Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditAfter putting up with months of stonewalling by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their aides, the Senate Judiciary Committee has issued subpoenas seeking information about internal debates regarding the legality of warrantless wiretapping programs that were promoted by the vice president and authorized by the president.
Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy today issued subpoenas to the White House and, in particular, to Cheney's office demanding documents relating to the National Security Agency's spying program.
The fact that a primary target of the subpoenas is Cheney's office confirms that the focus of the committee's investigation of White House collaboration with embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has expanded to include a sharp focus on the role that the vice president played in promoting lawless actions and in pressuring others in the administration to go along with him.
Subpoenas have also been dispatched to the Justice Department and the National Security Council.
All must be answered by July 18, according to Leahy, who wrote in the cover letters for the subpoenas, "Our attempts to obtain information through testimony of administration witnesses have been met with a consistent pattern of evasion and misdirection. There is no legitimate argument for withholding the requested materials from this committee."
If Cheney's office and the other targeted agencies do not comply by the 18th, Leahy can take the matter to the courts -- provoking a conflict like that seen when the Nixon administration when it refused to comply in the 1970s with Congressional investigators of the Watergate scandal.
By expanding the Gonzales inquiry to include consideration of the warrantless wiretapping program, Leahy has brought to a head a simmering conflict between the executive and legislative branches that is more than a year old.
Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, who last year proposed censuring President Bush for authorizing the illegal spying program, hailed the move.
"It has been more than a year and a half since it was first disclosed that the President authorized an illegal warrantless wiretapping program," he said. "After a year and a half of stonewalling by the Administration, the Judiciary Committee is finally taking appropriate action by issuing subpoenas for information that will tell us how and why high-ranking officials authorized this illegal program."
Specifically, the Judiciary Committee is seeking information about when high-ranking members of the administration were made aware of the fact that even their own appointees and allies believed the warrantless wiretapping program was in conflict both with specific laws and privacy protections outlined in the Constitution.
The decision to issue the subpoenas has bipartisan support, as the committee voted 13-3 to authorize Leahy to dispatch them. The ranking Republican on the committee, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, has consistently sided with Leahy on this issue.
"The bipartisan support for issuing these subpoenas demonstrates that both Democrats and Republicans are fed up with the misleading statements from the Attorney General and the Administration about this illegal program," explained Feingold, who chairs the Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on the Constitution.
And the committee has a good sense of what it wants. The authoritative Center on Democracy & Technology has prepared a list of the seven "most wanted surveillance documents."
They include:
1. Memorandum prepared by former Deputy Attorney General James Comey which, according to Comey, was sent to the White House shortly after March 10, 2004. The memorandum followed a review of the classified surveillance program (to which Comey referred in his May 15, 2007 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee) and it apparently explained why the Department of Justice in 2004 would not certify the surveillance program as lawful.
2. Memorandum from Department of Justice former Assistant Attorney General Jack Goldsmith, who participated in the DOJ's review of the classified surveillance program. This memorandum was attached to the Comey memorandum and was prepared in the same time frame as that document.
3. Department of Justice Office of Intelligence Policy and Review legal memorandum discussing the classified surveillance program, and drafts of that document. The final document was probably prepared in early March, 2004.
4. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum prepared in early 2004 -- by Comey's account -- laying out OLC's legal concerns about the classified program.
5. Memorandum from then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales received by Comey shortly after March 10, 2004 that responded to the determination by the Department of Justice not to certify the lawfulness of the classified surveillance program.
6. January 10, 2007 orders of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorizing what the warrantless surveillance program the Administration calls the Terrorist Surveillance Program.
7. Court order applications related to the FISC authorization of the Terrorist Surveillance Program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Nichols's book The Rise and Rise of Richard B. Cheney: Unlocking the Mysteries of the Most Powerful Vice President in American History (The New Press) is available nationwide at independent bookstores and at www.amazon.com. Publisher's Weekly describes it as "a Fahrenheit 9/11 for Cheney" and Esquire magazine says it "reveals the inner Cheney." The London Review of Books says The Rise and Rise of Richard B. Cheney "makes a persuasive case…that the vice-presidency is the real locus of power in the current administration: Cheney runs the show."
