Specter Dismisses Gonzales’ ‘Conclusory’ Claim Of ‘Nothing Improper;’ Wants Actual Facts
Specter Dismisses Gonzales’ ‘Conclusory’ Claim Of ‘Nothing Improper;’ Wants Actual Facts
In his Washington Post op-ed yesterday, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales insisted that “nothing improper occurred” when eight U.S. Attorneys were forced to resign last year. “I know that I did not — and would not — ask for the resignation of any U.S. attorney for an improper reason,” wrote Gonzales. “Furthermore, I have no basis to believe that anyone involved in this process sought the removal of a U.S. attorney for an improper reason.”
The assertion that there was “nothing improper” in the firing of the eight U.S. Attorneys has been a constant refrain from Gonzales and his supporters, even as evidence continues to mount that contradicts their public statements. Here are a few examples:
the goal is to show Congress and the American people that “the department did not remove the U.S. attorneys for improper reasons.” [Justice Department Spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos 3/20/07]
“No United States Attorney was fired for improper reasons.” [Alberto Gonzales 3/22/07]
“There was nothing improper about the decision here.” [Alberto Gonzales 3/23/07]
“I asked for their resignation not for improper reasons.” [Alberto Gonzales 3/26/07]
“Nor, to my knowledge, was any U.S. attorney asked to resign for an improper reason.” [Former Chief of Staff to the Attorney General Kyle Sampson 3/29/07]
Appearing on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, dismissed the claims in Gonzales’ op-ed. “Those statements are very conclusory,” Specter said. “He’s got a steep hill to climb. He’s going to be successful only if he deals with the facts.” Watch it:
The facts show considerable evidence of “improper” motivations behind the firings.
Just yesterday, the Albuquerque Journal reported that former New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias “was fired after Sen. Pete Domenici, who had been unhappy with Iglesias for some time, made a personal appeal to the White House.” The main gripe with Iglesias was that he had refused to give in to Domenici’s pressure and bring indictments against Democrats before the 2006 mid-term elections.
Furthermore, just one day after former San Diego U.S. Attorney Carol Lam widened her probe into a Republican bribery scandal, Gonzales’ former Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson warned the White House of “the real problem” they had with her. He then suggested that they should start looking for her replacement.
Sen. Specter is right. Gonzales is going to have a hard time selling his “nothing improper” story unless he produces facts that support his claims. Otherwise, when Gonzales testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow, his statements should be read with the utmost skepticism.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well, traitor (I mean Specter) you and the Dems will get your chance to ask for specific facts tomorrow.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:58 pmI don’t believe anything Specter says. He’s just a talking head and when the cameras are off he’s in Bush’s corner. It’s all just meaningless talk IMO.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:58 pmBut – but – but Clinton!
April 16th, 2007 at 3:59 pm“I know that I did not — and would not — ask for the resignation of any U.S. attorney for an improper reason,†wrote Gonzales. “Furthermore, I have no basis to believe that anyone involved in this process sought the removal of a U.S. attorney for an improper reason.â€
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, especially from the AG. What “basis” Gonzales as for his “belief” is irrelevant.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:01 pmIt’s typical Bush Admin language manipulation…so obvious I don’t know why Rove is considered such a genius. By continuing to answer by saying they didn’t fire anyone for improper reasons they are hoping the media will spread the message that nothing improper was done.
HOwever, just because Bush Co believes nothing improper was done, doesn’t mean it’s true. Hell, one could easily argue if they truly believed nothing improper was done then why the need for such a massive coverup, changing stories, missing emails, etc?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:02 pmI don’t believe anything Specter says. He’s just a talking head and when the cameras are off he’s in Bush’s corner. It’s all just meaningless talk IMO.
Comment by Roger — April 16, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
I concur. Sepcter is as close to a Republican version of Lieberman as exists. The only difference is, Lieberman talks and acts like a neocon, but Specter just talks like he’s tough on the administration and then inevitably folds when the chips are down.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:02 pmIgnore Specter; he’s all talk. I’m from PA and I know all about him…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:03 pmWell, traitor (I mean Specter) you and the Dems will get your chance to ask for specific facts tomorrow.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
Since when is “He’s got a steep hill to climb. He’s going to be successful only if he deals with the facts,†the language of treason?
Oh, wait — i just noticed it was Jake-off. Never mind.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:03 pmFcuk spector. He’s nothing but a rethug rat deserting the boy king’s sinking ship.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:04 pmGonzo’s been nothing but “broad brush sound bites” and “self-congratulatory bullshit” and he’s gotten away with it. Frankly, after seeing his abysmal and lackluster appearance during hearings, I was left wondering if he’d really ever completed law school. His lack of command of the english language is only superseded by his gross ignorance of our laws. I can’t wait for him to be brought up on charges regarding the legality of this president’s famous “signing statements” and how this tool has been abused by Bush. It’s appalling to have an idiot faux-attorney as head of our DOJ giving Bush advice to break the law continuously and then trying to convince the people that the AG knows the law. He doesn’t know it at all; in fact, I’m wondering if he doesn’t have some sort of mental handicap to boot.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:04 pmNow when the people hear “I’ve done nothing wrong”, we simply translate it in Bush-wellian Speak and it means “I’m in deep shit, folks”.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pmThen you’ll have some good questions for Abu Gonzales during the hearing tomorrow, won’t you Specter? And Abu G will be under oath, won’t he?
