Senate votes to limit Bush’s power on U.S. attorneys.
In a 94-2 vote, the Senate today voted to “end the Bush administration’s ability to unilaterally fill U.S. attorney vacancies as a backlash to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ firing of eight federal prosecutors.” The bill will cancel “a Justice Department-authored provision in the Patriot Act that had allowed the attorney general to appoint U.S. attorneys without Senate confirmation.”
UPDATE: Gonzales was supposed to appear before a House committee on Thursday to discuss the Justice Department budget and other issues not related to the U.S. Attorney purge. He just canceled. (Via Atrios)
UPDATE II: House Judiciary Committee to meet tomorrow to authorize subpoenas against Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Gonzales’ ex-chief of staff Kyle Sampson, Rove deputy Scott Jennings, and others.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
116 Responses to “Senate votes to limit Bush’s power on U.S. attorneys.”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yes!
March 20th, 2007 at 1:48 pmOh bummer for Bush. Now he’s gotto go through the confirmation process for lots of USA’s.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:51 pmVoting against, were Senator Hagel and Senator Bach(?).
March 20th, 2007 at 1:51 pmSo much for Hagel being a reasonable guy.
VETO!!!!!
March 20th, 2007 at 1:51 pmHe should have never had that power in the first place. The hastily passed Patriot Act gave him that overreaching authority.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:52 pmIt’s about time.
Sorry, Griffin…maybe next lifetime.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:53 pmTICK-TOCK….TICK-TOCK…..BUSH’S IMPEACHMENT CLOCK IS TICKING…
March 20th, 2007 at 1:53 pmVETO!!!!!
Comment by LHT
98-2;
OVERRIDE!!!!!!!
March 20th, 2007 at 1:55 pmVETO!!!!!
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists
OVERRIDE!!
Didn’t you see the vote, idiot?
March 20th, 2007 at 1:55 pm#3 - Kit Bond was the other Nay.
Thing about Hagel is that on foreign policy, there’s a lot to agree with him on. On everything else he’s a stone-cold wingnut.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:56 pmYeah, LHT, veto. That will be good for the GOP.
Heavy GOP losses in 2008. Will it wake up the party?
March 20th, 2007 at 1:56 pm94-2 = VETO PROOF for the math-challenged troll.
Uhm, AG wouldn’t have canceled because he won’t be the AG then, would he?
March 20th, 2007 at 1:56 pmgood rundown on the firings on CSPAN right now
March 20th, 2007 at 1:56 pmWoot.
So much for ‘gumming up’ the process, eh?
Let’s see Bush veto this. If he does, it is definetly over - there’s no way he can justify the policy - why would you need that kind of speed under any circumstance to place a US Attorney in power?
March 20th, 2007 at 1:57 pmNice call barfly!
March 20th, 2007 at 1:57 pmI saw the actual vote and initially there were “3″ nays which included Chuck Hagel. When the final count was announced, there were only “2″ nays. Did Hagel think he was voting on the two prior propositions perhaps since he arrived late?
March 20th, 2007 at 1:57 pmHmmm,
Does Gonzo canceling shed any light on his future status?
FITZ for AG!
March 20th, 2007 at 1:57 pmOops, only 94 to 2. My bad.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:58 pmLiberal Heart Terrorists sez:
I could take this opportunity to explain the concept of a veto-proof majority, and how that applies to the 94-2 vote on this issue, LHT…
…but you know what? It’s just easier to call you stupid.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:58 pmBack at you, RU.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:59 pmVETO!!!!!
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists
Neanderthal (idiot),you can’t veto that margin.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:00 pmSome crimes that a special prosecutor might one day look at:
1. Misrepresentations to Congress. The relevant provision, 18 U.S.C. § 1505, is very broad. It is illegal to lie to Congress, and also to “impede†it in getting information. Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty indicated to Congress that the White House’s involvement in firing the United States attorneys was minimal, something that Justice Department e-mail messages suggest to be untrue.
2. Calling the Prosecutors. As part of the Sarbanes-Oxley reforms, Congress passed an extremely broad obstruction of justice provision, 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (c), which applies to anyone who corruptly “obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,†including U.S. attorney investigations.
