.........but not under oath

[billvon 2,435]

>Didn't they try to impeach Clinton for confidential communications with his staff?

And they DID impeach Nixon for refusing to comply with a subpoena (among other things.)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Add to this that the Dems on the committe have publicaly said that no crime has been commited and you still think this is all legit?

No crime has been committed as in, the people who did the firing had the right to do so. A crime may have been committed when it comes to timing and reasoning. If not a crime, it may have been highly inappropriate and punishable under codes of ethics etc.

All completely different things.

No crime has been commited. No interference of any case has been alledged.
(even the one Lehee (sp) has spoken about has been debunked)
What else is there except the whitch hunts you hate so much?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,147]

Quote

No crime has been commited. No interference of any case has been alledged.

Excellent, then everybody can testify truthfully and everybody goes on with life.

[billvon 2,435]

> No interference of any case has been alledged.

From a Pennsylvania paper:

"What the Bush administration has done is quite different. Those eight U.S. attorneys were fired for prosecuting Republicans or for not prosecuting Democrats in regard to elections. U.S. Attorney John McKay was castigated for saying, “there was no evidence” to investigate the close election that Washington’s Democratic governor won. Carol Lam’s removal will end the investigation that put Republican officials at risk in San Diego. David Iglesias was condemned for failure to indict Democrats for voter fraud in New Mexico."

[rushmc 18]

And that is related how.

I am surprised it took so long to bring up one of the defining moments in Dem playbook

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,435]

>And that is related how.

Nixon - turned over tapes, but there were 18 minutes missing. He refused to turn over those 18 minutes. They later turned out to be incriminating.

Bush - turned over emails, but there were 18 days missing. He refuses to release those 18 days of emails.

Nixon - impeached when he refused to follow subpoenas to turn over the tapes and testify on their contents.

Bush - looks like he will be refusing to allow his people to obey subpoenas.

You're right, there is no relationship at all between the two. BTW here's the text of the completely non-related impeachment:

-------------------
RESOLVED, That Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanours, and that the following articles of impeachment to be exhibited to the Senate:

. . . .

Article 3

In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, knowledge or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In refusing to produce these papers and things Richard M. Nixon, substituting his judgment as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives.

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Ahh, did you happen to catch the Washington (com)Posts editorial today?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032101974.html

Maybe you should . Hell, even this left wing rag has it correct.

Wow! Case closed! An OPINION that you agree with. Whoda thunk it? Not that it makes any difference but I wonder who wrote it.
I also wonder what his opinion is of the 18 days worth of emails that haven't been released and the sworn testimonies that haven't been given. The Clinton folks could do it. And certainly the Bush folks are capable of adhering to a higher standard that the Clinton admin. Right? It's all about bringing integrity back to the WH isn't it? It's all about getting the "truth" out right? That's what Georgie said right?

[rushmc 18]

The only mistake made by Bush was not firing all of them day one. Left as they were they have now manufactured an issue they hope will stick.

Now, as before, I am going to sit back and watch the wall under this story come apart brick by brick (like past allegations)

Oh, the claims and allegations will continue to fly like shit from cows outside the milking barn but, nothing will come of this.

It will be fun to see

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Ahh, did you happen to catch the Washington (com)Posts editorial today?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032101974.html

Maybe you should . Hell, even this left wing rag has it correct.

Wow! Case closed! An OPINION that you agree with. Whoda thunk it? Not that it makes any difference but I wonder who wrote it.
I also wonder what his opinion is of the 18 days worth of emails that haven't been released and the sworn testimonies that haven't been given. The Clinton folks could do it. And certainly the Bush folks are capable of adhering to a higher standard that the Clinton admin. Right? It's all about bringing integrity back to the WH isn't it? It's all about getting the "truth" out right? That's what Georgie said right?

The lack of integrity is not in the WH. It is in the congress and the iresponcible media.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,435]

>The lack of integrity is not in the WH. It is in the congress and the
>iresponcible media.

That's right. When there's a conflict, the president is always correct, and congress, the media, the courts, the people of the US, and the rest of the world is wrong. Where would we be if people felt free to defy the actions of a king? We'd have some kind of anarchistic, irresponsible democracy!

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>The lack of integrity is not in the WH. It is in the congress and the
>iresponcible media.

That's right. When there's a conflict, the president is always correct, and congress, the media, the courts, the people of the US, and the rest of the world is wrong. Where would we be if people felt free to defy the actions of a king? We'd have some kind of anarchistic, irresponsible democracy!

Wow, this was helpful

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Bush said sworn testimony by White House officials would breach executive privilege -- the right of the president to have confidential communications with his staff -- and vowed Congress would face a legal fight if subpoenas are issued.

(this one's so easy I almost feel guilty)
Didn't they try to impeach Clinton for confidential communications with his staff?

Ahh, did you happen to catch the Washington (com)Posts editorial today?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032101974.html

Maybe you should . Hell, even this left wing rag has it correct.

Add to this that the Dems on the committe have publicaly said that no crime has been commited and you still think this is all legit?

You believe that it is fine for a Republican controlled Congress to compel sworn testimony from a Democratic administration over important issues like Christmas cards and travel office staffing.

At the same time, you hold that a Democratically controlled Congress has no business at all compelling sworn testimony from a Republican adminstration over what is, to most citizens, a really important issue.

The word for this is - hypocrisy

A very consistent behavior pattern for Bushies.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Oh, the claims and allegations will continue to fly like shit from cows outside the milking barn but, nothing will come of this.

It will be fun to see

I've attached a new avatar if you're looking for one.

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

The lack of integrity is not in the WH. It is in the congress and the iresponcible media.

http://www.cultintervention.com/warningsigns.html

Quote

By Rick Ross, Expert Consultant and Intervention Specialist
Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.