Yeah, we’ll see……
April 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pmHitler didn’t believe he was doing anything wrong either!! It’s the mentality/ the ideology of madness that spurs this group on.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:06 pmMaybe NOW Bush will finally regret not support Toomey in that primary ; )
April 16th, 2007 at 4:06 pmWell, now we know in jake’s world, facts are traitorous. that explains why jake can’t be factual about his age, religion, party affiliation, and his military service (or lack there of) jake is a scumbag
April 16th, 2007 at 4:09 pmIf one comes to a hearing unprepared to defend his generalities such as “I’ve done nothing wrong”, then there’s no point in wasting everyone’s time. It’s bullshit, plain & simple. It’s like saying “trust me” because I say so….”trust me because I AM the law of this land”….with a track record like Gonzo’s who’s conveniently created his own version of our laws to suit the crime, why would anyone ever believe this known liar? Why would anyone ever believe this manipulator of the law?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:09 pmtraitor (I mean Specter) Comment by Jake
For the record, “traitor” to _______?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:09 pmJake, why do you call Arlen Spector a traitor? That’s pretty strong word.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:10 pmJake,
why is Spector a traitor? She he not ask questions and try to find out the truth. It is possible that Attorney General comitted perjury. At the very least we have conflicting accounts of his level of participation in this. How is asking questions of a public servant in front of congress traitorous?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:10 pmIs anyone else beginning to see history repeat itself? After W.W.I., Hitler came to power with less than a majority of the vote, replaced judges with members of the nazi party, those faithful to a particular political philosophy, and the rest was history. But no…… that couldn’t happen here…… could it?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:10 pmZooey! You’re back! How did class go?
Well, traitor (I mean Specter) you and the Dems will get your chance to ask for specific facts tomorrow.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
Oh, c’mon Jake. Be realistic here. Specter is not a traitor, he’s just a pushover when push comes to shove…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:11 pmI find it ironic that Arlen “Magic Bullet” Specter is looking for facts.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:12 pmHey guys: Is it just me or does something really stink when we see Specter acting with such bravado and righteousness in this attorney scandal? Didn’t I hear something about his office being responsible for inserting, possibly de facto, the very phrase which allowed this to occur?? What’s up with that? Isn’t the de facto insertion of a phrase into something as critical as the Patriot Act breaking the law? Did the Congress vote on it sans this excerpt?? If so, then insertion de facto is a crime.
I heard dear phoney Arlan say something that “one of his aides inserted it and he didn’t know anything about it”. This gives me indigestion.
It’s the same old Bushie Song over and over again….my aide did it….the dog ate my homework….pass the buck up some else’s butt….and Arlan has a rep for being quite a corrupt scumbag himself so I never believe anything I hear him say especially when it appears that he is speaking with credibility and/or conscience.
We really need to get to the bottom of how this de facto phrase was inserted into the Patriot Act Renewal and by whom. Did Specter know about it? Did Specter originate it? If so, then all of his own protestations about the despicability of politicizing the DOJ is a lie since he was the one who provided the “tool” for doing so to this dictator.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:14 pmKeep digging, mr. magic bullet theory!
April 16th, 2007 at 4:15 pmSorry about my crappy typing!!!!
April 16th, 2007 at 4:15 pm#20 Many people have recognized Hitler’s karma in Bush. It’s textbook really.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:15 pmFor the record, “traitor†to _______?
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC)
Well I’m sure his answer would be different, but to me…let’s see…oh yes, hubris and hegemony. Of course, Specter is another one of those like Graham and McCain (and I’m still inclined to add Hagel to that list) who talks a big game but when push comes to shove is still a Republic in the end.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:16 pmMy gut tells me that Specter and his “bullet theory” was in cahoots with Bush Sr. as head of the CIA when the hit was put on JFK. Specter’s energy is definitely deceitful and borders on diabolical.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:16 pmSpecterSpecter is like the canary in the coal mine. If he’s trying to save himself other Republicans will soon be following him. Only our stupid little trolls will keep sacrificing themselves for these crooks.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:17 pmwhiteyfresh and Crump’s Brother:
Show trials throughout history have been conducted by traitors. Shall I start listing them for you?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:18 pmJust like all of the complicit demons who aided and abetted the genocide of 3,300 military deaths and countless innocent iraqis! I get it…Specter was complicit along with Bush Sr. in JFK….ff to 911…where was Arlan Scumter on that day?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:19 pm“Improper” seems to be Gonzo’s favorite word…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:19 pmWhile Boosch and Chainee use the word “confidence” to describe how they feel about him…
Now I understand, they have every confidence in his impropriety………….
Dyna Moe Humm, Dyna Moe Humm, where’s that Dyna Moe comin’ from?
my goal is to find a cure for irony and make a fool outta god
April 16th, 2007 at 4:20 pmAnd with this statement you can clearly see just how far of a right wing extremist Jake is. If he thinks Specter sides with the Dems, then he has got to be so far to the right that he is about to fall off his own flat Earth.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:20 pmIf Specter is, in fact, responsible for this defacto insertion into the patriot act which enabled the political removal of these attorneys, it’s no wonder he is leading the charge for Gonzo’s ouster….he doesn’t want too much testimony to come forth about his own complicity in all of this. Once Congress is through with Gonzo then they need to move on to Arlen and shake him down to get to the bottom of how this phrase was secretly inserted in the first place.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:20 pm#29 That’s because these pathetic little trolls have absolutely nothing to lose.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:21 pm#30 – You can start with the “show trial” against Frm Pres. Clinton, led by the traitorous GOP.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:22 pmWhen single bullett Arlen get on the bandwagon you know that the AG is finished.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:22 pmLet’s face it: Gonzo got the Shrub’s butt out of trouble for years and is being paid back for all of his corrupt handiwork by this appointment. Everyone knows it has nothing to do with his qualifications for the job.
Everyone in Bush’s administration is either fingered through blackmail to follow in lock-step or they’ve proven their ability to operate from a position of pure deceit in some way.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:23 pmShall I start listing them for you?
