House Judiciary Committee approves subpoenas
By on Mar 21st, 2007 at 11:06 am
House Judiciary Committee approves subpoenas
for Karl Rove and other White House aides. President Bush yesterday promised to fight the subpoenas.
UPDATE: Read the Judiciary Committee’s press release.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
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.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Hee haw.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:08 amBook ‘em,DanO.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:08 amOh, yeah. That is so awesome. They called his bluff ’cause Bush doesn’t have anything. There is history showing WH staff does get sworn in for testimony and there is no public support for this bufoon. I just want to see which Repugs support the Prez and his obstruction of testimony.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:10 amLet the case of Republicans Vs. The Rule of Law proceed.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:11 amThere is nothing more pleasing to sensible Americans to see a failed, delusional “president” being dragged through the mud. So what if it’ll be a show trial? Of course it is! The whole FIASCO became a show when this incompetent admin makes its incompetent decisions! I say bring out the pop-corns everyone!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:11 amYesterday, President Bush claimed that he was interested “in learning all the facts”. Apparently that assertion is only valid if that intrepid search for the truth is not done under oath, on the record, and in a public forum.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:11 amAhhhh I feel so good. Someone pass the whiskey, let the show begin.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:13 amShow time!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:13 amLet the games begin. Oversight and accountability. No compromise. You can’t give those devils the benefit of the doubt because they LIE. Get rid of Gonzo and Rove.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:14 amSit back and enjoy the show!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:14 amThe Facts, maam, nothing but the facts./joe friday
March 21st, 2007 at 11:14 amLet the games begin!!!
Bush has finally framed the debate AGAINST the Dems. Comparison to Nixon and Clinton are so wrong – they claimed executive in criminal proceedings.
I love watching the Dems foam at the mouth. It’ll only get better when Scooter is pardoned.
AND with the President’s approval a mere 36%, he can’t go any lower. What is he going to lose – Dem support – HA!! Indy support – doubtful. He just needs his base to stay in power. LOL!!! Good luck on those subponeas Leahy – it’s less likely you won’t be taking it up the ass tonight.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:14 amToo bad Harriet isn’t sitting on the Supreme Court right now. That would have made it more interesting.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:14 amGood now subpoena Dick Cheney and Condi Rice. Force them to testify under oath too. Force the entire Bush Regime to testify under oath. They all lie like dogs, so they would then be charged with perjury.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:15 amno subpoena to the gang folks. they haven’t issued them. lousy subhuman politicians are trying to work out some “deal”
March 21st, 2007 at 11:15 amyou had better start listening to us hard, because your ignorance of our position will end. you are not representing our interests, and you will be fired.
again, congress disgusts
#5 thomas is right–this makes sense to Joe Everyday American. Nobody demands “no oaths, no transcripts, no record whatsoever” if they intend to tell the truth.
We have entered a truly sad part of history. Bush will defy these subpeonas, courts or not. “Article II” or some shit like that. Just you wait.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:16 am#5 – it’s not a show trial, you’ll win. Leaky Leahy and Schumer are partisans. Once Bush starts punching back, the American people will split over who they want in power.
I know it’s hard for lefties to understand, but Bush one-upped you. He spit in your face and you won’t get Rove under oath.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:16 amCan you imagine how big a temper tantrum the “Decider” is throwing right now?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:16 am*taking whiskey, gulp*
March 21st, 2007 at 11:16 amOnly GOPers in Congress have dog and pony shows!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:16 amthank you thank you THANK YOU, DEMS !!!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:16 am#6 – what facts? NO law was broken. Bush did nothing wrong – the law was on his side.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:17 amGo House! Who approved these subpoenas? I want thems eated for a few more terms..
March 21st, 2007 at 11:17 amEffin’ A !
March 21st, 2007 at 11:17 amRight ON!!
the house of cards is coming down
March 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amHARD
They can say what they will about the Dems rushing to subpoena before negotiating a compromise, but Bushies don’t compromise. They dictate.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amWe have seen them in action for years now, and the Dems must take advantage of their oversight ability – if Bushies have nothing to hide, they shouldn’t object to testifying under oath and on the record.
If something they have to say is so crucial to national security, they can offer that portion of testimony in closed session — but this is a political matter, and national security is highly improbable — so it looks like Bush’s defiance is tacit admission that they have something they don’t want to go public.
They continue to forget they work for us – we employ them — when your boss wants answers, you better have them or lose your job.
#14 – Agreed. Expose the Democrats for the liars they are. YOU have no interest in stopping the war or cutting govt spending – you just want to get Bush. I was gettin nervous – it’s March and the Dems hadnt’ gone for the throat yet.
Thank you hateful Dems.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amOnly a reading of My Pet Goat II will console Chimpy now.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:19 amIt Wasn’t Just a Bad Idea. It May Have Been Against the Law.
exerpts below
it was not hard to spot that White House and Justice Department officials, and members of Congress, may have violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1520, the federal obstruction of justice statute.
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.
If Mr. Sampson withheld the information from Mr. McNulty, who then misled Congress, Mr. Sampson may have violated § 1505.
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.
