Pelosi Lies and Her Trip Is A Dud

[no1tovote4]

plus the fact that he actually paid attention to security memos and Richard Clarke...

No, he didn't. What he did was allow Clarke into meetings and do nothing at all with Clarke's suggestions. Bush took office and in less than 8 months had begun to implement them in actuality. What Clinton believed he had no time for, even though he got it two years before the end of his term, and would leave to the next admin was at the last stages before implementation and the last meeting with those in charge was set for 9/12 of all days.

Now he did pay attention to security memos, but not particularly to Clarke.

Clarke made it clear that access was what he prized most as he threw a snit because he was removed from the meetings. The Administration was actually implementing his ideas....

 

[Annie]

No, he didn't. What he did was allow Clarke into meetings and do nothing at all with Clarke's suggestions. Bush took office and in less than 8 months had begun to implement them in actuality. What Clinton believed he had no time for, even though he got it two years before the end of his term, and would leave to the next admin was at the last stages before implementation and the last meeting with those in charge was set for 9/12 of all days.

Now he did pay attention to security memos, but not particularly to Clarke.

Clarke made it clear that access was what he prized most as he threw a snit because he was removed from the meetings. The Administration was actually implementing his ideas....

Excellent synopsis, but I must 'spread it around.'

 

[wiggles]

No, he didn't. What he did was allow Clarke into meetings and do nothing at all with Clarke's suggestions. Bush took office and in less than 8 months had begun to implement them in actuality. What Clinton believed he had no time for, even though he got it two years before the end of his term, and would leave to the next admin was at the last stages before implementation and the last meeting with those in charge was set for 9/12 of all days.

Now he did pay attention to security memos, but not particularly to Clarke.

Clarke made it clear that access was what he prized most as he threw a snit because he was removed from the meetings. The Administration was actually implementing his ideas....

That must be why Clarke resigned and wrote a book documenting how the Bush II administration was more frustrating to his efforts than any other administration he'd ever served.

 

[wiggles]

but I must 'spread it around.'

miraculously i conceal my astonishment

 

[Annie]

miraculously i conceal my astonishment

You've never understood me.

 

[Gunny]

Where do you get his stuff? Is it pulled directly from that vaccuum between your ears? Or do you have SOME link to a credible source on the matter? Never mind, that last was a purely rhetorical question.

If anyone has been usurping power, it has been the Bush administration. They have been babbling about the notion of a "unitary executive" from they occupied the White House some six years ago. This concept is, of course completely unconstitutional, and a threat to the Republic.

I beg to differ.

The US Constitution, Article II, Section 3, Clause 3 establishes the role of the President in regard to receiving foreign visitors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article...tion#_not e-0

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304 (1936) is the legal precedent/ruling set forth by the US Supreme Court:


Quote:
The Court reasoned that, while the Constitution may not explicitly say that all ability to conduct foreign policy on behalf of the nation is vested in the President, such power is nonetheless granted implicitly. Moreover, said the Court, the Executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way which Congress cannot and should not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...ht_Export_Corp.

It states simply that the US Constitution implicitly grants to the President the ability to conduct foreign policy -- not "negotiate" -- on behalf of the Nation.

It further states that the Executive branch, not the legislative branch is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way Congress cannot and should not.

Pelosi was CLEARLY out of bounds for Congress based on the Constitution and following legal ruling made by SCOTUS. Felony? I don't see it, but definitely an attempt to usurp the powers of the chief executive.

 

[no1tovote4]

That must be why Clarke resigned and wrote a book documenting how the Bush II administration was more frustrating to his efforts than any other administration he'd ever served.

Yes, that is why. It was because he was no longer allowed in those top-level meetings.

I find it fascinating that people who only pay attention to the negatives of the "other" side can simply ignore these facts.

1. The Bush admin had actually begun the implementation of Clarke's ideas and had done it in less than 8 months. What Clinton got two years before and said he had no time to implement and left for the new administration...

2. That Clinton allowed Clarke into the top-level meetings.

3. That as soon as Clarke saw he wasn't going to be allowed to continue in those top-level meetings he resigned.

4. Then he wrote his book.

It seems very clear to me that what he thought was important was his access. Clinton did nothing on his ideas for two years, said it would take too long. Bush dug right in and started implementing them, but got the dirty end of his ire-stick because he didn't allow him the high-level access he thought he deserved.

