Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
When Cheney ought to be tried on corruption and war crimes charges?
You do realize that Mr Obama is the first person ever elected to the Presidency by criticizing and campaigning against a person that wasn't even running for the office, don't you?
Cheney refused a Federal Subpoena to testify before congress. He is in contempt, as we speak, never punished, which makes him a fugative from justice. The fact that no one had the balls to punish him doesn't erase the crime.
Well, didn't you just make a leap of judgment about me (and others)?When Cheney ought to be tried on corruption and war crimes charges?
You do realize that Mr Obama is the first person ever elected to the Presidency by criticizing and campaigning against a person that wasn't even running for the office, don't you?
Do you realize that you voted for the mental midget twice, which enabled Obama to be elected. You want to blame someone for Obama, look in the mirror.
Next time you complain about Cheney speaking his mind, look up at the flag. This is America. Dont like it? You know where the door is!
Cheney refused a Federal Subpoena to testify before congress. He is in contempt, as we speak, never punished, which makes him a fugative from justice. The fact that no one had the balls to punish him doesn't erase the crime.
Except that he claimed executive immunity; which, means he was not in contempt.
Not to mention that if he was, Congress can subpoena, but it has no judicial authority.
Besides, Congress is in contempt of the Constitution and the citizens of the US on a daily basis. They aren't in jail.
Cheney refused a Federal Subpoena to testify before congress. He is in contempt, as we speak, never punished, which makes him a fugative from justice. The fact that no one had the balls to punish him doesn't erase the crime.
Except that he claimed executive immunity; which, means he was not in contempt.
Not to mention that if he was, Congress can subpoena, but it has no judicial authority.
Besides, Congress is in contempt of the Constitution and the citizens of the US on a daily basis. They aren't in jail.
I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.
By your logic, and Cheney's, impeachent is now avoidable by claiming a non existant immunity. There is no such immunity. Well.....there shouldn't be. I'm just waiting for the next democrat to use this wonder of expanded executive power and then we'll talk again. maybe Obama will be summoned for impeachment and claim immunity from subpoena.
And it is the Justice Department who has the responsibilty to enforce these subpoenas. To claim that congress is void of the authority to enforce subpoenas is ridiculous. I guess you and I don't have to show either if we get one ? Being they can't do anything about it ? I would love to see you try.
The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns.
Executive privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.
But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.
Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.
At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.
You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.
But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.
Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.
At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.
you are expecting it, eh?
You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.
But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.
Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.
At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.
you are expecting it, eh?
LOLYou are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.
But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.
Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.
At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.
you are expecting it, eh?
Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.
Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.
Peethepants...you're a funny guy...entertaining....
Sip on a glass or two of Koolade and come back with your best shot...then we'll all see if we can guess your IQ....
We'll pick a # between 60 and 90...that should cover it....
LOL
you are expecting it, eh?
Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.
Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.
wow
there was no precedent set
you are delusional now
You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.
But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.
Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.
At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.
I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.
You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.
But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.
Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.
At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.
you are expecting it, eh?
Absolutely. Happens quite a lot. The only difference is that this is the first time there have been such a number of subpoenas completely ignored. Some of these subpoenas were made to people who were no longer in the government, private citizens, bestowed executive priviledge.
Rest assured. The republicans will regret this precedent.
You are correct Gunny. Clinton was compelled by a special prosecutor, under subpoena. I guess that is the way around the problem of congress having no jail house to put Cheney's sorry ass in.
But I don't see where the justice department is not responsible to enforce congrssional subpoena. The duty falls upon the US Attorney General to file for contempt, head of the Justice Department. This is where it becomes political where rule of law should hold true.
Also, the weight of history falls upon the executive branch capitulating to congressional subpoenas.
At any rate, I won't forget this conversation when it's a member of this administration under subpoena.
The duty falls on the AG of the District of Columbia, who has little power outside his jurisdiction, as my second link above states.
Congress's recourse is to obtain counsel and take it to court, as my second link above also states.
The weight of history falls on the side of the executive branch tossing a few crumbs Congress's way to mollify their ruffled feathers.
While you aren't forgetting, don't forget that it would depend on what Congress wanted; which, is a horse of a different color than a special investigator appointed by the AG of the US. Let's don't mix apples and oranges here.
And just to respond your little implication in your last statement, I don't and have never liked Darth Cheney. In response to your Clinton comments, I did not support going after him. Might want to toss those two facts into your assumption machine where I am concerned and see where they come out.
I have heard this claim Gunny and it's bunk. Let me tell you why. Remember when Clinton was impeached ? Know how he was summoned before congress ? That's right, he was subpoenaed.
Are you honestly suggesting that abusing authority to get blow jobs is somehow privileged information and national security information isnt? What is the separation of powers issue in purjury/blow jobs?