3. Witness Tampering. 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (b) makes it illegal to intimidate Congressional witnesses. Michael Elston, Mr. McNulty’s chief of staff, contacted one of the fired attorneys, H. E. Cummins, and suggested, according to Mr. Cummins, that if he kept speaking out, there would be retaliation.
4. Firing the Attorneys. United States attorneys can be fired whenever a president wants, but not, as § 1512 (c) puts it, to corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding.
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2007/ 03/ 19/ opinion/ 19mon4.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1174536000&en=47a69d5cd8348721&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin
March 20th, 2007 at 2:00 pmThis was a very good bill that all American’s should support. While Bush was perfectly legal in his actions, it doesn’t change the fact that congress needed to change the law so it won’t happen again.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:01 pmOf course Gonzo just cancelled. And we the American people are about to cancel a few things ourselves……And… It’s about time.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:03 pm#23 …While Bush was perfectly legal in his actions…
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 20, 2007 @ 2:01 pm
Need I type anything here?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:05 pmI heard on the radio this morning that the Administration had retracted its original complaint with the bill and announced that there would be no veto.
The update, though, is very interesting. The Thursday meeting was to discuss the department budget. Generally speaking, the head of a department likes to get out in front and make the best possible case for their funding, so Gonzo must really be freaking out if he canceled on this one.
Or, maybe he’s not going to be the head of the department come Thursday.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:06 pmDoes this mean it’s retroactive or did the DoJ accomplish its mission and basically end Lam’s probe of Government corruption with links to the VP?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:06 pmVETO!!!!!
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists — March 20, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
A bill passed by that level of majority *CAN’T* be vetoed - dum bass! You really know nothing about the American Government, do you fascist cultist?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:07 pmThis was a very good bill that all American’s should support. While Bush was perfectly legal in his actions, it doesn’t change the fact that congress needed to change the law so it won’t happen again.
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 20, 2007 @ 2:01 pm
Another *false* pronouncement from the Court Fool Roger. No Roger, you’re *wrong* again. You’ve repeated the same lie often, and debunked every time. You’re really quite st*pid, aren’t you old fossil?
If justice was obstructed, even Bush abused the law - just as Nixon did. Dum bass!
March 20th, 2007 at 2:09 pmThey had to fire Carol Lam to protect Cheney ($150,000 to Duke Cunningham for the “Duke-Stir” by way of MZM Inc. for phoney White House furniture - whew!).
They thought they were covering their tracks by firing all the others. But they had fun anyway. Time now to watch for the Reichstag to catch on fire.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:11 pm#25 - Didn’t you hear? In a recent addition to the wingnut lexicon, it is now acceptable to use interchangeably “perfectly legal” and “potentially obstructing justice”.
This was included in wingnut executive order 385696 (b) in case you missed it.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:12 pmLiberals Heart Terrorists,
Hey retard did you see the number of votes in favor? It would be ignorant to veto because it would easily be overturned…. oh wait, yeah it probably will be vetoed
March 20th, 2007 at 2:12 pmI wouldn’t get your hopes up for impeachment. The Democrats don’t have the cajones to impeach. They let Reagan off the hook for Iran-Contra and they will let little Georgie off as well. Though I am a liberal I have had it with this gutless bunch who call themselves Democrats.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:14 pmI was noticing over the last couple of weeks that various Right Wing Trolls were claiming “Bush was perfectly legal in his actions”, ie in firing the USA. Did anyone care to mention if they also claimed this was a morally or legally correct thing to do? Does the right wing understand some actions might be legal but not ethical or just or honest?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:15 pmMark_TheWildEyedLiberal,
Couldn’t agree more!
March 20th, 2007 at 2:16 pmI LIKEY life in the fast lane! Can this baby go any faster? C’mon!
March 20th, 2007 at 2:19 pmskeptic sez:
skeptic, neocons don’t worry about such human concepts as “honesty”, “morality”, or “ethics”. They only worry about “legality” in the strict sense of how they can most expediently circumvent it.
Don’t judge neocons according to your values, skeptic…they’re remarkably unencumbered by such conceits.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:20 pmHouse Judiciary Committee to meet tomorrow to authorize subpoenas against Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Gonzales’ ex-chief of staff Kyle Sampson, Rove deputy Scott Jennings, and others.