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
Finally.
Btw, for our resident apologists that always bring Sandy Berger's convicted crimes into focus.....what ever happened to those RNC / Whitehouse computers where the e-mails about the Gonzalez political firings "couldn't be retreived"?
Posted by freedomplease at 06/27/2007 @ 2:21pm
I have no illusions about the chances of success in serving subpoenas on the White House.
Nonetheless, I do believe it needs to be done, and the burner needs to be cranked up. The more they stonewall, and disrespect our democratic process, the more likely our citizens are to realize that these people are odious criminals.
Posted by drhammer at 06/27/2007 @ 2:22pm
Posted by FREEDOMPLEASE 06/27/2007 @ 2:21pm
Come on, FP. It's bad enough that the nutters drag Berger into every other discussion.
Posted by drhammer at 06/27/2007 @ 2:24pm
Good luck with that, Senator Leahy....you'll need it.
Sure as shootin', they'll invoke "executive privledge" and it goes to the US Supreme Court...
where John Roberts, Sam Alito, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia and possibly Anthony Kennedy will decide whether it applies.
Posted by Mask at 06/27/2007 @ 2:31pm
Mask,
But Chenney doesn't WANT exectutive privelege!
Posted by freedomplease at 06/27/2007 @ 2:37pm
Posted by MASK 06/27/2007 @ 2:31pm
Seems all too likely, doesn't it?
The White House gets too piss all over us, because ultimately, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, will tell us it's raining.
Posted by drhammer at 06/27/2007 @ 2:39pm
The White House gets too piss all over us, because ultimately, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, will tell us it's raining.
Posted by DRHAMMER 06/27/2007 @ 2:39pm | ignore this person
That is damn funny!
Certainly funnier that the terminal cancer of King Cheney invoking executive privelege in the same week that he tells us he's not part of the executive branch!
Posted by freedomplease at 06/27/2007 @ 2:41pm
All this is prearranged political hoopla! The show must go on for the current cast of characters in DC! Very practical since the Dems can't come up with reasonable legislations that even a small minority of the GOP can support to override possible Bush vetos. Talk Radio predicted all of this, especially FRANK's favorite, the one "on loan from God"!
Posted by Happy at 06/27/2007 @ 5:33pm
Posted by HAPPY 06/27/2007 @ 5:33pm | ignore this person
you are deluded, thinking that this doesn't hurt the repubs. the bill for the repubs will come due the next election, I predict a disaster for the repubs.
Posted by johannesrolf at 06/27/2007 @ 5:52pm
I predict a disaster for the repubs.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 06/27/2007 @ 5:52pm
Has there ever been a time over your adult life when you didn't predict a disaster for the republicans?
Posted by antiliberal at 06/27/2007 @ 6:02pm
As they did with the Gonzalez subpoenas, the White House should tell the Congress to stick their subpoenas where the sun doesn't shine.
This move by the Dems has nothing to do with seeking truth and everything to do with partisan manuevering for power.
Posted by antiliberal at 06/27/2007 @ 6:04pm
...the bill for the repubs will come due the next election, I predict a disaster for the repubs.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 06/27/2007 @ 5:52pm
Let's not go that far out! What's your prediction for Congressional Approval in another month? Don't just say "more than 14%"!
Is it going to be 20%, 30%, 40%? And the hard part, on what basis? It can't be "What the Dems have been and are still doing"....think, put you New York hat on, the dusty one w/out the propellers!
Posted by Happy at 06/27/2007 @ 6:34pm
the appro ratings for congress includes repubs equally. the Tories here neglect to mention that.