Comment by Jake
Sure, why not – only AFTER you answer my question: “Specter is a traitor to ___________”.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:24 pmJake, Arlen Spector is no traitor. Just because you disagree with the events that are shaping the remaining time of Bush’s Presidency. Spector is a true patriot for questioning the rationale behind the firings. This is classic checks and balances that our founding fathers viewed as essential. History also shows alarmists. Shall I list them for you?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:24 pmJake,
You evaded the question. What makes Spector a traitor?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:24 pmJake: you can start with the 40 million dollar show trial I have lovingly dubbed”hummergate”
:)
April 16th, 2007 at 4:26 pmShow trials throughout history have been conducted by traitors. Shall I start listing them for you?
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
You don’t have to list them, it would be more useful if you explained why that makes Specter a “traitor”.
Even if this is a show trialâ„¢ as you claim, how does that make Specter a “traitor”? Is a show trialâ„¢ treasonous? What “treasonous” act is Specter committing?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:27 pmWhat is the over/under on how many time Alberto will say I don’t remember?
I would say 75…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:27 pmwhiteyfresh and Crump’s Brother:
Show trials throughout history have been conducted by traitors. Shall I start listing them for you?
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
whiteyfresh or Crump’s Brother, could you ask Jake who determines what’s a “show trial”.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:27 pmWell, traitor (I mean Specter) you and the Dems will get your chance to ask for specific facts tomorrow. Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
Were you referring to yourself when you did that tourettes maneuver of spouting out traitor? Yeah, it’s easy to see that a traitor like you would hate anyone of either party that wanted to protect the democracy and the constitution…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:28 pmJake, You evaded the question. What makes Spector a traitor? Comment by Crump’s Brother — April 16, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
Spector isn’t kissing KING George’s *ss.
Jake uses the LAME excuse that George isn’t trying to be a King, because his reign ends in 2009. Since the rule of King’s never end, this means George isn’t acting like a King. Oh wait, the rule of Kings do end… Another Jake*ss remark…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:30 pmDynah Moe:
No need to list “alarmists” throughout history — so far, only 9% have joined that particular bandwagon — I will gladly wait until tomorrow’s questioning to see if Specter actually joins the traitors. BTW: checks and balances only go so far before this becomes Congress enfringing upon the powers of the Executive branch. If they do so for politics, providing aid and comfort to the enemy DURING WAR, that’s what is going to be traitorous.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:30 pmJake,
Come on, I’m not on your Ignore List. Just give me a simple answer: “Specter is a traitor to ___________â€.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:31 pmShow trials throughout history have been conducted by traitors. Shall I start listing them for you? Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
You mean like the ones conducted by Gingrich and the rest of the GOP just a few years ago?
Yeah, well, you conservatives have always been natural born traitors, that’s why so many of you moved to England during the Revolution.
Nothing changes Jake*ss, you’re still as UNAMERICAN as you always were.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:31 pmSpector is a true patriot for questioning the rationale behind the firings. This is classic checks and balances that our founding fathers viewed as essential. History also shows alarmists. Shall I list them for you?
Comment by Dynah Moe
Remembering his “patriotic” behavior during the NSA wiretap hearings, lets not rush to judgement in either direction; Specter has been know to fold at critical times in the past.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:31 pmCrump’s Brother and whiteyfresh:
I think I’ve answered your questions — the impeachment of Clinton by the House did not take $40 million either — even if you consider that a show trial. I would call that more like a Starr Chamber ; )
April 16th, 2007 at 4:32 pmShow trials throughout history have been conducted by traitors. Shall I start listing them for you?
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
Start listing them. Go ahead. You’re more of a traitor to this country than anyone on this board by far ,but no one but you would throw anyone out. You’re just a pathetic, angry, pasty little man.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:34 pmJake, please explain how this Show Trial!â„¢ that Specter neither called for nor presides over leads you to brand him a “traitor”.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:36 pmJake,
I’m still here. I’m still waiting. You are using a powerful term, “traitor”, and I would like to understand your use of it.
Just give me a simple answer: “Specter is a traitor to ___________â€.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:36 pmJake: you can start with the 40 million dollar show trial I have lovingly dubbedâ€hummergateâ€
:)
Comment by whiteyfresh — April 16, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Too funny. The Republican are so bitter because they never got a hummer they didn’t pay for and Clinton had them knocking his door down to get to him.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:36 pmJake,
“If they do so for politics, providing aid and comfort to the enemy DURING WAR, that’s what is going to be traitorous.”
Disgusting! I can’t believe you think that we ought to sacrifice the democratic way of life, simply because you think questioning the executive during war (which has no formal declaration) constitutes providing aid or comfort. Perhaps we should say the President is doing the same thing since he feels compelled to question the matter in which the Congress executes its constitutional mandate of funding during a time of war.
Thomas Jefferson said that it was not only the right of every citizen to question there government, but it was their RESPONSIBILITY to do so, especially during times of war.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:38 pmJake,
Why the leap of logic? BTW: checks and balances only go so far before this becomes Congress enfringing upon the powers of the Executive branch. If they do so for politics, providing aid and comfort to the enemy DURING WAR, that’s what is going to be traitorous.
Do so for politics is what got us to this point. The politics that shouldn’t not have been used when firing these 8.
Providing aid and comfort to the enemy is a stretch that defies any logic presented so far for or against this case.
During War is a wrong term because no war has been declared and the President doesn’t have the powers given in Wartime.
Those aren’t hypotheticals either.
You may not like Spector but stay grounded, don’t allow your anger to blindly spew venom.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:38 pmnice pun Jake. I HAVE to give you credit for the pun..
excuse me Jake, you’re right. It wasn’t 40 million, it was 47 MILLION
April 16th, 2007 at 4:41 pmToothless Lyin speaks with forked toungue.
Specter is SUCH A TOOL!!!! It’s sad to see an old man make an ass out of himself time after time after time.
My money is on Gonzo. I’m sure after his opening statement, Toothless Lyin will say something to the effect of ‘Oh, well, that clears up just about everything. Thank you Mister Attorney General, you may leave now.’