Told you, Jake.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:21 pmCould Gonzales be forced to testify if he were served with a subpoena?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:24 pm#33 At the end of the day, Reagan can claim credit (deserved or not) for the end of the iron curtain ~ Bush has no such gold star in his portfolio to grant him any sympathy. He has made a career out of burning people who both supported and opposed him, with little benefit to anything else.
There’s never been a President more suited for impeachment. The only matters left to discuss are timing and cost.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:24 pm#40- There has actually never before been a U.S. President more suited to be tried for real war crimes. W. always said he wanted to leave his mark, so…
March 20th, 2007 at 2:30 pm“…authorize subpoenas against Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Gonzales’ ex-chief of staff Kyle Sampson, Rove deputy Scott Jennings, and others.” - - The Bush Political Capital Bank is about to go Chapter 9, and screw the party for ‘08.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:30 pm#29 Firing a US attorney isn’t obstruction of justice. They are always working on case’s and doing investigations. The new replacements are free to pick up where the old ones left off. Furthermore, now that congress gets to confirm them, we can be assured the new replacements will get approval from both parties. They can look into the old investigations and decide if they warrent futher study. Simply purging US attorney’s does not equate to obstruction of justice. If that was true, every single US president would be guilty of it. When Clinton purged every single US attorney, one was in fact investigating one of Clinton’s buddies. Was that obstruction of justice? Even if it was, it doesn’t matter as Clinton had the right anyways.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:31 pm#40 There’s never been a President more suited for impeachment. The only matters left to discuss are timing and cost.
I couldn’t agree more! This bunch makes Nixon look like a choir boy! As far as cost? In my humble opinion impeachment will be the only way to gain any standing with the rest of the world. Bush and the 109th Congress have cost this country dearly. I think the only way for us to be credible on the world stage again is to impeach this chimp. In other words it will cost the country more in the eyes of the world if we don’t impeach him.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:32 pm“Could Gonzales be forced to testify if he were served with a subpoena?
Comment by Erroll — March 20, 2007 @ 2:24 pm”
YES
March 20th, 2007 at 2:34 pmVETO!!!!!
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists — March 20, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
Please tell me they don’t let this moron vote. LHT, get thee to a civics class ASAP.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:36 pmJust another attempt by the left to try to take over power for all three branches of goverment. Commie hippies need to leave Bush alone - he’s a hard worker in the army of GOD!
March 20th, 2007 at 2:37 pm“Firing a US attorney isn’t obstruction of justice. They are always working on case’s and doing investigations. The new replacements are free to pick up where the old ones left off. Furthermore, now that congress gets to confirm them, we can be assured the new replacements will get approval from both parties. They can look into the old investigations and decide if they warrent futher study. Simply purging US attorney’s does not equate to obstruction of justice. If that was true, every single US president would be guilty of it. When Clinton purged every single US attorney, one was in fact investigating one of Clinton’s buddies. Was that obstruction of justice? Even if it was, it doesn’t matter as Clinton had the right anyways.
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 20, 2007 @ 2:31 pm”
When it is to stop a criminal investigation into the WH it is!!!!
Just like the stopping of the Ambroff investigation. That was Obstruction of Justice.
Impeading a investigation that is going to lead to you or members of your staff is OBSTRUCTION. Just by putting another attorney “favoring” requests from the WH to stop the investigation is OBSTRUCTION.
This is the problem.
Your premis that purging all attorneys at the start of a term would equate is rediculous. If the attorneys were investigating crimes of the WH, then that would be true but otherwise it is a knowingly false assertion.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:39 pmC’mon baby let the good times roll,
C’mon baby subpoena them all,
C’mon baby let em sweat their balls,
All hearing long…
March 20th, 2007 at 2:40 pmJamie Kinstle (what kind of a name is that?) Wapakoneta (not native american, no way)
March 20th, 2007 at 2:41 pmYou are hilarious.
Sincerely,
Ragnar Ulysses Cerious.
#47 Commie hippies need to leave Bush alone - he’s a hard worker in the army of GOD!
Now that is FUNNY! LMAO!
You poor bastard! Don’t you know that the Democrats will have all 3 braches of Government because of George W? Bush is the best thing the Democrats have going for them in 2008!
March 20th, 2007 at 2:43 pm# 41
March 20th, 2007 at 2:44 pmI couldn’t agree more ! Attacking another country to control a third country is a war crime and the criminals confessed and signed before they actually committed the act .
