The Bushies believe that actions should be considered solely on the basis of whether or not they can get away with it.

They are amoral.

Puling hypocrites.

This is how dictatorships start. When executive privilege is used to block the checks and balances that made our government function, and the executive branch starts amassing power.

This is why we must have a Democrat in the White House in '08. Not becuase Hillary or Obama will be clean as the driven snow, but because with a democrat President, the GOP will finally start screaming against these abuses (lest Hillary or Obama have the same power) and we'll be able to pull the Executive branch back into check.

I would be concerned if there was no process in place to challenge such a claim. Since there is (i.e. the supreme court), then the claim of EP will and should be challenged. Let the supremes decide.

I believe in knowing where the boundary lines exist. This is one way of uncovering them.

About the only way that Congress can remain relevant, is to push forward and challenge this in court.

Otherwise, we have a dictator that can do anything he wants, and claim Executive Priviledge.

I still worry that the elections will be 'postponed', allowing Bush to remain in office. I don't trust this administration on any level.

US Courts are now successfully stacked in favor of the rich and powerful. Corporations and Presidents can do what they want....fuck the people.

Impeach Impeach Impeach

Gut check time for Pelosi and Reid. Wouldn't it be a hoot if SCOTUS decided in the WH's favor the day after Hillary is inaugurated?

Sad to see a guy who has failed in every aspect of his job to be making such a grab for power.

He had the athority to fire the attorneys. WTF over.

He had the athority to fire the attorneys. WTF over.

He had the athority to fire the attorneys. WTF over.

I love it. When it comes to interpreting the law in respect of their own power, they read it broadly. But when it comes to interpreting the law in respect of, say, abortion, gay rights, 1st amendment, etc., they read it narrowly.

And they call the judges "activists" and charge they make "result-oriented" decisions?? Wow. Hello, pot? Meet Kettle.

Face it. They interpret the law in any way they see fit.

this must be driving the democrats nuts.

They know t they have been trying to criminalize politics re. the attorney firings -- and now the WH has told them to put up or shut up.

It is pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that Congress overstepped its bounds. Bush can hire or fire political appointees like these attorneys, at will.

That's politics.

I hope the case goes to the SCOTUS so we can watch the dems get slapped down.

But the Deocrats know this is what is likely to happen, so I doubt they will try to challenge Bush in court on this.

Besides, they are so successful at condemning the Bush administration through a sympathetic liberal MSM without bringing any real charges against them, why would the democrats risk having their heads handed to them by the SCOTUS.

YEAH!

Once again we see the "cant trust government" so called "conservatives" ----- implicitly trusting government!

this must be driving the democrats nuts.

Not me. My Bush 'Countdown Clock' has ticked down steadily to the day he can go back to what he seems to be most qualified for: Clearing dead brush.

The jig is up. Bush is very close to being 'a comma in history'.

(I'm never surprised at what comes out of his mouth LOL)

This country was formed to escape a King and IRAQ was based on removing a Dictator.

The other King George was the namesake of the movie, 'The Madness (mental illness) of King George'.

Does history repeat itself or what?

""this must be driving the democrats nuts.""

Why? His declaration means he will not be bothered with Congressional oversight, Democratic or Republican.
I am not certain the SC will back him up even though they are a conservative majority, they might be looking ahead to President Hillary Clinton and realize that the right will not be able to cripple her administration without endless subpoenas, etc. to investigate Whitewater some more.

He has enough BALLS to say "Congress Role is just to give me all the Money I demand - not to supervise or control anything"

Well, that's true. he's the commander-in-chief who dictates operations on the ground and Congress controls the purse strings, they dictate whether they will give him money or not to fight a war.

Just because Bush is preventing the Congress from overstepping it's authority by attempting to tell the "Commander in Chief" how to use the money they give him to fight a war, doesn't mean the president is acting like a King.

BUSH officially declared himself KING!
Above ALL and ANY U.S. Laws..!!!

LOL

Bush hired the attorney's and he can fire them -- for any reason; at any time.

Just because the democrats are trying to overstep their authority and trying to criminalize the politics involved in firing these appintees who serve at the pleasure of the President, doesn't mean Bush has decalred himself King.

If anything, it is the Congress who is trying to infringe on the powers of the executive branch.

What drives me Nuts:

If CLINTON wasn't so damn Honerable and caring about America - He could have easily tried the same BUSHIT!

Just refuse to testify under Oath, Use "execute Priv" to Refuse Access to his Staff or INTERNS and told AMERICA to GO BLOW!!!


BUSH and his Ditto-Pubs proved beyond a doubt:

REPUBLICANS HATE RULES, LAWS, DEMOCRACY and AMERICANS!!!

Why? His declaration means he will not be bothered with Congressional oversight, Democratic or Republican.

That's not true. All his declaration says is that the Congress has no jurisdiction over his political appointees who serve at his pleasure and his discretion.

The Democrats have tried to criminalize politics -- and now the President said enough is enough -- put up or shut up.

My Bush 'Countdown Clock' has ticked down steadily to the day he can go back to what he seems to be most qualified for: Clearing dead brush.


I'll bet you said the same thing when Nixon got on the helicopter... Boy are you gonna be in for a shock over the next few decades. LMAO... fuck this ain't even the Bush Presidency in our lifetimes.

""That's not true. All his declaration says is that the Congress has no jurisdiction over his political appointees who serve at his pleasure and his discretion.""

I think I'll make a note of this and bring it up again after Hillary's inauguration. Me thinks that the righties here will be singing a different tune then.

"I would be concerned if there was no process in place to challenge such a claim. Since there is (i.e. the supreme court), then the claim of EP will and should be challenged. Let the supremes decide.

I believe in knowing where the boundary lines exist. This is one way of uncovering them."

Posted by FedUpWithPols
===============
Fedup: As it now stands the supreme court is predominately staffed with Bush(or conservative) appointees. How unbiased do you think they will be. Furthermore how long do you think it will take for the corrections to be implemented assuming they would favor the democrats? We are watching our government disolve before our eyes. The only hope is that the voters remember in 2008 and relegate the republicans to an also ran but now extinct status. Then institute new independent safeguards to correct the abuses of this president and his administration.

ROB

Nixon opted for the 'Super Deluxe' metal detector to comb the beaches of San Clemente. That was his version of'clearing brush'.

Nixon had more compotence in the tip of his little finger than Bush has on his whole ranch.

""fuck this ain't even the Bush Presidency in our lifetimes.""

Yeah, we're waining for Jeb to announce.....hahahaha......but he can't because his big bro has made the name synonymous with failure.

You Sheeple Repubtards all think the SAME!

Your FAT Limburger even insults you and you are too dumb to realize? - calls you "DITTO Heads" because your thinking is all EXACTLY the same - AS LIMPBONG INSTRUCTS YOU to THINK!!


And you wonder why America is being destroyed by Mindless MORONS!!!???

"Me thinks that the righties here will be singing a different tune then."

Can you even imagine if a Dem had done the things Bush has done?

There would have already been an impeachment.