Posted by johannesrolf at 06/27/2007 @ 6:40pm
The White House gets too piss all over us, because ultimately, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, will tell us it's raining.
Posted by DRHAMMER 06/27/2007 @ 2:39pm |
Yep.
BTW, FREE, standby for a semantical bizarrity.....Cheney won't claim HE has "executive privelege"...he'll claim what he SAYS or reports or writes have "executive privelege" because they get SENT to the Executive Branch.
Stupid?...Inane?...yep, and likely.
Posted by Mask at 06/27/2007 @ 8:31pm
the appro ratings for congress includes repubs equally.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 06/27/2007 @ 6:40pm
Duh! No sh*t! One key difference....that of expectations!
Few repubs expected much progress on our agendas....couldn't even make Bush's tax cuts permanent w/control of Congress...so, no surprise here or any self-identified repubs.
You think the Dem-controlled Congress have satisfied the `soft votes' that went your way in November? or Leadership qualities of globe-trotting Nancy & land-deal Harry have impressed? How much can you get out of the First 100 Hours?
Posted by Happy at 06/27/2007 @ 9:07pm
No reason to let you out just 'cuz you changed your name. Away you go. See ya.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 06/27/2007 @ 6:57pm | ignore this person
Like any ones day is ruined to be on Franks ignore list..
I would love to see the group show up to trestify and have it come out that the wiretaps used actusally prevented Leeky Leahy from being Allah Akbahred by some Isalmic nut....just to see the look on his face...priceless..
another witch hunt going on and we will see more and more an election nerars...can't have the electorate focus on the pesky anti Hillary feelings...
Posted by john maasch at 06/27/2007 @ 10:26pm
this will do some good for congress' approval ratings.
go get 'em boys.
Tell Leahy to go fuck himself on the floor of the Senate will ya you uncouth arrogant sht. . YEA! See what ya get!
I guess the VP is actually a power unto itself, unconfined by the constitution. Who would-a guessed it?
As Cheney is now a legislator, surely he must comply. The neo=cons can't even keep track of their machinations. They HAD to have the Watergate level travel office papers, but Cheney can do whateeevvvver he wants. I guess because everything he has been behind so far has been such a raging success.
Great war, Happy! When are you going to go do your share of the truck driving and winning of hearts and minds? "Conservative " used to mean one who desired a check on power of the guvt, guess that all went out the window with the poopy diapers after 9/11.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 10:27pm
I would love to see the group show up to trestify and have it come out that the wiretaps used actusally prevented Leeky Leahy from being Allah Akbahred by some Isalmic nut....just to see the look on his face...priceless..
do you think if they had that info, it would not have been "leaked" to friendly media? Have you forgotten all the stuff they pull out that is months and years old when bad news comes out on Mondays?
Watch out! Padilla is a dirty bomber!! Well, maybe he just supported some one somehow. Or something.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 10:29pm
2 years and your boy can go east for the country John. Then you can walk a block in Franks shoes.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 10:31pm
June 2002, Coleen Rowley testifies before congress that she tried to warn superiors about the and was ignored.
a few days later, Padilla's arrest is announced. Big, dirty bomb in NYC!!! Padilla had been in custody nearly a month at this point.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 10:47pm
Somebody tell Frank I have never bad mouthed him... I just laugh at his posts.
Posted by john maasch at 06/27/2007 @ 10:52pm
"2 years and your boy can go east for the country John. Then you can walk a block in Franks shoes.
Posted by CRABWALK 06/27/2007 @ 10:31pm
I am not sure what you mean Crab,do you mean if Thompson wins and the Congress drives Reid and Pelosi west with torches and pitch forks, that I will have a Frank moment?
Posted by john maasch at 06/27/2007 @ 10:53pm
"Guess someone should have taught Limbaugh a little better before they gave him the golden microphone. He's made alot of money killing conservatism.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 06/27/2007 @ 10:38pm '
Priceless...the only conservative left in the country, and Hillarys official ball lickers thinks Rush is the reason conservatives are dead...if he believes this to be the case..someone ask him why he wants to have Rush banned from the airwaves, if he is killing off the conservatives for him?
