It's A Friday! WH Refuses Solyndra Subpoena [Archive] - Debate Policy

Kathianne

11-05-2011, 12:59 AM

How many millions? How many other 'green loans?' No answers here:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/11/obama-lawyer-no-on-gop-document-request/1

Nov 04, 2011 Obama lawyer: GOP Solyndra request is politicsThe top White House lawyer told House Republicans investigating the now-bankrupt clean energy firm Solyndra today that their request for more documents places an "unreasonable burden on the President's ability to meet his constitutional duties" and smacks of politics.

White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler also criticized the decision by a Republican-led House Energy subcommittee to issue "an overbroad subpoena that is unprecedented and unnecessary." GOP lawmakers want to see all White House documents, memorandums and e-mails related to Solyndra...

We are to believe that the WH has insufficient staff to comply?

Thunderknuckles

11-05-2011, 01:28 AM

How many millions? How many other 'green loans?' No answers here:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/11/obama-lawyer-no-on-gop-document-request/1

We are to believe that the WH has insufficient staff to comply?
I snickered as well at the line "unreasonable burden on the President's ability to meet his constitutional duties"

As if the President doesn't have a hundred and one lackeys to dig up the files for him.

fj1200

11-05-2011, 03:29 AM

I'd say it's time to remove some other burdens so the President can focus on real constitutional ones. How about they strip away all ability for "the President" to make these loans in the first place.

bullypulpit

11-05-2011, 07:40 AM

Oh how short thy mem’ry dear lady.
Bush White House Refuses to Answer Congressional Subpoenas (http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Politics/wireStory?id=3325551#.TrUqpdQmaSo)
Citing “executive privilege” the late, unlamented Bush administration dodged more than one subpoena (HUNT, 2007). Never mind that it was the Bush administration that approved the loans for Solyndra (Media Matters, 2011).

References:

HUNT, T. (2007, June 29). [I]Bush White House Refuses to Answer Congressional Subpoenas. Retrieved Nuvember 5, 2011, from ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Politics/wireStory?id=3325551#.TrUqpdQmaSo

Media Matters. (2011, September 19). What The Press Is Getting Wrong About Solyndra. Retrieved November 5, 2011, from Media Matters for America: http://mediamatters.org/research/201109190020

jimnyc

11-05-2011, 07:46 AM

Is that REALLY your only defense of Obama, Bully? That Bush did the same/similar? Another idiot doing something wrong doesn't magically mean what Obama does is right. Would be nice if we could go 5 posts about the current McChimpy administration without someone still blaming and/or going back to GWB.

ConHog

11-05-2011, 01:06 PM

How many millions? How many other 'green loans?' No answers here:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/11/obama-lawyer-no-on-gop-document-request/1

We are to believe that the WH has insufficient staff to comply?

Seriously? Anyone wanna bet what would happen to a regular citizen if they refused a federal subpoena claiming they were just too busy?

logroller

11-05-2011, 03:47 PM

Seriously? Anyone wanna bet what would happen to a regular citizen if they refused a federal subpoena claiming they were just too busy?

I don't think 'too busy' exempts one from jury duty.

ConHog

11-05-2011, 03:56 PM

I don't think 'too busy' exempts one from jury duty.

Nor any other federal subpoena. If the average joe did this they'd be in jail.

logroller

11-05-2011, 04:00 PM

Is that REALLY your only defense of Obama, Bully? That Bush did the same/similar? Another idiot doing something wrong doesn't magically mean what Obama does is right. Would be nice if we could go 5 posts about the current McChimpy administration without someone still blaming and/or going back to GWB.

I don't think it was a defense, but it does speak to the non-partisan character (or lack thereof) of administrations dodging a subpoena. You're right it doesn't make anything right, that it's not about Obama this or Bush that-- as much as the feds et al. I have to wonder if the only way to shrink the federal govt is by electing people we know to be incompetent. That anyone else will do just enough work to keep their jobs and pet projects funded and what we really need are some truly truly useless reps that wont get anything done and let all the pork spoil away...oh wait, maybe we're already doing that--bring on the sequestration.:coffee:

LuvRPgrl

11-05-2011, 05:05 PM

Oh how short thy mem’ry dear lady.
Bush White House Refuses to Answer Congressional Subpoenas (http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Politics/wireStory?id=3325551#.TrUqpdQmaSo)
Citing “executive privilege” the late, unlamented Bush administration dodged more than one subpoena (HUNT, 2007). Never mind that it was the Bush administration that approved the loans for Solyndra (Media Matters, 2011).

References:

HUNT, T. (2007, June 29). Bush White House Refuses to Answer Congressional Subpoenas. Retrieved Nuvember 5, 2011, from ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Politics/wireStory?id=3325551#.TrUqpdQmaSo

Media Matters. (2011, September 19). What The Press Is Getting Wrong About Solyndra. Retrieved November 5, 2011, from Media Matters for America: http://mediamatters.org/research/201109190020

so, your arguement is, Bush did it, and it makes him an idiot
now, Obama did it, and it makes him a _________?

Fill in the blank

ConHog

11-05-2011, 07:42 PM

so, your arguement is, Bush did it, and it makes him an idiot
now, Obama did it, and it makes him a _________?

Fill in the blank

Now now you know how this works.

It's different when our allies do the same thing we complained about our enemies doing. It's different, somehow.

Little-Acorn

11-05-2011, 08:39 PM

Never mind that it was the Bush administration that approved the loans for Solyndra (Media Matters, 2011).
Is that REALLY your only defense of Obama, Bully? That Bush did the same/similar? Another idiot doing something wrong doesn't magically mean what Obama does is right.

Especially when Bush didn't do it. He refused to fast-track it, stated that it looked like a bad deal, and sent it back for re-examination and reworking. Not until Obama got into office, was it resurrected, fast-tracked, and completed despite numerous warnings and problems.

You weren't expecting truth from little bp, were you, Jim?

red states rule

11-09-2011, 04:47 AM

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/lb1108cd20111108022453.jpg