I imagine it will break some time around Jan. 19, when we get to see the flood of pardons.

The last thing we need is more embiggenated Congressmen.

What sort of penalties are incurred by being in contempt of congress? Can they jail you or does the DOJ have to do that sort of thing?

PhiloeBedoe: What sort of penalties are incurred by being in contempt of congress? Can they jail you or does the DOJ have to do that sort of thing?

I believe they send the Capitol Police after your ass and lock you up on Capitol Hill.

Marcus Aurelius: The last thing we need is more embiggenated Congressmen.

I don't think that would be very cromulent.

Churchill2004: I imagine it will break some time around Jan. 19, when we get to see the flood of pardons.

I've already booked that week off work. It's going to be orgasmic.

mcwebe0: I believe they send the Capitol Police after your ass and lock you up on Capitol Hill.

Yup, they got their own little cell. Rove is f*cked if he goes on Capitol grounds. He won't, though.

Question(s): if the president is found to be guilty of significant wrongdoing, are his pardons valid? Can this administration be tried under RICO?

"If the President does it, that means that it is not illegal."

-Richard Nixon

Bucky Katt: "If the President does it, that means that it is not illegal."

-Richard Nixon

Yeah, and look at the place in history he ensured himself after all that madness. He could have been the man who reopened relations with communist China and reduced the risk of nuclear war with the USSR.

Instead, he'll forever be known as the guy who bugged himself.

They'll be investigating this administration for the next 20 years.

Occam's Chainsaw: Question(s): if the president is found to be guilty of significant wrongdoing, are his pardons valid? Can this administration be tried under RICO?

I'm going to wager we'll never have to worry about finding out.

Tr0mBoNe: Churchill2004: I imagine it will break some time around Jan. 19, when we get to see the flood of pardons.

I've already booked that week off work. It's going to be orgasmic.

Well, that is the logical conclusion to people being farked for a long period of time.

Just so I understand, why must Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten get Executive Privilege rights?

Donald_McRonald: I'm going to wager we'll never have to worry about finding out.

Heh, no doubt, but it's a fun thought exercise. Until every Bush admin muckety muck is in the ground, I'm going to rail for trials which conclude at the end of a rope.

Falcc: Well, that is the logical conclusion to people being farked for a long period of time.

You, sir, win one (1) interweb.

The First: Just so I understand, why must Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten get Executive Privilege rights?

Because Bush, through proxies, Decided they should.

Srsly, beats me.

DimensionalPunk: They'll be investigating this administration for the next 20 years.

Sadly., no one will be held responsible. This administration is responsible for so many atrocities that it make historian's head spin. 25 years from now, everyone will ask why the fark were poeple in 2000 and 2004 so farking stupid.

DimensionalPunk: They'll be investigating this administration for the next 20 years.

Longer than that... and they still won't get everything, this administration is going to have historians wondering what was incompetence and what was corruption and conspiracy for a long time.

DimensionalPunk: They'll be investigating this administration for the next 20 years.

And then after that, the historians will be digging shiat up for the next hundred, or more, depending on what kind of impact this administration has on America's long-term viability.

hillbillypharmacist: mcwebe0: I believe they send the Capitol Police after your ass and lock you up on Capitol Hill.

Yup, they got their own little cell. Rove is f*cked if he goes on Capitol grounds. He won't, though.

You mean to tell me that the capitol police's jurisdiction begins and ends with the capitol building? Man, you guys are so such federalists.

Why can't there be a smoking gun or a deep throat for this presidency as there was one for Nixon??

There are already so many accounts for the epic failure and massive lies already out there, the latest being the book by the former press secretary that there has to be some journalist or politician with some balls to go after the real 'axis of evil' in Washington.

GoRedSoxGo: And then after that, the historians will be digging shiat up for the next hundred, or more, depending on what kind of impact this administration has on America's long-term viability.

That only helps if there is any iota of evidence. Remember the Bush admin never archived any e-mails, all the paperwork has already been shredded, and anyone involved in the massive failures and high treason (and I'm sure there is some treason here) will go to their graves with their secret.