Clarke was simply a broker of appearance. He made it clear to me and to others with open eyes that he wasn't in it for the good of the nation. He was in it because he wanted to appear powerful.

 

[maineman]

that's kind of revisionist, isn't it? Clinton was, by all accounts, somewhat bored with terrorism and was focused on starwars.

It was the topic of the speech that condi was going to give on 9/11.

Asscroft did cut $52M from the antiterror DoJ task force the day before 9/11....clearly the AG was more concerned with porn than terror

 

[Louie]

gotta make sure lady justice is good and covered, can't have any stone boobs showing now!! tsk tsk!

 

[no1tovote4]

that's kind of revisionist, isn't it? Clinton was, by all accounts, somewhat bored with terrorism and was focused on starwars.

It was the topic of the speech that condi was going to give on 9/11.

Asscroft did cut $52M from the antiterror DoJ task force the day before 9/11....clearly the AG was more concerned with porn than terror

I agree with this as well. However I was speaking of Clarke specifically. Notice in my posts I agreed that Clinton paid attention to the Intel reports? I'm not "out to ignore" faults on what you perceive to be "my side". I will, however, continue to point out facts that are very clear. Such as the fact that Clarke's ideas were being implemented at the same time he had quit and was writing his hissy-fit that people keep attempting to use to bash Bush with.

 

[no1tovote4]

gotta make sure lady justice is good and covered, can't have any stone boobs showing now!! tsk tsk!

One of the funniest things I had seen in a long, long time. I still laugh every time I think of somebody getting upset about the bare breast of Justice!

 

[red states rule]

RSR cannot give Clinton credit for anything, he is not programmed that way.

I give credit where credit is do

Clinton was a serial lier, a sexual predator, possible rapist, perjurer, great actor in front of the cameras, and could start crying on que (ron brown funeral)

other then that - not a bad guy

 

[Gunny]

I give credit where credit is do

Clinton was a serial lier, a sexual predator, possible rapist, perjurer, great actor in front of the cameras, and could start crying on que (ron brown funeral)

other then that - not a bad guy

 

[red states rule]

you disagree wth any of his specialties?

 

[Gunny]

you disagree wth any of his specialties?

I pretty-much disagree with your ultra-partisan, completely one-sided POV on most things. This one too.

 

[red states rule]

I pretty-much disagree with your ultra-partisan, completely one-sided POV on most things. This one too.

So what character trait I listed about Bill was not accurate?

 

[Gunny]

So what character trait I listed about Bill was not accurate?

The thread is about Pelosi's trip. This is my argument and references. Refute it if you can. There's ALREADY a Bill CLinton thread.

I

beg to differ.

The US Constitution, Article II, Section 3, Clause 3 establishes the role of the President in regard to receiving foreign visitors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article...tion#_not e-0

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304 (1936) is the legal precedent/ruling set forth by the US Supreme Court:


Quote:
The Court reasoned that, while the Constitution may not explicitly say that all ability to conduct foreign policy on behalf of the nation is vested in the President, such power is nonetheless granted implicitly. Moreover, said the Court, the Executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way which Congress cannot and should not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...ht_Export_Corp.

It states simply that the US Constitution implicitly grants to the President the ability to conduct foreign policy -- not "negotiate" -- on behalf of the Nation.

It further states that the Executive branch, not the legislative branch is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way Congress cannot and should not.

Pelosi was CLEARLY out of bounds for Congress based on the Constitution and following legal ruling made by SCOTUS. Felony? I don't see it, but definitely an attempt to usurp the powers of the chief executive.

 

[red states rule]

Um, I did not change the subject, and I was responding to someone elses post

 

[manu1959]

The thread is about Pelosi's trip. This is my argument and references. Refute it if you can. There's ALREADY a Bill CLinton thread.

I

she was on a fact finding mission...she wasn't negotiating....are you saying what newt did was a crime then as well.....*pokey stick smilie thing*

 

[Annie]

she was on a fact finding mission...she wasn't negotiating....are you saying what newt did was a crime then as well.....*pokey stick smilie thing*

Are you insinuating someone might have been poking rsr for reasons not quite on target, but he's a good scapegoat? Could it be?