What morons are Republicans.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:41 pmwouldja all like some mora,
April 16th, 2007 at 4:43 pmright here on the flora?
Jake,
I’ll be gone for about two hours. I’ll check back for your answer to my question (of that, you can be certain!).
In case you forgot, the question is: “Specter is a traitor to ___________â€.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:45 pmWow, it’s a miracle. Jake is correct.
It was a $65 million show trial, where everybody is the world discovered that the President of the United States was heterosexual and enjoyed blow jobs.
The only thing we know about our current president is that he was a cheerleader and Jeff Gannon had sleep overs with him 13 times.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:46 pmNever forget the fact that what Sen. Specter says has never had any relation with what Sen. Specter goes and does.
The hearings should be interesting.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:47 pmjust get me wasted and I’m halfway there cause if my minds tore up then my body don’t care.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:47 pmJake?
Jake?
You there, Jake?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:47 pmwouldja all like some mora,
right here on the flora?
Comment by Dora’s Aura — April 16, 2007 @ 4:
“…and how ’bout you fauna, ya wanna?”
And Jake, you have yet to back up any of the bile you spew!
my goal is to find a cure for irony and make a fool outta god
April 16th, 2007 at 4:48 pmOBVIOUSLY CORRUPTION IS ALIVE AND WELL
REGARDLESS………
OF ALL THE SO CALLED ANTI CORRUPTION
LITERALLY……. WE ARE DEALING WITH TRUSTED SERVANTS
THAT SERVE THEMSELVES IN A TOTALLY CORRUPT MANNER
April 16th, 2007 at 4:48 pm“Rappacheney! Rappacheney! And is THIS the upshot of your experiment?”
(apologies to Nat. Hawthorne)
April 16th, 2007 at 4:51 pmPatience evrybody, I’m getting word that Jake is on his coffee break and he’ll be back to answer all of our questions as soon as Unka Karl tells him how to get himself out of the mess he’s gotten himself into on this thread.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:52 pmIf they’re so all-fired sure the USAs weren’t fired for “improper reason[s]“, shouldn’t it be a piece-of-cake to come out with the ‘proper reasons’ these folks were canned?
That they don’t seem to be forthcoming on why the USAs were fired, and reduced to repeatedly saying why the USAs were not being fired, doesn’t bode well for them.
It’s beginning to sound a bit like “I did not have my hand in that cookie jar” when asked about the number of cookies left.
Cheers,
April 16th, 2007 at 4:55 pmGosh guys, I step away from the computer for a few minutes and everyone freaks out?! And, here I thought you didn’t care?
I also thought I answered all the questions (at least from those NOT on the “Ignore List”). I said am willing to wait and see if Specter goes through with his treason tomorrow — participating in the SHOW TRIAL (or Kangaroo Court / Witch Hunt if you prefer), rather than denouncing it — is just as bad as Leahy convening it. The actual impeachment of Bill Clinton did not cost $40, 47, or $65 million. Once the U.S. House impeached, the Senate was legally obligated to conduct the trial. That did not cost $40, 47, or $65 million either. Perhaps you are thinking about the INVESTIGATION (I do like puns, whiteyfresh — just like our buddy Jon Stewart ; )
And, I have already dealt with the “declaration of war” issue on so many threads, I don’t want to get into THAT again — see AUMF for the same legal equivalence. Last I checked, giving aid and comfort to the enemy during war = treason. YMMV. I will agree that Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian. How about that for a compromise?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:56 pmdynamoe watched,
April 16th, 2007 at 4:58 pmfrom the edge of the bed,
with her lips just a twitchin’
and her face gone red……….
Funny, most of these posts are a reply to jake. He (she, it, whatever) is just a button-pusher, and he’s pushed everyone’s button on here. That’s the purpose, and he’s loving it.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:02 pmJake,
So are you saying then, that during a (let’s just agree to call it this) time of armed conflict, Congress should in no way question the way in which the office of President conducts the business of the American people?
I find that completely un-American. So did Teddy Roosevelt.
I submit his thoughts on this..
“The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.”
“Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star”, 149
April 16th, 2007 at 5:04 pmMay 7, 1918
Sorry Arlen – you lost the right to be outraged when you refused to put AG under oath when you were Chairman.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:05 pmInteresting that the JFK assasignation was brought up. I watched just last night Lee Harvey Oswald saying over and over between the time he shot JFK until he was shot that he did not shoot anyone. He lied. The facts show it.
Gonzales has said over and over that nothing improper was done. He’s lying. The facts show it.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pmJake, am I on your “ignore list”? Because you didn’t answer my question:
Jake, please explain how this Show Trial!â„¢ that Specter neither called for nor presides over leads you to brand him a “traitorâ€.
Or was I said am willing to wait and see if Specter goes through with his treason tomorrow — participating in the SHOW TRIAL (or Kangaroo Court / Witch Hunt if you prefer), rather than denouncing it supposed to answer that?
If so, are you disavowing your earlier statement traitor (I mean Specter) from the top of this thread?
And that still leaves the question: how is this inquiry “treasonous”?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:15 pmJake is irrelevent. Arlen Spector has shown himself to be both stern and spineless. Luckily he is not presiding over this hearing. Merely a participant.
