Bush declares privilege everytime anyone in his regime is supoened. It's the courts who get to decide what is a privileged communication, not the Decider. Really, how can Bush order someone not to comply with a supoena? What real power does he have to do so? Ultimately it's their butt that's on the line legally, not his.

If Congress have the power to jail witnesses who refuse to testify they should imprision Meyers and every other member of this mis-Administration who refuses to do so and let the courts sort it our. How long do you think that would take? If Bush can run the clock out so can the Dems. Fill the jails up with 'em.

That'd would change the dymanic quite a bit I think.

...by the MINORITY party?

You know, the ones that lost the last election?

I don't know why we vote for these Democratic clowns.

You mean the one at which Leahy mews and Specter glares? Goodness, pretty soon they might really get angry and stamp their feet, then we'll get the answers we need, right?

Really this is ridiculous behavior by adults, much less US Senators. Mr. Gonzales is not going to answer your questions boys. If he does answer he's going to lie - and lie badly at that. He has demonstrated this over and over and over again, and you have demonstrated that you are perfectly happy with it.

Clearly Mr.Bush's theory of a Unitary Executive is demonstrably (if not legally) correct as the Congress has ceded it's power and he is simply filling the vacuum.

Somebody has to after all, and why not him?

How so? Is there another party of sociopaths disaffected conservatives can vote for instead? Because I'm not aware of any.

The "bullhorn moment" is the only time, the only one, that hardcore Bushists can site where their leader acted "presidential". And as someone pointed out upthread the bullhorn was simply a response to someone in the crowd yelling that couldn't hear him speak. So essentially we have a television commercial gag ("can you hear me now?") enshrined as an example of American national courage and resolve.

It's a perfect irony that the dim Glen Becks of the world will never understand.

They haven't been charged or convicted of anything. That's called being innocent.

If the government has charges, bring them in a courtroom. If not let them go. It's just that simple.

And as to Padilla I have no belief his conviction was on the up and up. Given Bush and his government's behavior in this case it's plausible, likely even, that they broke the law to get a conviction. If torture is acceptable to these people I'm sure lying isn't much of an impediment to their purposes.

As far as I can tell The American People (at least the Republicans who call themselves such) are perfectly happy with hypocrisy. In fact, they positively wallow in it while completely denying it's existence altogether.

What The American People (again, the Republicans) really can't tolerate is being gay and being out, even if they deny it like Senator Craig does. This appears to be the one thing that creates enough cognitive dissonance to actually penetrate the wingnut lizard brain.

Bush used these murders in exactly the same way - for his own political purposes. And he continues to this day dancing on their graves whenever the need arises.

Out of all the stupid and evil things he's done this alone makes him simply despicable.

And we have a perfectly good word for it in English - we call it "lying".

Thanks.

Tony thinks it's all a big game, the lies and misdirection that gave cover to his boss who gleefully set in motion events that have killed 800,000 people. "Let's do lunch!" he says.

Meanwhile Alberto the Serious stuck a dagger in the heart of the cherished up-by-your-bootstraps success myth by showing the real way to power and success in Republican America is sycophancy and toadyism mixed in with a good helping of hypocrisy. "I'm a good person because I tried to correct all the mistakes I didn't remember and took no responsibility for and denied actually occurred."

I find it hard to believe the Republican Party can possibly sink any lower.

44 American Senators voted again habeas corpus. This is an act of treason.

That should be the headline. Because that's what would happen if Israel were allowed to join. And that would be BAD for my county, the country were my loyalties lie, the country I live in, the United States.

As to the question of "how anti-Israel are you?" for me I'd say it fluctuates somewhere between 0 and 100% percent depending on 1) whether their interests coincide with mine and 2) whether their actions are ethically justified.

Sadly for Israel and the Neocons I usually find that neither case is satisfied.

By treaty diplomats have a right to travel freely within 25 miles of the UN building....this would of course include the World Trade Center site. Ahmadinejad doesn't need anyone's permission to go there. And no one can stop him if he chooses to do so.

If he is the wild-eyed anti-American Islamic terrorist the Neocons would have us believe he is why wouldn't he go?

What do you want to bet that one of Bush's reasons for invading will be Iran's mistreatment of homosexuals?

It seemed like Bollinger had some good points to make. Too bad he was unable to deliver them without stooping to name-calling.

I wonder if Ahmadinejad was less bellicose? I guess we'll never know.

Their integrity for lunch with Bill. GQ should have told her to go to hell.

But hey, it's not called the "lapdog media" for nothing I guess.