Nixon had more compotence in the tip of his little finger than Bush has on his whole ranch.

Posted by AllAmerican


Just saying if you think all Bush is going to do for the remainder of his life is clear sticks and shrubs in Crawford you're in for a bit of a shock. He'll always be a solid fundraiser, and like Nixon, Carter, Clinton and his Father he will do lots of work once out side of the White House.

I think I'll make a note of this and bring it up again after Hillary's inauguration.

LOL

There's a long way to go before that happens.

I think Obama, Hillary, Rudy, Fred Thompson and Bloomberg all have a credible chance at being our next president.

But lots of things can happen and will between now and November 2008.

Yeah, we're waining for Jeb to announce.....hahahaha......but he can't because his big bro has made the name synonymous with failure.

Posted by danni


Jeb... Maybe... not this time though, but his son, George? oh yeah, he'll be in there... give it 20 years.

Back in 1993 would you have predicted George H.W. Bush's sons would both be governors and one a 2 term President? Time heals all wounds...

Can you even imagine if a Dem had done the things Bush has done?

You mean like Clinton and his warrentless searches of public housing among other things.

You Sheeple Repubtards all think the SAME!

I think you're an ass DirtyRIGHTBoy...

Any Repubtards thinking the same as me?

Back in 1993 would you have predicted George H.W. Bush's sons would both be governors and one a 2 term President?

No one knew much about George then. He was busy electrocuting prisoners and hangin' with Rove throwing Asst. AG's at political opponents in his spare time.

Time heals all wounds...

God, we hope so

No, I mean like Bush and his pre-emtive war for oil based on fake intel, among other things.

Any Repubtards thinking the same as me?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

For days now..

"All his declaration says is that the Congress has no jurisdiction over his political appointees who serve at his pleasure and his discretion."

Uh, I think the article says that the declaration says that Congress has no jurisdiction at all in Executive Privilege cases.

"...executive privilege trumps all."

What I don't get is - so many people don't like Congress.

Heads up people! Congress is YOU. They represent YOU!!

So Bush is basically saying to YOU - "When I say Executive Privilege, YOU can go FUCK YOURSELF!"

I just want to see DRB and Tad go at it, lol.

No one knew much about George then

They knew his father... they disliked him enough to send him packing back to Maine... H.W. Bush wasn't even reelected and America still elected his son just one presidency later. Give it 20 years... George P. Bush, JEB's son will be right in the hunt for the White House, and probably win it.

He was busy electrocuting prisoners

I love this mentality... I'm vehemently against the death penalty, but to blame one man is fucking retarded... A person committed a crime, it was investigated by law enforcement officials, that person was indicted, had a trial, he/she was convicted by a jury, sentenced to die by a judge, denied appeal after appeal by other judges, all the while a Democratic Legislature could have abolished the Death Penalty, or the people of the state of Texas could have... But you're saying it was Bush doing the electrocuting because he didn't swoop down at the last second of each and every execution and spare the prisoner.

Right, gotcha... Bush was busy electrocuting people...

""Time heals all wounds...""

You righties would vote for Hitler if Rush/Sean/Bill told you to. Some of us don't forgive things like profiteering during WWII, Iran Contra, or the present war so easily because we realize that the dead remain dead even when the righties have forgotten and are willing to vote for the same liars or the liars sons.

So Bush is basically saying to YOU - "When I say Executive Privilege, YOU can go FUCK YOURSELF!"

Posted by PDAGUY9


Yeah... that's what he's saying... Exactly...

Wow...

You righties would vote for Hitler if Rush/Sean/Bill told you to.

Who the fuck is Bill?

Oh and kindly insert all your hitler/nazi references up your ass... i'm sure there's plenty of room.

"Bush hired the attorney's and he can fire them -- for any reason; at any time."


This statement is simply not true. There are a whole host of improper and ILLEGAL reasons to fire the USAs. And given the lying, secrecy, covering up, missing e-mails, etc. by the administration---there is more than enough reason to investigate this matter.

If you think the democrats are going to do anything to get this tool out of office you're dead wrong.

They can't do anything...

Did you guys skip your government classes in high school and college? You need the Senate to convict. You couldn't get 50 votes in the Senate for convicting to impeach Bush or Cheney. No Republican will vote for it and neither will Lieberman and probably a few other Democrats.

All an impeachment in the House would do is rally GOP around Bush like the DNC did to Clinton in 1998. I'm surprised the Democrats aren't being this stupid... I need to give Nancy more credit.

This statement is simply not true. There are a whole host of improper and ILLEGAL reasons to fire the USAs.

At the Beginning of Bush's term he fired a crap ton of attorney's for no reason other then he felt like it and nobody said a word...

At the beginning of Clinton's term he fired every attorney for no reason other then he felt like it and nobody said a word...

If Bush could fire them before why can't he fire them now?

Anyone who still supports this administration needs to be isolated from the rest of society for the good of the human race.

"Yeah... that's what he's saying... Exactly...

Wow..."

Great retort. Tell me where I'm wrong.

ROB:

Give it 20 years... George P. Bush, JEB's son will be right in the hunt for the White House, and probably win it.

Recent studies have shown that young people 18-39 are overwhelmingly leaning Democrat.

I'm vehemently against the death penalty, but to blame one man is fucking retarded

He executed the more prisoners than anyone else in modern American or Texas history, and then had the audacity to mock Carla Fay Tucker on TV in a squeaky voice and a smirk on his face, "Please Mr. Bush, don't kiiiiil me. Pleeeeeeeeease". What an unfeeling asshole.

A person committed a crime, it was investigated by law enforcement officials, that person was indicted, had a trial, he/she was convicted by a jury

Uh huh. Libby? Commutations for cronies. Bush himself said he'd fire whoever was responsible for outing Plame. Huh? Who's been fired so far ROB? We have several administration officials who uttered her name, and all but Armitage intentionally.

As to justice, if Bush hadn't been born into that family he'd still be doing 25 to life for cocaine possession like the rest he locked away with his 'law and order' attitude.

Rob--i know you can see the difference between the nondiscriminant firing a ton of attorneys at the beginning of an administration and firing select individuals who were weren't toting the administrations political line.

The fact of the matter is, influencing the actions of USAs to either go after dems or not go after republicans is IMPROPER, and in some cases ILLEGAL.

Given the allegations of those involved, there is enough to warrant an investigation. Now, had GWB fired every one of his USAs--this wouldn't have been a problem. If, when asked about it, his officials didn't lie through their teeth, this wouldn't be a problem. But the fact of the matter is, there IS a problem and it deserves to be investigated.

""If Bush could fire them before why can't he fire them now?""

He could but why did they then also have to say they fired some of them for incompetence, laziness, etc. When their files were read all their perfomances were rated excellent so why were they lying about the reasons for the firings???
Why were unqualified people appointed who had little or not experience and who had been involved with "caging lists" during the election???
Pretend all you want but there are many unanswered, reasonable questions that Congress has a right to ask and a right to recieve answers and documents about.

and firing select individuals who were weren't toting the administrations political line

Last I checked political appointees that serve at the pleasure of the President are appointed to implement the policies of the President -- if they don't, they get fired.

That's politics.

If and when a democrat gets in the WH, the Democratic President will do the same exact thing.

For all you Xians, Who woud Jesus execute?

He could but why did they then also have to say they fired some of them for incompetence, laziness, etc.

Incompetance and laziness are subjective and in the eye of the employer -- in this case the President - who can fire his political appointees at will for any reason.

But You are right Danni, at the very least it was bad form -- he should have just said he fired them because he can and given no reason at all.

If and when a democrat gets in the WH, the Democratic President will do the same exact thing.

Posted by Bowa

If and when a Democrat gets in the WH, and the Democratic President uses the power of the Justice Department for cyincal political purposes aimed at the opposition while ignoring wrongdoings of his own, there would be an equally fervent outcry from the public to end that practice and restore the JD to it's formerly nonpartisan self.

Just saying if you think all Bush is going to do for the remainder of his life is clear sticks and shrubs in Crawford you're in for a bit of a shock. He'll always be a solid fundraiser, and like Nixon, Carter, Clinton and his Father he will do lots of work once out side of the White House.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-07-20 11:13 AM

Really? What did Nixon do after he left office?

The real question is why does Rob worship him so much?

"Last I checked political appointees that serve at the pleasure of the President are appointed to implement the policies of the President -- if they don't, they get fired.

That's politics.

If and when a democrat gets in the WH, the Democratic President will do the same exact thing."

Last time i checked, firing or using undue influence with USAs to stop investigations against republicans was OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.


Quit politicizing a department that should be focusing on JUSTICE, not politics.


If you don't see a problem with this, there is something seriously wrong with you. I wouldn't take this crap from any administration--left or right.

If you don't see a problem with this, there is something seriously wrong with you.

In other words, if I don't agree with you there must be something seriously wrong with me.

So typical of so many on this site.

I wouldn't take this crap from any administration--left or right.

Frankly, we have to take this "crap" from every adminitration Left and Right -- that's the way it's always been and always will be.

It is called politics.

Quit politicizing a department that should be focusing on JUSTICE, not politics.

Get real. Every administration comes to the WH with an agenda, and the President chooses people to fulfill his agenda

These Political appointees serve at the pleasure of the president and can be fired at his discretion.

It is called politics

Posted by Bowa at 2007-07-20 12:29 PM

You're either with us or against us.

Who said that Lokiderfla?

He executed the more prisoners than anyone else in modern American or Texas history, and then had the audacity to mock Carla Fay Tucker on TV in a squeaky voice and a smirk on his face, "Please Mr. Bush, don't kiiiiil me. Pleeeeeeeeease". What an unfeeling asshole.

Bush has never executed anyone...

And you've been caught in this lie about Bush on television mocking Carla Fay Tucker... Bush never mocked Carla Fay Tucker on Television.

Frankly, we have to take this "crap" from every adminitration Left and Right -- that's the way it's always been and always will be.

It is called politics.

Posted by Bowa

There's the rub. The Justice Dept. is supposed to be nonpartisan, as all judical entities are required to be.

It hasn't always been this way. Karl Rove invented using prosecutorial powers to slander opponents and win elections. That has no place in America. There should never be 'right and left' in our Federal justice system, only 'right and wrong'.

Their efforts to subvert the JD to gain a permanent majority (their aim) is egregious and most likely illegal. I hope we get to the bottom of this when the Super Duper Patriot Christians in the WH are forced to tell the whole truth with their left hand on a Bible about this and many other issues for which the American people deserve to know the facts. They're supposed to work for ALL of us. The RIGHT thing for them to have done long ago is testify in public and under oath about a myriad of pressing questions surrounding their actions.

Last time i checked, firing or using undue influence with USAs to stop investigations against republicans was OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.


First, if I'm not mistaken, no attorneys were "fired" -- their terms expired and were not renewed. There's a difference.

second, I believe you have it wrong, the democrats are accusing the Bush adminsitration of getting rid of attorneys for not going after Democrats involved in voter fraud allegations, or pursuing illegal immigrants involved in crime aggressively enough.

Rob--i know you can see the difference between the nondiscriminant firing a ton of attorneys at the beginning of an administration and firing select individuals who were weren't toting the administrations political line

Of course I can... these firings were clearly a seperate issue, but the fact that every president fires attornies at the beginning of their term says that a president can fire these attornies if he wants to.

Its not like at any normal job... for example, if I get a new boss today, he can't just walk in and say, "You're fired, cuz I'm new and you're not my guy." I would have grounds to fight my termination... but every president has come in an fired people saying, "You're fired cuz I'm new and you're not my guy," and it is perfectly legal.

The reasoning behind these firings is shady, but the legality of it is not.

Bush has never executed anyone

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-07-20 12:38 PM

No he didn't you cubicle dwelling little Queef.

As usual, he had someone do the job for him.

There's the rub. The Justice Dept. is supposed to be nonpartisan, as all judical entities are required to be.

Says who?

Any department that is filled with political appointees is inherently partisan.

If you want a justice department that is not partisan (or at least less so) -- then take it out of the Executive branch, make it a separate entity,make the AG run for national office like the President, and then have all the attorneys he chooses have to be confirmed by a bi-partisan Congress. That would make Justice the 4th branch of government. Which is what you are asking for when you expect the Justice department to be "non-partisan".

in the meantime though, stop whining that what Bush has done is so horrible. Every Justice department is partisan and it's goal is to implement the policies of the administration in power.

No he didn't you cubicle dwelling little Queef.


HEY!!! Someone has improved their vocab a little... nice job buddy. Just another year and a half more until the Associates Degree huh? Well keep plugging away, you're only 57... Success by anyone's definition.

BOWA

Of course the JD, like every other dept. has it's share of political appointees. However, there are laws guiding what they can and cannot do while they are entrusted to uphold the laws of the land without partisanship ever becoming a factor in the dispensation of justice.

Using the JD for cynical the cynical purpose of creating a permantent Republican majority is not within their rights.

Administrations will change hands from party to party. This is a dangerous precedent if you're willing to allow it while your guys are in. It sure doesn't resemble the America I've lived in for over 60 years. Why do so many show a disinterest in right and wrong, yet show such a fervent interest in right and left?

ALL American - Useless. Noon E.S.T. so Dittos all left for daily confirmation and Brain F%#&S.

They deflect FACTS and Proof like an all-star Goalie.

They refuse to realize the Limburger never served one day in the Military or Government; yet He is somehow an "expert" on all those Topics.?

Hilarious but Sad


Why doesn't "Christian" LimpBong teach them about what He actually KNOWS:

- How to buy illegal Drugs and get Off
- How to F%#& Teen HOs in the Dominican
- How to collect Govt assistance when unemployed
- How to live off your Wife's income and hard work
- How to get divorced 5 times and claim to be "pro-marriage"
- How to convince BrainDeads to Send you TONS of CASH for spewing daily WARTHog RNC LYING Points.



That would be Logical; hence, they could never comprehend....

