You forget that, with the exception of impeachment, the President has near-absolute immunity from prosecution so long as he remains in office, and I doubt very much that the court would waive that immunity to allow a criminal proceeding to occur.

The Impeachment Clause allows for a criminal trial, but the long-standing interpetation of that clause states that the impeachment must happen first.

Although illegal law “must” be changed by “better” law; the Judicial Branch can striked down bad law leaving the President and COncgress in a hole. They cannot fill that hole with another bad law.

You’re not exactly correct; and just because you’re a lawyer doesn’t mean you’re correct. Lawyers can be disbarred. When your legal profession starts self-rgulating and not letting this abuse of power spread, I might have confidenc in lawyers.

Right now, lawyers are part of the problem: They’ve failed to timely bring prsoecutions — outside impeachment — which could ahve been done in 2001. That wasn’t done. We the People dn’t work for you or the legal profession; you work for us.

Act like a lawyer: Use all lawful options to impose consequences on this President. On the table are the President’s illegal activities. Congress refuses to impeach. I expect the legal profession to stop making excuses and organize themselves to prosecute this President otuside impeachment. If DoJ or the US Attys won’t do it, then time for the legal community to work with the 50 STate AGs to make it happen.

When this President is either posecuted or impeached i might have confidence in the legal profession. Until then, you and your peers have some explaining to do with what failed with the DC Bar rules, and why legal counsel, when they were known to have supported illegal activity, were not timely sanctioned with disbarment. The burden is on you and the legal profession. Start doing your job, and quit your lectures.

DC Bar Rule 1.1.6 compels mandatory withdrawals when there is illegal activity; and lawyers services, as was the case here, was used to implement illegal FISA and GEneva violations. Time for the DC Bar to get pu on the table.

Layers are either going to fully assert their oath and use all lawful optoins to defend this COnstution; or they may be prosecuted for not having asserted all options to proseucte this president. If you choose wrong, you as a legal officer could be prosecuted.

Comment by Ed Smith

i don’t know you, but i really like your way of thinking. but only if the same fate awaits the Dick, Rummy, and Wolfie.

Public Law 107-243 originated from joint resolutions introduced in each house of Congress. A joint resolution passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President or passed over his veto has the same effect as a bill introduced in either house and passed in identical form by each house. There is no difference between a joint resolution and a bill presented to the President. Often joint resolutions are used when members cannot agree on individual bills such as appropriations. A simple resolution is used to express the sentiment of that body or to inform of a condition. It requires no action by the other body. A concurrent resolution is used to offer sentiment shared by both bodies and is not presented to the President.

He’s always one of the very first to comment on a story.

He’s on progressive news blogs.

He always has right-wing comments.

He usually uses the GOP &/or White House talking points (which are usually BS).

He always acts as a White House apologist.

He uses name calling to upset progressives.

He doesn’t articulate his argument.

He doesn’t allow anyone to see his information (name, url, etc).

The GOP & the Pentagon have both now admitted to paying bloggers to do this & you can see this trend on many (if not most) progressive news blogs.

If the informants are correct in knowing he was using the DC Madame’s services, then Dick the ‘decent family man’ should put his hands in the air and step away from the flag!

A podcast of Monday’s interview with Jeane Palfrey is on my site and she brings up some interesting names… http://prissypatriot.blogspot.com

After the whole NSA spying debacle was belatedly revealed by the NYT (who blew the 2004 election by withholding it), I read an interesting article (don’t remember by whom or I would link to it) that
suggested that the whole thing was enacted as a means to discount votes by people (specifically minorities), who vote in the wrong districts or who could otherwise be invalidated.

At the time I though it was just a conspiracy theory (still could be), but the attorney scandal lends it some merit. The process would go something like this :

1. Isolate a district that would generally vote Democratic.

2. Isolate registered Democrats within that District.

3. Isolate within that group any recent address changes.

4. Isolate within THAT group any voters who have failed to update
their registrations.

5. Allow the person to vote in the wrong district – discount the
vote for that reason, then prosecute the person for voter fraud to
justify your discounting of their vote.

Given that the U.S. Attorneys that were fired have expressed that they were being pressured to prosecute voter fraud, I would hazard a guess that this was what was going on.

The problem was that the Attorneys, (most likely all of them, since Harriet wanted to fire all of them, originally, although that could have been a smokescreen) had some real problems with the legality of all this.

It’s not a big deal to re-register a voter. In 1998, I had moved, and when I went to the wrong place to vote they changed my registration right then and there at the high school.

Done even on a local scale, this kind of thing could sway an election. Done on a national scale, and given that many Americans don’t get around to updating their information immediately when they move, it’s almost certain that it WOULD sway an election.