GoRedSoxGo: And then after that, the historians will be digging shiat up for the next hundred, or more, depending on what kind of impact this administration has on America's long-term viability.

More like the aliens will be digging it up in the fossil record... right below that thick layer of radioactive ash.

The First: GoRedSoxGo: And then after that, the historians will be digging shiat up for the next hundred, or more, depending on what kind of impact this administration has on America's long-term viability.

That only helps if there is any iota of evidence. Remember the Bush admin never archived any e-mails, all the paperwork has already been shredded, and anyone involved in the massive failures and high treason (and I'm sure there is some treason here) will go to their graves with their secret.

You have a point, but I feel like there's already enough second-hand evidence and innuendo to keep historians speculating and arguing. Kind of like the Richard III-dead nephews fiasco. But yeah, you're right.

GoRedSoxGo: You have a point, but I feel like there's already enough second-hand evidence and innuendo to keep historians speculating and arguing. Kind of like the Richard III-dead nephews fiasco. But yeah, you're right.

Screw the speculation. Historians speculate now on what happened to King Tut, who killed Kennedy, who was Jack the Ripper and et al. I want these assholes to be held responsible. It's about time someone in the administration took responsibility on what's been going on in the last 7-8 years.

The First: Screw the speculation. Historians speculate now on what happened to King Tut, who killed Kennedy, who was Jack the Ripper and et al. I want these assholes to be held responsible. It's about time someone in the administration took responsibility on what's been going on in the last 7-8 years.

If "enhanced interrogation" works so well on "terrorists", what about the treasonous?

Occam's Chainsaw: Donald_McRonald: I'm going to wager we'll never have to worry about finding out.

Heh, no doubt, but it's a fun thought exercise. Until every Bush admin muckety muck is in the ground, I'm going to rail for trials which conclude at the end of a rope.


Man, get a grip on the Bush Hatred; it's bad for the soul, and I'd be willing to bet that they've done nothing that warrents a "Death Sentance".

/Though it is kind of funny to see all the Democrats who now support the Death Penalty. (but only if it pertains to Bush and his supporters)

Nothing will change until we all, as citizens, have the balls to march into the Capitol and White House and retake them. These crimes are a result of our own complacency.

REVOLUTION

Churchill2004: I imagine it will break some time around Jan. 19, when we get to see the flood of pardons.

Funny how American's get their blood boiling over illegal immigrants, stem cell research, gay marriages, and other nonsensical issues yet tolerate this administration for their lack of respect to the Constitution.

Has anyone ever in this administration taken any responsibilities for anything?

unholycode76: Nothing will change until we all, as citizens, have the balls to march into the Capitol and White House and retake them. These crimes are a result of our own complacency.

REVOLUTION

OMG RON PAUL FTW!!11!!

CanisNoir: Occam's Chainsaw: Donald_McRonald: I'm going to wager we'll never have to worry about finding out.

Heh, no doubt, but it's a fun thought exercise. Until every Bush admin muckety muck is in the ground, I'm going to rail for trials which conclude at the end of a rope.


Man, get a grip on the Bush Hatred; it's bad for the soul, and I'd be willing to bet that they've done nothing that warrents a "Death Sentance".

/Though it is kind of funny to see all the Democrats who now support the Death Penalty. (but only if it pertains to Bush and his supporters)

First mistake: you think it's Bush I want to see swinging.
Second mistake: you think I'm a Democrat.
Third mistake: you think I wasn't a death penalty supporter in 1999.

/Fourth mistake: you didn't close your tags. ^_^

unholycode76: Nothing will change until we all, as citizens, have the balls to march into the Capitol and White House and retake them. These crimes are a result of our own complacency.