I don’t know where she’s coming from but I just met a girl……
April 16th, 2007 at 5:24 pmCrump’s Brother:
I have no problem with legitimate oversight, even during war. Where I draw the line is giving aid and comfort to the enemy — setting forth the exact date our forces will leave Iraq, for instance, is not within the purview of Congress.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:25 pmbillG:
You are not on the List — see above re: aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime — let me know if you still have any questions.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:26 pmAlso, I am not disavowing my earlier statement, but we will have to wait until Thursday now — the AG is sorta busy right now with the Virginia Tech massacre.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:30 pmJake,
While I think it makes little difference, we are talking about the war appropriations bill here. You have gotten off topic.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:33 pmbillG:
You are not on the List — see above re: aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime — let me know if you still have any questions.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:26 pm
So… a Congressional inquiry into possible obstruction of justice by the Justice Department provides “aid and comfort to the enemy”? Wowwee. I guess the things everyone says about you on this site are kind of accurate. That’s about the most bizarre interpretation of that phrase that I’ve ever heard.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:34 pmFunny how Jake uses words such a purview of Congress but can’t allow the checks and balances to take place.
The Jakester is so very egocentric. All these people wanting his attention. It’s not that way at the Piggly Wiggly when he get’s yelled at for using paper instead of plastic.
Ah, the internets. You can be anyone you want.
Where’s that Dynah Moe coming from. I’ve done spent 3 hours and I ain’t got a crumb……
April 16th, 2007 at 5:34 pmAlso, I am not disavowing my earlier statement, but we will have to wait until Thursday now — the AG is sorta busy right now with the Virginia Tech massacre.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
Well, on the one hand, you declare Specter to be a traitor, then on the other, you say you’re willing to wait until the hearing to see if Specter is a traitor.
Sounds kind of inconsistent to me. But it doesn’t seem like consistency is one of your priorities.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:37 pmCrump’s Brother:
The Congress has the legitimate right to defund the war — they do not have the right to play Commander-in-Chief — they also can’t accept bribes to vote for defunding the war. Let me know if you don’t see the differences there.
billG:
Congress also has the legitimate right to impeach and remove Bush — if they do that in order to aid and comfort the enemy during wartime, that’s treason too. Get it now?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:40 pmI meant to say that we are NOT talking about appropriations
April 16th, 2007 at 5:41 pmP.S. Specter was broadcasting his intent to commit treason — even Benedict Arnold was smart enough not to do that. That’s why he’s already a traitor IMO — I am willing to wait until Thursday to formally charge him though.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:41 pmOh, kinda like you meant a WORLD-WIDE gun ban? I see now.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:46 pmJake,
You are making no sense. Stay with me here.
Spector, questioning the Attorney General concerning statements he made to Congress, which may or may not be perjurous, is traitorous? why?
I’m not talking about war funding. How is this kind of oversight traitorous?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:46 pmP.S. Specter was broadcasting his intent to commit treason — even Benedict Arnold was smart enough not to do that. That’s why he’s already a traitor IMO — I am willing to wait until Thursday to formally charge him though.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
So IYO what someone says determines who he is, regardless of his actions. See, the reasonable thing to say would be, “I was rash in labelling Specter a traitor before. IF he participates in this “SHOW TRIAL!” then he will have committed treason”.
It still wouldn’t be sane, but at least it would have the appearance of reason. What you said above, however, just make you sound loopy.
You DO realize that not everyone thinks that the Bush administration is the same thing as the United States of America, right?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:47 pmP.S. Specter was broadcasting his intent to commit treason — even Benedict Arnold was smart enough not to do that. That’s why he’s already a traitor IMO — I am willing to wait until Thursday to formally charge him though. Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
Congress, fulfilling their ‘Constitutional’ duty is treason? Wow, you really are a Fascist, Nazi terrorist, aren’t you Jake*ss? Why do you hate America so much, that you’re UNPATRIOTIC enough to undermine our Constitution?
Jake*ss is proposing George is *King* again – what a Nazi piece of sh*t. You know Jake*ss, that’s how we know you’re not a Christian or a 75 year old Veteran. Nothing about you represents America, our values, our history, or our Constitution. You’re as unpatriotic, unamerican, and traiterous as any Al Qaeda cell – Jake*ss!
April 16th, 2007 at 5:51 pmJake*ss is calling for the destruction and internment of Congresspeople. Jake*ss is a traitor to the Constitution and our Country, and should be jailed.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:52 pmCongress also has the legitimate right to impeach and remove Bush — if they do that in order to aid and comfort the enemy during wartime, that’s treason too. Get it now?
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:40 pm
What in God’s name makes you think that Congress is pursuing this investigation “in order to aid and comfort the enemy during wartime”?? That seems like a pretty effing big condition to be met.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:55 pmtill, dyna moe
April 16th, 2007 at 5:59 pmfinally,
did give in,
’cause I told her all she really needed,
was some
discipline….
billG:
Specter HAS BEEN participating in the Show Trial so far — his comments above indicate he is going to go ahead and commit treason — since the Dems can’t defund the war and commit treason that way, they are trying to impeach Bush instead. As I said above, if any of that is done to aid and comfort the enemy, that’s treason.
April 16th, 2007 at 6:02 pmJake, you didn’t answer my question (that’s becoming a familiar refrain)
What in God’s name makes you think that Congress is pursuing this investigation “in order to aid and comfort the enemy during wartime�? That seems like a pretty effing big condition to be met.
Comment by billG — April 16, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
Let me put it a different way:
You claim that Congress is pursuing this investigation as a means of “providing aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime”. I think we can agree that this is your position, since your allegation of treason rests on this condition.
Simple question that follows: WHY do you hold this position?
April 16th, 2007 at 6:11 pmI did answer that question, on the newer thread. You want me to cut and paste all of that back here too?
April 16th, 2007 at 6:26 pm(from the newer thread)
Jake,
You said “I have no problem with legitimate oversightâ€
Maybe you could define that phrase for me. I think looking into statements made by the Attorney General, which could be perjurous in nature, is completely legitimate. Yet you keep calling it a “Show Trial.â€
Could you make your position clearer?
