All you do is lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie. Just like all the other Republicans around you.

Enough already. Go home and get a real job.

What’s the deal with all these lying sacks of dung in the Bush Administration? They’re such pussies to think Americans can’t handle the truth. We’ll we know the truth, that EVERYTHING they say is a lie. EVERYTHING.

Question authority. Always. If you don’t we end up with idiots such as those in the White House.

And these people are running the country? God help us.

I wasn’t talking about “prior to the impeachment process.” Are you really prepared to concede that President Bush could have issued a pardon yesterday, as to the grounds for impeachment cited by Kucinich today, and that somehow would have prevented Cheney from ever being removed from office?! That, and JPark’s convoluted concept of Double Jeopardy, would really take the Constitutional cake.

What good would the power of impeachment be if the President could simply pardon anyone (including himself) right up to the very last vote to convict being cast in the Senate? Sorry, but Presidential Pardons do not apply in those cases at all. Or, I guess as JPark would point out, it would have to go to the Supreme Court of Fantasyland.

Also, I just noticed you never answered my question on the actual topic above: “. . . my point to Nico / Admin was that Congress has a legitimate oversight role (as Dana was pointing out) over CABINET DEPARTMENTS. That’s not the same as Congress claiming oversight of Harriet Miers, wouldn’t you agree?” (Emphasis Added).

Before you answer that one, here’s the full question and answer again (as you can see, Nico falsely claimed that Perino’s answer today came in response to a question regarding subpoenas that target the White House specifically — for example, subpoenas for White House emails and for testimony from an aide to Karl Rove):

Q On the Hill, House Republicans are beginning today to basically push back against Chairman Waxman’s investigations and oversight. And he, I believe, is going to have them vote on authorizing subpoenas for Secretary of State Rice. Has the White House said, or are you prepared to say what Waxman is doing is over-reaching?

MS. PERINO: Well, I do think that there is a difference between oversight and over-reaching. And we understand that the Congress has a role to play, which is oversight over the executive branch. I believe that this administration has been responsive to Congress, as we’ve worked with the new majorities, as well, that we’ve been responsive. But there does come a point where it does start to look like over-reaching.

bob’s your uncle:

I pointed out to JPark above why Congress cannot force the President to testify. I’m not going to repeat myself.

Comment by Judy — April 25, 2007 @ 10:25 pm

Please do not misquote me, because I said no such thing. I simply asked for you to provide solid evidence that states clearly and without any equivocation that Congress cannot call the President to testify. If that’s your assertion, don’t you think you should be prepared to back it up?

Tell him yourself, bossy-assed Jake, I have no clock.

No Jake, you didn’t convince either of us of anything. You alleged that Clinton could be impeached again, and both of us reminded you that you are full of shit.