Bush-Congress Showdown Is a Goldilocks Tale
"I wonder if this is all part of the softer, cuddlier approach of the new Fielding regime," said this lawyer. "And if so, it's certainly yielding bitter fruit for now."
But University of Richmond constitutional law scholar Carl Tobias believes that, in fact, Fielding, in this latest round at least, has been rather stingy.
"One could argue that you give as little as you can in the opening overture," says Tobias. "But it doesn't seem fair to talk about that as a reasonable offer. There just isn't much there." Indeed, says Marcus, the U.S. attorney firings is not a strong case for refusing to allow testimony, because it involves communications between White House lawyers and Justice Department staff, and not the president.
"While it's true that personnel decisions by the president are sensitive matters in which he needs confidential advice," says Marcus, "the current situation does not on its face involve advice to the president. So I don't see how testimony by the officials raises significant privilege issues."
Democrats in Congress most certainly agree. Their next step: the threat of subpoenas.
So even though little Goldilocks finally found the right-size cot to take a cozy nap, this story may not have a happy ending for a long time to come.
advertisement