Torture is a war crime according to international law !
#39 Feels sooo good….sweating them all night loooonng!! I can hear the rhythm in my head.
Wonder why Gonzo cancelled? I believe he can be forced to testify by the Congress so perhaps that will be what is necessary to get to the bottom of this pile of dung.
This IS the constitutional crisis everyone has suspected all along. This attempt to interfere and obstruct the Justice Department is a clear and unbridled “obstruction of justice” by the WH. Now if that’s now enough grounds to impeach, I don’t know what is!
March 20th, 2007 at 2:44 pmThe right had all the power in the world, they virtually had all 3 branches, they blew it with greed, cronyism, and corruption. Now after about 2 mos. of Dems having Congress, some moron from the right feels like the Dems are taking over all 3 branches. No, the separation of powers is back now. You’re so far to the right, you think moderated government with separation of powers is a liberal conspiracy. Moron.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:45 pm#52 I’ve heard rumblings about overturning the Military Commissions Act just as they rolled back the Patriot Act today to it’s original wording and intent. They can roll the Military Commissions act back as well as it’s turning out to be “another tool” for “obstruction of justice” in order to protect criminal behavior on the part of the administration. Then we’ll see these clowns get the justice they’ve asked for and is due them.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:45 pm#48 I will back you 100% if that ever turns out to be true in a court of law. If they find enough evidence to convict someone of this crime, I will then agree with you. Currently, you are simply using assumption and your opinion of someone to convict them in the court of public opinion. That is fine as we live in a free country, but you cannot expect people to take your opinions as fact without enough true evidence to actually prosecute someone.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:45 pmRU, you are so cleaver, Thank’s for the memories….Blessings
March 20th, 2007 at 2:46 pmYes, Carol Lam was looking into the contract for $140,000 (ahem of our dollars) to furnish the Dick, Cheney’s office. The people want to see what their $140,000 furnished - we want photos! Carol Lam was going after Cheney and they knew they had to quash her immediately. This will all come out in the wash soon.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:47 pmComment by Jamie Kinstle Wapakoneta OH
March 20th, 2007 at 2:48 pmYou ever actually read the gospels ?Jesus was the prince of peace , not an advocate of torture and pre empive war !
SHAME ON YOU !!!!
Reagan can claim credit (deserved or not) for the end of the iron curtain ~ Bush has no such gold star in his portfolio to grant him any sympathy.
Comment by DM
Sympathy is the only thing that kept Reagan from impeachment. Walsh interviewed him, and saw how out of it he was; he took pity on Reagan, and decided not to prosecute. Bush doesn’t have Alzheimers’ to fall back on; but if he went into rehab, most would not opt for impeachment.
Speaking of rehab, is there someplace that offers political rehab? All those Bush supporters who’ve become hooked on the unchecked power, and the rapacious neocon agenda; what will they do when they lose the presidency as well? Cold turkey is a bitch; look for reported cases of animal abuse to start spiking about that same time.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:48 pmRoger,
You’re wrong on every post, you never admit it, we’ve convicted you of Idiocy. For your punishment try a rbrain abortion! (Stick a coat hanger up your nose and pull out what remaining brains you have, they’re not helping you anyway.)
March 20th, 2007 at 2:49 pmNeed more of this…America is WATCHING
March 20th, 2007 at 2:50 pmUnfortunately, it’s becoming clear that this administration has hijacked this democracy. If you look at every single pivotal point in the progression of their plan, you can see the WH fingerprints on each event….from 911….to the Patriot Act. Without 911 there would be no “need” for a patriot act. With the Patriot Act and their hasty push of it’s renewal through the most enabling, dastardly congress in the history of this country (this one’s predecessor), we lost all of our freedoms and our constitution was trampled.
Once they accomplished their little treachery (Patriot Act), they could essentially have a military state where the WH set the rules now. Each of their abuses of power reflect directly back to either presidential signing statements (which will be declared illegal and have been by the most experienced of law professors in the country) or by provisions of the Act iself.
This is a textbook case of how “absolute power corrupts absolutely” and we’re going to have a ring-side seat to watch the Fall of this Faux Empire. We will see each of the criminals be brought to justice (yes, Cheney and Bush, too) and the people will finally take back the reigns of this renewed democracy from the hands of wicked despots.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:50 pmann:
Do you know if this has passed the House of Representatives with a veto-proof majority? Last time I took a civics class, you needed that as well.
