Bush Will Address the Nation at 5:45pm

[CSM]

if they did nothing wrong, then they did nothing wrong.... no jesting involved at all.... lawyers cannot turn innocence into guilt. If what Rove, Gonzales, Miers and Bush did was completely above board and totally within the scope of their prerogatives, then they have nothing to hide. If you believe that the President and his attorney general can fire US attorneys for no other reason than they don't fall in line lock step with the administration's political philosophy, then what is there to worry about?

Hmmm ... I guess it boils down to who's interpretation of Constitutional powers is correct. It seems to me that once those are blurred by any branch of government then this nation will indeed fall. It is my opinion that if Congress does indeed restrict the Constitutionally granted powers of the Executive or vice versa, then this country will fall into anarchy.

 

[maineman]

Hmmm ... I guess it boils down to who's interpretation of Constitutional powers is correct. It seems to me that once those are blurred by any branch of government then this nation will indeed fall. It is my opinion that if Congress does indeed restrict the Constitutionally granted powers of the Executive or vice versa, then this country will fall into anarchy.

and no doubt the court will be asked to adjudicate...which is how the system works

 

[T-Bor]

How about Evil Do-ers... Or Weapons of Mass Destruction...

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2966979

Take a drink every time he says "support," "mistakes," "brave," and "terror."

I assume that's EST, so check in about an hour.

 

[T-Bor]

Its like busting a crack addict on street with no drugs..Even though he may not have had drugs at the time you busted him..you know he has done something wrong at some point and that society would be better off without them. You know these guys are guilty of something. They are getting what they deserve...they are all shady crooks. This is what happens when you are a bad person, you eventually get caught for something and all the chips wont fall your way at some point. Thats what happens when you dont walk a straight line. I dont have an ounce of sympathy for any of em.

I agree, Scooter Libby is the perfect example. The Damnocrats have nothing on the Republicans, so they question them under oathe multiple times until their memories fail, and then they get them for perjury.

It's complete bullshit.

 

[glockmail]

Its like busting a crack addict on street with no drugs..Even though he may not have had drugs at the time you busted him..you know he has done something wrong at some point and that society would be better off without them. You know these guys are guilty of something. They are getting what they deserve...they are all shady crooks. This is what happens when you are a bad person, you eventually get caught for something and all the chips wont fall your way at some point. Thats what happens when you dont walk a straight line. I dont have an ounce of sympathy for any of em.

The verdict proves that Libby was guilty of nothing except having an imperfect memory. Under that standard, all of the other witnesses in the trial should be jailed as well.

The facts really suck for you, don't they?

 

[mattskramer]

The verdict proves that Libby was guilty of nothing except having an imperfect memory. Under that standard, all of the other witnesses in the trial should be jailed as well.

The facts really suck for you, don't they?

Have you ever heard of the answers “I don’t know”, “I forgot”, or “I am not certain”? If he had a faulty (selective) memory, he could have said so. I agree that much of this is politics. The Democrats seem to be grasping at straws but it reminds me of when the Republicans were hounding Clinton to hurry up and answer questions. In either case, if you (Democrat or Republican) have noting to hide, you should speak up and answer the questions. Isn’t that right, Dirt McGirt?

 

[glockmail]

Have you ever heard of the answers “I don’t know”, “I forgot”, or “I am not certain”? If he had a faulty (selective) memory, he could have said so. I agree that much of this is politics. The Democrats seem to be grasping at straws but it reminds me of when the Republicans were hounding Clinton to hurry up and answer questions. In either case, if you (Democrat or Republican) have noting to hide, you should speak up and answer the questions. Isn’t that right, Dirt McGirt?

A faulty memory means that sometimes you don't realize what you've forgotten. No one should have to answer questions when there is no evidence of guilt. That's a basic part of our system.

 

[mattskramer]

A faulty memory means that sometimes you don't realize what you've forgotten. No one should have to answer questions when there is no evidence of guilt. That's a basic part of our system.

Whatever. The bottom line is that when you are asked a question, you are to answer a question. If you do not what to answer the question, then you say, “I won’t answer the question”. If know the answer to the question, then you answer the question. If you do not know the answer to the question, then you say that you do not know the answer. It is as simple as that. How much more difficult can it be?

 

[glockmail]

Whatever. The bottom line is that when you are asked a question, you are to answer a question. If you do not what to answer the question, then you say, “I won’t answer the question”. If know the answer to the question, then you answer the question. If you do not know the answer to the question, then you say that you do not know the answer. It is as simple as that. How much more difficult can it be?

Again, sometimes you don't realize what you've forgotten. Its that simple. Really.

 

[GeeWhiz]

Speaking of faulty memory it seems Bush is now inflicted by it.

There is an 18 day gap in the emails handed over to the investigators. Tony Snow was unable to give a reason for this gap but he's pretty sure there must be a good reason why there is a gap.

It appears that Bush was brought into the decision to fire the prosectuors on political ground for instance they aren't loyal to him and Bush is doing the Libby which is selective memory loss, convenient memory loss.

Bush did it with his AWOL period. There is a gap in his military record. He seems to have disappeared when he was ordered to show up at Arkansas. Nobody ever saw him and guess what Bush did the Libby he doesn't remember what happened back then.

But everyone and I mean everyone remembers Clinton's BJ and that was how many years ago?

 

[Annie]

Speaking of faulty memory it seems Bush is now inflicted by it.