Let’s take the case of Carol Lam, United States attorney in San Diego. The day the news broke that Ms. Lam, who had already put one Republican congressman in jail, was investigating a second one, Mr. Sampson wrote an e-mail message referring to the “real problem we have right now with Carol Lam.†He said it made him think that it was time to start looking for a replacement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/19/opinion/19mon4.html?ex=1331956800&en=ffab854496251b4b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
A recent report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (released Feb. 22, 2007) revealed that since 1981, no more than three U.S. attorneys had ever been FORCED OUT UNDER SIMILAR CONDITIONS.
http://www.buzzflash.com/archives/07/US_attrny_rprt.pdf
BTW 18 days of DOJ Emails concerning the “Prosecutorgate” debacle appear to be missing.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:19 amLHT > go peddle your crap on RedState.com. We do not care what drivel you spew on here trying to defend the criminal Bush Regime.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:19 am#18 GeekDad ~ Oh, to be a fly on the wall of the Oval Office!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:20 amHeh…
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists
You are already getting worked up so early in the day, calm down man.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:21 am#17 “Liberals Heart Terrorists” with all the media attention so far the whole thing was already a show-trial long before your pea-brain can even realize it. Dems are not making this a show-trial, the released emails THEMSELVES show that admin aides and repubs have long worried about political spectacles and repercussions EVEN as they considered firing the prosecutors. It’s the REPUBS that are making this a show-trial because of their own stupidity and ignorance of the law and constitution. Eat it.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:22 amThe Bush followers lose the court of public opinion and the next election because the old saying applies…..if you have nothing to hide why ask for special favors. One doesn’t run if no crime was committed, does one?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:22 amChimpy also claimed yesterday that he had given all the relevant emails and documents to Congress.
Chimpy is lying. A lot of documents are missing or have been redacted, according to Senator Leahy.
Chimpy probably thinks that if he shreds the paper copy of an email, he has destroyed the email itself. LOL!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:22 am#18 – Geekfather – It will probably register on the Richter scale. :-)
March 21st, 2007 at 11:22 amAnd, awaaayyy we go… ! Heads, we win- Tails, you lose, Repub fascists. Karma is kinda instant, if even six years tardy.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:24 amJust what I’ve been waiting for: A Subpoena Watch!
Rove and Meirs singing yet another corrupt duet. Sweet!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:24 am#28 Kay
Goes something like
Once upon a time, my pet goat ate my 18 pages of emails.
the end.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:24 amLHT > We want the Iraq Fiasco War ended and Bush removed from the White House too. Unlike GOPers we can chew gum and do other things at the same time. How much does Karl Rove pay you to hang on here?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:25 amBTW 18 days of DOJ Emails concerning the “Prosecutorgate†debacle appear to be missing.
Comment by mrJJ
Sounds alot like the missing Nixon tapes….
March 21st, 2007 at 11:25 amBefore the Reich wing trolls scream executive privilege will save their man-child idol, they need to read and absorb the following two paragraphs from the case of United States v Nixon 418 US 683 (1974). Of course we now have three rabid activist judges on the court (Roberts, Scalia, Alito) who can save the day for the Republic Party. However there are still six others who should live by precedent.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:25 am
Rove wipes his ass with Chucky’s subpeona and sends it back to him.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:26 am“So, G. Dubious, you want to take this to the courts? Better “lawyer up” as they say.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:26 amHow about your little pet pit bull Harriet?
Huh? Oh yeah, that’s right…
Well, he said he was to busy, but, how about Alberto? He was pretty good at getting those drunk driving tickets expunged from the record….What? Him too?
Geez, looks like you’re up shyt cryk!
To bad Johhny Cochran went to that big bar in the sky so soon…”
Even if this goes all the way to the SCOTUS, this administration, and repugnantcuns running for election/re-election in 08 are going to be faced with the question ~ What do they have to hide?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:26 amDrag ‘em in squeeling. Then send them to guantanamo. They want the cabanna with the view toward Havana.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:26 amFight those subpoenas hard, Chimpy, fight ‘em real hard.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:27 amWe’ll get into the 29% base in no time.
Good-bye, so long, farewell, hateful and mean-spirited neo-Neanderthal asswipes. Could anyone use a tissue? Why me laugh like hell?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:27 amHow long will it be before George W. Bush proclaims, a la Richard Nixon, that “I am not a crook”?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:28 amThe years and years of co-dependent behavior and enabling this moron are finally catchng up to old Miers, Rove, and Gonzo. They’ve been at it so long they became lost a long time ago, and can’t even see what they have been doing for so long.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:28 am#11 On the other thread we have howsad freaking out, and here we have LHT freaking out. LHT, you might not care if Bush’s approval rating falls to 15%, but let me tell you something: the GOP damn well cares about it. They are already facing heavy losses in ‘08 because they can’t get Bush under control. It won’t go on forever.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:28 amFavorite argument here: “Bush did nothing wrong.” Then why is he scrambling and working so hard to prevent any testimony under oath? An innocent man need not run from the police. Yet Bush and Rove scurry away from the bright lights like the cockroaches that they are.
Welcome to oversight, Republican crooks!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:28 amThey can sing that tune from Jackson Brown
March 21st, 2007 at 11:28 am“Lawyers in Love”……….
“Testimony to be given not under oath, behind closed doors and no transcript.”
What does Bush think this is…….Iraq under Saddam? While we may still get there, we are not quite there yet.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:29 amLHT has all the optimism of a private prep school cheerleader whose team is down 27 points late in the fourth quarter, and, because of her lack of knowledge of the game, doesn’t realize they’ve got not a snowball’s chance…..someone give her a pat on the head, and try to get in her sweater after the game, k – it’ll help her self esteem. (or, LHT could be a boy cheerleader, like the Dub)
March 21st, 2007 at 11:29 amSo Bushy Boy finally gets to see some combat! Question is, who of his friends will he hold in front of himself as a human shield?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:29 amPatrick in “duckie”
March 21st, 2007 at 11:30 amAnother day of false bravado from our fading trolls.
It was just yesterday that Jake was claiming that the administration could simply ignore subpoenas. Funny thing, though, today the administration is saying they will fight the subpoenas in court, which is hardly the empowering situation fantasized by Jake.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:30 amLiberals HATE Terrorists.
Anybody who says otherwise is a LIAR.