REVOLUTION

Umm, no. Bush remained in power largely due to the mid-west. They believed Bush over and over and over that brown people are coming to rape their women and kill their men. And, they STILL believe it. Despite knowing that Bush misled everyone about Iraq, a large percentage of ppl (mainly in the mid-west, and south) believe the Saddam was responsible for 9/11. They also think Obama is a secret Muslim who will give the keys to the White House to Iran if elected.

How do you educate these people? No matter what you tell them, their inbred minds will not understand that Bush is the evil one...

The First: Churchill2004: I imagine it will break some time around Jan. 19, when we get to see the flood of pardons.

Funny how American's get their blood boiling over illegal immigrants, stem cell research, gay marriages, and other nonsensical issues yet tolerate this administration for their lack of respect to the Constitution.

Has anyone ever in this administration taken any responsibilities for anything?

What are these "Lack of respect for the constitution" that you speak of? I mean, the way you talk, we should have strung up Lincoln and FDR as well, or is it that you just have something special against Bush?

/2000 Election is a long time gone, and 2004 proved it wasn't stolen, time to get over it, take a step back and look at things through the prism of reality.

Occam's Chainsaw:
First mistake: you think it's Bush I want to see swinging.
Second mistake: you think I'm a Democrat.
Third mistake: you think I wasn't a death penalty supporter in 1999.

/Fourth mistake: you didn't close your tags. ^_^

Fifth Mistake: I didn't friggin preview :)

I know you're not a dem, we've agreed and disagreed in the past, I was kinda using you to poke at First and Redsox though. Not to mention all of the vitriol you see from the left (Who by and large are "against" the death penalty) regarding the lives of Bush Admin people.

I just think too many people are buying the Rhetoric, Bush hasn't done anything that didn't have precidence set in past wars and in fact he's gone out of his way to make it better than previous presidents, yet all of a sudden he's "Shredding the Constitution" - I just don't get it.

/Had a crappy start to the day so I'm kinda snarky tonight too :P

CanisNoir: Fifth Mistake: I didn't friggin preview :)

I know you're not a dem, we've agreed and disagreed in the past, I was kinda using you to poke at First and Redsox though. Not to mention all of the vitriol you see from the left (Who by and large are "against" the death penalty) regarding the lives of Bush Admin people.

I just think too many people are buying the Rhetoric, Bush hasn't done anything that didn't have precidence set in past wars and in fact he's gone out of his way to make it better than previous presidents, yet all of a sudden he's "Shredding the Constitution" - I just don't get it.

/Had a crappy start to the day so I'm kinda snarky tonight too :P

But again, we're no longer in a war. We won. Two of 'em, in fact. We just really, really, really suck at peace. And no, wars on ideas don't count as "ongoing wars", otherwise Carter was a wartime president.

CanisNoir: What are these "Lack of respect for the constitution" that you speak of? I mean, the way you talk, we should have strung up Lincoln and FDR as well, or is it that you just have something special against Bush?

/2000 Election is a long time gone, and 2004 proved it wasn't stolen, time to get over it, take a step back and look at things through the prism of reality.

Correction, BOTH 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen, but that's a different story all together.

As far as the "lack of respect for the constitution", you mean other then the fact that Bush calls Constitution 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper' (new window)?? Illegal wiretaps, ring a bell?

The First: CanisNoir: What are these "Lack of respect for the constitution" that you speak of? I mean, the way you talk, we should have strung up Lincoln and FDR as well, or is it that you just have something special against Bush?

/2000 Election is a long time gone, and 2004 proved it wasn't stolen, time to get over it, take a step back and look at things through the prism of reality.

Correction, BOTH 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen, but that's a different story all together.

As far as the "lack of respect for the constitution", you mean other then the fact that Bush calls Constitution 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper' (new window)?? Illegal wiretaps, ring a bell?

Kind of like how Democrats say that it's a "Living Document meant to change over time"?

Sounds like neither have respect for it.

Oh, and Canis: Past misbehavior by presidents in no way excuses current misbehavior.

CanisNoir: Kind of like how Democrats say that it's a "Living Document meant to change over time"?

Sounds like neither have respect for it.

Bingo! You're learning.