Priceless Frank post, once again.
Posted by john maasch at 06/27/2007 @ 10:56pm
Frank, John says he makes guttural noises to your posts, in a way that could be the expression of amusement, or the mating call of the Bull Moose. apparently he has never issued a foul word about you or your ancestors, holding you in a special place in his heart.
I took some liberties in the translation.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 11:02pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 06/27/2007 @ 10:53pm
I mean your boy will be 18, old enough to go defend you from the terrorists.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 11:05pm
How are we doing in the "Hearts and Minds" Plan put forth by our Peerless leader?
Give it a read. C'mon, you can do it...
http://pewglobal.org/commentary/display.php?AnalysisID=1019
Here is a tatse
Second, while anti-Americanism is a global phenomenon, it is clearly strongest in the Muslim world. For instance, in all five predominantly Muslim countries included in our 2006 study, fewer than one-third of those surveyed had a favorable view of the U.S. Moreover, with the Iraq war, anti-Americanism spread to parts of the Muslim world where the U.S. had previously been relatively popular. In Indonesia, for example, between 2002 and 2003 America's favorability rating dropped from 61% to only 15%. In Turkey it plunged from 52% in the late 1990s to 15% by 2003.
After Iraq, many in Muslim countries began to see the U.S. as a threat to Islam, and what had perhaps been loathing for the U.S. turned into both fear and loathing. A 2005 Pew study found that in all five majority Muslim countries surveyed, solid majorities said they worried that the U.S. might become a military threat to their country. This includes 65% in Turkey - a longstanding NATO ally.
doin' a heck of a job chimpy! You too Dick! Fine, fine work.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 11:18pm
LOL, He's a strange bird that Maasch. A dying breed.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 06/27/2007 @ 11:15pm
He better hope I am not a dying breed....someone has to keep the country running and the treasury coffers full...when the union workers are taxed at 65% rates(including State and all fed take aways) for health care, there wn't be any one to keep it going..
Although, by then I might be eating shrimp on the barbie..as I refuse to learn Spanish in order to get by in the IS.
Posted by john maasch at 06/27/2007 @ 11:20pm
should be US.
Posted by john maasch at 06/27/2007 @ 11:20pm
When are the coffers going to fill? I missed that part. Unless coffers is a word for "debt owed to foreign bank?"
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 11:26pm
hope your putter doesn't fall off, and all of your drives are true, JM.
TTFN.
Peace and goodwill toward men. Or some such hippy nonsense.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 11:28pm
That will be his job in the next Clinton administration.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 06/27/2007 @ 11:28pm
AARGHH!!!! Now I'm going to have nightmares of Hillary in that stupid yellow dress singing Ashcrofts ballad to the soaring eagle. (the one saved from extinction by the evil liberal scumbags.) gotta quit while I'm ahead.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/27/2007 @ 11:31pm
Go to this site and watch the video. AMAZING STUFF http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/june2007/240607Goats.htm
Posted by Lucem ferre at 06/27/2007 @ 11:36pm
Exposing the unions
http://www.unionfacts.com/index.cfm
Posted by antiliberal at 06/28/2007 @ 02:38am
Exposing the unions
http://www.unionfacts.com/index.cfm
Posted by ANTILIBERAL 06/28/2007 @ 02:38am
sorry wrong thread
Posted by antiliberal at 06/28/2007 @ 02:38am
You need Unions now that Corporations have "rights".
Posted by zhongman at 06/28/2007 @ 03:00am
Roberts said in his campaign reform decision that the provision they stuck down infringed on Corp. rights. Fictitious organizations have Rights?
Posted by zhongman at 06/28/2007 @ 03:05am
http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm
Notice what Jonathan Turley says 1/2 way through, about congress not having to go to the supremes if they're investigating a potential 'crime' since hsuB 'ordered' criminal offences... impeachable.