Liberals HATE Torturers and Traitors….in other words, Repukes.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:30 amWow! Dems grew a pair. Nice.
It’s about time someone holds Bush the Dumber accountable. Here’s to hoping balance of power is restored hereby.
ITMFA now!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:31 ammrjj, thanks for the legal content of this. It shows that, at the very least, more information is needed from the white house to get to the truth. This is what needs to be pushed forward. Not the non issues of Clinton’s testimony and Attorney’s serving at the pleasure of the President. The missrepresentation to Congress is the issue.
thanks again.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:31 am#43- Heh, heh, heh. You’re a little upset, aren’t you? Too bad- so sad. I tried to tell you about karma, but you wouldn’t listen. Fat-head, know-it-alls rarely do.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:31 amWho wants to personally deliver the subpoenas?
Raise your hands and don’t all shout out at once.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:31 amHowsad that now Patrick 1 has to flatulate in Roger’s face.
Politics are a bitch, eh Rightards?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:31 amdidnt the rethug shills say whe they wanted to wiretap our phonecalls look at our e-mails and medical records why would u mind if u have nothin to hide well this goes to the white house and u rethugs let rove and bushes cronys testify under oath what do they have to hide if they didn nothing wrong
March 21st, 2007 at 11:31 amThe above sounds like its spoken from personal experience.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:32 amLet’s see… 3 years wasted on Plamegate trying to get Rove… now another set of hearings on a non-issue designed to get Rove…
So tell me two things “Progress”ives:
1. What makes you think that the average American even knows who Rove is and that they give a f*ck if he recommended firing some attorneys?
2. Don’t you think the American public is going to wonder why the Dems are wasting all this time, effort and money on witchhunts instead of more important things?
The Dems are shooting themselves in the foot on this one.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:32 amYou liberals are kidding yourself and living in a fantasy land if you think that these subponeas are going to go anywhere.
the subcommittee has to now take it for a vote in Congress, if it passes there, the Executive Branch can refuse the subponeas. Then the Judicial Branch gets involved. It is a long process liberals. You can be sure that not much is going to come out of this.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:33 amComment by Ben Dover — March 21, 2007 @ 11:25 am
Rove wipes his ass with Chucky’s subpeona and sends it back to him.
Comment by Patrick1inch — March 21, 2007 @ 11:26 am
Quickly, I’d like to point this out.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:33 amBen Dover presents a post with factual information, even cites the actual case.
Patrick1inch? How does he respond? How does he debate? By articulating an act of cleansing after a b.m.!
Just letting the newbies here, who may want to engage these trolls, know what childish mentality they would be dealing with!
Stupid Repuke Trolls are spewing talking point LIES.
Today’s Repuke talking point: “Gonzales and the White House did nothing wrong”. That is a LIE.
At least one of the 8 US Attorneys, Carol Lam, was fired in the middle of an investigation into Jerry Lewis. This is obstruction of justice.
Chimpy and his thugs have done this before. The US Attorney on Guam was investigating sex slavery and forced abortions being covered up by the Repukes. Abramoff called Rove and the attorney got fired and replaced with a Repuke party hack. The investigation was dropped. That is OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:34 am#63- Me, me me!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:34 am#42 I love the smell of settled law in the morning.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:35 amLet’s see how Harriet Miers holds up when questioned under oath. At one point the administration claimed that the firings were originally her idea, but they backed off this claim within 24 hours. Might it be that Harriet said she wouldn’t lie for them?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:35 amPatrickarmyof1: Let’s see, I’m guessing you’re a horny 14 year old, upset that Foley didn’t add him to the list.
You’re use of expletives is the tell, that you’re scared shitless that bush may actually suceed in ushering in 40 years of liberal dominance in American politics.
Under oath – the truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God -
March 21st, 2007 at 11:35 amCan’t wait to hear you’re boss, karl utter that phrase.
Harriet Meirs on the Supreme Court would have indeed been interesting…
The Supreme Court ruled today that the President is far too good-looking to answer any subpoena.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:36 amI would deliver the subpoena to Karl Rove, if I lived in DC. I would love to see his fat face turn red in anger. He would probably call me a foul name and I would say likewise to him.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:37 am“Smells like 1974″
March 21st, 2007 at 11:37 amEverybody here, except the Repuke trolls, supports good government and the rule of law.
The Repuke trolls support obstruction of justice, perjury, treason, torture, lying to start wars, destroying the environment, destroying the Constitution, destroying Habeus Corpus, and generally destroying our great nation for their own partisan gain. And the Repuke trolls support covering up sex slavery and forced abortions on Guam.
You Repuke trolls are disgusting.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:37 amYou liberals are kidding yourself and living in a fantasy land if you think that these subponeas are going to go anywhere. Comment by howsad — March 21, 2007 @ 11:33 am
You don’t get it. It doesn’t matter if the subpoenas die.
The American public is going to see that Congress was forced to issue subpoenas to try to get these guys to tell them the truth and that Bush and his cronies would stop at nothing to avoid testifying under oath.
The White House has already lied about who was involved and why these prosecutors were fired. What are they hiding? Must be something pretty awful.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:39 am#67 and #68 are textbook cases of what I mean by false bravado.
If what you say is true, chaps, then why is the Bush administration freaking out about the subpoenas?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:39 amThe trolls here are, among other things, moral train wrecks.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:40 amHarriet Miers has done Chimpy’s dirty work before, back in Texas.
When the Texas Lottery awarded contracts based on competitive bids, one of the losing bidders was a company with ties to Chimpy.
Chimpy had Harriet Miers FIRE the Texas Lottery director because she refused to cancel the contract and give it to the Chimpy crony instead.
