Others made reference to it, but has there been any organized activity to persuade Obama to pardon Tamm once he's sworn in? I'd gladly sign a petition or make a phone call or write a letter.

Perhaps it's a more drastic step than is strictly necessary, but it would be a powerful political statement by Obama in support of whistleblowers, and against political vendettas. We could also tweak the message to suggest that it's in keeping with his "post-partisan" approach to governance.

From NPR:

All Things Considered, January 6, 2009 · President-elect Barack Obama has met with his team of economic advisers in Washington and said the government must get its own fiscal house in order. He said new spending in the stimulus package will be carefully monitored, and won't include earmarks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'in the stimulus package' not in other legislation.

All in one post you told so many lies that it would take someone with much more self control than me to parse them out. But in a word: Bullshit.

put his feelings and need for celebrity ahead of the safety of the country.

The fact that he has no support beyond the sympathetic journalsists and bloggers like Glenn shows you how wrong he was.

Go get him DOJ!

Off the top of my head, I recall that Colleen Rowley was an FBI whistleblower who became Time's woman of the year in 2002, iirc. One of the things she blew the whistle on was the FBI's refusal to coordinate intelligence among disparate reports of Arab men taking flying lessons and also the huge obstruction that took place when Moussaoui was detained in MN.

Her testimony at the 9/11 Commission was marginalized. See also: Edmonds, Sibel, for much more scintillating stories.

There are more than a few reasons to believe Bush followed the rule of law, by virtue of his powers listed in the Constitution. In order to pursue this, the Supreme Court would be involved, Congress investigated, all our intelligence apparatus exposed, and would completely overshadow Obama for years to come.

You keep repeating your mantra regarding "by virtue of his powers listed in the Constitution" but you never seem to tell anyone what those powers are or from what SCOTUS decision (if any) they are derived from. Are speaking of a Yoo memo? Please tell us.

Certainly Tamm is entitled to presumption of innocence, just like Bush and Blago. But Tamm knew exactly what he was doing and what he was in for.

Are you saying that Bush and Blago didn't know what they were in for by your use of the word "but"?

The great majority of posts concerning Tamm's legal troubles concern how to assist him pay for his defense, and not about not charging him with a crime if a crime was committed. There are several posts questioning the latter. If he committed a crime, he should be charged and if there were mitigating circumstances, those circumstances should be brought up during the trial, not as a means of avoiding trial which, I might add, is precisely what you are attempting to do with your claim that the Executive has all these super-hero powers because of the Great Hoax Known as The War on Terror. If you're so sure that everything Bush did was legal, you should take the position that he should be tried and if mitigation is found, acquitted just as you have done regarding Tamm. You have never, to my knowledge, said that Bush should be investigated, much less tried. If you have, please post a link.

Meanwhile in the Times desire to wound Bush,

Do you have anything which would prove that the Times desires to do anything except fulfill their Fourth Estate role or are you once again blowing smoke out of your ass?

legitimate programs like the Swift banking affair were exposed making the tracing of funds impossible.

Are you sure?

Quite frankly, it's my opinion that adolescent desires for revenge and retribution are at work here, for slights real and imagined going all the way back to the 7-2 Supreme Court decision in 2000. There is no nobility here.

Projecting again? Are you proud of the manner in which Bush as conducted himself as President?

http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/kmov-stlouis-news-090601-shoe-bomb-threat.4672f28b.html

When a flight attendant asked him to close his laptop after boarding, Shafermeyer says he was just trying to make a joke when he asked her, “Are you the one who checks for shoe bombs?”

That comment got the guy 3 days of solitary confinement.

Constitutional guarantees? Not in the US.

There are more than a few reasons to believe Bush followed the rule of law, by virtue of his powers listed in the Constitution.

-- shooter242

Copy/paste where in the Constitution it gives Bush or any president the power to break the law.

Good work.

"your claim that the Executive has all these super-hero powers because of the Great Hoax Known as The War on Terror"

Thanks. Made me laugh.

BARACK OBAMA, President-elect of the United States: We are going to ban all earmarks, the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review. We will put information about where money is being spent online so that the American people know exactly where their precious tax dollars are going and whether we are hitting our marks.

From the transcript of the Jim Lehrer News Hour

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/news_summaries/2009/01/summary_06.html

About 3/4 way down the page

The transcript makes it pretty clear that his remark was in reference to the stimulus package.

He should be able to keep track of at least that one so it's not outside the rhelm of possibility that he would veto the bill if it contains earmarks and send it back for revision.

Still.....

I'm pretty certain that "no earmarks" ban only applies to the upcoming stimulus package. So, let's not get our panties in a ringer.

it appears that he's drawn a line in the sand and sent a message to Congress about how he expects the stimulous package to be treated.