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 08:51am
Posted by ZHONGMAN 06/28/2007 @ 03:05am
Yep, 'personhood' sculpted out of dollar bills...
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 08:56am
Congress gets a choice whether to bother with the supremes or just impeach. Don't need no stinking courts.
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 08:58am
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 06/28/2007 @ 08:58am
Along with Bernie Sanders, HSUB, better add Rep. George Miller (D-CA) to your e-mail list....
heard him not 40 minutes ago on Air America tell the "Young Turks" that he thought impeachment was a "distraction" and the Democrats shouldn't pursue it.
And he's no "DLC'er"....the guy's the rep from Napa Valley, north Bay Area.
Posted by Mask at 06/28/2007 @ 09:27am
They, the President and Vice President, Bush and Cheney have always given me the impression that they were acting illegally as they were put in office in an "illegal" manner. The war is illegal, some of their policies could be described as "illegal" and to sum it up, their entire time in office coupled with everything they have done, has been illegal in the eyes of many Americans. I vote for impeaching the both of them together.....Mary Newlon
Posted by Mary Newlon at 06/28/2007 @ 09:46am
Posted by MARY NEWLON 06/28/2007 @ 09:46am
Sounds like you need to bone up on how presidents are elected...
and it also sounds like life for you the past 6 years has been illegal,so..
1. Get a life...
or
2. Get a lawyer.
Posted by john maasch at 06/28/2007 @ 10:06am
Hey Masky, for the hundreth time, put down the water, congress will get/are getting millions of offers they can't refuse- to ignore, in form of hate mail from their constinuancies for sitting on their asses about impeachment. Coupled with the hsuB/cHeney admin non-cooperation, the choice will be a 'stop the presses' moment where the repubs and dems agree to save their own necks-- rather than those new con supporters, servicers of dic'tator philosophy, the hsuB/cHeney admin.
And hey there will always be a few that 'fear' a shot to the face more than 'we the people'...
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 10:13am
I wonder what impeachment should be used for (other than fellatio).
Posted by freedomplease at 06/28/2007 @ 10:13am
If the American people were to vote in Mike Bloomberg....I think it's pretty safe to say that since he would be elected on a plurality, not a majority, the moment his approval rating dipped below 50% there would be overwhelming bi-partisan support for an impeachment.
Thus, does it follow that we can assume that Bush (approval rating now in the 20's) with a list of crimes that would make Al Capone blush, avoids impeachment because there is only one political party?
Posted by freedomplease at 06/28/2007 @ 10:18am
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 06/28/2007 @ 10:13am
HSUB, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but....I don't make it up. I heard the man say what he said.
And again, Miller is no "Southern Dem", "blue dog", or DLC'er. He's Napa Valley, outside of San Fran. "The Young Turk" hosts (one of whom was Wesley Clark Jr.) were perturbed to say the least (as I'm sure you would be), but Miller stood his ground.
He said it was a "distraction" and that he didn't want to go down that road.
Rahm Emmanuel on the OTHER side of the spectrum said the same thing on "Hardball" on Friday to Matthews.
Now, if you've got the liberal wing and the "DLC" wing of the Democrats saying no to impeachment....and the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee (Conyers...search "Nation" with "Conyers Laura Flanders")....AND the Speaker of the House....
and this is the last week in June?......sorry, Gore's run for '08 is more likely.
Posted by Mask at 06/28/2007 @ 10:35am
The police find the body of a young girl in a park. No one is charged. there was no crime.
Neo-con logic.
Posted by crabwalk at 06/28/2007 @ 11:15am
Crab,
I gave up on ponti....but you've got to love his lack of logic. In the case of an uncharged murder....well that's different because there's somebody dead. But in the case of the fact that everyone in the world now knows that Brewster Jennings is a CIA front company and everyone knows that Valerie Plame and all her middle eastern connections were working for the CIA...well in the case of those mangled dead bodies....he's not sure!