Harriet Miers is the Lizzie Borden of the Chimpy regime…a real hatchet woman.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:40 amTom3 > the Bush lover trolls get paid to post on here. If Karl Rove fails to pay them, then they vanish leaving skid marks > lol.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:41 am#67……. responses to questions:
March 21st, 2007 at 11:41 am#1… I would say that approximately 70% of Americans know who Karl Rove is, and as that is a significant majority, could be construed as average.
( Undoubtedly there are many within the remaining 30 % who know who he is as well…)
#2… more important things… such as?
Are there any intelligent Repukes left on the Hill? Or have they been so completely brainwashed by the spin machine that they cannot think for themselves anymore?
Watch which Repukes to ABANDON CHIMP on this scandal. They’re the smarter ones who still want to have jobs in 2008.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:42 amBush said sworn testimony by White House officials would breach executive privilege — the right of the president to have confidential communications with his staff.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:42 amSo, is he saying he was in the loop and involved with the firings? Gee, Gonzales says he himself was mostly unaware of anything. So, now we have Bush communicating with staff over who to fire and why, but the AG not.
Cynicon Implant asks:
1. What makes you think that the average American even knows who Rove is and that they give a f*ck if he recommended firing some attorneys?
Doesn’t matter. Our country is a representative democracy, not a pure democracy. We hire people to represent our interests so that we don’t have to know all the intricacies.
2. Don’t you think the American public is going to wonder why the Dems are wasting all this time, effort and money on witchhunts instead of more important things?
If they are paying attention to the fact that there is an investigation, they can also pay attention to the facts behind the investigation. Or do you think all American citizens are just dumb relatives of the evolution-deprived President?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:43 amThis is worth a repeat — by Briseadh na Faire:
May those who know of the crimes of this administration continue to come forward with testimony and evidence of wrong doing.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:43 amIt doesn’t even matter what the dirty trolls say. It just makes me smile even harder to see them squirming to protect their master. I can’t get enough.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:44 am“…obstruction of justice, perjury, treason, torture, lying to start wars, destroying the environment, destroying the Constitution, destroying Habeus Corpus, and generally destroying our great nation….” Comment by Tom3
And all of it done in the name of the Lord. I agree – disgusting.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:45 amKarla Rove…Prison Bride of the Year.
I can hardly wait. LOL!!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:45 amerrrr….
actually, no subponeas have been issued to anyone! hahahaha!! you silly little Liberlas.
the subponeas were written and approved, but they have been handed to anyone.
This is going to be a Constitutional show down between Congress and the Executive Branch and you can bet is not going to go anywhere.
the problem here is that the Democrats were desperate to get Karl Rove with the whole Plame thing and when it didn’t happen, Democrats went crazy and they want Rove at any cause.
poor, desperate, angry, hateful, meaningless Liberals and Democrats. I have to laugh at how they are embarrasing themselves.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:47 amyou silly liberals, didn’t you learn with the whole fake Valarie Plame thing?
the same exact crap you guys are spewing now, you were spewing about the Plame thing and what happened? NOTHING!
you poor things are so desperate, so hateful, so ignorant, so ill informed by your pundits like poor desperate Thinkprogress.org..
March 21st, 2007 at 11:48 amTrolls that think Bushhas a chance to fight this had better read UNITED STATES VERSUS NIXON (1974)
This is a case of settled Law.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:51 amBush will lose.
One of the fired attorneys, Carol Lam, was fired for convicting Duke Cunningham, getting Dusty Foggo to quit, and investigating Jerry Lewis.
Chimpy was really mad at her, because Jerry Lewis is one of his favorite comedians.
8^)
March 21st, 2007 at 11:52 amhowsad:
Plame is out of the news, only because Walter Reed and this fine mess have eclipsed it.
Why don’t you go back to Fox News, I hear they’re covering Anna Nicole and Brittany.
By the way, weren’t you the one last week saying the USA firings was a “non-story”? LMFAO
March 21st, 2007 at 11:53 amValerie Plame was an undercover CIA agent and the Scooter Five outed her AND her cover company.
That’s not fake, you stupid Repuke troll. Go back under your bridge.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:53 am#93- Then what are YOU doing here? You’d better prepare to lay down in front on the oncoming traffic. Your presense will shortly be no longer required.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:53 amthe same exact crap you guys are spewing now, you were spewing about the Plame thing and what happened? NOTHING!
Tell that to Scooter Libby. Bwaaahahahahahahaha!!
March 21st, 2007 at 11:53 amThese scumbag liberals will pay. When you libs are booted out of Congress in 08, remember that the American people wanted you to do something for the country, not pursue your hateful vendetta against Bush.
Scum.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:54 amI’m guessing the White House now runs the IDG; the Iraq Distraction Group. It’s in high gear.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:54 amthe same exact crap you guys are spewing now, you were spewing about the Plame thing and what happened? NOTHING
Tell it to Irving Libby troll
March 21st, 2007 at 11:54 am“the same exact crap you guys are spewing now, you were spewing about the Plame thing and what happened? NOTHING!”
Uh, Scooter was convicted and four other White House goons were named in testimony as leakers.
That’s nothing? Jeez, you Repuke trolls just get dumber and dumber.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:55 amyou silly liberals, didn’t you learn with the whole fake Valarie Plame thing?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:55 amComment by howsadicantdebate — March 21, 2007 @ 11:48 am
I patiently await your link or proof about the fake Valarie Plame thingy!
howsad,
Please give us all the facts, with links. We want to learn.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:55 amyou poor things are so desperate, so hateful, so ignorant, so ill informed by your pundits like poor desperate
Nothin like wakin up to projection courtesy of the water-carriers for these criminals. Previous entry SHOULD read “you poor things are so desperate, so hateful, so ignorant, so ill informed by your pundits like poor desperate Faux News Channel”
March 21st, 2007 at 11:55 amLet’s see Rove use “THE Math” to get him and his buddies out of this one.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:55 am#43 Patrick1
Rove wipes his ass with Chucky’s subpeona and sends it back to him.
