Roberts: If the President Does It, It’s Not Illegal
Filed Under: Intelligence
By on Feb 12th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
Roberts: If the President Does It, It’s Not Illegal
Sen. Pat Roberts on the separation of powers:
TIM RUSSERT: Senator Roberts, let me ask you a very serious question. Do you believe that the Constitution gives the President of the United States the authority to do anything he believes is necessary to protect the country?
ROBERTS: Yes, but I wouldn’t say anything he believes. I think you go at it very, very carefully. And that’s been done by every president that I know of.
In other words, the Constitution gives President Bush absolute power as long as he’s extra careful. Roberts should stick with Nixon’s version, it’s simpler.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
97 Responses to “Roberts: If the President Does It, It’s Not Illegal”
Register
RSSLogin
View Most Popular
Visit Our Affiliated Site
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Drudge
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Feith
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Gore
Guantanamo
Hagee
Health Care
Immigration
Impeachment
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
“You really don’t have any civil liberties if you’re dead.”
February 12th, 2006 at 12:51 pmPat Roberts, 2/1/06.
Now Crooks and Liars has that video labeled as being May-1977, it is clearly time stamped April 11, 1978.
February 12th, 2006 at 12:51 pmYes I agree Pat Roberts should .
Nixon: If the president does it,then its legal….
Ok he’s a good foot solider for the Herr bushco…..
February 12th, 2006 at 12:51 pmKlatu Verada Nicto.
February 12th, 2006 at 12:52 pmDOCTORS ORDERS
GET A NEW PERSCRIPTION DAMN IT!
February 12th, 2006 at 12:53 pmWhat are guys like Roberts and the rest of his congressional “toe the line at any cost Senators and Congressman going to do”, when Bush and Company figure out a way to neutralize congress and in effect make them all null and void?
For all intents and purposes I suspect that his kind is already null and void. Null and void of anything that makes a person decent and relavant that is.
February 12th, 2006 at 12:59 pmI saw this on MTP this morning and could not believe it. By the bye, what’s his party affiliation?
February 12th, 2006 at 12:59 pmOne prob with Patty boy’s “views” People do not trust this president in DROVES….and the numbers climb daily. And of course, no sane, reasonable person should place absolute trust in their leaders..duh….or it’s not Democracy is it now.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:01 pmPeople are starting to smell the coffee. And the ones smelling it still have some common sense left…they think things like…lies are bad….stealing American’s money for the top 1% ain’t cool….letting people die in New Orleans is primarily, at the end of the day, the failure of one man…GW Bush. Or have “some” ( a word the fake Conservatives like to use) forgotten where the buck stops? hmmm?
Pat Roberts really let ‘em have it today, folks.
He proved that it’s not easy walking the fine line between reality and lunicy. And he almost jumped off on the lunitic fringe.
I can simply see this duality that he has to manage. I think we all did today. He walks the Party line but likes to kick up some dust along the way. Unfortunately, the smartass comment directed toward those that fail to fall in line looked more like mud in his face.
Go figure, right???
February 12th, 2006 at 1:02 pmOver-sight? We don’t need no stinking over-sight!
February 12th, 2006 at 1:03 pmWe just KNOW that Commander Codpiece
is doing the right thing, because even a blind squirrel
finds a nut every once in a while!
Roberts toed the party line. Until more details are revealed,the debate will continue on these lines. When,if ever,will either Specter or Wilson or whoever have somebody like Tice as a witness along with one or two more NSA staff? Until somebody in the program brings out the details in a forum where some action can be taken,we stand as ineffectual witnesses to a president who says he can do anything in the name of Allah,er, I mean, defending us from Allah and his minions.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:06 pmThe republican party has a lot to answer for. They have a bad president and they are still trying to shore him up rather than cutting him loose as evidenced by Roberts. Huge budget and trade deficits, a disastrous war, an economy that is stuck in the mud for average people and the government growing more under Bush than under Clinton.
Somebody remind me - What do republicans stand for again?
Oh, I forgot. The rich got their tax cuts.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:08 pmThe issue here is very clear. Bush, by his own admission, broke the law. He could have gone through FISA, which has approved 99 percent of requests in the past. The administration could have sought these taps retroactively, then gone to a court to obtain their warrants. The only logical conclusopn to draw from this is that the administration does not want to reveal whom they had illegaly spied on. The hope, albeit a slim hope, is that the Republicans, the party in power, will look deep down in their souls and ask themselves to whom does their allegiance lay: with Bush or with the Constitution?
February 12th, 2006 at 1:10 pmPat Roberts is ‘totally’ what is wrong with Republican partisans….a disgrace to the job.
OTOH, Jane Harman totally rocked on Meet the Press this morning, she strikes me as a solid, serious and pragmatic thinker….I wish we had more like her.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:10 pmDid Socrates die in vain?
