Letters to the Editor
-
Re ahhh
Actually Ktwdawg, I was just going to post that you hit the nail on the head.
-
Politics, politics
There is a political dimension to this. Bush and the GOP are in a free-fall. Many of their supporters are tired and ready for a change.
By taunting the Democratic Congress and starting a fight, and if Congress accepts the challenge, this would provide a rallying point for support which would only invigorate the GOP base.
If Congress does not act then the Congressional Democrats would be shown as meek and timid, infuriating their base.
Very Rovian.
-
I'm moving toward the impeachment solution myself
When a guy like Radley Balko -- who is not exactly a fire-breathing lefty and is possessed of a moderate temperament -- calls for impeachment, I'm ready to think it is time:
I find myself leaning more and more toward firing up the impeachment machinery.
...
As my colleague Jacob Sullum explains, even if you think the U.S. attorney firings are a non-issue, the implications of this assertion of power are frightening:
Under this theory, could the president also block the prosecution of an official who, say, tortured a prisoner or conducted illegal surveillance, if the president determined that such measures were necessary, proper, and constitutional tactics in the war on terrorism?
http://www.theagitator.com/archives/027954.php
I've tended to agree with those who have argued impeachment is a waste of time and energy. But, I'm starting to change my mind.
-
You can't really blame Pelosi
too bad Nancy Pelosi is playing politics with the rule of law
Their wrongdoing is extreme, and only equally extreme corrective measures will suffice.
Yes, but Nancy Pelosi doesn't want to impeach. See, she thinks that 2008 will be a Democratic wipeout if Bush and Cheney are still in power, so she's taken her oath of office off the table.
-- thegris
She is in the difficult position of being next in-line for the presidency if she does impeach them. You can certainly blame everyone else, Democrats and Republicans alike.
ahhh
I see Ondelette and DCLaw1 have already explained what I was trying to say- only clearly and concisely. It is a relief.
That scene in Ghandi, where his followers walk towards the factory guards- and their billy clubs- in waves, the women carrying the beaten and bloodied away for the next wave to advance- that would be something to see in our country today, wouldn't it?
-- Ktwdawg
None of those people had mortgages and well paying jobs. Also most Buddhists and Hindus know that your posessions own you, not the other way around.
-
Peer-reviewed consensus
Wonderful, isn't it? The independent production and confirmation of theories that is the backbone of science- so reviled by these people- so easily presents itself in our observations? So sad, too, that this same principle confirms our worst fears, that to know the nature of a thing is to know what it is capable of. And ironic- that they employ this principle in their service to obliterate the obviousl conclusions it presents to us in all matters- legal, social, economic, environmental, biological... I suppose then that we are learning, too- evolving our understanding of how these matters will work themselves out. I just hope that in the future we will be as vigilant, in remembering and employing the lessons we've learned, as the Imperialists have demonstrated their dedication to be [evil].
-
Can't we file an ethics complaint with the bar against Gonzalez?
I would find it hard to believe that any bar association wouldn't find him guilty of malpractice or some ethics violtaions.
1) Lying to congress
2) Arguing the Right To Habeus is not in the constitution. It's laughable on it's face which would make him unfit in the eyes of the bar.
3) Trying to coach a witness before she testified
This is all downright shameful.
Also, I wrote an essay called "REPUBLICANTS" that I would like you all to digg if you like it. Click here (http://www.digg.com/political_opinion/REPUBLICANTS_is_the_New_Acronym_for_the_Party_that_Can_t_Do_Anything_Right) or on my signature to read it.
-
impeach
If this theory is actually asserted to ignore a criminal charge it constitutes an impeachable offense in and of itself.
-
Enough
Haven't we yet reached the point where open rebellion becomes the best solution?
-
I wish this was just a soap opera
Interesting that both Fred Fielding and John Roberts both conspired on the draft of that 1984 strategy. Bush and his White House lawyers know exactly where this is headed should the House committee invoke "inherent contempt" charges against John Bolton and Harriet Meiers, and he is confident that the court will diminish any Congressional attempt at oversight. While John Roberts, and the other Conservatives on the court might be anxious to support the Executive they do so at risk of diminishing their own power.
-
There Are No Letters To Display
that could possibly describe just how bad this is for our country. God Save the Constitution!
-
Permanent Republican Majority?
This whole theory -- the so-called unitary executive -- only makes sense if they never intend on surrendering the office, right? I mean, any sane person would understand that if you make the presidency a dictatorship, then the last thing that can be allowed to happen is to let that dictatorship fall into the hands of the opposition. Dick wants this power, clearly, but does he want Hillary to have it?
I fear for our future.
-
@dwhite
If this theory is actually asserted to ignore a criminal charge it constitutes an impeachable offense in and of itself.
Yup, I'm as critical as anyone here of how the Administration has conducted itself re: firing U.S. Attorneys, but that's a murkier issue, since they do serve at the president's pleasure. (Not saying a criminal case, obstruction of justice, or some such could not be made out, but it would be difficult.) The wholesale violations of FISA, however, are straightforward. And this Administration clearly thinks it has a right to violate any law it doesn't like.
Myself, I do not trust Hillary Clinton, finding her to be utterly lacking in principle and driven only by ambition and power lust. If she isn't keen on pushing some of these hearings, much less impeachment, it is because she would be delighted to step into the Executive-cum-monarch role Bush has prepared for his successor.
If she ends up the Dem nominee, I really don't think I will vote -- well, maybe a protest vote, writing in Russ Feingold.