Posted on 01/29/2002 3:27:46 PM PST by Oregon Coast Conservative
Edited on 06/29/2004 7:08:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush won the backing of Republican leaders on Tuesday in seeking to deny congressional investigators access to records critics say could show the role played by Enron Corp. in crafting an energy plan favorable to the now bankrupt company.
(Excerpt) Read more at wired.com ...
Besides, when did it become illegal to consult with a major energy marketer in drafting a national energy policy? And what part of that policy (which IS public) would have benefitted Enron specifically?
The BIG question is, why should VP Cheney statisfy any demands, or requests from the GAO and Congressional Critters like democrat Henry Waxman and republican Dan Burton? The VP would be setting a bad precedent that could effect future presidents and vp`s, from having the ability to seek out and receive advise in private. So far, all that exists is innuendo and rumor and a few outrageous and false charges by Terry McAuliffe. The key here is evidence of involvement in some impropriety and right now evidence is something which doesn't exist. No one in the Bush administration has given any impression of hiding anything. This is a Democrat inspired and media led, fishing expedition.
I believe Cheney has already released the names of the people he met with and the companies they represented. The problem is that the GAO is demanding transcripts and records of everything that was discussed. A word by word timeline of everything that transpired. Democrats like Waxman want the details so they can fabricate a connection with Bushes energy policy and prove the existence of a quid pro quo. There's no evidence to support such an inquiry.
It is the constitutional duty of Congress to provide oversight to the Executive branch-- not some Legislative creation like the GAO, which is nowhere mentioned in the US Constitution.
That he would offer such advice to the Bush administration does not bode well.
Walker's backpedaling.
There'll be no lawsuit.
Thanks, Denny.
How would they like it if the adminstration says fine, we'll release the information on our consultations -- all of our consultations!"
I have a sneaking suspicion that they'd scream bloody murder if the adminstration threatened to release notes on consultations initiated by the fair-haired boys of the liberal camp. And "all or nothing" stance might be worth considering. When the "concerned watchdogs" start crying foul, the administration can then cast them as the hypocrites that they are, and then "move on".
OK, here's a poll question to test that statement...
"What's more important...Congress's need to know about Enron and the energy task force, or the President's need to be able to receive confidential advice?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.