They Can Testify, If Not Under Oath

The Bush Administration has been involved in three scandals over this last month: The Scooter Libby leak, the Walter Reed Hospital Crisis and now firing of various federal prosecutors where contradictory statements are flying wild. And at the heart of these and many other of the Bush scandals seem to so often be the same people: Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, and others.

For some time now congress has wanted them to testify to explain what is going on. Of course they haven't. This last prosecutor fiasco seems to be the last straw and congress promises to issue supeanas to force testimonies.

What is Bush's response: Rove and others can testify, if not under oath.

Well, I've heard the argument both ways. The New York Times has a great article. But after the you hear the arguments I can't help but wonder why so many scandals, so many rumors of cover ups and now a statement which can also be taken as "They can testify, you just can't force them to tell the truth." Even if Bush is well intentioned, which I'm sure he is, it just doesn't look good. In any, *any* history class you usually view governments fraught with scandals and cover ups as less effective.

Anyways, Bush is threating to take congress to court over this, maybe all the way to the Supreme Court. It will be a constitutional showdown.