Even stalwart Reagan administration officials are aghast at Bush's power grab, and fear that he and Cheney may attempt to make it semi-permanent if they can.

Ditto heads -

Certainly you can only regurgiate what LimpBong has programmed and injested into your brain F%#& - understood.

However, We ALL have done something "Wrong" sometime - like Speeding on the Highway.

It is not just a matter of also "getting caught" but you refuse to understand that it is about the Severity and Damage caused by the wrongdoing that matters most.

Real Analogy:


Clinton was a misdemenor for running a STOP Sign.


BUSH stole a Truck with trickery, assaulted the Owners , raided all their accounts, invaded their homes, went on a 5 year Flee and elude, smashed countless Property in the $billions, killed hundreds of thousands during the pursuit, tied up countless Police forces intended to serve and protect their own communities, and then pretended that He is a "Christian" and needed to do it "to Protect You"..?


And you DITTO Brain FOOLS LICK IT UP like Candy..!!!!!

hmmm... my first reaction to "let the supremes decide" was of course they'll side with Bush... and then the question of how they (the supremes) will like it with a Dem president.

If it is against the constitution for a Prez to assume total power... then by all means IMPEACH ! (and if the SC has granted him total power, then he can say fug you Impeachers...).

HEY!!! Someone has improved their vocab a little... nice job buddy. Just another year and a half more until the Associates Degree huh? Well keep plugging away, you're only 57... Success by anyone's definition.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-07-20 12:52 PM

Like I said before. I could buy and sell you and the princess.

Like I said before. I could buy and sell you and the princess.


LMAO!!!

You've got to love the guy who comes to an anonymous message board and tells everyone he is wealthy!!

Tomorrow acting prez Darth Cheney will broadcast to the nation that he has issued an executive order shutting down the Drudge Retort --- as well as Congress and the supreme court.

Three percent of viewers will raise eyebrows. The rest will go back to the important stuff, Tiger and Barry. herm

oh my god Herm how many times are you going to post this?

If nobody finds it funny in the first thread, chances are nobody is going to find it funny in the next 17...

Blame it on the neocons. And ask W to EXPLAIN himself!

Like I said before. I could buy and sell you and the princess.

Posted by itsme at 2007-07-20 01:44 PM | Reply

Hmmm, well then, got a spare hundred grand I could borrow? hahahahahaha

Damn , I think I wrote that very thing on this thread 2 to 3 weeks ago , go feeger .

So I guess all Clinton had to do was to make the same claim and we'd never have had the republicant circle-jerk that was his impeachment proceedings.

Why do I think the rightists would still be screaming about that?

Dirtyrightboy, I'm sorry, but if you don't quit combining bad grammar, run-on sentences, and bold type, I'll just have to beat the hell out of you.

If the Congressional Democrats feel so strongly they are right on this issue, they should instruct the Sergeant at Arms to arrest Harriet Miers on contempt charges and force a Constitutional crisis that the SCOTUS would have to resolve.

Heals=Heels

IMPEACH



JUST DO IT111

Executive Privilege is not in the constitution and the supreme court ruled during Nixon's time that executive privilege can only be used when it involves "NATIONAL SECURITY" concerns.

I fail to see anywhere that this invoking of EP has anything to do with national security. If it goes to the supremes Bush will lose his shorts.

As usual Bowa, you're missing the big picture. This is the kind of stuff that lays the groundwork for the presidency to become a dictatorship. Maybe not now.

As usual Bowa, you're missing the big picture. This is the kind of stuff that lays the groundwork for the presidency to become a dictatorship. Maybe not now.

I completely disagree.

If anything, it is the Congress that is attempting to overstep its authority.

BOWA, as usual you are quite wrong again.

The Supreme Court considered this argument in the 1974 case of United States v. Nixon. A grand jury convened by Watergate special prosecutor Leon Jaworski issued a subpoena to President Nixon requiring that he produce Oval Office tapes and various written records relevant to the criminal case against members of Nixon's Administration. Nixon resisted on grounds of executive privilege.

The Court recognized "the valid need for protection of communications between high Government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties." It noted that "[h]uman experience teaches that those who expect public dissemination of their remarks may well temper candor with a concern for appearances and for their own interests to the detriment of the decisionmaking process."

Nonetheless, the Justices concluded that the executive privilege is not absolute. Where the President asserts only a generalized need for confidentiality, the privilege must yield to the interests of the government and defendants in a criminal prosecution. Accordingly, the Court ordered President Nixon to divulge the tapes and records. Two weeks after the Court's decision, Nixon complied with the order. Four days after that, he resigned.

Again BOWA, you need to "SHAKE YOUR HEAD, YOUR EYES ARE STUCK."

Your eyes are stuck moneywar. Obvioulsy you missed the part where the SCOTUS in Us V Nixon said "The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending CRIMINAL trial."

last I checked, there was no pending criminal trial in the Congressional Investigation into the attorney firings.

It is the Congress, that is trying to overstep its authority in this case, not the President.

Money...I love ya baby, but why do you waste so much time and effort on Bowaaaaa?

You never he will never admit he is wrong, will never admit to facts that speak against what he has been brain washed into believing.

What's the point in posting to him?

Oh and He wastes His time emailing Me to Please Stop Pwease top bwhahahahahahah LOKISFUR is a fraud and everyone knows it.

Larry

Bowa-
I'm assuming that you didn't read the article. At least I hope that's the case, as I'm sure you would not grant such sweeping authoritarian power to a Democrat.

Innie,

I know he will never change or admit he his wrong, just love making him look so damned foolish.

It clearly shows how stupid the republicans really are.

How is the huby? Doing well I hope.

Kids doing well, gettin lonely with no one in the house. They now alld growd up!!

the privilege must yield to the interests of the government

and defendants in a criminal prosecution.

Seems BOWA eyes stick no matter how many times he shakes his head.......OOOOOh! Hey BOWA, ........YOU'RE SHAKING THE WRONG HEAD!!!!!!!

At least I hope that's the case, as I'm sure you would not grant such sweeping authoritarian power to a Democrat.

Boyd, I don't view it as "authoritarian" at all. In fact, I believe that every President should have a right to hire and fire their political appointees at will and use the entire executive branch to pursue the agenda of the President who was elected by the people to do just that.

You never he will never admit he is wrong,

Lisa, so how am I wrong? I posted the relevant points from US V Nixon which state emphatically that there must be a pending criminal prosecution/trial for the claim of "executive privilege" to be denied by the courts.

When the Congress gets a grand jury indictment against the "President's men", then Bush won't be able to claim executive privilege -- until then, the Congress is going on a fishing expedition and overstepping it's authority.

SNIPER ... "He had the athority to fire the attorneys. WTF over"

BOWA ... "It is pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that Congress overstepped its bounds. Bush can hire or fire political appointees like these attorneys, at will"

BOWA ... "Bush hired the attorney's and he can fire them -- for any reason; at any time"

BOWA ... "That's not true. All his declaration says is that the Congress has no jurisdiction over his political appointees who serve at his pleasure and his discretion."