1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.

8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".

9. The group/leader is always right.

10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[idrankwhat 0]

LOL!!!! If it doesn't automatically load click on "showdown in Washington".
http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_daily_show/index.jhtml

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Bush said sworn testimony by White House officials would breach executive privilege -- the right of the president to have confidential communications with his staff -- and vowed Congress would face a legal fight if subpoenas are issued.

(this one's so easy I almost feel guilty)
Didn't they try to impeach Clinton for confidential communications with his staff?

Ahh, did you happen to catch the Washington (com)Posts editorial today?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032101974.html

Maybe you should . Hell, even this left wing rag has it correct.

Add to this that the Dems on the committe have publicaly said that no crime has been commited and you still think this is all legit?

You believe that it is fine for a Republican controlled Congress to compel sworn testimony from a Democratic administration over important issues like Christmas cards and travel office staffing.

At the same time, you hold that a Democratically controlled Congress has no business at all compelling sworn testimony from a Republican adminstration over what is, to most citizens, a really important issue.

The word for this is - hypocrisy

A very consistent behavior pattern for Bushies.

There someone goes again saying for all to see that they know what I believe. How arogant.

We are taling about a group of politions wanting to create a political spectical for thier own gain. I despise that on both sides.

I questioned Clintons firings as those were more ethically questionable than these that you want to jump on. Bottom line? Firing them was his right. Same for Bush. But you dont want to see it that way now do you.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[idrankwhat 0]

We are taling about a group of politions wanting to create a political spectical for thier own gain. I despise that on both sides.

Hahahaha! No, really. You're killing me here.

I questioned Clintons firings as those were more ethically questionable than these that you want to jump on. Bottom line? Firing them was his right. Same for Bush. But you dont want to see it that way now do you.

(wiping tear from eye) Ok, which ones?
http://www.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33889_20070222.pdf

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

Pretty much since day one, he's been trying, at least. This is the kind of fellow our founding fathers warned us about.

Quote

2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

Running from congressional subpoenas

Quote

3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

One out of ten ain't bad! Which is not to say that the budget looks good, but we can't pin that entirely on him.

Quote

4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

Terrsts. or is it tourists?

Quote

5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

OK, that's 2 out of 10.

Quote

6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

Lets see...clamping down on public statements, vindictiveness, insists on loyalty and punishes independent thought...

Quote

7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.

There aren't many topical articles that don't.

Quote

8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".

DHS comes to mind. Pentagon's TIA and related data driftnets at the FBI, CIA, etc.

Quote

9. The group/leader is always right.

I am the decider.

Quote

10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

Let's see...pretty much the whole Iraq thing. Secret trials, avoiding the criminal justice system for accused international criminals, etc.

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

The lack of integrity is not in the WH. It is in the congress and the iresponcible media.

http://www.cultintervention.com/warningsigns.html

Quote

By Rick Ross, Expert Consultant and Intervention Specialist
Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.

1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.

8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".

9. The group/leader is always right.

10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

Appears to me you have a bad case of paranioa.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

Appears to me you have a bad case of paranioa.

Further on down the page on that link:

Quote

Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader.

1. Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.

2. Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.

3. Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".

4. Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.

5. Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.

6. Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.

7. A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.

8. Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.

9. Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.

10. Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.

Emphasis mine.

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Appears to me you have a bad case of paranioa.

Further on down the page on that link:

Quote

Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader.

1. Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.

2. Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.

3. Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".

4. Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.

5. Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.

6. Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.

7. A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.

8. Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.

9. Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.

10. Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.

Emphasis mine.

and it is growing

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Appears to me you have a bad case of paranioa.

Further on down the page on that link:

Quote

Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader.

1. Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.

2. Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.

3. Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".

4. Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.

5. Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.

6. Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.

7. A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.

8. Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.

9. Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.

10. Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.

Did you really expect to get a sensable response when you post a degrading, insulting general attack against everyone you disagree with??

Now that is funny

Emphasis mine.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Did you really expect to get a sensable response when you post a degrading, insulting general attack against everyone you disagree with??

I'm pretty sure that he got the response he expected.

[funjumper101 15]

Back to the topic of the post.

Why does the Bush administration feel that they are above the law? Congress has the right to subpoena any white house staff that they feel will help in the investigation, even if the investigation is over trivial bullshit. That was established during the last administration. What makes ShrubCo think they can get away with this crap now that there is a Democratic majority in Congress? What goes around, comes around. Man up and deal with it.

It makes a lot of sense that they are trying to wriggle out of testifying under oath. The facts on this matter are quite clear. US Attorneys were fired and replaced via a newly enacted law that was snuck into the "patriot act" by the sleazebag republicans. The decison making process was heavily politicized. A part of the government that is supposed to be politically neutral has been politicized in a major way. If it was Dems doing it, the Repubs would be screaming for blood. Since it is Repubs doing it, all is good, according to the conservatives. 7-1 investigations of Dems vs Repubs. Those numbers don't lie. ShrubCo put the heat on the US Attorneys and they did as instructed.

Hey, conservatives, how about some consistency in your ethics and judgement? Do you really, honestly believe that what ShrubCo did was morally and ethically correct? For the good of this country, I sure hope not.

This whole thing stinks. It never should have happened. We, the people, deserve much better from the people who work for us. Weaseling around denying the politics of the decisions, getting caught, then weaseling more, is unacceptable. I don't care if you are liberal or conservative. What happened and how it happened is wrong. So wrong that heads need to roll. The hubris that has set in due to six years of zero oversight is incredible. It is time to rein these dirtbags in and keep them on a really short leash.

[funjumper101 15]

Did you really expect to get a sensable response when you post a degrading, insulting general attack against everyone you disagree with??

Now that is funny

Emphasis mine.