But here’s a truth. Sometimes you want “bad” intelligence…to suit your needs.

yawn..thanks, legal beagal. still wondering if you’re ever going to offer the explanation about how “non-frivilous” = “substantial” in a legal context?

while your probably right about the next president being unable to un-invoke EP, all he has to do it tell the attorney general to follow the law and do his job, and then let the bush cronies try to invoke EP from a jail cell..

i doubt that, i really do…she is indeed highly motivated, but I think she’s only one of many fiercely ambitious women, especially of her age cohort, who tasted nearly the first fruits of the gender/sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s.

It won’t last much beyond. The new administration can say that there’s no EP for her, and that’s the end of it.

Cheers,

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080514/us_nm/usa_immigrants_deportations_dc;_ylt=Aq9ovJPjGcu65uqlYShKXlCs0NUE

The newspaper said it has identified 250 cases in which the government has, without medical reason, given drugs meant to treat serious psychiatric disorders to people it has shipped out of the United States since 2003.

Records show that the government has routinely ignored its own rules, which allow deportees to be sedated only if they have a mental illness requiring the drugs, or if they are so aggressive that they imperil themselves or people around them.

What’s next? Trains to some detention facilities to execute the Final Solution on illegal immigrants?

In fact, ALL the intelligence communities where receiving YOUR input, not the other way around. YOU where the one choosing which intelligence to send, and what foreing intelligence dismiss. Remember “Curveball”? Deemeed too shaky to be a reliable source by the german intelligence community? The french intelligence community saying “it’s not credible that Saddam houses Al Qaeda training camps? The skepticism of Russia (remember, they have first hand knowledge of Afghanistan and the terrorists hidden there)? Remember the Powerpoint presentation done by Powell at the UN? It was done in the Pentagon, not at some third world country.

Misled is the proper word. It was intentional to invade Iraq. Cheney didn’t like the intelligence the CIA was providing so he set up his own intelligence operation, disregarded the warnings and cherry picked away. Powell’s testimony was from a plagarized student disertation and not even real intelligence.

Did people lie to Bush? They told Bush what he wanted to hear. What they did was clearly dishonest and dishonorable. There was no attempt to deceive Bush so in that sense they were not lying to Bush but Bush and others did have a goal of deceiving the American people. The problem is not what the advisors told Bush but what Bush and his advisors told the American people and those were clearly lies since the American people were deceived. The question can’t be restated because this is done to deceive as well making what Bush just said another lie.

roberto(x2): The next President has control over his own claims to Executive Privilege, subject to Judicial Review, but he does not have power to waive a Former President’s claim to Executive Privilege. E.g. Pres Bush cannot force former Pres. Clinton to drop any claim he may make to Executive Privilege for commicatios that took place during the Clinton administration. See, United States v. Nixon (1974).

In my reading of U.S. v. Nixon, (which case took place while Nixon was still President) I find absolutely no reference to executive privilege surviving after a President has left office. Granted, I scanned the opinion, so I may have missed it. If you can find the reference in the attached, please do so.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=418&invol=683

Well, here’s one:

Hours after being routed by Hillary Rodham Clinton in West Virginia, Barack Obama picked up two more superdelegates, offering fresh recognition from Democratic leaders of his inevitable nomination.

I don’t think it would make a sh1t of difference to the judge at The Hague! They both deserve to swing and honestly I don’t care where it happens.

“He is not electable. White folks are not going to vote for him. Hillary supporters aren’t going to vote for him. The Democrats are handing the Presidency to McCain if they nominate Obama………”

The stench of their fear is palpable. Obama will kick McCain’s ass like a red haired stepchild. Their only hope is that somehow Hillary gets the nod and they can fire up the base with their Clinton/strong woman hatred.

Clinton said if voters chose to nominate her now, she vowed to win against the presumptive Republican presidential nominee in the fall, John McCain. “You know I’ll never give up,” said Clinton. “I’ll keep coming back and stand with you as long as you stand with me.”

McCain pushes global warming lie to win libs!

Muslim student threatens to kill epileptic teacher’s service dog

A St. Cloud State University student in a teacher-training program at Technical High School left the school in late April because he says he feared for the safety of his service dog

McCain’s spiritual guide
speaks out
(YouTube.com) Pastor Rod Parsley says America was founded, in part, to destroy Islam

roberto(x2): The next President has control over his own claims to Executive Privilege, subject to Judicial Review, but he does not have power to waive a Former President’s claim to Executive Privilege. E.g. Pres Bush cannot force former Pres. Clinton to drop any claim he may make to Executive Privilege for commicatios that took place during the Clinton administration. See, United States v. Nixon (1974).

As i said, i’m no legal expert. Phrases such as “judicial review” are a bit lost on me to be honest. One point or actually question i have is this : Do presidents lose their claims to executive priviledge when they have been charged with a criminal offence while in office. Would Bush still be able to claim priviledge if he is taking to a Human Rights court?

I understand that Ford pardoned Nixon, so in the Nixon case, although technically he was charged in Watergate, no conviction was upheld and thus Nixon retained executive power. But what would happen if Bush were charged and President Obama did not grant a pardon?

Betcha most of them know how to route his emails to the junk mail folder!

Webb should compromise with McIIIrd by requesting that he tamp his version of the GI Bill up his rectal cavity with barbed wire.

Note the computer at the ready on his desk in this Official White House Photo.

What on earth would that man use the computer for? Why is it even on? Another look at “the ranch” using “the Google?”

His claims of not emailing are not credible.

Why should we believe differently?

I would suggest that he issue an Executive order before he leaves town suspending the ban on computers for inmates at Leavenworth.

BTW — question for the legal scholars out there. Can a new president override any invocations of “executive privilege” under an old president, the way he can override an old president’s executive order? Or can he merely lend his support to congressional and/or court challenges of EP?

A new President would have the same controls as the old President because he would be acting under the laws created under the old one’s reign. I believe (although i’m not a legal scholar – far from it) that in order to execute executive privilege, you need to be the executor – the President. And thus, President Obama can overide executive privilege should he choose to. Although technically, he’d be taking power away from himself – something i doubt a Clinton or McCain would do.