That’s okay. It’ll make it all the more fun to watch Schumer stuff it down Rove’s throat.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:55 am#92
errrr….
Comment by howsad
You should have stopped there. That was the most intelligent point you made.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:56 amThe Scooter Five: Scooter Libby plus four unindicted co-conspirators:
Karla Rove, Ari Fairy Fleischer, Richy Rich Armitage, and the director of the conspiracy, Deadeye Duck Cheney.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:57 amLet’s call them what they are…THE ALAMO BUNCH
They’re all Texans with a trait of lying.
They’re all about fighting war against ‘lesser’ enemies.
They’re all about illegal activities & cover ups.
They’re all about staying together, right or wrong.
We know how those in the Alamo fared. Any bets on this bunch?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:58 amhowsad is posting like a caged monkey overdosed on amphetamines, smashing itself into the walls until it falls to the floor unconscious.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:58 amThese scumbag liberals will pay. When you libs are booted out of Congress in 08, remember that the American people wanted you to do something for the country, not pursue your hateful vendetta against Bush.
Scum.
Comment by firehead
Look, fairyhead, this culture of corruption goes all the way to the top…they ARE doing something for the country so that the next scumbag who comes along will think twice before leading this country down the road to fascism. I see you’re suffering from a severe case of cranial rectumitis…
Scum.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:58 amStupid Repuke trolls are delusional. They think the voters will kick the Dems out in 2008. LOL!!
It is obvious that the Dems are going to sweep the 2008 elections. They will get the White House back, and get supermajorities in both houses of Congress.
The many scandals of the Chimpy regime are going to bring down the Repukes in 2008. And you can bet the farm on that.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:59 am… ya know…
the ONLY response needed for these troll-bots is:
IF THEY HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE
WHY ARE THEY TRYING TO HIDE EVERYTHING?
that’s all… copy, paste, repeat…
don’t give them the satisfaction of getting your ire up…
March 21st, 2007 at 11:59 amthat is their only purpose…
#100 fLamebrain
remember that the American people wanted you to do something for the country, not pursue your hateful vendetta against Bush.
I think it’s possible to do both. In fact, considering the mood of the country towards Bush and everything he does, I’d say it’s exactly what the American people want us to do. It’s our patriotic duty to get rid of the little turd.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:00 pmit’s good to see the manson family faithful pouring out their hearts full of hate for everyone – substitute “pig” for liberals, and you’ll have the transcript of the trial – the trial that put charlie and key family members behind bars for life.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:01 pmTroll your little
March 21st, 2007 at 12:02 pmThe Bush cabal is sure performing a strange dance for a bunch that “did nothing wrong” and therefore “has nothing to hide”.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:02 pmThe many scandals of the Chimpy regime are going to bring down the Repukes in 2008. And you can bet the farm on that.
Comment by Tom3
I hope you’re right. I wouldn’t bet the farm just yet, even though a good portion of the country is waking up from their post 9/11 haze, there’s still an awful lot of stupid people out there…there could be at least a million people for every single propaganda-pusher regurgitating every Rovian talking point on here. Scary, isn’t it?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:03 pmWhoever said It smells like 1974 – right on!!!
ITMFA now!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:03 pmPoor Bush, he thinks he’s still playing Texas Hold’em with his pals, but this time it’s not cards he’s playing with, it’s subpoenas !!!
March 21st, 2007 at 12:04 pmAnything that holds BushCo accountable for it’s numerous illegal actions is a Good Thing(tm).
March 21st, 2007 at 12:05 pmRove WOULD wipe his ass with a subpoena.
Rove is a criminal with absolutely no respect for the law.
You Repukes support criminals. You suck.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:06 pmJust because the current regime appears to be lying to congress and obstructing justice does not mean that there is no underlying crime. To jump to that conclusion defies logic.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:06 pmJob Posting:
Former Ivy League cheerleader looking for work.
Willing to do anything for money.
Long history of lying for profit, hiding the truth & being a piss-ant.
Some military experience, w/o documentation.
References: Daddy, KKKarla, Big Dick, LaLa, Babs Bush
Reason for leaving last job: Impeached
Have you ever been convicted of a crime? Not Yet
Anyone in your household? Wife ran over & killed someone.
Expected Salary: Something with a lot of zeros in it.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:07 pmCHOOSE CONFRONTATION
March 21st, 2007 at 12:10 pmCHOOSE CONFRONTATION
CHOOSE CONFRONTATION
CHOOSE CONFRONTATION
CHOOSE CONFRONTATION
CHOOSE CONFRONTATION
CHOOSE CONFRONTATION
CHOOSE CONFRONTATION
CHOOSE CONFRONTATION
Once more, for the troll corps.
Would anyone try to make the case that it is a good thing to have politics and political influence inserted into our legal system?
Is it OK or not to have U.S. Attorneys making decisions to prosecute not be based on their legal training and ethics, but instead on the political machinations of the party in power?
Go ahead. Make the case.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:12 pmThe people have already made that decision. 28% will be really mad at the liberals, while the other 70% will be waiting for Bush’s impeachment. Not sure what the other 2% are gonna do, but 70 in plenty enough to keep you whackos at bay.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:13 pmThese scumbag Repukes will pay. They will lose the White House in 2008 and the Dems will get supermajorities in both Houses.