February 12th, 2006 at 1:13 pmI saw Roberts on the show and it looked like his head was going to explode as he repeated the same old lame defense of executive power in “time of war.” The poor old geezer should retire before blood starts squirting out his ears
February 12th, 2006 at 1:14 pm#6: Tom in Maine,
Our administration believes that the American people are ignorant, stupid and sinful. They believe the only cure is an authoritarian government to tell everyone how to live their life. They share that view with the religious whack-jobs like James Dobson. Some Republicans agree with Bush, some don’t. The ones that agree have no problem surrendering their authority. They keep their job, with its salary, while Bush does exactly what the congressmen would do in Bush’s position: keep the ignorant masses in line. These are the same people who have the nerve to call progressives “elitists” when it is they who are the elitists. Senators like Roberts are not going to care when they are made obsolete. The only hope is to get enough moderate Republicans to stand up to the administration.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:15 pmSenator Roberts is a certified Bush ass kisser and one of the dumbest GOP creeps to ever sit in the Senate! He must be voted out of office or impeached like King George!
February 12th, 2006 at 1:16 pm:) Fankly, my dear…
I don’t think so. He knew the foibles of men. That’s why he chose not to let them win….he valued his truth above towing the line so he could have a few more meals on earth. He remained who he was always, even faced with death. So, I think he would say to those frustrated with people that don’t value truth ( our government and a lot of it’s followers) , just keep searching for truth…not what’s comfortable., Beyond that there is nothing worthwhile. Truth is part of love as well ..I believe
February 12th, 2006 at 1:18 pmAnyone wanting to see the real skinny on Pat Roberts, go here:
February 12th, 2006 at 1:20 pmhttp://roberts.senate.gov/
Gee, he seems to be a great man! I,ve hardly ever seen a more glowing report on any senitor of the United States!
Post 19 refers to: Did Socrates die in vain ..above posted by frankly, my dear
February 12th, 2006 at 1:21 pmRoberts even mentioned his promised Senate investigation into the misuse of intel by the Bush admin - but only to stonewall and say that no intel analysts had come forward to complain about pressure from above. The corn-fed royalist has been making this claim for months now, so I guess its only a matter of time before leaks from HIS (non)investigation start appearing in the papers.
The residents of Kansas must be so proud to know they elected a rubberstamp.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:22 pmHe answers “yes” to the question, and THEN qualifies it with “but I wouldn’t say anything he believes.” Ummm, you just did! Stupid F*ck!!!
February 12th, 2006 at 1:24 pmCorrection: make that “years” instead of months.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:24 pmI wonder where these guys were when Clinton was being impeached. If the president does it, it’s not illegal!
February 12th, 2006 at 1:27 pmI guess we should just declare the United States a monarchy rather than a republic then. After all, Roberts says that Bush can do whatever he wants because he is President. Lets make sure that textbooks state that Congress and the Supreme Court subservient then to the Executive branch so that school children will not be confused.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:27 pmi suppose he’s had his “meeting” with rove, knowing that his appearance on MTP was upcoming…http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/Rove2.htm
roberts did speak of his “part 2″ coming out sometime this week - i think i may have heard that…correct me if i’m wrong here…
reminds me - joe? where’ve you been? joe? you out there?
February 12th, 2006 at 1:28 pmI’m convinced that these people can only think in terms of hierarchy - and do not understand the word ‘lateral’. They just cannot grasp that the Executive branch is equal with the Judicial and Legislative branches.
They need a Political Science course along side those self-prescribed Ethics ones. Except an actual college professor, and not Harriet Miers should teach it.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:30 pmSuzanne - While I appreciate and agree with your outlook, Socrates accepted the hemlock to show that, in a democracy, no man is above the law. It was his great gesture. He was done in by religious fundamentalists, but his gesture has outlived the gods that they were trying to protect.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:31 pmPresident Clinton once said that Washington, DC, politics is Hollywood for ugly people > lol. Senator Roberts is so damn ugly that mirrors crack in the next room! Why do these grizzled old Repubs always look like scrotums?
February 12th, 2006 at 1:33 pmWhy do these grizzled old Repubs always look like scrotums?
Comment by Jay Randal — February 12, 2006 @ 1:33 pm
I think it’s all the hate. They don’t understand that people internally produce their own hatred and that’s where it stays… nothing botox could ever fix.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:36 pm#8 Newt Realizes it; but doesnt realize its HIS ILK that are at the root of the problem…
By WILL LESTER
WASHINGTON — Newt Gingrich, who led the Republican Party to power a dozen years ago, told conservatives Saturday it is time to overhaul a balky, slow-moving government locked in the last century.
Citing multiple government failures after Hurricane Katrina, the former House speaker said the government meltdown at all levels illustrated how badly government needs to be updated in all of its operations.
“The system failed, the city of New Orleans failed, the state of Louisiana failed and the government of the United States failed,” Gingrich said. “When you see an American body on an American street sitting there for three days on television because the government can’t collect the dead, something has failed.
