"Two uninvited guests who slipped into a White House state dinner Nov. 24 declined to testify to Congress today about how they managed to get in, prompting a lawmaker to say they will be forced by subpoena to face questions if they don't show up. House lawmakers want answers in a hearing about how Tareq and Michaele Salahi got through security checkpoints while their names were not on a list of guests. Their publicist, Mahogany Jones, said in a statement that the couple had provided information to two lawmakers as well as the Secret Service and would not come. . . . Also, White House social secretary Desiree Rogers will not testify at the hearing, press secretary Robert Gibbs said. Allowing Rogers to testify before Congress would violate the constitutional separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches of government, he said."
http://www.usatoday.com/NEWS/usaedition/2009-12-03-capcol03_ST_U.htm?csp=34
I can understand the gate crashers not wanting to testify or taking the Fifth Amendment.
But, "White House social secretary Desiree Rogers will not testify at the hearing" because of executive privilege?
That sounds like a cover up. And, even more so after you read about Desiree Rogers background, connections and friendships:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desir%C3%A9e_Rogers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment