And the view from the right is that the media, specifically CNN, just hated Palin for no reason.

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2008/09/can-someone-please-explain-to-me-why.html#comments

John Lott? Mr./Mrs. "I'm my own sock-puppet" Rosh?

WTF cares what he (or should I say "they"?) think[s]?

Cheers,

What an example these people have shown us Ignore subpoenas! I say what works for them should work for the peasants. Folks if you are ever called to testify by the state or congress. We have quite an example to follow.

... Is that the media, specifically CNN, just hated Palin for no reason.

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2008/09/can-someone-please-explain-to-me-why.html#comments

If McCain Palin win, none of this will matter. To the victor go the spoils, after all.

On the other hand, if they lose, well, when it rains it pours, doesn't it? Once branded a loser, Sarah's teflon forcefield will disappear, and Todd, Frank Bailey and the rest of the crew will have to testify, which is to say lie under oath or take the fifth. Won't be pretty, end of Sarah's career, and all that.

IF they lose. They're all in on this one.

Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden said earlier this week that he and running mate Barack Obama could pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration if they are elected in November.

Biden's comments, first reported by ABC news, attracted little notice on a day dominated by the drama surrounding his Republican counterpart, Alaska governor Sarah Palin.

But his statements represent the Democrats' strongest vow so far this year to investigate alleged misdeeds committed during the Bush years.

When asked during a campaign event in Deerfield Beach, Florida, whether he would "pursue the violations that have been made against our Constitution by the present administration", Biden answered in the affirmative.

"We will not be stopped from pursuing any criminal offence that's occurred," he continued, going on to praise congressional committees for the deliberate pace of their inquiries into alleged Bush administration misdeeds.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/03/uselections2008.joebiden

What are they going to do to Mr 'I'm my own government'? Hold their breath? Stomp around? Cry?

Judge orders Cheney to preserve records

By PETE YOST Associated Press Writer

* Buzz up!

* Share

o Email

o Digg

o Facebook

o StumbleUpon

o Reddit

* Print

Sep 20th, 2008 | WASHINGTON -- A federal judge on Saturday ordered Dick Cheney to preserve a wide range of the records from his time as vice president.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is a setback for the Bush administration in its effort to promote a narrow definition of materials that must be safeguarded under by the Presidential Records Act.

The Bush administration's legal position "heightens the court's concern" that some records may not be preserved, said the judge.

A private group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, is suing Cheney and the Executive Office of the President in an effort to ensure that no presidential records are destroyed or handled in a way that makes them unavailable to the public.

In a 22-page opinion, the judge revealed that in recent days, lawyers for the Bush administration balked at a proposed agreement between the two sides on how to proceed with the case.

The administration, said the judge, wanted any court order on what records are at issue in the case to cover only the office of the vice president, not Cheney or the other defendants in the lawsuit. The other defendants are the Executive Office of the President and the National Archives.

The lawsuit stems from Cheney's position that his office is not part of the executive branch of government.

The lawsuit alleges that the Bush administration's actions over the past 7 1/2 years raise questions over whether the White House will turn over records created by Cheney and his staff to the National Archives in January.

In 2003, Cheney asserted that the office of the vice president is not an entity within the executive branch.

Two historians and three groups of historians and archivists joined CREW in filing the suit two weeks ago.

One Bushist disciple judge and he walks away...

He's 'too big to fail'. He's 'the architect' and 'the key maker' all rolled into one... He's damn near untouchable that hunk (of shit) of a guy named Cheney. (Especially since Obama has said that he's 'not interested' in pursuing the Bush crimes. Maybe I'm not so interested in voting for him then either.)

I'm just wondering if the otherwise despicable hacking of Sarah Palin's Yahoo E-mail account might yet have some positive result in the matter of Troopergate.

Tell me if I'm being too optimistic here:

Palin cites “executive privilege” as her reason for refusing to give up E-mails related to Troopergate. But if there’s a chance that Mike Wooten and “Troopergate” were discussed via a private Yahoo account — something we might never have known if not for this anonymous hacker — is it possible that Stephen Branchflower might subpeona these Yahoo E-mails? And wouldn’t Palin and her lawyers have a harder time citing executive privilege in connection with a personal E-mail account?

After all, how can she claim these E-mails contain government information so highly sensitive as to be protected under executive privilege, when she sent and received them on a free Yahoo account with nothing more to shield them from prying eyes than lost-password questions like “Where did I meet my husband?”

When PART-TIME mayor of Wasilla, Palin was confronted by a recall. It forced her to change her decisions and behavoirs in order to remain mayor.

The people of Alaska should immediately -- if not sooner -- begin a RECALL! against Palin. If nothing else will make this subversion of the law and elections process national headline news, that will. Better, there is NOTHING the McSame camapign, or the Republican-controlled Alaskan legislature, can do about it, as it is beyond their reach and control.

Act NOW, Alsaka! Get these facts before the ENTIRE country, despite the efforts of various media outlets to pretend there is nothing happening, and that it is all only politics anyway.

Violating the law, if one is a Republican, is "only politics". If one is a private citizen, it is a matter of law, and one's ass is busted for it.

Do the media place themselves in the political camp as concerns rue of law? as elitist/entitled/contemptuous as Republicans? Or do they report the whole news, including the fact that politics can be ignored, but the rule of law cannot?

If, that is, one isn't in a postion of privilege.