Repuke Scum.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:14 pm#22- Liberals Heart Terrorists
Did you actually bother to read what I had written at post #6? I wrote “President Bush claimed that he was interested in ‘learning all the facts’ ” which should indicate to any intelligent person that it was Bush himself who made that statement, as indicated by the quotes. Again, if he is allegedly interested in finding out the truth, then he should have no problem having his employees testify under oath, on the record, and in a public forum, any questions that members of Congress may direct toward those outstanding paragons of integrity and virtue.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:16 pm“Just because the current regime appears to be lying to congress and obstructing justice does not mean that there is no underlying crime.”
Obstruction of Justice and Lying to Congress ARE crimes, dumbass.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:16 pmCHOOSE CONFRONTATION
Comment by Spudge_Boy
Absolutely.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:17 pmFunny…Jake’s oddly silent…especially considering his bluster regarding this issue late yesterday.
Here are a few quotes from Shakey Jake’s performance yesterday:
March 21st, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Please stop repeating that Repuke troll’s inflammatory nick.
Liberals do NOT love terrorists. That’s a Repuke talking point LIE.
Stop repeating their lies. Just call him a troll and leave it at that.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:18 pmTo do: Have my Secretary find the nearest leper colony with at least a four star hotel.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:21 pm“No one is going to “revolt†as long as I have breath in my body.”
I’d be happy to fix that for you.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:22 pmJake is being held in reserve. His handlers will release him onto the playing court soon, though. Howsad seems to have disappeared, so I assume that he is out of the game with a brain aneurysm, after putting on a troll performance for the record books this morning.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:22 pmDidn’t Cheney tell Leahy to F**k himself on the Senate floor? Payback’s a bitch.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:27 pmWould anyone try to make the case that it is a good thing to have politics and political influence inserted into our legal system?
Is it OK or not to have U.S. Attorneys making decisions to prosecute not be based on their legal training and ethics, but instead on the political machinations of the party in power?
Go ahead. Make the case.
Comment by RUCerious
RU, your first question doesn’t make sense to me. You can’t keep political influence out of our legal system — it is actually designed to ensure that politics is directly involved in it. Just look at the way we nominate and approve Supreme Court justices for example.
To your second question is better — I would hope that they balance the legal/ethical side with the political. But again, the way the US Attorney system is designed you are going to have political influence no matter what.
If you don’t like the way it is set up, then work to change it – but don’t waste everybody’s time with stupid hearings that are supposed to prove criminal behavior from a process that worked the way it was designed.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:29 pmVerbalKint sez:
How sad, indeed. howsad’s aneurysms can be traced directly back to chronic cognitive dissonance poisoning, which is a telltale sign of the advanced stages of COD (Clinton Obsessive Disorder).
March 21st, 2007 at 12:31 pmI have not seen one troll address UNITED STATES VERSUS NIXON (1974) at all yet. All they can do is repeat their talking
pointsLIES.Precedence has already been set on this issue by the Supreme Court by a margin of 8 to 0. Congress has every right to have oversight of the Executive Branch as given in the Constitution.
The Nixonian idea of executive privilige is a modern concept dreamed up by the Republicans to try to cover criminal activity.
Even FDR’s council had to appear before congress to testify while WWII was raging on.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:31 pmFor a bunch that “did nothing wrong”, the Bush cabal is sure acting very weird. Makes me think to myself, “Maybe, just maybe, Clinton did NOT do it tooâ€.
Although Clinton did do something even worse – Clinton lied about an adulterous blow job to protect his marriage and, as any Rethug will tell you, there is no greater crime than the “protection of marriage†by a Democrat.
Now if it had been with a male page or a male prostitute or even a choir boy…………..
March 21st, 2007 at 12:33 pmLet’s see:
- Obstruction of Justice
- Perjury/lying to Congress
- Politicization of the Federal Justicial system (a concept which is blatantly contradictory to every ideal upon which our Constitution is based)
A few here think this is no big deal, just a witch hunt. What is profoundly disturbing is how cavalierly the apologists and loyalists treat this most heinous and serious issue. That our very foundation and governmental structure is being severely compromised and corrupted doesn’t seem to bother them in the least.
I would not have thought that I would live to see the day when so many Americans would treat our constitution and democratic government structure as just quaint ideals of yore. Money above people. Party above country. Avarice above compassion. Greed above humanity.
Americans vs. Americans in an all out win at all costs power struggle. Everything democratic and truly “American” has been thrown out the window just so that one party or another can claim a “win”. A very sad and low day in American history.
We no longer occupy the ivory tower of democracy and freedom. Instead, we exist in bunkers of deceit and corruption on the battlefield of greed. “America the beautiful” has been transformed into “murika the trailer trash”. And astonishingly, there seems to be a number of Americans who actually like it that way.
A very sad day indeed.
P.S. Anyone know how many Iraqis we killed today? Oh yeah, that’s right, who cares? Especially now that Britney is out of rehab.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:44 pmCarl . . . Rove !
March 21st, 2007 at 12:46 pmCome on down !!
This is a fabricated and phony scandal.
Trumped up charges for the impeachment.
Go ahead and play games Democrats.
Just remember an election is coming and you will smell like #*@! when the hearings are done and Bush is still there.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:48 pmYou’re right, Flaco.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:54 pmIt’s OK, though, we’ll take care of it for you. You just come along back to your room. I’ll send one of your friends in to visit you. She’ll give you a little pill and you’ll be able to rest and not have to think about it.
That’s right, Flaco. Come along now.
#142,
Wayne, I will address U.S. v. Nixon. For the record, I do think administration officials should testify publicly before Congress in this matter.
Now, having said that, U.S. v. Nixon is not exactly on point or entirely analogous to the current situation. That decision did not state that Executive Privilege is not a valid doctrine. In fact, quite the opposite. The Court said, presidential communications have the “presumption of privlilege” and that “The privilege is fundamental to the operation of government and inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution.”