Bush is only able to appoint/fire USAs because of sweeping changes made due to the Patriot Act; shoved down the throat of Congress and the American people by Bush and his Republican (puppy dog) Congress. This Administration has set the Judicial and Executive tone for a coup of the US Government. Bush effectively has control over the Executive and Judicial Branches of our Government. I find it unbelievable that the GOP is praising him like a crowd at an old-time revival; this isn't a game of "politics", it's the future of our country, and the GOP is acting as cheerleaders for its demise ...

GooooOOOO TEAM!!!

Bowa-
re: Boyd, I don't view it as "authoritarian" at all. In fact, I believe that every President should have a right to hire and fire their political appointees at will and use the entire executive branch to pursue the agenda of the President who was elected by the people to do just that.

And you believe that, per the authoritarian statement by the executive, "the Justice Department will never be allowed to pursue contempt charges initiated by Congress against White House officials once the president has invoked executive privilege."?

BOWA-
re: Boyd, I don't view it as "authoritarian" at all.

Of course you don't. Why don't you tell me what power exists to check the executive?

"Innie,

I know he will never change or admit he his wrong, just love making him look so damned foolish.

It clearly shows how stupid the republicans really are.

How is the huby? Doing well I hope.

Kids doing well, gettin lonely with no one in the house. They now alld growd up!!"

The sad part is, Money...is that Bowaaaa doesn't think anyone makes him look stupid or foolish. Posting to him oly allows him the opportunity to keep spewing his nonesense. If everyone would just ignore him, this site would be so much better.

Money....I'm not married. Mike is my best friend, not my husband. But Mike is doing as well as can be expected. The doc told him this week that he doesn't think he'll be able to have a lens replacement since there is nothing for it to attatch to or something like that, so they were talking about fitting him with a special contact lens that would give him the same kind of benefits. We'll see what happens.

Ah, you suffer from empty nest syndrome. Athough I still have the little guy at home, I do have that feeling, missing the older kids. They grow up so fast! God Bless them!!!

I know he will never change or admit he his wrong, just love making him look so damned foolish.

It is you who look foolish Moneywar.

You look Foolish in your attempt to deflect the thread and make me the issue rather then admit that I just destroyed your lame argument against Bush's claim of "executive privilege".

You look Foolish as I showed you point by point that until the Congress issues a CRIMINAL indictment against the president and/or his men re. the attorney firings, the claim of executive privilege is legal and would stand up to any challenge in the courts.

You look so foolish in fact, that you can't even respond to my argument -- all you have is personal attacks and vindictiveness.

yawn.

Lokisfur You have the credibility of an infected Pubic hair on a Gnats ass. Why don't You come to terms with the truth and FACTS instead of spinning Your way out of that infected pubic hair folical?? You are so very wrong and You know it. Please Stop Pwease Top bwhahahahahahah

Larry

You look so foolish in fact, that you can't even respond to my argument -- all you have is personal attacks and vindictiveness.

yawn.

Posted by Bowa at 2007-07-20 11:07 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Giving a Personal attack while complaining about a personal attack how typical of You Lokisfur. But we shouldn't expect anything else from You now should we.

Larry

Bowa-
re: You look Foolish as I showed you point by point that until the Congress issues a CRIMINAL indictment against the president and/or his men re. the attorney firings, the claim of executive privilege is legal and would stand up to any challenge in the courts.

Then why, by this decree, does the executive announce that all such matters shall be kept from "the courts"?

B--

What investigation was thwarted, stopped or delayed by firing these 8 USA's??

Name one case...

The Congress is on a fishing expedition and drawing it out for the media.

They serve at the pleasure of the President. Could they have handled it better? Yeah--They could have said they are fired and given no reason.

And it seems that they are using the EP just for this issue--so much for the dictatorship.

And Bowa links the case that there has to be a criminal case going on --and there isn't--

There seems to be a lack of a genuine crime--but don't let that stop the Dems from the continous circus they keep presenting.

The whole thing is ridiculous to begin with. BTW--Gonzo should go IMHO--just because he didn't prosecute Sandy Burglar caper with the papers in the pants routine.

Murphy

Speaking of personal attacks. Larry why don't you address Tadowe w/ a little more respect? You cry free speach all the time and call others "Nazis" or "fascist" and call for their banning. "Me" thinks you are an enemy to free speach!

BOWA,

I don't respond to YOUR argument because it is just plum WRONG.

You are just to stubborn and stupid to understand.

What part of "NATIONAL SECURITY" don't you understand.

Like I said, you clearly show how stupid the republicans really are.

Of course you don't. Why don't you tell me what power exists to check the executive?

The SCOTUS and Congress both check the executive branch in numerous ways.

In this case, the Congress overstepped its authority.

They could challenge the actions of the President today, by circumventing the Justice department and having the "Sergeant at Arms" arrest Harriet Miers for contempt.

No doubt, such an action by the Congress would be a "check" on the "Executive branch" and the President would likely appeal to the SCOTUS to determine the outcome -- and as the SCOTUS said in US v Nixon, "Many decisions of this Court, however, have unequivocally reaffirmed the holding of Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137 (1803), that "[i]t is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."

And if that happens, unless the SCOTUS is prepared to find that the President must yield executive privelage to any Congressional investigation and not just in pending criminal matters - they will find in favor of the President.

Speaking of personal attacks. Larry why don't you address Tadowe w/ a little more respect? You cry free speach all the time and call others "Nazis" or "fascist" and call for their banning. "Me" thinks you are an enemy to free speach!

Posted by Dalton at 2007-07-20 11:19 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

He doesn't deserve My respect. He lost that long ago. Do You capisce THAT??

Larry

As far as "stupid" goes... Anyone w/ any education would know it is "too stubborn" smartass. It's a shame you do not know your limitations!

BOWA-
Excuse me, but you don't seem to understand:

Under federal law, a statutory contempt citation by the House or Senate must be submitted to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, "whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action."

By this decree of the king, the "president" is AVOIDING "the courts".

Get it?

what about the personal attacks and the call for banning hime when he has not attacked any poster?

I don't respond to YOUR argument because it is just plum WRONG.

How am I wrong?

it's real simple moneywar.

Criminal Indictment against the Executive Branch = no executive privelege protections

No Criminal Indictment against the Executive Branch = executive privelege protections

what about the personal attacks and the call for banning hime when he has not attacked any poster?

Posted by Dalton at 2007-07-20 11:23 PM | Reply

You obviously haven't seen Taddy Boy's post history. too bad Google tosses most of older Drudge Retort posts for I would show You precisely what I am refering to.

Larry

hime= him

Bowa-
Since you seem to prefer to cut-n-paste from sources you fail to link to, or even cite, in lieu of actually addressing my points - allow me to boil it down for you:

By this fiat of the executive, Cheney/Bush is AVOIDING any court ruling.

Get it?

I know what I have read today. And he has not attacked anyone. Why don't we ban all the people who have called someone a fascist/Nazi?

Bowa-
Allow me to attempt to make the simple concise:

Federal law states: Under federal law, a statutory contempt citation by the House or Senate must be submitted to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, "whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action."