Posted by freedomplease at 06/28/2007 @ 11:24am
Masky, what it is you're bearing is new con 'water' and it seems you're stuck in their swamp-think as is a few dems.
But then again you can't help yourselves, I'm sure.
You all just need to just click your glass slippers together 3 times and repeat, "there's no constitution like our US Constitution, there's no constitution like our US Constitution,...", as often as possible-- 'til you see dry land and your soul there waiting for you.
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 12:23pm
It's getting out there more and more:
Impeach Cheney
The vice president has run utterly amok and must be stopped.
By Bruce Fein (Deputy Attorney General in the Reagan Administration, posts at the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute.)
Posted Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 5:06 PM ET
http://www.slate.com/id/2169292/
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 12:46pm
Cynicism and Generosity to Congress
By David Swanson
"There was never any evidence to support the strategy of avoiding impeachment, but my point is that Pelosi adopted that policy in May 2006, well before the elections. And there are some Democrats who recognize that impeachment is the surest way to win in 2008. And there are others who put saving human lives at least on an equal level with winning in 2008. Others favor impeachment but are afraid to challenge Pelosi or afraid to move on anything controversial until a lot of others move first. There are some in prominent positions afraid to move until someone even higher up gives the OK or until a whole lot of those lower down demand it. And of course a lot of those lower down are afraid to act until someone leads them.
How many of you think this is what is happening in Washington? (In Chicago, ¾ of the room raised their hands.)
...
The alternative to impeachment is either submission to fascism or a suicidal, immoral, and impossible attempt at violent revolution. What we need is a nonviolent revolution that imposes the will of the people on our current government – and the way to do that is through impeachment. Writing the Bill of Rights was a positive endeavor. Reinstating it is a positive step.
Reverend Jesse Jackson said this recently. Stand up and repeat after me:
Bush spied. Cheney lied.
Far too many people have died.
It's time they were tried.
It's impeachment time."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard. php?az=view_all&address=132x3333124
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 12:57pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 06/28/2007 @ 12:23pm
HSUB, don't know how many times I have to say it....I'd LOVE to see Bush and Cheney impeached.
It's just not going to happen. Miller's no "back bencher", the man has been in Congress for years and is chairman of Education and Labor Comm. He's against impeachment.
Emmanuel is chairman of the Democratic Caucus, making him the fourth-highest ranking Democrat in the House. He's against it.
John Conyers is the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee (where bills of impeachment must start). He told Pacifica Radio a few months back that he's against it. (Laura Flanders wrote about it, remember?)
and finally the Speaker of the House of Reps, one Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco....has said it is "off the table".
Now why is that these folks with (combined) DECADES of experience in politics and the Congress....do not realize that they will be FORCED to impeach Bush and Cheney in just a matter of 4 months....
but noted blogger HSUBFOOLS does?
Posted by Mask at 06/28/2007 @ 1:22pm
Bush less trusted than Putin by U.S. allies
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2007-06-28 14:43. Media
"In one measure of Bush's unpopularity," a new Pew poll shows "he is less trusted on foreign policy than Russian President Vladimir Putin by allies Britain, Germany and Canada, even as faith in Putin has plummeted."
The poll also found that majorities in 26 countries now have a less favorable view of the United States than they did in 2002. Also, "opinions of the American people have declined over the past five years in 23 of 33 countries where trends are available."
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 1:26pm
Leahy: Bush's lawlessness worse than Nixon's
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2007-06-28 14:40. Congress
By Jeremy Jacobs, The Hill
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) blasted the Bush administration Wednesday, indicating that it is disregarding the law more flagrantly than the Nixon administration.
"Certainly not since I've been old enough to vote have we had an administration so willing to ignore the law," the 67-year-old senator said. "I've never known an administration so willing to operate outside the law, even to operate against the law, in violation of the law, as this administration."