I’m sure certain people commenting on this site would think that “Hey, that’s great, Democrats don’t need to vote anyway”. But for me, regardless of my affiliation (Democrat, but anymore I’m tired of all of them), that’s just further evidence that Repugs don’t give a f__k about Democracy or the Constitution, they just want to see Repugs elected because they somehow believe that lowering taxes for the rich will save them money.

Just something to think about, and, if true, certainly a reason to start criminal proceedings against, at least, Rove and Gonzales.

Bush should suffer the same fate as Saddam for the war crimes he has committed.

Ron Paul 2008

I say impeach Cheney- from the Wapo series it’s clear that a majority of the administration’s most horrid failures can be laid at his door. Without the tough Cheney political machine Bush will be left with only Rove to isolate him from the shitstorms to come.

I don’t think Turd Blossom is going to be enough, this time.

If that’s what you want to offer up, then I will research each and every one and challenge my sources with the information. I will present my findings on this blog in whatever diary I find you in as soon as I have them, but no later than next Wednesday, 7/4.

If I am wrong, I will honor my challenge.

Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution.

Opinion of the Attorney General of the United States, 6 Op. Atty. Gen. 680

Consumer Energy Council of America v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 673 F.2d 425 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (available at any law library with Westlaw or LEXIS access)

I gave all of this to you already. I’m not gonna do your homework. You want to fact-check it, be my guest. I already have.

Interesting perspective. Here’s some more:

The Iraq Genocide Project (aka Iraq Invasion/War) is known both here and abroad to have been initiated based on lies and deception, ie; it is wrong. Hundreds of thousands have already died. Millions terrorized, tortured, and oppressed, ie; a crime in progress.

These are facts. And these facts are known and recognized both here and abroad.

So, there is a crime in progress that “civilized” people are aware of and either doing nothing about or delaying any meaningful efforts for various extended time periods for the sake of CONVENIENCE. Currently September is the delay date. Before that it was January 2007. Before that it was November 2006. Before that it was November 2004. I think that you are getting the drift.

Now, that is EXACTLY the same thing as knowing that a women is being brutally raped, yet delaying calling the police about it until your next monthly cellphone billing cycle because you are running low on your allotted minutes.

Welcome to Amerika.

“Every day four women die in this country as a result of domestic violence, the euphemism for murders and assaults by husbands and boyfriends. That’s approximately 1,400 women a year, according to the FBI. The number of women who have been murdered by their intimate partners is greater than the number of soldiers killed in the Vietnam War. Every year 1.2 million women are forcibly raped by their current or former male partners, some more than once.”

Yep, blood is on all of our hands… and people are getting “so upset” because Nancy hasn’t done anything about the deleted emails!! Bummer, huh?

If that is your wish, assuming that I am wrong about the AUMF/Iraq “War” Authorization of 2002 being reversible (don’t know the “legal” terminology) by a simple majority vote in congress which then cannot be vetoed, I will send them the money.

Now, I mean no disrespect but the person who first told me about this is a lawyer too, recognized by the state bar, and his 4 years (I guess) of Law School was completed before there were computers. In other words, this is a person of considerable experience and expertise.

But don’t misunderstand me, I’m not concerned about being “wrong” though I hope that the information that I’ve received is accurate and that this is a solution that can be enacted to end this travesty. But before I give up on this pursuit, I’m going to carefully review the facts. Unlike many here who just “feel” that this is too simple and give up on it before even looking into it.

Also, if I’m not mistaken, I believe that even Ms. Hillary made mention of this just a short time ago. Though, if I recall correctly, she was using it as a political threat and not actually proposing it as an action.

Comment by Fed the Fcuk Up! — June 28, 2007 @ 9:04 pm

I’m not out to prove you wrong. I recently completed 4 years’ of law school, much of it studying Constitutional Law and Supreme Court cases. I’ve even studied under a Supreme Court Justice. If Constitutional Law were so easy, why is it 4 out of 9 Justices get it wrong so much of the time?

I tell you what, whatever Capp’s office says, why don’t you take the $100 and send it to Gold Star Families for Peace.

They’re trying to make a difference.

Support your assertion with facts that can be sourced to someone other than yourself and I will honor the $100 challenge.

For those who think that I’m bluffing, here is how I will deliver to you the $100 WITHOUT getting any of your personal information other than a Zip Code. After receiving the Zip Code, I will then find the main post office that handles that Zip Code and I will send a money order or cashiers check to that post office addressed to whatever name (can be any name you wish, even your screen name) you choose c/o General Delivery. Then you just go into the Post Office and claim the piece of mail.

Sounds like the WHOLE Bush administration!!!

Thank you for the FIRST reasonable and considered response. I will post the information that I receive from Congressperson Capp’s office tomorrow.

If you prove me wrong, I will honor the $100.

And then I supported it with BLACK-LETTER law when you demanded more. Or is the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision I quoted in #139 “my opinion” too?

You just WILL NOT ADMIT you were WRONG! Wrong on the facts and wrong on the law.