Bush states: Fuck you. I will prevent my toadies in the DoJ from referring any contempt charge to a grand jury.

"Speaking of personal attacks. Larry why don't you address Tadowe w/ a little more respect? "

Oh, you mean that same Tadowe who has frequently called posters, "traitors", "subversive scum", etc?

Boyd--if there was a criminal charge filed and case in force--the EP would be challenged to the SCOTUS.

They can't avoid anything.

The point here is that there is no crime--and the President says certain folks have to follow his order in this matter.

It's total BS with the USA's--but if the Dems feel good--go ahead and file criminal charges for firing the USA's and then the SCOTUS can decide if the EP is correctly applied or not.

Murphy

Murphy law like murphy brain

also make bed in wall

very stupid

USA like Russiya

Putin teach Bush good

Next learn how to anchor boat

Bowa-
So, your answer is that once Bush violates federal law, there are other options for congress.

So, you seem to be ok with the violation of federal law. (In fact, you have defended it all day)

"As far as "stupid" goes... Anyone w/ any education would know it is "too stubborn" smartass. It's a shame you do not know your limitations!"

"what about the personal attacks and the call for banning hime when he has not attacked any poster?"

Priceless

Murphy-
re: The point here is that there is no crime--and the President says certain folks have to follow his order in this matter.

What the president has said is that the Department of Justice is his own private law firm.

Get off the Republican schtick for a moment and imagine (if you are capable of it) that a Democrat asserted the same power.

George W. Bush will go down in history as one of our greatest presidents based on his steadfast global war on terror.

Mark my words folks.

Bowa and Murphy-
At certain points I have seen left and right come together on issues of this nature, and was confounded by the zombies on the right or left that would defend the indefensible purely out of habit or spite or ignorance.

This is one of those times.

I know what I have read today. And he has not attacked anyone. Why don't we ban all the people who have called someone a fascist/Nazi?

Posted by Dalton

Bowa loves this country very, very much too...you can tell by his all posts defending the greatest President ever ~ GW Bush!:>)

I know what I have read today. And he has not attacked anyone. Why don't we ban all the people who have called someone a fascist/Nazi?

Posted by Dalton at 2007-07-20 11:29 PM | Reply

You obviously haven't been around when Taddy Boy has spewed His Balderdash. Let Me see what I can find and I will show You what I am refering to.

Larry

George W. Bush will go down in history as one of our greatest presidents based on his steadfast global war on terror.

Mark my words folks.

Posted by Beachbuzz at 2007-07-20 11:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Whatever stirinthepot.

Larry

Beachbuzz-
re: George W. Bush will go down in history as one of our greatest presidents based on his steadfast global war on terror.

Mark my words folks.


Why? They're Bill Kristol's words.

Why? They're Bill Kristol's words.

Great minds think alike.

Lisa, touche. I spelled a word wrong. Which was clearly a typo. V/s a clear violation of the English language. You are a troll. Thanks for the ankle biting! Do you have anything to contribute are you just going to defend you team?

Boyd--

Congress can run the EP issue up to the SCOTUS--right now if they want--and have them decide.

And from the branches of gov't it would appear that the DOJ is part of the Executive branch.

They are appointed --not elected--by the presiding President.

They leave with the President--unless they are asked to stay by the next President.

Murphy

George W. Bush will go down in history as one of our greatest presidents based on his steadfast global war on terror.

Idiot talking and a Dead woman walking.

Sean Penn knows how to read? maybe--but he certainly has difficulty comprehending


Murphy

Oh, you mean that same Tadowe who has frequently called posters, "traitors", "subversive scum", etc?

Posted by Bill_OReilly


Oh come on, Bill.
How many of us would give a flying fuck about the word "puling" were it not for The Tadster?

What a lexicographer, that senescent old fart.

Do you have anything to contribute are you just going to defend you team?

Posted by Dalton


Self retorting again, balton?

"Bowa loves this country very, very much too...you can tell by his all posts defending the greatest President ever ~ GW Bush!:>
"You have somebody like George Tenet acknowledging in his book that he knew that the administration was deceiving the American people into a situation that is murdering young men and women from this country, then George Tenet and Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice and George Bush should be in f***ing jail."

-- Sean Penn

Now I know not that you can not be taken seriously Bani. You get your information from Sean Penn. That about sums it up?

Billy Kristol very funny guy

First see on soap

All amerikans gay like billy

Real men in Russiya

"Which was clearly a typo."

Which IMHO was clearly the case with Money as well.

Team?? What "team" would that be?

I'm on America's team...not owned by either party.

Larry:
AOL mail.
10 minutes until the book.
YOGF

So, your answer is that once Bush violates federal law, there are other options for congress.

My answer is that Bush didn't violate federal law -- and if Congress wants to press the issue they can do it by using their own prosecutorial powers.

Bush is telling the Congress to put up or shut up.

In other words, he's calling their bluff.

And when the Congress does not use their powers to press the president on this issue becaue they know they have no case -- I wonder what the Lefty's here are going to say

Dead woman talking?

Realy dear, please elaborate.

Ok Dalton You asked for it.

ScaredE confesses his fear of and support for our terrorist enemy, "Time to come home befor[sic] we do more damage..."



Yeah, we might actually be able to beat a small minority of neolithic, cultist Islamic jihadists if we were to stay, along with any of the civilians those rapists and murderers hide behind!

That's the Democrats for you: Okay to go to war if a Democrat is president, but too dangerous and expensive if a Republican should do so . . .

World class hypocrisy! Democrats are number #1 (Uno) in that department!

Posted by tadowe at 2006-06-02 06:21 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

THIS IS A CLASSIC TADDY BOY POST

This subject is a good example of why the Democrats are acting out as subversives; undermining our national intelligence capabilities for partisan political gain.



From the very first response on this thread, the blatant and abysmal ignorance of the public is demonstrated, along with their led-by-the-nose hatred of anything the "party" points its finger at to revile, along with a blind denial of any negative consequences to their efforts and actions.



The Democrats have placed a huge anchor around the efforts to determine the terrorist's contacts and possible plans to attack the United States!



The Democrats don't care if that assists the terrorists as long as their party can gain a propaganda victory over this administration!



It is the same with all these leaks, and which intent is to gain that political propaganda victory over Republicans -- from Wilson's "leak" to the one about "wiretapping" Americans (a lie in itself!)



All of you Democrats are faithless anti-patriotic idiots -- of that there is no longer any doubt!



Ironically, you defend the CIA as concerns Plame/Wilson (the very first "leaker") while reviling them for moving prisoners to other countries . . . !!!



Total and complete puling hypocrites -- that's the Democrat party and the American Left!

Posted by tadowe at 2006-05-16 01:20 AM | Reply

Larry

Beachbuzz--great minds

Yes parrots smart like einstien

Needless to say, this is getting old. Despite failure after failure, and power-grab after power-grab, we can always trust the resident Bushbots (Bowa, Murphy, Beachbuzz, et al) to defend this president no matter how flagrant the abuse of power, or how spectacular the failure.

