Kreyzhorse
New member
The best quote I've heard so far was that the Senior Bush is very pleased with the job that dubya has done. Seems that every day dubya is in office, it makes Senior Bush's time spent look that much better.
White House used RNC email to illegally bypass Pres. Records act of 1978
- Thread starter Redworm
- Start date
The best quote I've heard so far was that the Senior Bush is very pleased with the job that dubya has done. Seems that every day dubya is in office, it makes Senior Bush's time spent look that much better.
Mannlicher
New member
its all a political witch hunt. Yawn
To me, its a non issue
To me, its a non issue
Marko Kloos
Inactive
It's only a witch hunt and a non-issue when your favorite team is in charge. Put the guy from the other team into the Oval Office, and the same stuff would be an impeachment-worthy offense.
And we wonder why politics has become so polarized...Congress and the political parties are merely reflecting the electorate.
And we wonder why politics has become so polarized...Congress and the political parties are merely reflecting the electorate.
Scott Conklin
New member
I just wonder if the resident leftists planned this thread beforehand, so they'd all know where to be and when, or if they just naturally all come together with the scent of a Repub Bashing.
Here's what matters on a gun board: Unlike the certain reality had a Dem won, we did not see new gun bans nor a renewal of old ones. That's really all that matters, though the tax cuts and moderately decent SCOTUS appointments are certainly perks, too.
Here's what matters on a gun board: Unlike the certain reality had a Dem won, we did not see new gun bans nor a renewal of old ones. That's really all that matters, though the tax cuts and moderately decent SCOTUS appointments are certainly perks, too.
ok, but what was the point? this wasn't a LOL BUSH SUCKS CLINTON WAS SO COOL thread
Pointing out the faults of the previous administration in no way excuses the crimes of the current one.
yeah, nice little conspiracy we have going hereNo, that's not all that really matters. The rest of the amendments in the bill of rights are just as important and while you may be happy with this administration's treatment of the 2nd but it's treatment of the 1st, 4th and 5th are horrendous.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
Nor did you see Bush punished for doing the same thing when he came into office.
What you do see is people looking into the matter of them being fired towards the end of the administration after news of possible misdoings, lying to congress, reports of possible obstruction, and now reports of illegal usage of private correspondence.
See the difference? if not I am afraid explaining it to you would not be within my abilities.
It all came down to the fact of "if they weren't doing anything wrong, why the big cover up?" Then after looking into the matter it appeared that there is a big possibility that the firings were done to prevent politicians that will be leaving office from being prosecuted. That is illegal (hence the reason for the lying and the cover up). Then they find that the white house has been blatantly breaking the law and evading oversight with their secret emails.
Where is all the righteous indignation from the righties that pretend to care about only the country and the constitution?
But there WAS oversight by congress back then. Same thing here. In this case, there also seems to be a problem with breaking the law requiring record keeping. And statements made under oath that are repudiated by documents such as emails.
I'm sure the recent resignations on this matter are only because they did everything legally. And didn't cover it up. And didn't lie under oath
Tomorrow will be a fun day on CSPAN.
But he is now.
What I see is congress prying into a matter in which they originally had ZERO evidence of any wrong doing. As of right now, there is still ZERO evidence of any wrongdoing with respect to the firing of these people.
Incorrect. In order for these firings to be obstruction there needs to be something more than simply terminating these attorneys. Unless someone can show that Bush fired them after giving them an ultimatium or something similar.
What bothers me more is your faith in the reasoning for this investigation. "They must have something to hide" flys in the face of every protection that we value in this country. Should the police officer arrest someone simply because they invoke the 5th? After all if they weren't doing anything wrong why remain silent?
All this is even more outraeous in light of the fact that the executive doesn't have to justify his reasoning for firing these people to congress. Add this all together and this entire thing started off as a witchhunt. This will remain so regardless of whether wrongdoing is found.
If you kick in enough doors in a neighborhood you will probably find something illegal. That doesn't make it right. The same applies here.
I do care about the constitution. I care about separation of powers. I don't wish to see the powers of the executive whittled away as most liberals would like.
Defending the constitution is most vital when its not fashionable. Today its completely fashionable to piss on the executive.
Feel free to read up on what the USAs have been saying.