The First: unholycode76: Nothing will change until we all, as citizens, have the balls to march into the Capitol and White House and retake them. These crimes are a result of our own complacency.

REVOLUTION

Umm, no. Bush remained in power largely due to the mid-west. They believed Bush over and over and over that brown people are coming to rape their women and kill their men. And, they STILL believe it. Despite knowing that Bush misled everyone about Iraq, a large percentage of ppl (mainly in the mid-west, and south) believe the Saddam was responsible for 9/11. They also think Obama is a secret Muslim who will give the keys to the White House to Iran if elected.

How do you educate these people? No matter what you tell them, their inbred minds will not understand that Bush is the evil one...

This was sort of my point. I meant nothing will change until we have the balls, and I'll add brains, to retake our own government (by the people, for the people). I didn't say it was likely to happen. That's why I prefer to sit on the sidelines and enjoy the show as the whole thing comes crashing down. Kinda like the last scene from Fight Club.

CanisNoir: Kind of like how Democrats say that it's a "Living Document meant to change over time"?

Sounds like neither have respect for it.


Yes, but find one Democrat, or another republican, who actually said the Constitution was a goddamned piece of paper.

Funny, if anyone else had said that everyone would be callign the person a traitor or labeling them a terrorist. But Bush can say it, and we are supposed to ignore it, right?

Occam's Chainsaw: But again, we're no longer in a war. We won. Two of 'em, in fact. We just really, really, really suck at peace. And no, wars on ideas don't count as "ongoing wars", otherwise Carter was a wartime president.

That my friend is the true sticking point and I blame that more on the many presidents of the past since WWII who changed our Foriegn policy to include Military Power as a form of Diplomacy, not Bush.

It's not that we suck at Peace, it's that we didn't properly classify this action as a Gosh Darn WAR. So yea, technically it's a police action but I'd hardly call the past two years in Iraq "Peace". (Though we are starting to win).

To be honest, FISA is the one thing that bothers me, but Bush was neither the first nor (even if Obama is elected) will he be the last to use it.

Occam's Chainsaw: Oh, and Canis: Past misbehavior by presidents in no way excuses current misbehavior.

Not an excuse, but when some are lauded as Heroes while others are lined up for the firing squad, one must wonder; what's up with the double standard?

The First: CanisNoir: What are these "Lack of respect for the constitution" that you speak of? I mean, the way you talk, we should have strung up Lincoln and FDR as well, or is it that you just have something special against Bush?

/2000 Election is a long time gone, and 2004 proved it wasn't stolen, time to get over it, take a step back and look at things through the prism of reality.

Correction, BOTH 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen, but that's a different story all together.

As far as the "lack of respect for the constitution", you mean other then the fact that Bush calls Constitution 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper' (new window)?? Illegal wiretaps, ring a bell?

Does Lincoln suspending Habeas Corpus ring a bell?

Occam's Chainsaw: And no, wars on ideas don't count as "ongoing wars".



OBEY

unholycode76: This was sort of my point. I meant nothing will change until we have the balls, and I'll add brains, to retake our own government (by the people, for the people). I didn't say it was likely to happen. That's why I prefer to sit on the sidelines and enjoy the show as the whole thing comes crashing down. Kinda like the last scene from Fight Club.

I'd sit back and watch and see what happens until the Nov elections. If McCain wins, then we pretty much have another 4 years of Bush on our hands (and economy).

You're right, the ONLY way we can get the government back before the disease known as Bush/Cheney came along is for more and more people demand real change from our elected officials. And, only in an election year do we as voters have any real power.

CanisNoir: The First: Churchill2004: I imagine it will break some time around Jan. 19, when we get to see the flood of pardons.

Funny how American's get their blood boiling over illegal immigrants, stem cell research, gay marriages, and other nonsensical issues yet tolerate this administration for their lack of respect to the Constitution.

Has anyone ever in this administration taken any responsibilities for anything?