Newt Gingrich HAS just called President Bush a Failure.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:37 pmThanks Newt!
You do realize that he says this because he knows he can. So long as the details are kept inside the NSA,nothing can happen. There will be no details until a committee chair has hearings that will go into the details and I just don’t see that happening. Will Wilson or Sensenbrenner (oh for God’s sake!) actually call witnesses other than administration people who are not going to give up the president.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:38 pmMore tilting at windmills.
Did anyone ask Sen. Roberts, or any of the other GOP guests on the Sunday talk shows about Anne Coulter’s vile remarks? Or does that “association game” only apply to liberals?
February 12th, 2006 at 1:43 pmYes post 34 unbelievable > the hatred inside the GOP politicians in DC boils out onto their faces > it turns them ugly! Condi Rice for example was once attractive, but look at her now > her eyes are sunken and pulse with hate!
February 12th, 2006 at 1:49 pmSenator McCain was once a handsome man, but now his face is puffy, and red, pulsating with meanness! The same for Dick Cheney who scowls and looks like the devil! Shame on them!!!
If Roberts argues that the president has the authority granted to him through the resolution to use force (mind you, not a resolution to go to war) as in article II, and that the statute was made by the congress when they authorized all and full necessary force, then why pre-tell, do the RIGHTIES continue the justification of a law or a set of laws that which he all but admits can be ignored?
WHAAAAA????!!?!?!?!?!?!!!!
Rewind it again.
What country is Terrorism? - I flunked geography.
What Nationality is Terrorism? - my humanities classes failed, i guess.
What does the Government of the nation of Terrorism do that is so different than what we’re doing now? - Political sciences, I did not take.
Like the War on DRUGS; A war that has no real beginning because we all acknowledge that drugs have always been a problem, and it will have no end as long as there out there.
Like the war on HUNGER; hello?
Like the war on HOMELESS; Ahh, right.
Like the other wars on ideologies and behaviors that have no specific person, place, or thing, the war on TERRORISM has, is and will be a constant reminder to us all; that as long as there are weapons of any destruction, there will be terrorism.
But like those other wars, this war will not only be around to haunt us because of the FEAR FACTOR, but because like those other wars, we won’t get it right. We are too consumed as a nation in the here and now to even fathom what tomorrow brings.
The laws that we make today, by the Congress that we have today, ruled by the judges that we have today, will be the laws that determine the future decisions and precedents of our Presidents, Congressmen, and Judges of tomorrow. This is the SLIPPERY SLOPE that we are on at this moment in our history.
So Pat, while you may believe that the president may act outside of the law at his own whim, on his own accord, just so as long as his ministers are at his round table to approve his private decisions, and dare to be called traitors if they talk outside their confines, then so be it. What we have then is a Kings Court of the middle-ages.
What seat is your’s then Pat?
February 12th, 2006 at 1:51 pm#37,
Good point. The “liberal” media was happy to bring up Cindy Sheehan or Howard Dean when interviewing Barack Obama. You’d think the “liberal” media would use Coulter as a wedge issue too since they are so liberal.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:54 pmAnn Coulter is the assigned “bad cop” to the GOP leadership’s “good cop”
She serves the function of diversion and division while they pretend to be above it and go about taking over our Democracy . Don’t tell me she isn’t strongly encouraged by people in power.
And Frankly my dear…. I was going more general in my comments about Socrates. He really died because those in power wanted him to admit that he had mislead the youth of Athens and this threatened them. Athens was in a state of chaosat the time and the fundamentalists wanted things nailed down and simple, not a climate of investigation and self examination. He died for his right to be true to himself and his ideals. And for the right to practice them through conversation and teaching. Freedom.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:55 pmRepublicans learned NOTHING from the nixon crimes…so…we’ll do it AGAIN, resign or get IMPEACHED.
February 12th, 2006 at 2:01 pmThanks spudge boy for the vid.
Is the law flawed? Why does Russert ask Roberts whether or not he “believes that the Constitution gives the President of the United States the authority to do anything he believes is necessary to protect the country?” It really doesn’t matter what Roberts or anyone else “believes.” The Constitution is black and white. What does it say? The president either has the authority or does not. Russert should show the audience the contents of the Constitutional law on the TV screen like he does with other quotes from government officials. Then we can determine what kind of authority the president has or does not have. Why leave it to speculation or misinterpretation?
February 12th, 2006 at 2:02 pmComment by Obie
In actuality, the Constitution isn’t as clear as you think. It implies that the president may use all necessary force as granted through the congressional process of approval and oversight, however, the president argues that the approval was given in the declaration to use force against the Taliban in Afghanistan.
So the intellects argue what exactly was it that congress enacted? Daschel was very clear. The use of force did not include wire taps on American citizens on American soil. End of discussion, you would think???
