrats on the Judiciary, Judiciary Committee are not satisfied with that," said Hatch.
Only last week, GOP Senator Trent Lott also defended President Bush's decision to stonewall the investigation into the firings, contradicting his previous statements during the Clinton Administration where he himself was a leading voice criticizing President Clinton's use of executive privilege.
.
- Log in to post comments
As a life-long resident of Utah, I can assure you that this is fairly modest flip-floping by Hatch standards.
When his political contributors develop competing interests, and enter a bidding war for his favor, he flips and flops and flaps about so swiftly that he becomes no longer a mere mortal, confined to stand in one spot, but a mystical blur, who is in all places at once.
Is this a case of what New Scientist calls "Nominative Determinism"? Hatch is his name, and things can go back and forth through a hatch...
I've been away from the intertubes for a few days, and the British news hasn't been following US politics closely. So, can someone bring me up to speed: has Gonzales resigned yet?
Bob
no he has not resigned -- yet. he is slated to appear before the senate on 17 april -- so he still has some time to tender his resignation.
The Republicans always insist on having it both ways. That's the GOP: Got.Ours.Pissoff.
Oh, but you know Clinton got a blowjob! And Bush was just trying to SAVE AMERICA FROM THE LIBE^H^H^H^HTERRORISTS! Obviously, Clinton was absolutely wrong in trying to conceal his sinful ways, while Bush deserves full honors for his attempts to deceive the Dem^H^H^HAl Quada scum. Whaddya mean you don't buy it -- don't you know that buying things is the only way you peons can stop the next 9/11? Ummm.... blue dress! cigar! yellowcake! rocket tubes!
...
Hey look, there's a terrorist cell right behind you! <runs away>
</SARCASM>