TripMaster Monkey:
All I said last week was that they were going to give them a week. I never doubted the subpoenas would be issued. Whether Rove will testify under said subpoena is another matter entirely.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:51 pmWho were the two TRAITORS who voted against this bill???
March 20th, 2007 at 2:52 pmHow can we still continue to support a crook like Cheney?
How can we have one iota of respect for someone out on a hunting/tryst with his “swiss miss” and so bombed that he doesn’t realize that his friend is right beside him and shoots him in the face.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:53 pmHow have we not seen what a tragic fool we have for a Veep? Once we get to the bottom of the no-bid contract of the over-charging Haliburton (who has conveniently moved it’s headquarters last week - hmmmm - moving ahead of the fray which is coming their way??) and Cheney’s “war profiteering gold mine”, then he’ll really begin having strokes.
veritas sez:
What’s especially interesting is how the PATRIOT Act, which was ostensibly penned as a response to 9/11, was actually written well in advance of that event…
Makes you think, doesn’t it? (Well, it should, anyway…)
March 20th, 2007 at 2:54 pmI am so glad we got the Dems back in both houses. In 2008 we need a Dem President. Old Bushies should of never had that power.
Next we need to put impeachment back on the table. We can not waste anymore time on this. 2008 is coming fast. Old Bushies need to be tried for war crimes for starter.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:54 pmRoger don’t let them get to you, they just hate god. Jesus believes in peace but he only means with other Christains - he says to not suffer a witch to live…and those judges were obviously into witchcraft.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:54 pmveritas:
Would a video tour of the VP’s office be good enough?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ history/ life/ vpresidence.html#
March 20th, 2007 at 2:54 pm94-2 vote? Who were the 2 who voted no, who were the others who didn’t vote at all? Anyone know?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pmRUCerious
Wapakoneta - Ohio hometown of Neil Armstrong and, apparently, a very confused troll or a very good parody. Hard to tell since here in Ohio it could be a very true sentiment being expressed.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pm#65 as I watched it unravel, there were originally “3 traitors” and Chuck Hagel waltzed in late and gave his recorded vote at that moment as a “nay” so I don’t know if his Nay remained or if he thought he was voting on either of the two preceeding amendments.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:56 pmTripMaster: You and I know and have known for a long time that this plan was hatched well in advance of the events. In fact, Bush is quoted as saying that it would take “another Pearl Harbor type event” to bring this plan into motion. Voila! 911. Does anyone else find the thoughtful planning of the date even suspicious??? 911 is the panic button for all americans and creates a gut reaction well in advance of any other association with the numbers.
The Downing Street Memo, for another piece of evidence, which clearly states that the British knew that Bush was cooking the books - i.e. fixing the facts around the policy.
Is there anyone in this country with a real moral compass who doesn’t see what’s happening here? Is there anyone who has enough trust and respect now to believe that these thugs would do absolutely ANYTHING to achieve their agenda? I believe it’s becoming sadly but realistically clear in the minds of everyone this week.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:59 pmI find it fascinating how now the media along with Bruce Fein’s group to bring this constitutional crisis under control by reversing all of Bushreich’s changes in the law, are calling those who still support the policies of “Steal and Conceal” the real “traitors”….fascinating how the worm turns, isn’t it?
This conservative coalition movement is an outreach of the Republican Party of those with a conscience and sense of morality who want to distance themselves from the “enemy within”….and from the “traitors” to our constitution. Very interesting.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:02 pm#57 Sharon, how ya doin? Blessings back atcha.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:03 pmFiring a US attorney isn’t obstruction of justice. They are always working on case’s and doing investigations. The new replacements are free to pick up where the old ones left off.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:03 pmRoger_Roger, you really are a dipstick. Are you so stupid that you couldn’t consider the probability that the “new replacements” would have marching orders to protect friends of the White House, any White House, when they took over?