What are these "Lack of respect for the constitution" that you speak of? I mean, the way you talk, we should have strung up Lincoln and FDR as well, or is it that you just have something special against Bush?

/2000 Election is a long time gone, and 2004 proved it wasn't stolen, time to get over it, take a step back and look at things through the prism of reality.

You're right. I see it all so clearly, now. When Bush ordered the telecom companies to provide wiretaps for intelligence agencies on calls with even one person in the US, it wasn't a violation of the 4th Amendment! It was a necessary action to protect our freedom...before 9/11. When Bush ordered a resident of Peoria, IL detained without habeas corpus, that wasn't a violation of the 5th and 6th Amendments. I simply misread the Constitution and the hundreds of years of case law. When Bush consistently pulls "Executive Privilege" as an excuse to keep his minions agents from testifying, it in no way infringes on the balance of powers. He is simply trying to keep Congress from infringing on his power to do whatever the fark he wants!

You're right, simply viewing these actions through the lens of reality, it all is perfectly reasonable and, more importantly, Constitutional.

The First: CanisNoir: Kind of like how Democrats say that it's a "Living Document meant to change over time"?

Sounds like neither have respect for it.


Yes, but find one Democrat, or another republican, who actually said the Constitution was a goddamned piece of paper.

Funny, if anyone else had said that everyone would be callign the person a traitor or labeling them a terrorist. But Bush can say it, and we are supposed to ignore it, right?

Well given Bush's reputation for sterling use of the English Language when speaking; I'm guessing he meant pretty much the same thing as the Democrats who called it a Living Document meant to change.

CanisNoir:
That my friend is the true sticking point and I blame that more on the many presidents of the past since WWII who changed our Foriegn policy to include Military Power as a form of Diplomacy, not Bush.

It's not that we suck at Peace, it's that we didn't properly classify this action as a Gosh Darn WAR. So yea, technically it's a police action but I'd hardly call the past two years in Iraq "Peace". (Though we are starting to win).

To be honest, FISA is the one thing that bothers me, but Bush was neither the first nor (even if Obama is elected) will he be the last to use it.

We've done this dance before and I don't feel like waltzing tonight. It can't be classified as a war. Period. You go to war with an entity which controls a nation-state. So unless you're proposing we go to war with the current governments of Iraq or Afghanistan, war's been over since we toppled the previous regimes and installed new governments.

CanisNoir: Well given Bush's reputation for sterling use of the English Language when speaking; I'm guessing he meant pretty much the same thing as the Democrats who called it a Living Document meant to change.

You really can't distinguish between a living document and a goddamn piece of paper?

A goddamn piece of paper, you can shred and throw away.
Living document meant to change, you can update it so it can be true to today's time.

Really, don't see the difference b/w the two statements?

mcwebe0:
You're right. I see it all so clearly, now. When Bush ordered the telecom companies to provide wiretaps for intelligence agencies on calls with even one person in the US, it wasn't a violation of the 4th Amendment! It was a necessary action to protect our freedom...before 9/11. When Bush ordered a resident of Peoria, IL detained without habeas corpus, that wasn't a violation of the 5th and 6th Amendments. I simply misread the Constitution and the hundreds of years of case law. When Bush consistently pulls "Executive Privilege" as an excuse to keep his minions agents from testifying, it in no way infringes on the balance of powers. He is simply trying to keep Congress from infringing on his power to do whatever the fark he wants!

You're right, simply viewing these actions through the lens of reality, it all is perfectly reasonable and, more importantly, Constitutional.

I think you're missing my point; Occam got it kind of. Those things you mentioned are drops in the bucket compared to the Precidence with which he acted. Hell Clinton had a mans wife shot in the back while holding his kid, simply for having too many guns. Wild speculation about the Vince Foster, Travelgate, White Water. Sure those are all ...but...but...Clinton, but you realize that it makes you guys screaming about Bush look like little kids trying to get revenge for Clinton Derrangement Syndrome.

And I thought you were supposed to have the Moral High Ground, but really all I see is SSDD from the Dems.