Nope. The RIGHTIES of the BushCo then argue that the laws weren’t good enough, fast enough, smart enough, strong enough (Steve Austin I hear you coming) enough, that they needed to act outside of the laws that are on the books. Hugh?????!!!?!??!?!!! Didn’t they just waste precious nose picking’ time tryin’ to sell me as to why the president has the power to usurp the law? Usurp Congressional procedures.
Oh, that’s right. I remember now. The pills just kicked in. The reason the president can act outside of existing laws is because those laws are broken, but not enough to actually get ‘em fixed.
And why are they broken? Because the president says so.
February 12th, 2006 at 2:24 pmSuzanne - I agree again, but I was trying to relate Socrates’ death to the present context. Popular as he was with the youth of Athens, he was willing to die to make a point. If Bush is above the law, then either Socrates died in vain or else the United States is not a democracy.
February 12th, 2006 at 2:25 pm#8 - “People are starting to smell the coffee. And the ones smelling it still have some common sense left…they think things like…lies are bad….stealing American’s money for the top 1% ain’t cool….letting people die in New Orleans is primarily, at the end of the day, the failure of one man…GW Bush.” Comment by Suzanne
******Your point of view is consistent, to say the least. Allow me share another perspective.
People are starting to smell the herbal tea….they think things like…lies are bad….terrorists cannot be ‘reasoned’ with…stealing money from the top 1% isn’t cool….charity is wonderful….complaints with few suggestions is lazy….letting people die in New Orleans is primarily, at the end of the day, the failure of one man and woman….Mayor Ray Nagin and Governor Kathleen Blanco.
February 12th, 2006 at 2:46 pmFirst….Bush is an asshole. Now on to higher thoughts..:)
Yes Frankly maDear, I see what you’re saying. I think if Bush is allowed to be above the law, the United States is not a Democracy. But Socrates has secured his legacy regardless. You can lead a horse to water……
February 12th, 2006 at 2:48 pmSocrates is not responsible for what we do with his wisdom right? And the fact that he was true in his life means, to me, his death could never be in vain. Because the value of a person’s life, again to me, is based on how they live it, not what others choose to do in response to it. Salvation lies with each person, not with how a group behaves. I know you’re thinking in terms of ….his example is not being followed so it’s as if he died in vain. Do you see my distinction?
All arguments of this type fall completely apart when you ask people of Roberts’ ilk where exactly these supposed super-powers are described in the constitution. One would think that something this all encompassing would be specifically spelled out. Otherwise Clinton could have just declared Gore to be his successor in the interest of national security. A very go case could have been made that GW was so incompetent that it would not be in the best interest of the country to ever let him be president.
February 12th, 2006 at 2:49 pm#43 - “The Constitution is black and white. What does it say?” Comment by Obie
February 12th, 2006 at 2:50 pm*******Actually, Obie, EVERY liberal worth their salt will tell you you are ABSOLUTELY wrong. According to the progressive intelligensia, the Constitution has all kinds of things that are NOT in black and white….you know that concept of the “living, breathing Constitution?”
I respectfully disagree Aphrodite. The buck stops at the top with Bush. Legally, constitutionally, and ethically. If you don’t know that, just go back and bone up on the facts. I like herbal tea too. Let’s have a party…:)
February 12th, 2006 at 2:50 pm“[. . .] the Constitution has all kinds of things that are NOT in black and white….you know that concept of the “living, breathing Constitution?â€
Comment by mighty aphrodite — February 12, 2006 @ 2:50 pm
And the truly hilarious fact is that suddenly conservatives are finding “inherent” (royal) powers in the Constitution! Just shows how un-American they really are. Go back to England, royalist. Our ancestors didn’t like kingly rule, and neither do we.
February 12th, 2006 at 3:09 pmSuzanne - Yes, I see your point. History is history and everyone is free to make what they will of it. Cue Santayana … (except that the people who are perpetrating this atrocity on the people of the United States seem to think that he is the guy who attacked the Alamo). Anyway,
February 12th, 2006 at 3:23 pmI’m glad someone recognized the significance of the original question.
Fuhrer Bush iz never wrong!!!
February 12th, 2006 at 4:06 pmBill of rights?!? I thought is was the bill FOR the rights of right–wingers.
Roberts:
Where do you draw the line between laws that restrict the Executive which are constitutional and those which are not. You claim FISA is not. Which are? How about the new law against torture? The President seems to think he can ignore that too: http://www.boston.com/ news/ nation/ washington/ articles/ 2006/ 01/ 04/ bush_could_bypass_new_torture_ban/
How about the Freedom of Information Act - can the Executive ignore that too? How about any law? Is the Executive Branch free to ignore them all? Will you have the same view the next time a Democrat is elected President?