"The video above illustrates how the U.S. government lied to its citizens. It also shows us what angry Americans do to respond to the government that should be protecting the American people not sending their young men and women to fight and die for their personal enrichment.

This video should be posted everywhere on the internet so I am asking everyone with a conscience to spread the video and spread the truth."

You are really crazy. It shows no "proof"!
Lisa, you show your team by defending someone who has a clear lack of understanding between "to" and "too" v/s a typo of "hime" v/s "him". The fact that you (lisa) would even try to equate the difference shows who's team you are on.

Tadowe--puling hypocrites

Better push than pull

Easier on back

Bowa-
re: And when the Congress does not use their powers to press the president on this issue becaue they know they have no case -- I wonder what the Lefty's here are going to say

You do understand that the Bush administration has made a habit of avoiding "the courts" at all costs?

(No, you probably don't understand that, sadly enough)

Larry are you against free speach? He has the right to say it does he not? Me thinks so.

So has every other POTUS.

Bowa-
What I hear from you, ad nauseam, on so many issues such as this is that "if only this would go to 'the courts', the Bush administration would be vindicated".

But it never gets to "the courts", and when it does, either Cheney/Bush is successful in arguing around the point by getting the case dismissed, or they lose.

Bowa/Murphy/Beach-
I really think it's time you guys admitted that Bush could eat puppy brains for breakfast and feed the entrails to Barney and you would find a way to justify it.

Dead woman talking?

Actually I said Dead woman walking.

A play on Penn's roll in that movie with Susan "I like a mean snatch on my face" Surandon, Dead Man Walking.

Sorry to offend :)

Bani, you are pathetic. Really. Where is your "proof"?

Larry are you against free speach? He has the right to say it does he not? Me thinks so.

Posted by Dalton at 2007-07-21 12:02 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

If I get DUmps for excersizing My Free SPeech here then by God so should Tadowe. Only problem with Your argument is this isn't a Free Speech zone this is RCADE's "Home" Or have You not noticed this??

Larry

By the way Bani. I said nothing of the kind. Go back to Seann Penn and find some proof.

Beachbuzz-
Sorry to offend, but you're an idiot. Bush has managed to inspire Al Qaueda in Iraq, when it was not there before, while simultaneously allowing bin Laden's Al Qaueda to regroup and expand in Afghanistan/Pakistan (our ally), while nearly half of the foreign fighters and over half the suicide bombers are coming from our ally Saudi Arabia.

And all the while defending this administration's attempt to avoid scrutiny of any kind.

Congrats.

What I hear from you, ad nauseam, on so many issues such as this is that "if only this would go to 'the courts'

That's because on separation of powers cases between the legislative and executive branch the courts are the decider.

In this case, the President is asserting that he will not allow the "executive branch" (justice department) to enforce contempt charges against employees of the exeutive branch for following the orders of the head of the executive branch.

In fact, if he did allow the "executive branch" to enforce the contempt charges against its own employees it could be construed as an admission of guilt.

So it's a wise move on the part of the President -- and there is nothing to stop the Congress from enforcing the contempt charges by using their own porsecutorial powers.

Beachbuzz-
Are you an agent of the jihadists?

"The video above illustrates how the U.S. government lied to its citizens. It also shows us what angry Americans do to respond to the government that should be protecting the American people not sending their young men and women to fight and die for their personal enrichment"

proof Bani! Quit changing the goal.

Bowa-
I'll repeat, as you did not answer:

What I hear from you, ad nauseam, on so many issues such as this is that "if only this would go to 'the courts', the Bush administration would be vindicated".

But it never gets to "the courts", and when it does, either Cheney/Bush is successful in arguing around the point by getting the case dismissed, or they lose.

Bani, which debate do you want to have? You go from topic to topic as if they are the same?

Bowa-
Really?

"executive branch" (justice department)

So, the "executive branch" is also the Department of Justice?

Bowa-
That's an interesting notion, Bowa. Is the Supreme Court also of the executive branch, as those who serve on it also are nominated by the executive and confirmed by the Senate?

"Larry are you against free speach? He has the right to say it does he not? Me thinks so."

Hold on a second, Dalton:

You criticized Larry for his right to express himself...HIS freedom of speech by showing his distaste for Taddy, but you defend Taddy's right to free speech as he attacks others??

Double standard there isn't it, sweetheart?!

So, the "executive branch" is also the Department of Justice?

The department of Justice is part of the executive branch.

Bowa-
Or did you just shove you head so far up the king's ass that you don't know which way is up anymore?

Is the Supreme Court also of the executive branch, as those who serve on it also are nominated by the executive and confirmed by the Senate?

No, the SCOTUS is a separate entity. it is part of the Judicial branch of government.

Bowa-
But the DoJ is merely an arm of the executive?

Bowa-
US attorneys are also nominated by the executive and confirmed by the senate (until lately, that is)

I really think it's time you guys admitted that Bush could eat puppy brains for breakfast and feed the entrails to Barney and you would find a way to justify it.

I really think its time you admitted that if your wife came home sweaty with a rosy red, right ass cheek and messed up hair, you'd find a way to blame George W. Bush for banging her.

You're a compulsive, irrational fucking idiot---and completely representative of the left-wing blogosphere.

Or did you just shove you head so far up the king's ass that you don't know which way is up anymore?

Boyd, I guess yu are getting testy because you know you are wrong.

What's stopping the Congress from using their prosecutorial authority to arrest harriet meirs for contempt and bring the charges into the federal court systeme themselves. Why do they need an attorney from the justice department to do that?

The Congress has the power Boyd, let's see if they use it.

BB,

Just curious as to why you would make a reference, directed toward me I think, of a person about to be executed for something?

Care to elaborate on that?

No, the SCOTUS is a separate entity. it is part of the Judicial branch of government.

But the DoJ is a political arm of the WH?

Bowa-
US attorneys are also nominated by the executive and confirmed by the senate (until lately, that is)

Posted by Boyd

FF

BOWA-
You need to do some thinkin' and some research, dude. You should also examine your motives, and why you seem happy to have a king.

Later.

But the DoJ is a political arm of the WH?

I wouldn't describe it that way -- but to a great extent it is. The priorities of the President become the priorities of the Justice department.

For example, enforcing Brown vs Bd of Ed was not that musch of a priority for the Eisenhower justice department, but under JFK it was.

So the policy goals and priorities fo the President definitely shape the way business is conducted within the Justice department.

Do you think there is something wrong with that?

Oh-
The creepy masturbatory troll has arrived to elevate the dialogue:

I really think its time you admitted that if your wife came home sweaty with a rosy red, right ass cheek and messed up hair, you'd find a way to blame George W. Bush for banging her.

I guess they cut Pinche off at the titty bar again. Our misfortune, I suppose...

Later all.

BOWA-
Read the article. Comprehend it. Please.

Really gotta go.

Later all.

Why do you always say "later" when you have zero intention of leaving?

Is that like your three-hours-til-closing-time "warning bell"?