Comment by Crump’s Brother — April 16, 2007 @ 5:40 pm
I was actually hoping the Dems forced him to attend rather than take care of Virginia Tech issues — the hearing would have been flooded over by news coverage tomorrow — which is why I think Leaky Leahy wanted to postpone his SHOW TRIAL to make sure nothing else was competing for the lede headlines. Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:35 pm
You are a sick, sick individual, you disturbed little piece of sh*t.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — April 16, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
Not only is the postponement appropriate, but even from a crass political/media angle, a smart move. It will be wall-to-wall VA-Tech shooting and “guns†in the media for the next day or two. Better to give it 3 days to play out some before the Thursday AG self-immolation occurs.
Comment by lestatdelc — April 16, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
Jake, maybe the delay is for the deaths and not a need for headlines.
chadwick, this isn’t something the AG would address?
Comment by hellinabucket — April 16, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
LOL — call back the FBI and ATF folks then!!!
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
don’t be upset Zooey. see my above post!
Comment by whiteyfresh
Oh well…..all better now.
Gonzo better show his stupid face in VA at some point in the next two days. That’s what I’m saying.
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:35 pm
So Jake, did you have a good wekend (depsite being an un-American anti-Christian)…?
Comment by lestatdelc — April 16, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
Crump’s Brother:
I thought I did so in the other thread.
lestatdelc:
For even considering the crass political angle, I think you are about to be called “a sick, sick individual, you disturbed little piece of sh*t.†Or, maybe not.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
Why would the AG be involved in this? Chadwick’s got me thinking. As terrible as it is it’s not a federal crime so what brings the AG into this.
Comment by hellinabucket — April 16, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
If anybody thinks that Gonzo will be working on the VA Tech shootings anytime in the next two days, I have a bridge I am trying to sell.
Comment by Spudge_Boy — April 16, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
did my Princess of Progress have fun in class?(you know that’s my new nickname for yuo now, don’t you?)
:D
Comment by whiteyfresh — April 16, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
The disgustingly permissive gun laws are part of DoJ’s purview–not saying Gonzo is going to address the problem, but he should.
Automatic weapons are not vital to individuals’ everyday survival–when the F*CK are we going to wake up?
Comment by guy2k — April 16, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
Other than that, my weekend was fine, lestatdelc — how about yours?
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
Agreed, and it will be interesting to see what Gonzo does with an event such as the Virginia Tech tragedy.
Leahy’s parting remark sounds like he was pointing Alberto in the direction of his job description….
Comment by Raven — April 16, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
Is Gonzales head of the FBI now? The DOJ doesn’t really get involved until someone gets arrested. At least one of the shooters is dead.
Perhaps the delay is for DOJ to turn over the documents from Conyer’s subpeona, which they failed to do so far.
Comment by Fools on the Hill — April 16, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
What’s this, another staged act of terrorism so the Bush administration accomplishes another goal.
Comment by Shane — April 16, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
If I understand correctly, the hard drives where those e-mail messages were written may still have remnants – if not all – of the emails that were “deleted.†Also, China was able to force several internet providers to turn over all kinds of confidential on line information to use in repression of its citizens. Why is there no discussion of anyone issuing subpoenas for the hard drives and internet service providers for the RNC to see what might be left instead of believeing the RNC and “Justice†department “deleted†the 5 million emails that in part may address what Gonzales had to say as a witness?
Comment by Robert — April 16, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
Good. The longer this stays in the news, the bigger the corrupt incompetent fool Gonzo is shown to be. (pretend I wrote that in English)
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid — April 16, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
did my Princess of Progress have fun in classComment by whiteyfresh
Oy!
Someone has a crush.
Shall we leave you two alone?
Comment by Yenta’s Protege — April 16, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
How long does it take someone to rehearse the phrase “I don’t remember�?
Comment by veritas — April 16, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
Jake,
you did no such thing.
You have made it clear that you feel the Congress has no authority to put conditions on funding (which was your attempt to change the subject), but you have yet to explain why questioning Gonzalez is not legitimate oversight. Or why it constitutes a “Show Trialâ€
Comment by Crump’s Brother — April 16, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
LOL – is the Attorney General head of the FBI?? You mean the “FBI†within the Department of JUSTICE???
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
did my Princess of Progress have fun in class?(you know that’s my new nickname for yuo now, don’t you?)
:D
Comment by whiteyfresh
I was sensing a trend. :)
Loads of fun in class — groundwater systems. Woo Hooo.
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
Oy!
Someone has a crush.
Shall we leave you two alone?
Comment by Yenta’s Protege
Does someone need to get smacked on the back of the head? :P
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
Does anyone give a rat’s ass what a troll’s weekend was like? Now this amoeba is posting to himself?
Comment by veritas — April 16, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
So, should Gonzales go to Virginia Tech? Damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. LOL
Here’s another one (the Wikipedia link does come across, sorry):
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is a United States federal agency; more specifically a specialized law enforcement and regulatory organization within the United States Department of JUSTICE. Its official abbreviation is “ATFâ€, however it is frequently also referred to as “BATF†or “BATFEâ€. Its responsibilities include the investigation and prevention of federal offenses involving the unlawful use, manufacture, and possession of firearms and explosives, acts of arson and bombings, and illegal trafficking of alcohol and tobacco products. The ATF also regulates via licensing, the sales, possession, and transportation of firearms, ammunition, and explosives in interstate commerce. Many of ATF’s activities are carried out in conjunction with task forces made up of state and local law enforcement officers, such as Project Safe Neighborhoods. ATF operates a one-of-a-kind fire research laboratory in Ammendale, Maryland, where full-scale mock-ups of criminal arsons can be reconstructed.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
Gotta run!(me leaving has nothing to do with Yenta’s comment, btw). It’s time to get off work, and I got a man coming to talk about windows…
PEACE!