There is an 18 day gap in the emails handed over to the investigators. Tony Snow was unable to give a reason for this gap but he's pretty sure there must be a good reason why there is a gap.

It appears that Bush was brought into the decision to fire the prosectuors on political ground for instance they aren't loyal to him and Bush is doing the Libby which is selective memory loss, convenient memory loss.

Bush did it with his AWOL period. There is a gap in his military record. He seems to have disappeared when he was ordered to show up at Arkansas. Nobody ever saw him and guess what Bush did the Libby he doesn't remember what happened back then.

But everyone and I mean everyone remembers Clinton's BJ and that was how many years ago?

Does he need to 'provide' a reason? I don't think so. They serve at the pleasure of the president.

 

[boedicca]

I have far less sympathy for eight prosecutors who can now make big bucks in private practice than I had for travel office clerks who were summarily dismissed by the Clintons and then falsely accused of crimes.

 

[Bern80]

It absolutley baffles me, not just with this administration, but past ones and all of politics; why do the things that people don't want us to know about always wind up being written on paper? You'd think if one was trying to keep something secret, making a hard copy of it would be kinda stupid.

 

[glockmail]

I have far less sympathy for eight prosecutors who can now make big bucks in private practice than I had for travel office clerks who were summarily dismissed by the Clintons and then falsely accused of crimes.

That's way to inconvenient for the Democrat smear machine.

 

[glockmail]

It absolutley baffles me, not just with this administration, but past ones and all of politics; why do the things that people don't want us to know about always wind up being written on paper? You'd think if one was trying to keep something secret, making a hard copy of it would be kinda stupid.

emails. We live in an electronic age where everything is recorded.

I'm reminded of that commercial: "what have you been living under a rock or something?"

 

[GeeWhiz]

Does he need to 'provide' a reason? I don't think so. They serve at the pleasure of the president.

Incorrect. The Preamble of the United States Constitution is quite clear that the government has been instituted to serve the People of The United States.

All three branches are to serve the People of the United States. The Department of Justice is to be an apolitical dept and it is the duty of Congress to investigate and with powers of oversight make any correction deemed necessary. They did this when they took away the Executive Branch's power to replace prosecutors without Senate confirmation.

You are incorrect in that nothing is written in stone. For instance if the President dismissed someone based on race, creed and religion or disablility the President cannot hide behind the, "They serve at the pleasure of the president" as you claim. The President can be guilty of discrimination. The President is not above the law.

The current investigation of which Bush is running from is an investigation to remedy a serious problem Bush created. A problem that taints and pollutes the DOJ that was once a dept that the people can trust but can no longer trust in it due to the corruption of Bush.

One email even state "loyal Bushies" whatever happened to "loyal Americans"?

Are loyal Americans no longer suitable for Bush? Based on what is unfolding it would appear that way.

We want to find out how he tainted and polluted the DOJ.

 

[jasendorf]

Hmmm ... I guess it boils down to who's interpretation of Constitutional powers is correct. It seems to me that once those are blurred by any branch of government then this nation will indeed fall. It is my opinion that if Congress does indeed restrict the Constitutionally granted powers of the Executive or vice versa, then this country will fall into anarchy.

The only problem with your assertion is that the Constitution expressly states that Congress will advise and consent on all executive appointees and that they can only delegate that power through their own will. The Republican congress chose to turn the Presidency into a Kingship when it started giving away those powers in the Patriot Act. The Democratic Congress has decided that the Constitution got it right in the first place and took those powers back.

 

[Annie]

Incorrect. The Preamble of the United States Constitution is quite clear that the government has been instituted to serve the People of The United States.

All three branches are to serve the People of the United States. The Department of Justice is to be an apolitical dept and it is the duty of Congress to investigate and with powers of oversight make any correction deemed necessary. They did this when they took away the Executive Branch's power to replace prosecutors without Senate confirmation.

You are incorrect in that nothing is written in stone. For instance if the President dismissed someone based on race, creed and religion or disablility the President cannot hide behind the, "They serve at the pleasure of the president" as you claim.

The current investigation of which Bush is running from with his tail between his leg is an investigation to remedy a serious problem Bush created a problem that taints and rots the integrity of the DOJ that was once a dept that the people can trust but can no longer trust in it due to the corruption of Bush.

One email even state "loyal Bushies" whatever happened to "loyal Americans"?

Are loyal Americans no longer suitable for Bush? The answer is it would appear that way.

It's funny that loyal Bushies are the ones that scream if you have nothing to hide when Bush committed illegal wiretappings know Bush wants to hide by having his top aides testify in secrecy, not under oath and no transcript.

We want to find out how he tainted and polluted the DOJ.

The bolded part is all you've got. since he hired them, that type of discrimination would be pretty hard to argue, but go ahead.

Methinks some of the moonbats need anger management, as you have definately gone off the deep end over GW.

 

[jasendorf]

Does he need to 'provide' a reason? I don't think so. They serve at the pleasure of the president.

He needs to provide one to me since I'm his and their employer. He's not a King even though you'd rather have it that way.

 

[jasendorf]

The bolded part is all you've got. since he hired them, that type of discrimination would be pretty hard to argue, but go ahead.

Methinks some of the moonbats need anger management, as you have definately gone off the deep end over GW.

If we'd gone off the deep end the Administration would be running to go testify under oath to clear their good name. But, instead they're trying to hide. Only the guilty try to hide this hard.