You're a compulsive, irrational fucking idiot whose entire political consciousness centers around your dislike for the sitting President.

Thats it.

That's all you got.

Hyperbole after hyperbole.

Really gotta go

Yeah right.

Gotta meet the escort at Graham's CS.

The creepy masturbatory troll has arrived to elevate the dialogue

...said the guy who, only minutes before, posted:

I really think it's time you guys admitted that Bush could eat puppy brains for breakfast and feed the entrails to Barney and you would find a way to justify it.

Hyperbole after hyperbole.

Posted by Pinche_Mao

What's your hyper~bowling average, Mao?

DOJ is supposed to be above politics. It's involvement in political issues traditionally is limited to upholding and enforcing laws. Brown v. Board of Education being a clear example. Until GWB, DOJ has never been used as a tool to go after political enemies. The scandal surrounding GWBs firing of US attorneys is at root due to the fact that it appears these US attorneys were fired due to a reluctance to be used as political tools to baselessly go after democratic politicians and groups, as Rove and Co. were pushing them to do.
If GWB had fired these attorneys simply for coming to work late or not filing motions on time, there would be no scandal. It isthe gross politicalization of a department generally held above the political fray which is the cause of the uproar.
Frankly, I believe all you Republicans on this site already know that, but try to obfuscate the issue because of the ugly light it sheds on the Bush Administration.

What's your hyper~bowling average, Mao?

Actually, we play ninepins around this part of the country.

But about 4 games.

Then they kick us out for being too drunk.

...but try to obfuscate the issue...

Its always best to try to eschew obfuscation.

If the eschewance of obfuscatory behavior results in your ever having to agree that we leftwingers are correct, and you rightwingers are dead wrong, then eschewance of such obfuscation is not an option . (Huh?)

Actually, we play ninepins around this part of the country.

But about 4 games.

Then they kick us out for being too drunk.

Posted by Pinche_Mao at 2007-07-21 01:04 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Where's the 10 pin?? Up Your ass maybe??

Larry

I guess they cut Pinche off at the titty bar again.

Where's the 10 pin?? Up Your ass maybe??

That was pretty funny, Larry.

"Up my ass"

*hee hee*

Those are Texas titty bars you're talking about, they don't cut folks off. ;)

Oh, don't let him fool you.

Boyd lives in Lubbock.

He's probably the only guy in South Plains history to have been kicked out of the Yellow Rose for acting like a pervert.

Pinche-
Perhaps you'd like to give out some more personal information about me, or perhaps you'd like to make another comment about my wife.

If Pinche truly has tried to publish personal information about you on this site without your permission, he should be banned. It is that simple.

Moder8-
He hasn't "tried", he has.

Moder8-
I should add that I have NEVER done the same to him.

Perhaps you'd like to give out some more personal information about me, or perhaps you'd like to make another comment about my wife.

The fact that you live in a particular town of 200,000 people?

Yeah, that's pretty personal.

The escort not show up?

Moder8-
It's a familiar pattern with Pinche. When his nose gets bloodied, he uses personal information to intimidate and bully. If he had my address and my wife's name, he'd use that too.

Pinche-
Blow off, creep.

When you can argue and banter without the personal information, maybe you won't be regarded as a troll.

Until then, I'm just glad I don't stoop to your level.

If you'd like to share any more personal information about me, Pinche, or perhaps insult my wife with crude jokes, or make comments about when or if I should "poke" my wife, I guess now is the time, dude.

(Yeah, you're a creepy motherfucker Pinche, and I'm a bit tired of it)

Pinche is the ugliest type of poster we encounter on this site. Since intellectually he is too stupid to maintain a position, he quickly is reduced to insults and trying to intimidate. If he is actively attempting to publish info about you on this site, I would contact Rcade immediately. That type of pettiness is unacceptable. Honestly though, I expect that type of behavior from people like Pinche.

Adios. I'm weary of rest-stop trolls peeking through the gaps in the stall.

Good night.

It's a familiar pattern with Pinche. When his nose gets bloodied, he uses personal information to intimidate and bully. If he had my address and my wife's name, he'd use that too.

Oh shut the fuck up, you sniveling, overly-dramatic POS.

I no more divulged any "personal" information than Beto Gonzales did.

maybe you won't be regarded as a troll.

I've been wiping my ass with your politics for nigh on half a decade on this website, chump.

You know damn well the difference between a troll and me.

If you'd like to share any more personal information about me

What "personal information"?

Pinche, frankly I have never observed you out argue anyone ever on this site. All you seem to ever do is throw insults. Honestly, I think you are an idiot. But hey, that is just based on the consistent shallowness of your posts.

Pinche, frankly I have never observed you out argue anyone ever on this site.

I dunno, Tiny Dancer.

You ran away from the other thread---unable to back up assertion that a vetoed bill was an example of the government "dictating" a lifestyle choice upon its populace.

You coulda had a first hand observation of me "out-arguing" you had you stuck around.

All you seem to ever do is throw insults

Look at your own, last 10 or so posts, asshole.

Lets compare substance and insults.

You seem to consider it "running away" when another realizes what an immature and insulting prick you are and chooses to disengage. What a troll.

You seem to consider it "running away" when another realizes what an immature and insulting prick you are and chooses to disengage.

No.

I consider it "running away" when you can't back your shit up and simply default to being an immature and insulting prick.

Like what you did.

I feel like I am bickering with a third grader. Whatever. Why am I even bothering? Your posts speak for themselves. Your ugliness is apparent to all. Your partisan hypocrisy exudes a foul odor which it seems all but the most ardent rightwingers find nauseating, even over electic microchips which form the internet. You are nothing.

You ran away from the other thread---unable to back up assertion that a vetoed bill was an example of the government "dictating" a lifestyle choice upon its populace.
Posted by Pinche_Mao

Funny, I'm still awaiting your response on that thread.
This seems like a self-retorting retort to me.

exudes a foul odor

That's great writing.

PINCHE is a prick. Fuck him.

And just an ordinary garden variety prick at that.

Can I at least be an organic garden variety prick, maybe?

Can I at least be an organic garden variety prick, maybe?

Posted by Pinche_Mao

Puta,

Since you asked so nice...sure

One that's been rotting in the hot sun for a few weeks.

I should add that I have NEVER done the same to him.

Posted by Boyd at 2007-07-21 01:55 AM

*shudder*

You mean, you actually could if you wanted to? That's gotta be an uncomfortable feeling.

""says a former Clinton Department of Justice political appointee.""
""says a former Clinton White House staffer.""

Great sources. Their mommies couldn't think of names for them, so sad.

Bowa, your view that DOJ is not supposed to be above politics sums up the the current administrations problem in a nutshell. Every fair and intellectually honest person agrees that of course DOJ is supposed to pursue prosecutions free of political pressure. The fact that people like you and Alberto Gonzalez reject that obvious proposition is why the nation is so outraged. And this is not a situation of reasonable people disagreeing. This is a situation where fascists like you and Gonzalez are trying to undo hundreds of years of a democratic tradition in this nation, and then justify it as merely being par for the course.