I think it would be inappropriate for the executive branch to have a tight reign on making decisions for the attorneys as to which cases to prosecute and which not to. "Oh, he's a friend of mine, take a pass on this one, David." or "Regardless of evidence, I think you should prosecute this guy"
You know, the whole separation of powers thing.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
Wrong, he is not being punihed for removing the attoneys that he did when he took office he is being investigated for the reasons why he removed attorneys that he appointed after they showed "disloyalty" and then his administration provided false testimony as to why they were removed.
Once again, I hope you can see the difference.
Wrong again. They looked into it after e-mails and other information that directly contradicted the administration's stated reasons for firing them. Like lying about performance evaluations. A few of the attorneys fired had some of the highest performance rating in the country but had been involved in prosecuting the Duke and others. Even though they had such high rating the administration claimed they had poor ratings.
Wrong again. If evidence can show that the adminstration fired these people for fear that they would not refuse to prosecute republican law breakers than the law has been broken. That is obstruction of justice and abuse of power.
So you consider requiring the president to obey the law "pissing" on him? There is no doubt now that they have broken the law with the e-mails. Now we need to find out what they felt was important enough to not only violate the law but then delete the evidence of afterwards.
lol does anyone see the smiliarities?
sure, maybe the administration did nothing illegal in those firings but they sure did something illegal in destroying evidence. just like someone did nothing illegal in getting a blowjob but did something illegal in lying about itlolololololol
I really don't disagree with this take at all. This is, IMO, exactly the same type of 'scandal' as "travel gate", "obstruction" of White Water, "pardon gate", the looting of the White House and most recently the whole Sandy Burger/keep the documents from the 911 commission. It also reminds me of every criminal and civil proceeding I have ever been engaged in. Both sides drag their feet, skirt the requirements, test the legality of the requests, and are basically adversarial during the process. Don't give up or admit to anything which you absolutely don't have to. The population both take their respective sides, and as Mark said, those in opposition of the administration will call for impeachment as the scandal is the worst thing to ever happen.
Instead it is to be expected, it has happened before and it will happen in every administration to one degree or another. I haven't heard anyone in a position of knowing claim the firings in themselves being illegal, I keep hearing "it is the way in which it was done". It is partisan politics and not a quest for justice IMO.
Executive picking and choosing which laws the legislative creates to enforce falls under it, though.
The executive is in the unique position of completely invalidating laws passed by the legislative simply by refusing to enforce the law. That definitely throws the balance of power around. Heck, by never bringing certain cases to court, the executive can ensure that the judicial has no say in the matter, too.
That is not a direction this country should be going. Checks and balances are a good thing.
But again you are making that statement with 1) not knowing if its true and 2) after the fact. When this investigation started the only thing that congress knew is that some US attorneys had been fired. Thats it. Thats the only thing that Dianne "contracts" Feinstein and Schumer had to go on. If this were a police matter, there would be no PC, no reasonable suspicion or anything of the kind. This thing started as a political witchhunt.
But again, why were they looking into it the first place. Why was Gonzales called to testify in the first place. When this whole thing started the only information that existed was that a handful of attorneys were being replaced and the reason for the firing did not include race, sex, national origin or religion. Subsequently a bunch of high ranking democrats started rooting around. Thas political. Spin it all you want, but its purely political.
But the mere firing of these people isn't evidence. You need something more than simply a terminated USA to have obstruction of justice. You need to show that the executive actively engaged in some action to obstruct an investigation or something of the kind. You don't have any evidence of that here.
Let me be perfectly clear. If the whitehouse broke the law with regards to emails, or anything else then the guilty parties should be punished. That said, anyone here who thinks that the motivation of the people leading this crusade is anything other than a political hit is just delusional. Its kind of like making an illegal search and finding a bunch of dope. Sure you found something illegal, but your motive and method is improper.
When senators grill the attorney general and demand to know why these people were fired, that is pissing on the executive. They have the right to ask and he has the right to tell them to pound sand. When Pelosi travels to a country that we are diplomatically ignoring, and over the objections of the branch of government that is exclusively granted powers of diplomacy, that is pissing on the executive.
The fact that you wholly ignored my paragraph addressing the "reasoning" for this investigation leads me to believe that you know what I'm talking about.