Nor did the decision address the issue of executive officials being required to testify before Congress. The dispute in U.S. v. Nixon was not between the president and Congress. It was between two parties that were officers of the Executive Branch — the special prosecutor and the president.
The case does not touch upon the denial of information to Congress.
What the Court did decide in U.S. v. Nixon is that while executive privilege does exist, the privilege is not absolute and can give way to the “fair administration of criminal justice.” The Court said, “The allowance of the privilege to withhold evidence that is demonstrably relevant in a criminal trial would cut deeply into the guarantee of due process of law and gravely impair the basic function of the courts.”
The Court concluded “that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.”
In short, the Supreme Court found that the executive privilege is a vald doctrine, rooted in the Constitution, but that it does not protect the president from turning over evidence that is the topic of a subpoena sought by a prosecutor and issued by a district court for use in a criminal trial.
The facts surrounding the controversy ultimately resolved in U.S. v. Nixon are very different from the current controversy.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:54 pmComment by mrJJ — March 21, 2007 @ 11:19 am
Thanks for the citations JJ. Everybody else – whenever the fearsome Rethug Foursome (partick1, Flaco, Liberals Heart Terrorists, and sosad – or whatever the hell his handle is) mention “no underlying crime”, point them back to jj’s post.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:57 pmThis is a fabricated and phony scandal.
Comment by Flaco
Prove it…
March 21st, 2007 at 12:57 pmverifiable proof , privide a link to your source, unless it is just your A$$.
Obstruction of Justice
-Perjury/lying to Congress
We talking about Clinton right?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:57 pmThis is a fabricated and phony scandal.
Trumped up charges for the impeachment.
Go ahead and play games Democrats.
Just remember an election is coming and you will smell like #*@! when the hearings are done and Bush is still there.
Comment by Flaco
“I think credibility is important. It’s going to be important to be the — for the president to be credible with Congress, important for the president to be credible with foreign nations. And yes, I think it’s something that people need to consider. This isn’t something new. I read a report or a memo from somebody in the 1988 Campaign — I forgot the fellow’s name — warning then-Senator Gore to be careful about exaggerating claims.” -Governor George Bush, Online NewsHour, October 11, 2000
March 21st, 2007 at 12:59 pm“This is a fabricated and phony scandal” that must be exposed for what it is – behind closed doors, no cameras, no transcripts and certainly not under oath.
Riiiight.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:00 pmDemocrats sure are abusing their new power,
March 21st, 2007 at 1:05 pmusing it for evil instead of good.
Tom3 – I’ll slow it down for you. Of course lying to congress and obstructing justice are crimes. My point is just because they appear to be committing them is no reason to think they are innocent of original crimes that they are obstructing justice and lying to congress about. Just because you are unable to understand a post does not necessarily mean that the poster is a dumbass.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:06 pmThis is what happens when sombody is surrounded by friends and yes men and doesn’t listen to what anybody else has to say.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:06 pmYou get delusions of your own importance and think everybody loves you and nothing can hurt you.
All these so called friends didn’t help the country, or Bush or themselves. They were all so fixated on doing what they wanted and achieving their personal goals that they sold this country down the river.
Nice bunch of Americans.
The Dems are shooting themselves in the foot on this one.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — March 21, 2007 @ 11:32 am
And they’re going to cry all the way to the White House.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:10 pmNow Tony Snow is explaining constitutional law at a press conference.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:15 pmAnd he just said they were trying to be accommodating to congress.
Too bad he’s not under oath.
As refreshing as it is to see some demands on this administration for accountability, I wonder if the whole thing about testifying under oath is blown a bit out of proportion. I mean, even if they swore on a stack of bibles, korans, torahs, and bhagavad-gitas, I would not believe a single word that came out of the mouths of Bush’s staff. They are pathological liars. And to hear Bush refer to them as “honorable public servants” makes me throw up in my mouth just a little.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:17 pmPERJURY/OBSTRUCTION—No, fukko…
That was LIBBY, the ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT (and Cheney’s CHIEF OF STAFF) who is now a CONVICTED FELON.
Karl Rove needs his face SMASHED by a group of soldiers PERMANENTLY WOUNDED and MAIMED for Bush’s Iraq/WMD
LIES.
Then sent to Iraq to be LIBERATED!!!
SHWEET!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:17 pmThe Dems are shooting themselves in the foot on this one.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — March 21, 2007 @ 11:32 am
And they’re going to cry all the way to the White House.
Comment by shane
They will get crushed in 2008 if they insist on being the “petulant and petty” party.
People don’t care how “secretive” the Bush adminnistration is. It’s a non-issue.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:19 pmshane sez:
There’s an idea…make Snow-job swear in before every press conference. ^_^
March 21st, 2007 at 1:20 pmGood Morning all, sunshine for the moment on the west coast….Note I have not posted much the past few day’s…Read nearly all the back and forth from the progressives and dark hearted troll’s…
This morning Tony snow flake again on the new’s and I wonder…..How weird is this yet again, bush and company trying to make the world play by their rules, not the rule of law…I find this entire thing bizzar..No swearing in, no note’s, no cameras…..LOL…We will give you what we want you to have and our term’s only….Confadentialety of the president.???? You don’t like the question just don’t answer…..”We have made an extremely generious offer.” WTF is that about.? If you have nothing to hide why all the fuss, just go and answer the question’s under oath….More lies and hiding will never take this away..Lot’s of speel and their using stone walling again with the press…If this keep’s up the republicans can pack their bags and go away forever, the public looking on..Blessings all
March 21st, 2007 at 1:27 pmThey will get crushed in 2008 if they insist on being the “petulant and petty†party. Comment by Cynicon Implant — March 21, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
You mean like Bush’s speech yesterday? You CONS have always been the “petulant and petty” party.
