- Joined
- Jul 6, 2005
- Messages
- 18,930
- Reaction score
- 1,040
- Location
- HBCA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
I am now starting to become a "Proud American" once again.Democrats send out first round of subpoenas
By Susan Crabtree
A House Judiciary subcommittee approved today the first in what is expected to be an avalanche of subpoenas to Bush administration officials. They will likely explore corruption and mismanagement allegations on everything from pre-war Iraq intelligence to the mishandling of the response to Hurricane Katrina.
The first round of subpoenas concern the recent controversial firings by the Bush administration of seven U.S. attorneys, some of whom were pursuing public corruption cases against Republican members of Congress.
The House Judiciary subcommittee on commercial and administrative law, chaired by Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), approved subpoenas requiring four former U.S. attorneys to appear at a subcommittee hearing next Tuesday. The former U.S. attorneys include Carol Lam of California, David Iglesias of New Mexico, H.E. Cummins III of Arkansas, and John McKay of Washington state. The subcommittee approved the subpoenas by voice vote; no Republican lawmakers were present.
Tuesday’s hearing will consider a bill by Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) that would reverse a new Patriot Act provision allowing the attorney general to appoint federal prosecutors without Senate confirmation through the duration of the Bush administration.
Democrats have come to the defense of several dismissed prosecutors, in particular Lam and Cummins of Arkansas. They have noted that Lam was leading the probe of ex-Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.), while Cummins was removed to make room for a former aide to White House senior adviser Karl Rove. Other U.S. attorneys, including those in Nevada and Arizona, were acting on corruption charges against GOP lawmakers before their resignations were requested.
It's about god-damn time!
I certainly hope this means Congress has finally grown a pair.
"Impossible" is a big word. It is a very extreme word. It is a very absolute word. Unfortunately, it just may be a very appropriate word.Originally posted by bigsmitty
Impossible, sir.
God in his if and existance dont give a **** about america, nor about any country. God if existance are all humans "father", we are all his "children", this is what the world should focus around, not some selfish unrealistic "God bless my country" bullshit. The world is his childrens home and all the children therein are equal.
Arrogance has been the most consistent hallmark of George W. Bush's presidency. His administration's simple philosophy of government has been consistent: We can do any damn thing we want.
We can invade Iraq. We can blow off the Geneva Conventions. We can listen to your private phone calls, Mr. and Ms. America, and we can read your private e-mails, too. We can arrest anybody we want and hold them as long as we want, and we don't even have to tell them why, much less file formal charges or hold a trial. We can even defy the laws of science -- or at least ignore the ones that annoy us, such as that whole "greenhouse effect" thing. We can use the troops for photo ops when they come back from war grievously wounded and then basically forget about them.
And we don't have to explain ourselves, either. The nerve of anyone to even ask us. Don't you people understand that asking impertinent questions of the White House is exactly what Osama bin Laden wants you to do?
washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines
God in his if and existance dont give a **** about america, nor about any country. God if existance are all humans "father", we are all his "children", this is what the world should focus around, not some selfish unrealistic "God bless my country" bullshit. The world is his childrens home and all the children therein are equal.
WTF does this have to do with the topic at hand?
I'll be a proud American when all the politicians actually do something for we the PEOPLE, not themselves. All they do is waste our time and money.
On the off topic comment MZ, if you choose to believe in God then you should know Deuteronomy 7:6 doesn't agree with you. He favors the Jews.:mrgreen:
You're right. HE views everyone the same. For now. The only reason I used that term is it was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw the report about the Subpoenas.Originally Posted by Maximus Zeebra
God in his if and existance dont give a **** about america, nor about any country. God if existance are all humans "father", we are all his "children", this is what the world should focus around, not some selfish unrealistic "God bless my country" bullshit. The world is his childrens home and all the children therein are equal.
Eugene Robinson's editorial today in the Washington Post talks about this administration's arrogance, and it is right on the money. It's exactly how I feel about it. Sorry, White House, your time of NO OVERSIGHT is over.
just a side comment on the topic. If a player prays for his team this is a selfish act, he should peay for his team and the players on the other team. Selfish acts is what made the world what it is today, a place of missery for most, a very good place for the few, and a decent place for the 1/10th of the world population that lives in the EU or US.. Not even all those live good lives. Selfisness is the first thing that need to go for humans to progress.
The Congress does NOT oversee the Executive branch nor the other way around. The Congress has no more business demanding this than the Executive would have demanding that Schumer and his staff all go under oath and supply all there emails concerning a legislative issue.
The Congress does NOT oversee the Executive branch nor the other way around. The Congress has no more business demanding this than the Executive would have demanding that Schumer and his staff all go under oath and supply all there emails concerning a legislative issue.
Remember the howling from the Democrats when Jeffersons office was searched? And THAT was associated with a felony investigation.
The hiring and firing of US Attorney's is the purvey of the executive and the congress has no business in it.
Now just slow down and imagine if we now give such oversight and precedent to congress and Hillary gets elected and the Republicans take over the congress. Alls fair isn't it, and they will be just as anxious to put her staff under constant subpoena and investigation as the Dems are for Bush. Calling her CoS to the Hill under oath looking for a perjury trap. Time to cut the political war and attempts to bring down the administration and get on with running the government which includes replacing US Attorney's whenever the Executive branch so sees fit.
If Hillary does get elected she should be able to handle the above situation pretty well since she's already been through it. Her husband, when President, was investigated by the Republicans for most of his term.
They were the majority then and made investigation of the President their priority.
The Republicans came out losers on the Whitewater thing, but they kept trying.
This transcript of the Hearings of the Subcommittee on Rules & Organization of the House Committee on Rules from Thursday, July 15, 1999, suggests otherwise.
TRANSCRIPT -- Cooperation, Comity, and Confrontation: Congressional Oversight of the Executive Branch
Please learn to spell and punctuate. Are you sure that male sign in your profile accurate?
That Congressional committee can sound as high falutent as it wants. Just as Chuckie Schumer is trying to do now. The executive does not work for nor report to the Congress it's internal policy deliberations or decision making. It's the whole basis for executive privilege.
I dont care about my spelling, its an internet forum not a spelling contest. IEnglish is my fourth languuuuiach btw.
Sorry, I quoted you to refer to your signature. America is of the past (it is 230 years old) but Europe (1000s of years old) is of the new millenium? Whatever you say.
Oh do you realllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllly want to go there? Comparing this to the criminal investigations into the Clintons?
Ahhh Clinton called for and appointed the Whitewater OIC.
20 people went to jail including the second in command at the Justice Department and a sitting Govenor. You would have preferred all those crimes not be investigated and justice be done? We as americans are losers when people who commit crimes go to jail?
And read the OIC report, far from exonerating the Clintons he is clear that he simply could not proceed with the investigations because of the obstructions the Clintons and other engaged in.
G.O.P. to Get Peek at Clinton Land Deal
By MICHAEL WINES,
The Republicans today renewed their calls for hearings into the links between President Clinton and a failed Arkansas savings and loan, and they won the Democrats' assent to take at least a brief look into the matter. How deep, for how long and when were matters that the Democrats studiously left unclear. For now, it appears that Republicans will at most be allowed to question officials at the Federal agency that in 1989 bailed out the bankrupt Arkansas institution, the Madison Guaranty Saving...
http://www.nytimes.com/top/referenc....html?offset=0&&&&&&&&&s=oldest&&&&&&&&&&&&&&So you would have preferred those crimes go unprosecuted?
And let's look at the bottom line here, those were CRIMES. And they had to do with FEDERAL ISSUES, and taxpayer money. Not policy matters that are the perview of the executive branch.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?