February 12th, 2006 at 4:14 pmLet’s just recognize that the Republican Party has become the Putsch Party. They tried to stage a putsch by impeaching Clinton and then Gore, to install Newt Gingrich as President. When that failed, they stage a putsch by stealing the election in Florida. Now, they’re trying to finish the overthrow of the Constitution by staging a putsch through enabling the President to do whatever the Executive branch of government sees fit to do. Please name me one Republican official who has carried out their oath of office to preserve and protect the Constitution. The silence will be deafening.
February 12th, 2006 at 4:42 pmMighty Aphrodite,
Anyone who blames the governor of Louisiana and the Mayor of New Orleans for what went on during and after Hurricane Katrina isn’t paying much attention. How were they supposed to get Mr. Chertoff and Mr. Brown to talk to each other? Brown and Chertoff apparently didn’t communicate.
Don’t you think the President has to take on some responsibility for all this? It isn’t like a major disaster wasn’t the likely outcome days in advance and the President had no reason to know a hurricane was approaching the United States. Come on, he is supposed to be a leader. He should have made sure his people were ready.
Did you know there are trailers in Arkansas that should be in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi? That isn’t Louisiana’s fault.
February 12th, 2006 at 4:55 pmThe Republican party has been infiltrated by neo-Nazi sympathizers calling themselves neocons to avoid the bad publicity associated with Hitler’s old party. Once they have succeeded in making sure that the cult of George W. Bush reigns supreme and unchallenged over any law passed by a meek Congress or a Supreme Court willing to look the other way, they will start having Bush rule by decree and the USA as we know it will disappear into the history books, destroyed from within. This is how the 230 year old American experiment in democracy and rule by law will end.
February 12th, 2006 at 4:56 pmWhose surprised @ anything this Bu$hCo whore and assklown says? He’s been actively blocking any investigations into this criminal juntas activites from day 1 because he’s on their payroll. This isn’t a legal Gov’t anymore it’s violated it’s oath some many times it’s a joke. These folks act more like a bunch of street gang thugs then a elected officals. Bu$h uses the Constitution as toilet paper. But, with all the branches of Gov’t now safetly intheir hands Bu$hCo can act with near total impunity. Their isn’t even any media left to act as a break onthem and anyone who dares stand up to them is hammer at ceaselessly by it’s own MSM and right wing flunky corp. God help us but I doubt there anyway out of this anymore. To be blunt were Screwed!!
February 12th, 2006 at 5:04 pmI think Roberts lied when he said the Democrats did not object or do anything after they were informed of the NSA spying.
In retrospect, Rockefeller should have done more. At least send another letter to Cheney.
This issue is going nowhere. They’ll change a few things and comply with FISA. I detest Bush, but am not worried about this.
Incompetence in Iraq, Deficits forever and GOP Corruption along with favors to the Rich are the winning issues.
February 12th, 2006 at 5:05 pmMighty Aphrodite,
The Constitution is a living document. It was designed to be such. Amendments are part of that design. They insure that the document lives and changes as necessary. To claim that it is all to be interpreted as “black and white” is wrong. There are areas that can be interpreted that way and others that can’t. That is pretty clear. It is to be read to protect the people’s rights and give the most liberty possible to the people, not constrain their liberty unnecessarily or unbalance the carefully constructed balance of power between government branches in a way that would make the executive branch all powerful.
The present administration is trying to interpret the Constitution incorrectly. They are even going against DIRECT statements in the Constitution. The fourth amendment, for example, does establish the standard of “probable cause” and call for warrants. It doesn’t say “reasonable”.
If you are buying all this garbage you are being fed about FISA and presidential power, you aren’t paying very good attention or being vigilant in regard to your liberty.
February 12th, 2006 at 5:09 pm#57- My dear NSA - It must really be hard being you - a “neo-Con” conspiracy under every rock!!!!! But I do have one question (which I have posted but you may have missed the thread):
WHICH IS IT - Is George W. Bush the stumbliing, bumbling ignoramus who fooled the majority of the American people?
-OR-
Is George W. Bush an eviiiiilllll mastermind out to control the world?????
February 12th, 2006 at 5:11 pmSen. Pat Roberts seems to be trying to SAVE a sinking ship. I’m sure it won’t be long before we’ll all hear from a few “others†who are possibly criminally connected in this too.
The REAL problem for them will be what’s above the current “corruption†level of crimes! You’ll probably fall out of your chair, so please fasten your seatbelt!
When the other higher levels of crime surface, that’s when you’ll start to understand WHY people, like Pat Roberts, are trying to stop the movement against all the obvious lies coming from the White House! You haven’t seen anything yet! Additional proof will be with surfacing their Corruption Laundromats! I know of a few and one is HUGE! This will show us who has been stealing out TAX Dollars too!
February 12th, 2006 at 5:45 pmMA …..George W. Bush the stumbliing, bumbling ignoramus who fooled the majority of the American people.
Karl Rove is an eviiiiilllll mastermind out to control the world( through the ciontrol of the Bush admin and his blackmail tactics in congress)Why do ypou think bush can’t do anything without him.