You can make fun of my town all you want but God knows you cant be liberal, patriotic, and christain at the same time. Sense this last election that was oviously rigged in dem’s favor, they have been siphoning power away from the President, making it so he cant get anything done. Now we have fairy judges, hippy tree huggers, feminists, and people will want the right to marry there pets pretty soon. No wonder god hit us with natural disasters.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:04 pm“Unfortunately, it’s becoming clear that this administration has hijacked this democracy. If you look at every single pivotal point in the progression of their plan, you can see the WH fingerprints on each event….from 911….to the Patriot Act. Without 911 there would be no “need†for a patriot act. With the Patriot Act and their hasty push of it’s renewal through the most enabling, dastardly congress in the history of this country (this one’s predecessor), we lost all of our freedoms and our constitution was trampled.
Comment by veritas — March 20, 2007 @ 2:50 pm”
Here is something that many people forget about the PA! It was delivered only days after 9/11. It was several THOUSAND pages long.
It takes MONTHS or YEARS to write a law like that. Soooooo….. That means that someone was hard at work long before 9/11 writting this law for this very day.
Many people simply overlook this little FACT!
March 20th, 2007 at 3:06 pmPLC - you’re from OH too? I could see the Wapakoneta troll being genuine. It’s almost embarrassing to be from NW Ohio with the sentiment and lack of intelligence that (mostly) characterizes the area.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:06 pmWhy is it that trolls think checks and balances is something they try (unsuccessfully) to do with their bank accounts?
March 20th, 2007 at 3:07 pm“What’s especially interesting is how the PATRIOT Act, which was ostensibly penned as a response to 9/11, was actually written well in advance of that event…
Makes you think, doesn’t it? (Well, it should, anyway…)
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — March 20, 2007 @ 2:54 pm”
Damn….. You beat me to it TMM……
I just posted something very similar, and then I read your post!
March 20th, 2007 at 3:08 pm#69 Jamie Kinstle Wapakoneta
You really are a nut aren’t you? This is a blog where I, along with many others have political discussions and arguements. I put you in the same group as losers that simply respond to posts with junk, nasty words, or meaningless crap. For example:
#61 Roger,
You’re wrong on every post, you never admit it, we’ve convicted you of Idiocy. For your punishment try a rbrain abortion! (Stick a coat hanger up your nose and pull out what remaining brains you have, they’re not helping you anyway.)
Or your post:
#69 Roger don’t let them get to you, they just hate god. Jesus believes in peace but he only means with other Christains - he says to not suffer a witch to live…and those judges were obviously into witchcraft.
Both of these posts are worthless wastes of time. At least respond with an idea or viewpoint based on the topic. While the first post was obviously from either a complete idiot or an unsupervised child, your post just proves you need to get back on the meds. Stop posting for awhile, get some help, then come back and try to actually add something to the topic being discussed. Have a nice day.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:09 pmPLC, thanks, I thought that was the trolls last name. Ohioans everywhere are probably shaking their heads at this nutjob troll.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:10 pm“I am so glad we got the Dems back in both houses. In 2008 we need a Dem President. Old Bushies should of never had that power.
Next we need to put impeachment back on the table. We can not waste anymore time on this. 2008 is coming fast. Old Bushies need to be tried for war crimes for starter.
Comment by Mary Poplins — March 20, 2007 @ 2:54 pm”
I don’t care if its while he is in office or after……. I prefer during but he can still be Impeached after getting out of office. This is literally the only way to try these bozos for their crimes. So either way they have to be Impeached to further any other charges…..
I say do it now though, but later is fine just as long as it gets done.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:10 pm#45 - RemoveBush,
Gonzo could always take the fifth.
That could result in some creative writing in a future resume when he leaves Federal prison..
March 20th, 2007 at 3:10 pmR2 ~ your stock just went up. Way up.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:11 pmCommie hippies need to leave Bush alone - he’s a hard worker in the army of GOD!
Comment by Jamie Kinstle Wapakoneta OH — March 20, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
Sorry nutwad but we don’t live in the Country of God. We live in the United State of America. But God called and said you should take you’re Thorazine now.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:12 pmok “roger” like youre name isnt being used by someone else - nice try libs!
March 20th, 2007 at 3:14 pmYou can make fun of my town all you want
Comment by Jamie Kinstle Wapakoneta OH
I didn’t make fun of your town. I visited the Armstrong Museum there and liked your town. I didn’t make fun of you either - yet.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:15 pmSince the things this administration has done is so much more extreme than any modern administration I’m not sure precedents will matter anymore.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:19 pmEvery other administration had some voices of reason that said you can’t go there to the president but this one had Cheney and Rove saying just go for it.
