No. That's not even what they are claiming. They cannot be questioned about what they do during the execution of their office.
The AG is in charge of the section of the branch that fired these people. If he lied, and it wasn't simply a mistake as they claimed, I'd like to see evidence of it. Why does it seem we constantly forget innocent until proven guilty? -----Original Message----- From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 3:18 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Gonzo: I'm Staying For The Kids > tBone wrote: > Separation of powers? > > Ringing any bells? > Not sure what you mean by this. My question is, for example, are you covered under exec priv? That is, would you consider yourself un-subpoena-able due to the fact that you work for the gov't? About anything, too. That is, Bush is claiming that *anyone* that works for/with the executive branch is covered anytime about any topic. So, for example, if you witnesses a beating at the bar tonight, Bush would claim you're covered by exec priv. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJQ Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:231238 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