February 12th, 2006 at 6:06 pmRoberts was unbelievable! I was more shocked that Harman and Daschle didn’t take him to task for such a statement. If these Democratic leaders are the best the party has to offer, no wonder the party is so ineffectual. Harman needs to be replaced on the intellegence committee for her lack of spine and republican-lite attitude and well good thing Daschle is gone. The bumbling Roberts looked primed for an ugly explosion and if an adept politician like Russ Feingold was at that table, I think it would have lead to some light being shined on how really complicit the Intellegence committtee has been on this topic.
February 12th, 2006 at 6:57 pmThere is this great pull towards unlimited presidential power, especially in the time of war. This is countered by an ever increasing resistance to dictatorial authority.
We haven’t won the war on poverty because we haven’t killed all the poor. We haven’t won the war on drugs because we haven’t killed all the drug addicts. We won’t win the war on terror until we kill all the terrorists. And only a dictator can be ruthless enough to win these wars.
What’s the worst that can happen if we give the president the power he needs to combat the terrorists? Really: End of life as we know it on this planet. Is that so bad? I mean, that way every individual gets to go to his/her concept of heaven or hell and we are done with the misery of life on this plane of existance. End of story.
Intelligent design. Go figure.
February 12th, 2006 at 7:06 pmGWB is the idiot. Dick Cheney is the evil mastermind. That’s not all that hard to figure out, is it?
February 12th, 2006 at 7:24 pm#26 - “I wonder where these guys were when Clinton was being impeached. If the president does it, it’s not illegal!”
February 12th, 2006 at 7:26 pmComment by Noonan — February 12, 2006 @ 1:27 pm
****Good point, Noonan!!! Just one question - what part of the bl*w j*b$ President Clinton got from Monica, lascivious behaviour with the other women and lying about a sexual harassment civil suit aided our national security?? Just wondering….
Aphrodite,
My dear, don’t you realize that Clinton’s daliances in the White House caused 9/11? And Katrina? If only Clinton had kept Saddam Hussein from amassing weapons of mass destruction, Bush would not have had to bomb Iraq back to the stone age. If only Clinton had put qualified people in charge of FEMA, the agency would have been able to properly respond to Katrina. If only Clinton would have left the federal budget in the black, we wouldn’t be facing multi-trillion dollar deficits.
Oh, wait…I think I’ve been channelling O’Reilly again. sorry….
February 12th, 2006 at 7:40 pmmighty….here’s the rub…Clinton/Monica behavior had no thing at all to do with national security.
February 12th, 2006 at 7:51 pmmighty….here’s the rub…Clinton/Monica behavior had no thing at all to do with national security.
February 12th, 2006 at 7:51 pm#68 Good qyestion MA why did the Republican congress waste all that time on Clinton instead of investigating the real threat from outside the country. Also why did fiscally conservative republicans not restrain the spend thrift Ken Starr when he wasted 40 million dollars on the incidents you deplore? The money and time should have been spent on making this country a safer place from terrorists like the ones who bombed the twin towers, US embansies, warships, but clintons BLOW-JOB was much more important an issue to investigate….RIGHT?
February 12th, 2006 at 7:51 pmIllegal orders, NSA, and rancid memories . . .
House Judiciary Briefing: Monday 3PM EST, Feb 13th
Chris Cylke may have some news on why the White House and DoJ are worried: [ http://tinyurl.com/cwacl ]
February 12th, 2006 at 8:07 pm#71 Excellent! Bravo to you, Clif!
February 12th, 2006 at 8:11 pmaphro - Just one question - what part of the blow job President Clinton got from Monica, lascivious behaviour with the other women and lying about a sexual harassment civil suit HINDERED our national security?? Just wondering…
February 12th, 2006 at 9:11 pm#74 please don’t say BLOW JOB to MA it brings back the horrors …oops I did it again..LOL
February 12th, 2006 at 9:33 pmI think a hacker or GOP agents are trying to interfere in posting on thinkprogress threads tonight! Also porn popups occur on here, so organized attack on this site perhaps?!
February 12th, 2006 at 9:47 pmI work in a doctor’s office, and a couple of the girls are faithful followers of James Dobson and are part of the fanatical religous right. It drives me crazy that they still fervently believe that Saddam has buried WMDs under the sands of Syria, that Bush is a decent, honest man whose domestic spying is legal, and Saddam conspired with Osama in the 9-11 attacks. They dismiss any and all evidence to the contrary as the work of the America-hating Michael Moore crowd. They sincerely believe that Bush is God and walks on water.THERE ARE NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE WHO REFUSE TO SEE. God help our country and the world when enablers(like the ‘good German’ under Hitler) are in charge.
February 12th, 2006 at 9:57 pmBesides Roberts’ impossible to follow answers - the memory pills ain’t workin/ - the part that drove me nuts was the was the oft asked “you voted to authorized the use of force, would you vote against it now?”