I’m not sure saying this never happened before or so and so got away with it or that supoenas can’t follow makes any sense. Because frankly I think we’re on the verge of seeing actions that have never taken place before because they weren’t necessary.
And that is going to be fun for news junkies like us.
Lupeyg2
I am seriously hoping that Governor Strickland is able to change people’s minds in Ohio about what a Democrat really is and does. I think he’s already making some great administrative moves.
It’s nice to know there are other progressives floating around Ohio, isn’t it? Although, I am originally from western NY! (Then, again my family tends to be conservatives.)
March 20th, 2007 at 3:19 pmHey Jamie, I live in Bothell Washington, infamous for being the worst place on earth for Bots to live.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:24 pmStrickland is a member of the Illuminati - you just wait and watch your taxes get raised through the roof -that’s the reason so many business have left the state! And don’t even get me started on the fake moon landing - I watched the special on TV where they interviewed a Russian scientist who said it was impossible.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:25 pmI’ve heard rumblings about overturning the Military Commissions Act just as they rolled back the Patriot Act today to it’s original wording and intent. They can roll the Military Commissions act back as well as it’s turning out to be “another tool†for “obstruction of justice
veritas - you are driving my mood way up today, thanks.
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 20, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
March 20th, 2007 at 3:29 pmAnd R2 - you’re a regular voice of reason, occasionally.
Jamie, are you my dead grandfather, re-incarnated? He never believed we landed on the moon.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:29 pmOh, yeah and he said heart transplants were an affront to God, who gave us our hearts. What say?
[…] Senate votes to limit Bush’s power on U.S. attorneys - THINK PROGRESS From the Overnight DoJ Document Dump - FIREDOGLAKE Finally, Something On Which We Can Agree? - CAPTAIN’S QUARTERS Senate Approves Bill To Repeal Gonzales’ Hiring Authority - TALK LEFT Technorati Tags: Bush, confirmations, document dump, DOJ, firings, Gonzales, Headlines, News, Patriot Act, Politics, Senate, US attorneys, White House Bookmarkz […]
March 20th, 2007 at 3:30 pm#89 I assure you this is the very real Roger_Roger. I simply hate nut jobs posting crap like that. I equally hate the childish types that enjoy posting nasty words and meaningless junk not relevant to the topic at hand. Do these types think that being mean on the internet wins you something? You are all just folks I enjoy discussing and arguing politics with. There is no place for name calling as it gets you no where. Do you think my feelings are hurt by the children posting that sort of junk?
March 20th, 2007 at 3:31 pm“RemoveBush,
Gonzo could always take the fifth.
That could result in some creative writing in a future resume when he leaves Federal prison..
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 20, 2007 @ 3:10 pm”
Sure, but that would not help in his defense would it? I would love for him to do that…….
With the evidence available, that would absolutely seal his fate for jail.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:32 pmComment by Jamie Kinstle Wapakoneta OH — March 20, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
Really Jamie this is all sarcasm right. It’s all a put on isn’t it - it must be. I hope. Because otherwise you are really scary.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:33 pmPlease Jamie Kinstle Wapakoneta, GET SOME HELP. This is a post about the Senate limiting Bush’s power so he can’t bypass them when he appoints a US attorney. What the heck are you thinking when you post this crap about what God thinks? Do you think he cares at all about petty issues revolving around who has what authority to appoint an attorney and how its done? I think God has much biggger fish to fry. I don’t even want to get into the idea that “Time” is a human created dimension that God doesnt abide by. Get a life and post something meaningfull to to topic at hand or simply keep your odd thougts to yourself sir. They are creepy.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:35 pmClassic. Roger_Roger is having to put the smack dab on his groupie troll.
I am behind you 100% Roger_Roger. Your groupie is one of the strangest yet. It is one thing to attack the other side for things they have done. It is another thing altogether to state somebody is a Satanist or witch.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:48 pmYour post was going along so well and had merit until you did what you said you were against, which is name calling. Either you do it or you don’t do it.
In my book, there is no difference between calling somebody a child or calling them a d!ckhead. It is just a different word.
So, either call names or don’t call names. Make up your mind.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:50 pmGod cares about everything Roger - it’s clear your a left-wing imposter and probably burn flags and now your just making excuses for the Dems.