Comment by whiteyfresh — April 16, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
Of course, this is tragic and good reason to postpone things out of consideration for the families of the victims. Other than that, it gives the public much more time to begin connecting the dots of Gonzo’s lies….and what now has surfaced as evidence of such from his own ranks. Sampson’s already thrown him under the bus and in his testimony and now one of the attendees at this Nov. 27 meeting Gonzo attended testified that Gonzo not only approved the paperwork with the names but was in full discussion and awareness of it….bye, bye Gonzo!
Comment by veritas — April 16, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
back on later though…
Comment by whiteyfresh — April 16, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
Crump’s Brother:
If Congress is conducting these hearings to give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime, that’s indeed treason. Consider it a hypothetical scenario for now, if that helps you wrap your mind around it.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
#35 There have been subpoenas of those hard drives owned by the RNC et al. And, as everyone knows, with servers connected to servers, those emails are still out there in cyberspace and can definitely be retrieved. Karl Rove and his band of nazis had better be afraid, very afraid. These emails WILL come back and bite them on their fat asses.
Comment by veritas — April 16, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
Bye, whitey….catch you later.
Comment by veritas — April 16, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
Oy!
Someone has a crush.
Shall we leave you two alone?
Comment by Yenta’s Protege
Does someone need to get smacked on the back of the head? :P
Comment by Zooey
What?
I try to help and I get violence?
Oy!
Comment by Yenta’s Protege — April 16, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
Later, whitey.
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
Jake,
You are ducking like crazy here.
Do you think that these hearings constitute “aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime†or not.
You know what these hearing are about. You are ready to call Spector a traitor over them. So take your stand. Do these hearings, which have nothing to do with war, consitutue a traitorous act to you?
Comment by Crump’s Brother — April 16, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
Does anyone know what Jake is talking about? Is that 30%-er speak?
Comment by Candyce — April 16, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
If Congress is conducting these hearings to give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime, that’s indeed treason. Consider it a hypothetical scenario for now, if that helps you wrap your mind around it.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
“Consider it a hypothetical scenario for NOW� What is your evidence that Congress is conducting these hearings “to give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime�
I’ll agree that if that were the case, it would be treason. But what leads you to that conclusion? There must be something that someone said that was overtly sympathetic to terrorists, right? Since they’re the enemy?
Comment by billG — April 16, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
Yes — I am willing to wait until Thursday to see if they follow through with their threatened treason to formally indict said Senators though.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
I second post # 20.
It is high time people on this post got their minds around the fact that Jake is a total loser, and here only to cause trouble…
This poster is not for real in my opinion…..a paid troll plant…or just a nut.
Comment by s — April 16, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
Candyce:
You would have to read the previous Gonzales thread they keep asking me about over here too.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
#26 For even considering the crass political angle, I think you are about to be called “a sick, sick individual, you disturbed little piece of sh*t.†Or, maybe not.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
Why would you leap to that unfounbded conclusion Jake? I prefaced my statement pointing out the political/media angle by saying that it was wholly appropriate to postpone for legitimate reasons given the circumstances, beyond the secondary the political/media ones. I am able to look at more than levels or aspects to something.
#31 Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
My weekend was great Jake. Took my kid to see a 3D movie, and spent some quality time hanging out together.
So, still carrying water for warmongers who favor the rich over the poor while shredding the Constitution?
Comment by lestatdelc — April 16, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
What?
I try to help and I get violence?
Oy!
Comment by Yenta’s Protege
I don’t steal babies from the cradle, sicko!
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
We should have a moment of silence for the deceased today. Maybe TP should not post for a minute or something. Just sayin’
Comment by ForTruth — April 16, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
We’ll have an easier time getting Rove to admit he pulls the heads off of small animals than getting Congress to turn on itself and admit their motives are aimed at aiding and comforting the enemy. That’s what it would boil down to Jake.
You didn’t think that one thru did you son..
Comment by hellinabucket — April 16, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Jake,
Name one congressperson or senator, who you think is actively trying to give aid or comfort to our enemies. It seems to be what you keep coming back to.
I find it disturbing that you feel “legitmate oversight†would constitute giving aid to our enemies.
I also find it pathetic that you feel that the Congress passing a budget with a ending date to the war is giving aid to our enemies. God forbid we disagree, but just because we disagree, does meant we are giving aid to our enemies. And for you to say so, makes you sound eerily familiar with the religious nut jobs we are apparently at war with. You are either with them, or against them right Jake?
Comment by Crump’s Brother — April 16, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
We need to just ignore Rape Joker Jake.
He has monopolized every thread I’ve looked at today.
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
The bottom line (from that other thread): “. . . since the Dems can’t defund the war and commit treason that way, they are trying to impeach Bush instead. As I said above, if any of that is done to aid and comfort the enemy, that’s treason.â€
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
Candyce,
Jake believes that questioning the attorney general in front of a sentatorial comittee is a treasonous act punishable by death. Apparently.
Comment by Crump’s Brother — April 16, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
joke gone bad……
sorry.
Comment by Yenta’s Protege — April 16, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
Hey Jake, why didn’t Gonzales protect our children BEFORE the crime?
What does the hatch act have to do with terrorism Jake?
What does Gonzales lying under oath have to do terrorism Jake?
You are really stretching the limits of your sudo-reality aren’t you?
Comment by Zep Tepi — April 16, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
#43 Comment by veritas — April 16, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
Nothing wrong with being pleasant while asking the troll if he is still a water-carrier for warmongers and those who subvert the Constitution as well as betray the core tenets of the major religion of this country.
Comment by lestatdelc — April 16, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
The bottom line (from that other thread): “. . . since the Dems can’t defund the war and commit treason that way, they are trying to impeach Bush instead. Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
Bush isn’t King, and Congress has control of the purse string Constitutionally. What’s treasonous is Bush lying to congress to go to war, and you working to subvert the Constitution on the part of a delusional man that would be King.