People don’t care how “secretive†the Bush adminnistration is. It’s a non-issue. Comment by Cynicon Implant — March 21, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
For you, but not for the *majority* of americans. And by *people*, you mean your religious zealous friends? They don’t count – you’re the minority. As was shown in 2006.
Catch a clue – moron.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:28 pmForgot this little thought….they protest to much….Blessings
March 21st, 2007 at 1:31 pmNew orders for the SS at the White House just came down:
Shoot any Sherrifs on sight trying to deliver subpoenas…
Go Congress!!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:37 pmLa cucaracha, La cucaracha,
March 21st, 2007 at 1:45 pmYa no puede caminar…
…on deep background the press secretary whispered…
We don’t have anything to hide, and we always play fair, but we just can’t allow anyone to question us. It’s against our rules.
POWER TO THE SUBPOENA!
March 21st, 2007 at 1:49 pmAren’t these the same dingleberries that made the secret service testify against President Clinton. Do the Democrats have the balls to stand up to the Nazi’s in Washington.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/05/22/lewinsky.scandal/
March 21st, 2007 at 1:52 pmFor some this posting was deleted. I’ll try again:
#142,
Wayne, I will address U.S. v. Nixon. For the record, I do think administration officials should testify publicly before Congress in this matter.
Now, having said that, U.S. v. Nixon is not exactly on point or entirely analogous to the current situation. That decision did not state that Executive Privilege is not a valid doctrine. In fact, quite the opposite. The Court said, presidential communications have the “presumption of privlilege†and that “The privilege is fundamental to the operation of government and inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution.â€
Nor did the decision address the issue of executive officials being required to testify before Congress. The dispute in U.S. v. Nixon was not between the president and Congress. It was between two parties that were officers of the Executive Branch — the special prosecutor and the president.
The case does not touch upon the denial of information to Congress.
What the Court did decide in U.S. v. Nixon is that while executive privilege does exist, the privilege is not absolute and can give way to the “fair administration of criminal justice.†The Court said, “The allowance of the privilege to withhold evidence that is demonstrably relevant in a criminal trial would cut deeply into the guarantee of due process of law and gravely impair the basic function of the courts.â€
The Court concluded “that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.â€
In short, the Supreme Court found that the executive privilege is a vald doctrine, rooted in the Constitution, but that it does not protect the president from turning over evidence that is the topic of a subpoena sought by a prosecutor and issued by a district court for use in a criminal trial.
The facts surrounding the controversy ultimately resolved in U.S. v. Nixon are very different from the current controversy.
Comment by Exley — March 21, 2007 @ 12:54
March 21st, 2007 at 2:01 pmIs it just me or does that chick to the left of Harriet look like Monica Lewinsky?
March 21st, 2007 at 2:15 pmfirst thing i thought too, kiki… but monica was more attractive…
boy, that’s one i’d like to have a heartoheart with…
am i alone to think she was used, even a plant?… silly girl…
March 21st, 2007 at 5:45 pmbut she so seduced that dummy…
i’ve dated his kind… he just couldn’t turn it down… dummy…
…
Exley, I willl repeat, and also state I did NOT misread the ruling against Nixon
The key part of the ruling against Nixon’s claim of executive privilige in the Watergate Scandle is â€
Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets
Now tell me are the firings military? No
Diplomatic? Nothing diplomatic about the handling for sure.
Sensitive national security secret? No
Even if Bush lied and talked about it with Rove or Meyers, it still does not meet the criteria set forth by the Supreme Court for a claim of Executive Privilige.
Please cite any court ruling in your rebuttal for verification.
March 21st, 2007 at 5:48 pmbut she so seduced that dummy…
i’ve dated his kind… he just couldn’t turn it down… dummy…
Comment by katy #170
WOW…
…SOOOO not fair…
…Bill was seduced by a coquettish hero worshipper…
…who stroked his ego (pun unavoidable)…
…giving him everything he missed at home…
…Like Wanda Sykes so succinctly put it…
…”When ya get t’ be th’ First Lady…
…YOU ain’t got t’ (comment deleted by site administrator)…
…NO mo’…
March 21st, 2007 at 6:42 pmYOU CAN FIGHT ALL YOU WANT, CHIMPya–YOU STAND AS MUCH CHANCE AS AN ONE-LEGGED MAN IN AN ASS-KICKING CONTEST!!!!! HAH HAH HAH HAH HAH!!!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:49 pmWayne,
The Court’s language regarding the “need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets” applies only to the invocation of executive privilege in the context of a criminal trial.
What the court was saying there is that Nixon could not invoke executive privilege to ignore the district court-issued subpoena in a criminal case “absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets.”
The current controversy does not involve a criminal prosecution or a court issued subpoena. It involves the possibility of a congressional subpoena in a non-criminal trial setting. Thus, to invoke executive privilege here, the Bush administration does not have to make a claim that military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets would be endangered if the congressional subpoena were honored.
These are critical differences. The court’s ruling in U.S. v. Nixon is narrowly written to apply only to court-issued subpoenas in a criminal trial.
“We conclude that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.”
In other words, the generalized assertion of privilege may indeed suffice to withstand a subpoena issued by Congress in a non-criminal trial setting.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:55 pmwell, so just what are you saying, big papa? …
what’s not fair? … i don’t get it…
btw… i googled “wanda sykes, ‘first lady’”… here’s the video:
A Black Guy, A Sista and A White Dude…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9zf9aKNcsw
very funny…
March 21st, 2007 at 8:58 pm[...] Instead, it has offered closed door “interviews” with no oath and no transcript. The House and Senate Judiciary Committees have rejected that offer and authorized subpoenas of White House [...]
March 23rd, 2007 at 11:03 amhey i back the laws up ….. lol
April 17th, 2007 at 1:54 pm