March 20th, 2007 at 4:10 pm#102 There is a big difference in my book at least. Either way, you are correct and I was out of line. I try not to respond to those that don’t even provide a viewpoint of the topic we are discussing. Sorry Spudge Boy and I’ll try to not have it happen again. TP should really regulate those trash posts that have nothing to do with the topic IMO. It is clutter that you need to skip over. I am all for people disagreeing and voicing different opinions. I have learned alot on this forum actually and I hope I helped some others think about these topics in a different light as well. Lately however, many seem to be getting away from facts and working more with opinions and emotions. Those posts are very boring as they provide nothng new. They are kinda non stories.
March 20th, 2007 at 4:19 pmJust investigate, investigate, investigate. Quit worrying about impeachment that will never get past the senate. It ain’t gonna happen and it wastes time that can be used to INVESTIGATE! Keep it non-stop scandals till Nov 08.
March 20th, 2007 at 4:53 pm#102 There is a big difference in my book at least. Either way, you are correct and I was out of line. Comment by Roger_Roger — March 20, 2007 @ 4:19 pm
That’s classic for you *CONS*, you always think there’s a *big-difference* when you’re the criminal. Hypocrite, fool, idiot!
March 20th, 2007 at 5:22 pmJake wrote on March 20, 2007 @ 2:54 pm
Would a video tour of the VP’s office be good enough?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ history/ life/ vpresidence.html#
March 20th, 2007 at 5:30 pmThe only piece of equipment in that office that has not belongedto the government since the early 1900’s is the $140,000 telephone.
one was in fact investigating one of Clinton’s buddies. Was that obstruction of justice? Even if it was, it doesn’t matter as Clinton had the right anyways.
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 20, 2007 @ 2:31 pm
Roger_Roger supports obstruction of justice! No surprise there.
No president has the right to obstruct justice.
Tell us, oh wise one, what the “problem with Carol Lam” was that Sampson was referring to in the e-mail TP posted yesterday. Any clue?
And tell us, Roger, whether Carol’s replacement took up where she left off. Hell, why don’t you tell us if any of the 8 replacements continuted any investigations that were planned or under way.
March 20th, 2007 at 5:41 pmHey Roger_Roger!
Bush personally blocked an investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility in the Justice Department — the office responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct involving Department attorneys — which repeatedly attempted to investigate whether DOJ lawyers acted improperly concerning their role in the President’s warrantless eavesdropping program, but finally stopped their investigation because the President refused to give them the security clearances they needed to conduct the investigation.
Bush had no problem, however, granting security clearances, some to civilians, when he wanted to check into the leak of the NSA warrantless wiretapping program.
But see, you idiots don’t see a problem with this. That, or you are so far up Bush and the Republicans as*es that you don’t WANT to see a problem. Archie Bunkers…each and every one of you.
If Bush will personally block something like this, it’s not too much of a stretch of the imagination to conclude he’ll take any action to prevent investigation of any wrongdoing by his administration or any of his cronies.
March 20th, 2007 at 5:51 pmChuck Hagel PROBABLY DIDN’T KNOW WHAT HE WAS VOTING FOR, BUT IF HE DID, HE JUST DEEP-SIXED HIS OWN CHANCES OF RUNNING FOR PREZ IN 2008—-AND, trolls, FOR YA INFORMATION, 94-2 IS A “NON-VETOABLE” MAJORITY, SO PUT THAT IN YA PIPES ALONG WITH YA CRACK-COCAINE AND SMOKE IT!!!!! HAH HAH HAH HAH HAH!!!!!
March 20th, 2007 at 11:15 pm#110 I have been very clear on this point. I believe the president was wrong with his illegal wire taps. Not sure if you are once again using assumptions to formulate your opinion, but that is sad. I have actually made some long posts explaining thoroughly how against wire taps I am. So, please at least stick to the subject and try and read my posts so you know my feelings on something. Just throwing darts in the air means you usually miss and look foolish.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:36 amfurniture wastes
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok. do you know what is the first? i`ve the new album at my blog
March 25th, 2008 at 10:02 amJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 31st, 2008 at 2:05 pmCracks House
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 12:24 pmJack
I appreciate your effort and the quality of the information you provide. Hopefully you can find the time to visit my site.
April 13th, 2008 at 8:37 pm