As I said above, if any of that is done to aid and comfort the enemy, that’s treason.†Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
Comfort the enemy? You mean Saudi Arabia, the country where the terrorists, and Bush’s favorite mouth kisses come from?
You’re a terrorist, a traitor, and a fool Jake*ss.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — April 16, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
I wasn’t aware impeachment had begun. When did this happen?
Comment by Candyce — April 16, 2007 @ 6:14 pm
Zooey, Dynah Moe and I agree. Jake’s ego is swelled enough. He’s in a never ending loop and logic just doesn’t take root in that ever swirling vortex he calls his mind.
Comment by hellinabucket — April 16, 2007 @ 6:14 pm
Classy guy, that Sen. Leahy.
Comment by powkat — April 16, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
The bottom line (from that other thread): “. . . since the Dems can’t defund the war and commit treason that way, they are trying to impeach Bush instead. As I said above, if any of that is done to aid and comfort the enemy, that’s treason.â€
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
Jake, I’m trying to get a straight answer from you on two threads about this.
Your claim of treason rests on the condition that this investigation is done “to aid and comfort the enemyâ€. Without that condition of aid and comfort, you don’t have treason. Agreed?
Now, WHAT leads you to the judgment that Congress is pursuing this investigation IN ORDER TO PROVIDE AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY?
When answering, keep in mind that the last part of that question is the key issue to be addressed.
Comment by billG — April 16, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
The bottom line (from that other thread): “. . . since the Dems can’t defund the war and commit treason that way, they are trying to impeach Bush instead. As I said above, if any of that is done to aid and comfort the enemy, that’s treason.â€
Comment by Jake
The Vietnam war was defunded as well Einstein. Losing 8 billion dollars in Iraq is Treason because that money went to the terrorists. Who was in charge Jake? The Commander in Chief?
Your really strecthing your sudo-reality Jake. In fact what you are saying is truly senile.
Comment by Zep Tepi — April 16, 2007 @ 6:17 pm
As I recall Jake, this was Operatio Iraqi Freedom. Are you saying that to aid and appease the enemy is treason?
The isn’t freeing the terrorists treason? How much has the Bush admin spent to rebuild the terrorist infrastructure Jake?
Comment by Zep Tepi — April 16, 2007 @ 6:18 pm
Because, lestatdelc, I was called “a sick, sick individual, you disturbed little piece of sh*t†by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — April 16, 2007 @ 5:41 pm — for posting the same exact crass political angle. As for carrying water, sure am — although we’ll have to agree to disagree on your premise.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
We should have a moment of silence for the deceased today. Maybe TP should not post for a minute or something. Just sayin’
Comment by ForTruth
Maybe Jake could just shut the f*ck up. That would help a lot.
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
I don’t steal babies from the cradle, sicko!
Comment by Zooey — April 16, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Never heard of anybody who can fit in a cradle typing. We’re all just here to help, Zooey.
Comment by Shane — April 16, 2007 @ 6:21 pm
I don’t know this “Jakeâ€, my computer doesn’t show any of his posts, how about you guys? All you need is to download the Jake 2.0 patch, and walla, no more Jake.
Just kidding.
I bet all you posters can’t just ignore him, I betcha can’t, prove me wrong.
Comment by ForTruth — April 16, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
No, Candyce and Crump’s Brother, I don’t believe that any ol’ questioning of the AG in front of a Senate Committee is a treasonous act punishable by death. Questioning of the AG in front of a Senate Committee INTENDED TO PROVIDE AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY DURING WARTIME is a treasonous act, IMO, and punishable by death. Let me know if you still can’t see the difference.
P.S. to billG: just call it a hunch ; )
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
April 16th, 2007 at 6:30 pmAt least the record is complete now. If anyone (NOT on the “Ignore List”) has any more questions, I will try to check in tonight or tomorrow.
April 16th, 2007 at 6:40 pmImadethelist!Imadethelist!ImadethelistImadethelistImadethelist!
April 16th, 2007 at 6:51 pmOhpraisejeebusImadethelist!
If everyone makes the list, there will be no one for the poor sucker to talk to.
I think the only list is his left eye.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:05 pmTP,
Please delete #101.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:30 pmApparently, to Jake Specter is “aiding and abetting the enemy” (otherwise known as the Democrats) which makes him guilty of treason.
To Jake, you can forget about aiding our own country, forget about checks and balances, forget about oversight on following duly enacted laws, forget about respecting the Constitution, forget about demanding that public officials act ethically. To Jake, it’s remember your party affiliation. To that, I offer a campaign slogan for 2008 “We remember”.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:36 pmCongressional oversight during wartime is treason?
OOOOOOHHHHHHH!!!
Now, I see. I get it!!
“He has no brain, Jim!” – Bones McCoy
April 16th, 2007 at 8:38 pmSpector is at it again – saying all the right things, but when push comes to shove, he will kiss the ass of the administration.
April 16th, 2007 at 11:50 pmSorry to say this, but at this point, everyone answering to Jake is as trollish as he is.
April 17th, 2007 at 1:24 amyou are so right Juan C. just saw the massive paste job. Moving forward now.
April 17th, 2007 at 9:52 amThe Gonzales thing is a demo of smoke and mirrors conducted by the Bush White House. It buys time and deflects attention from more serious issues, such as the infamous 16 lying words in Bush’s state of the union speech about the yellow cake issue. Rice still defies Congress and refuses to testify on this matter. Bush is allowing Congress to use Gonzo the Bozo as a whipping boy.
April 17th, 2007 at 12:13 pmSpecter, the man who brought us the “single bullet” theory for the JFK assassination? The guy who is always there to play the good bad guy and guide history to a whitewashed and bowdlerized version of itself for our nations good? That Spectre?
April 17th, 2007 at 2:12 pmI want the truth to come out, so more power to Specter!
April 17th, 2007 at 5:32 pm