Someone please teach the Democrats how to anser that quenstion. It’s George’s war, hang it around his neck. Knowing the debacle it’s become, it’s time to start answering with an emphatic NO.
Daschle’s not even in Congress anymore and he still can’t bring himself to slip out a no. What’s to lose? The majority of the public is against the war. Trust me, they’ll understand. And if the Democrats actually stood up and called the war a mistake, we’ll all feel better about having a party that might finally stand for something.
February 12th, 2006 at 10:56 pmGreat posts here today!
February 12th, 2006 at 10:57 pmI also saw Roberts on MTP and he was a defensive, angry Bush-ass-kisser who acted more than a little looney.
He practically declared that Bush is King and can do no wrong because he IS president; eerily reminiscent of Nixon.
For a gang of Rethuglicans who challenged Clinton on everything, (even as he was president and supposedly also incapable of error)these guys have done a 180, as they worship at the altar of Bush.
He is in denial of his promise to open up phase II of the intel investigation which has never materialized even after the Dems held up the Senate and forced him to say something. All he did was angrily declare that the report was ready and would be out in two weeks — that was in November!
Is it any wonder that America is in peril with Bush in charge and idiots like Roberts at his side.
MA, you did know that was a stupid comment before you said it right? Please say you did because I had so much respect for you…oops, no, I lied.
February 12th, 2006 at 10:57 pmThere’s just no “yes, but” answer to that question, unless maybe it would be “yes, but that would mean I, as a senator , am irrelevant.”
February 12th, 2006 at 11:41 pm#80 MA-IRI-Gary Rupert… aren’t wrong because we don’t want to drink the kool aid, It is like arguing with my daughter when she says she can talk to the dog, I don’t “believe enough”(her words), but she’s nine so I understand her.
February 12th, 2006 at 11:57 pm[…] In other presidential office faux pas: will people finally start listening to what the references to history? For months, I’ve been saying that Bush is going completely Nixon on us, and people have laughed it off. Come on people, get with the program! It’s like we’re back in the 70s. Maybe I’ve said enough… […]
February 13th, 2006 at 12:15 amjust a shaman’s vision, but I have already seen the entire eastern seaboard in flames….millions gone….and the earth covered in fog and ice….
few will notice this little post. is it prophetic? or will we change from that path?
to quote yoda, “always in motion, the future.”
February 13th, 2006 at 12:56 amPost 84 that could happen if Bush and Cheney remain in power, so they must be impeached, or we might all perish!
February 13th, 2006 at 1:51 amI too read this guy’s bio off his site a while back, and, despite his pronouncements of legality, I didn’t see where he is a lawyer. He has also obstructed the work of the Senate Intelligence Committee and is a real danger to American liberty, IMHO.
February 13th, 2006 at 1:56 amOops. For the record, I would like to retract my comments. I had several ideas in mind, but failed to articulate them correctly. The Constitution is a living document. And laws are written to amend it to further refine our system of government. I would hope that the laws are written to expand our civil liberties. I would rather have the country move forward. My statement about the Constitution being black and white was very abstract and wrong. I guess I was trying to say that our system of goverment, the three branches and the system of checks and balances should be very clear and respected. I’m just frustrated with this administration failing to follow the laws and making up their own. The FISA act had been amended 15 times and it is still not good enough for the president. And I like the president’s comment on the FISA act written in 1978 and now it is 200…6, and it is a different world. If he doesn’t like it, then he should continue to go back to Congress until he gets something that will work. The Constitution was written in 1776, and it is still a work in progress…
February 13th, 2006 at 7:48 amIRI, Puny Hermaphrodite, Scary “Gary” Pookbutt, Trashy, Bluba*ls State inbRed here’s your fuhrer’s national security hoax:
“A new poll commissioned by the American Bar Association (ABA) found 52 percent of the American public say the president cannot suspend constitutional freedoms in the fight against terrorism. Seventy-seven percent of the respondents expressed deep reservations about Bush’s secret domestic surveillance program.”
-American Progress Report-
…then there’s the one about how the Republiscum in Congress have lowered the boom on Bushiva’s failure to respond to Katrina…
…and L’il Dick’s murderous rage (hunting “accident” my a*s)- the bi*ch shot a man!
…still a lot of talk…
…but no action…
Can I get an impeachment?
The curse is working…
February 13th, 2006 at 12:21 pmHmmm… “If the President Does It, It’s Not Illegal” sounds as the logic of Forrest Gump. So much for a Senator.
February 13th, 2006 at 12:27 pmThis guy Roberts kneels dutifully in front of Bushiva and L’il Dick daily…
…his Brooks Brothers suits have the stains to prove it….
February 13th, 2006 at 12:44 pmI don’t disagree that the Repubs wasted alot of time AND money on Clinton’s disfigured “member”. My 20/20 disagreement with him isn’t his sexual or family morals - we all know he has none in that department - rather, he handled the terrorism in the 90’s like Barney Fife. And have that schmuck, AlGore, out glad handing the Muslim community. I think Al should have shown his New Age sensitive side and donned a burka while delivering his latest verbal tripe.