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 1:27pm
About 7 minutes into it is where it really starts going through a long list of crimes and impeachable offences. But better yet it lists things we can do to push media and congress to move to impeachment of the hsuB/cHeney per the damage and the continuing crimes being unapposed.
Town Hall on Impeachment With Lawrence Wilkerson et alia on June 23
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2007-06-28 15:13.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/24084
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 1:50pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 06/28/2007 @ 1:27pm
Interesting you mentioned Patrick Leahy.....
from-a blog concerned with local Vermont politics [7d.blogs.com]
"Congressman Welch [on left in photo], the only millionaire in the Vermont congressional delegation, was friendly to the Impeachment Foursome and spoke with them for 5-10 minutes, expressing his distaste for and opposition to the current corrupt and dishonest regime in the White House."
"But Welch, like Sens. Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders, believes impeachment would only slow things down and delay and sidetrack investigations of the bankrupt Bush Administration already underway."
Posted by Mask at 06/28/2007 @ 3:20pm
Congresswoman Maxine Waters, Chair of the Out of Iraq Caucus, has joined Congresswomen Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey, the two Co-Chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, as well as Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, Chief Deputy Whip and a member of the Steering and Policy Committee, and Congress Members Yvette Clarke, William Lacy Clay, Albert Wynn, and Dennis Kucinich in cosponsoring Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney (H. Res. 333).
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 3:26pm
The list of state Democratic Parties that have passed resolutions urging the impeachment of Bush and Cheney has recently grown to 15. Meanwhile, 11 state legislatures have introduced such resolutions, which have now been passed by at least 77 cities and towns and a growing list of labor unions and other organizations. These resolutions are all listed at http://impeachpac.org/resolutions-list
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 3:27pm
"This move by the Dems has nothing to do with seeking truth and everything to do with partisan manuevering for power." from AntiLib --------------------------------------------------------------- Well it is now official... AntiLib is Dick Cheney!! I had my wondered previously but now it is far to obvious when he repeats Darth Cheney's mantra word for word!!! What next? The FOXNEWS Talking Points verbatem?
Posted by snowdude38 at 06/28/2007 @ 3:45pm
For Immediate Release
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) Released the Following Statement in Response to the President's Assertion of Executive Privilege in Response to the Committee's June 13 Subpoena for Documents:
Contact: Jonathan Godfrey(202) 226-6888, Melanie Roussell(202) 226-5543 June 28, 2007
"The president's response to our subpoena shows an appalling disregard for the right of the people to know what is going on in their government. The executive privilege assertion is unprecedented in its breadth and scope, and even includes documents that the administration previously offered to provide as part of their 'take it or leave it' proposal. This response indicates the reckless disrepect this administration has for the rule of law. The charges alleged in this investigation are serious - including obstruction of justice and misleading Congress - and the White House should be as committed to this investigation as the Congress. At this point, I see only one choice in moving forward, and that is to enforce the rule of law set forth in these subpoenas."
Posted by hsuBfools at 06/28/2007 @ 3:52pm
"This move by the Dems has nothing to do with seeking truth and everything to do with partisan manuevering for power." from AntiLib --------------------------------------------------------------- Well it is now official... AntiLib is Dick Cheney!! I had my wondered previously but now it is far to obvious when he repeats Darth Cheney's mantra word for word!!! What next? The FOXNEWS Talking Points verbatem?
Posted by SNOWDUDE38 06/28/2007 @ 3:45pm
Nope, just common sense. It appears you have never observed politics in the US.
Posted by antiliberal at 06/28/2007 @ 4:33pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 06/28/2007 @ 3:52pm
Now that is a joke coming from Conyers, who himself is a joke.
Posted by antiliberal at 06/28/2007 @ 4:34pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 06/28/2007 @ 10:06am
1. Get a clue.
Eric
Posted by Malcontent at 06/28/2007 @ 6:30pm