"believed" violated?

We know the President committed felonies by engaging in activities which his own ideologically-sympathetic DOJ officials violated the criminal law.

Glenn, do you know of anyone who has created an updated "state of litigation" on this issue? I believe the ACLU filed some papers challenging the Constitutionality of the retro immunity legislation w/ [Walker?]

To the best of your knowledge, is there presently any legal strategy geared toward uncovering a. What the Bushies were doing up until 2004 and b. What they might have been up to pre-9/11?

STAY, Shartstain! STAY!!

there are those who will find your stuff and read it anyway.

Hey, I thought only your friends addressed you that familiarly.

;)

Tumulty and others are keenly aware oF GG's media criticism. She was dismissive of bloggers in general. It was her mistake to cite Mr. Greenwald in particular as an example.

I'm guessing she won't do it again.

Theoretically, what can the House do about it? Can they demand/subpeona the info? Would that set up a conflict w/ DOJ? Is Contempt of Congress an option?

Some guy I "know" says blueberries are good for [whatever].

Nice to see you're home from the VA.

Glenn, final vid Q&A, the man asked about "the Left's" disdain for private property rights. I notice you didn't directly address his accusation, but my question is more basic.

WTF was he talking about? To me that sounds like code for "I'm not allowed to externalize the costs of my strip-mining, deforestation practices, wetland destruction, etc. Is that it?

I assume you'll be all over that Court of Appeals Hearing today? And in the next-to-previous thread, I have a quick question about the vids you posted, if you have 30 sec.

Link to my question @ sig.

And man, I do love the way you talk sans notes of any kind.

Dow closed @ 11,489.36 on Jan. 19, 2000.

Bush inaugurated 1/20/00

Dow closed @ 10,609.99 today.

7.66% DECLINE from 1/20/00

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Does anybody know what statutes would be applicable to the alleged offense? People are screaming and yelling since it's so "obviously illegal" (or at least, it ought to be), but I wonder - if one were prosecutorially inclined, what specific laws were broken/charges would be applicable?

I go with "Brain-Dead".

I concur, but even without getting into the "relative" criminality, is it even illegal for [somebody] to hack an email? Have the statutes kept pace w/ the technology? Hell, there are plenty of emails I've sent around I'd rather not be open to public consumption. But has the law been "updated"? Are there distinctions between public servers, and government, or business accounts? I don't even know enough to frame the question properly...

I assume the "hacker" obtained access to all the emails in that particular account? Some of them, as posted, appear innocuous enough - gauging from the reactions of others, I haven't read them. BUT! Are there perhaps more substantive revelations to follow (related to the various "scandals" under investigation)? Was she using other personal accounts for official business as well? Why aren't there criminal penalties for doing so, inasmuch as it's demonstrably easy for such information to be disclosed?

RE: Pales in comparison.

How about the alleged hacker apparently violated a Federal law. Once.

And Bush, by his own admission committed multiple thousands of felonious violations.

I think the brouhaha about the Headline is a manifestation of the RWA wing's inability to perceive irony.

Go kill yourself.

My reaction to the First Dude news was, how the hell can he get away with that? Asked and answered, at this point.

Shouldn't admit it, but I'm almost curious about how the paid trolls will consciously misstate this post.

And there's a misspelled word somewhere. Illeagal, maybe? Beginning of the post...

Glenn, you articulate much better than I do my own misgivings - and then further extrapolate and explain the fundamental basis for them.

I've been walking around the past few days saying exactly this - I don't know what this plan is, I don't think anybody does. I don't know how much it will cost, I don't think anybody does. I DO know, I don't trust this Administration to suggest an even remotely competent response to this "crisis". And I DO know, that up until a few days ago, we couldn't have Universal Healthcare because it was "too expensive". And I DO know, "conservatives" claim "Welfare is BAD, unless it's given to Corporations.

And I have said, until every goddamn person who worked for any of these Corporations in any "managerial" capacity whatsoever is abjectly penniless, I don't want taxpayer dime one to be doled out.

National Socialism. Fuck me.

Or, a neurologist explains why, to many, Sharter28% is such an incomprehensible twit.

http://www.salon.com/env/mind_reader/2008/09/22/voter_choice/

or click sig

Dunno why the reference to the 1999 experiment. I remember talking about this phenomena as a Cornell undergrad in the 80's...

Might want to take a look at this and revise (add to) that letter

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/business/22global.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

or click sig

UBS (and other foreign banks) are bellying up to the bar...

...or what Stock Futures look like. Could be an "interesting" Monday...

And Glenn, I tend to disagree w/ your statement that [paraphrasing] the general understanding is that it's the financial services entities, and not the community banks, that are in trouble.

I think all Joe Blow hears is "The (Financial) Sky is Falling! We need Money!" The worry is quite generalized, I believe.

If the public was aware of Prof. Sheehan's perspective, they, the public, would be even MORE pissed. They might even yell at their televisions, as well as their spouses...

You should take a look at the .pps file I sent to your Salon email address. I think you'd like it.

10:06 CST this morning. The attachments fairly sizable (2MB). I just tried again.