February 13th, 2006 at 2:17 pmFat Papa - your citation of American Progress is almost as unbiased as my quoting the American Spectator. Please tell me how and when progs hope to CONvince the American public that national security is a PRIORITY of their platform.
P.S. You seem like such a pervert that I’m GLAD you don’t live near me. No wonder you admire Mr. Bill so much….jealous?????
February 13th, 2006 at 2:31 pmClinton’s disfigured “memberâ€. You know personally Clinton’s member? It is you, Monica?
February 13th, 2006 at 2:31 pmmighty assodite.
Clinton has been out of office for how long now?
How exactly did Clinton handle terrorism that would lead you to equate him with ol Barney? Do not just spew - cause that don’t work round here. Your boy W has not exactly covered himself in glory in his war on terrorism - if you were intelectually honest (your post indicate otherwise)
you would have to admit:
Iraq not equal to 911 attack
saddam had NO wmd
OBL is still on loose and no concern apparently to W.
Katrina natural disaster could have been a terist attack -
and the bungling would have been same (provided the vicims were not lilly white of course).
Pat Robertson is a tool and a lying one at that. If your boy is so right - why fear an honest investigation on what lead up to the quagmire in Iraq? something to hide?
So quick on judging mericans on spying - cause “if they have nothing to hide” why should they fear being spyed on.
You would not be so cavalier if a Dem was violating FISA.
That is for damn sure.
If you dare answer be on point else stfu and die.
February 13th, 2006 at 3:23 pmSo…. according to this logic (whatever the president does is legal because hes the president and he decides the law), this logic would imply that if george bush set a baby on fire on the whitehouse lawn it would be legal because the president did it. oh of course the baby was going to grow up to be a terrorist, so this was all done in the name of national security. Wow.. amazing. Also if a Dem prez takes office and jails all republicans because they are a threat to national security, it would be legal because whatever the president does is legal. yea that was a real thought out argument.
February 13th, 2006 at 3:27 pm#95 - - “Royal Highness, aphrodite,
Clinton has been out of office for how long now?”
Ignorant comment by, the aptly named “Donkdip”
*****Dear DonkeyDip - Six years - which isn’t along time except to self absorbed liberals. But the most important park of your lacking question is the understanding that Mr. Bill and his traveling penis, was the Prez. directly proceeding Bush. His military decisions, expenditures, etc. indirectly affect the successor 8 1/2 months later.
“How exactly did Clinton handle terrorism that would lead you to equate him with ol Barney? Do not just spew - cause that don’t work round here. Your boy W has not exactly covered himself in glory in his war on terrorism - if you were intelectually honest (your post indicate otherwise)
you would have to admit:” - More stupidity from DonkDip
******** clinton thought he was doing the right thing by his peace, love, dove base - but he inadvertantly contributed to our current problems by throwing like a girl; by handling this as a law enforcement issue and NOT a national security issue. His taking action ranging from “nothing” to “next to nothing” in regard to the attacks on the Khobar Towers, the embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya and the USS Cole translated into “weakness” to the barbarians.
“Spew”? You mean like that idiotis AlBore? As one of my favourite Presidents said, “Second guessing is not a strategy.”
The rest of your post is too sophomoric and stupid (good alliteration) to reply to. You sound like a high school “firebrand” - if you are older than 19 - go right to your principal and ask for a refund, OK??
February 13th, 2006 at 6:49 pmsp. correction: “part” NO “park”
February 13th, 2006 at 6:50 pmIt is like arguing with my daughter when she says she can talk to the dog, I don’t “believe enoughâ€(her words), but she’s nine so I understand her.
Comment by Clif — February 12, 2006 @ 11:57 pm
So what does the dog have to say? It might help comprehend Madga’s incoherent rants…
February 13th, 2006 at 9:26 pmFor those of you who are part of the “rapture” crowd, what or why do you fear? If Muslims attack the United States and kill millions of you, your souls will be released to live forever in happiness and love. Why then must you have a commander at the helm to safeguard you? Surely, heaven is a far better place than this? I would think you would want to get it over with quickly? That weak democratic party that fought the Kaiser, Hitler, Korea, and Viet Nam,would surely allow WMD to inundate this country, sending you and your children to a right wing heaven. Why not elect any democrat to hasten the day?
February 14th, 2006 at 2:59 amHow can so many people still be so blind after so much has came out on this white house ? At least we didn`t lose under Clinton are boys din`t die every day .We had our companies still in america and work .IT seemed to me people liked Clinton the world over Why would he get standing ovactions if they didn`t care for the way he got this country in shape now it`s going down hill fast We need new people in WAshington.
February 14th, 2006 at 12:24 pm