@OxTheWriter I have a guide on my page to better understand the soul development of each individual that is mentioned on my page. Please feel free to read it so you can understand a bit more about soul development.
@AbelVanguard. Soul level running? That doesn't make any sense. By the way, the constitution clearly said church and state is supposed to be separated. This isn't a Christian founded nation like you and many others make it out to be.
Reason and logic should be the qualities that a politician should have while seeking office. Not "soul finding." Russ Feingold stands as one of the better constitutional minds.
@AbelVanguard. "Soul level" as you put it and your entire profile leads me to conclude that your statements have much to do with religion. That or you're just plain nuts.
Your conclusions are off. You’re telling me that if one talks about the “Soul” then one must be referring to Religion or a religious belief? That utters nonsense. I think you’re the one that’s having a hard time separating the two because I’m not religious by any means.
@AbelVanguard. Your statements and profile suggests you have some strange belief in some New Age bullshit rather than using reason. And you call me stupid? Somehow you may want to re-examine how the real world works rather than have some fixation on spiritual light found in everything.
@AbelVanguard. What are you talking about? I'm making it plain and simple for slow-minded folks like yourself to see. You do not use "soul level scores" to determine a man's qualifications. Not some New Age belief or some other religious nonsense. You use reason to conclude a man's worth. These are your own words, retard: "I have a guide on my page to better understand the soul development of each individual that is mentioned on my page."
@mortalhellion Wow, winner and a loser? Your Ego is totally out of control. Again more stupid words from a very stupid person. You have no clue and please go away troll.
@AbelVanguard. You don't know the definition of the word "troll" means. A troll is someone who makes one inane comment and leaves the comments page, vanishing without any prolonged debate.
@AbelVanguard. Keep being an idiot. You're doing a better job than anyone else. You've run out of debate and now name-calling. Not much ammo left in the debate, have you?
Vote republican November 2nd if you care about Americas traditional values, about this once thriving countries thriving economy...about the preservation of the FREE MARKET. Fight against the murder of unborn children! Fight against the legalization of Marijuana! Fight against leaders that didn't make time to allow our troops, the backbone of our country, vote! This is it Wisconsin, take back the day, lets restore this state one vote at a time!
Russ is implying here that it's only INTERNATIONAL messages that da gubmint can snoop on. Wake up and smell the concrete people! Da gubmint can, already is, and has been for a long time snooping on ALL your emails, phone calls whether landline or cellular network, etc. They're even monitoring your TV viewing habits, and every keystroke on your computer. Get in the game people. Stand up and take your freedom back before it's too late! Watch Alex Jones Channel here at YouTube.
100% sincere. It is far worse than I stated below. We are in serious trouble. We are under an absolutely monstrous tyranny that goes far beyond the universal invasion of privacy over our telecomms and internet. We are chattel, pure and simple. And senator Feingold is most definitely part of the problem, as are nearly all Democrats and Republicans, for they all dance to the strings of One puppetmaster. End the Fed. Abolish the IRS, CFR, IMF, UN, Say NO to the NWO.
Yup. Just what I figured. Go ahead and laugh at my "tin foil hat," just as your weak mind has been conditioned to do. They all laughed at Galileo and the Wright brothers too. But it turned out the Earth IS round, and man CAN fly. Too bad so many Americans like you just won't wake up. There are none so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Just take your blue pill like a good little sheep and go back to sleep. Nighty-nite, little sheep.
@PistolPackingPatriot Haha calm down dude i just think that Alex Jones is a sensationalist joke, I don't think your stupid or anything, but Alex jones is a bit crazy. Also I'm not American I'm Canadian. You just made an extreme assumption from me saying " ...lol Alex Jones".
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings."
John F. Kennedy
O-bomb-a, you are not change, you are another George Bush, you voted for the Patriot act, and for funding the war. What ever happened to Kennedy being you ideal?
GOOGLE: RON PAUL(He supported Nader after he lost his campaign as well.)
I agree. Judging by their actions, I saw Obama and McCain were too similar and therefore, not worthy of a vote.
Both voted to give amnesty to the telco companies that spied on americans at the behest of the government. Both voted for the first wall street bail out. Both voted, repeatedly, to continue funding for the Iraq war.
Also, like McCain, he didn't take the nuclear option of the table in regards to Iran, Afganistan or Pakistan.
I took my Obama bumper sticker off because he voted to not only let the Bush administration and the telecom companies off, but leave James Risen holding the bag for bringing awareness to the domestic spying. Nobody should have been let off the hook for blatant betrayal.
Hitler was only successful because he stripped civil liberties away. As this slowly happens to us, we'll then be unable to fight back against authoritarian corruption and greed. Compromise is inevitable, but that was betrayal.
Whats it going to take before the people get fed up with the power structure in Washington wiping their ass with our constitution. The general misrepresentation and self interest in politics in this country will come to a head more than likely in my life time. I just hope there is enough left of our constitution to protect ourselves when that time arrives.
THANK YOU, Senator Feingold, for standing up for my Constitutional Rights, where the majority of others in congress only worry about what they can get put into their pockets!!! Feingold does not belong said in the same sentence as McCain! Feingold is for the country's liberty. McCain is for his own narcissistic fame. Although they worked on some bipartisan legislation together, they are not the same!!!
The Usa government has had the entire Internet taped since the 70's the problem is them not following the proper laws and constitution. They have always had the file about everything you have ever done on the Internet its about following the proper steps like warrants before accessing that info that is the debate.
If the telecoms use fisa to violate the civil liberties of innocent Americans they will be caught charged and prosecuted on criminal charges to the full extend of the law. Fisa only grants them immunity to lawsuits. The funny part is the corrupt thought they had gotten full license to spy on Americans with out being held accountable. They should learn how to read better. Money doesn't do you much good in the big house aka prison and fisa is not 100% immunity.
Man as long as American people obsess over Celebrities, and Trivial Bullshit, then yeah Fisa will be 100% Immune. Oh and Money does good in prison, thats how people get to eat.
What change is Obama talking about, huh, huh? Don't vote for him. He is the most liberal member of the entire senate. His score was 95.5% in 2007. Hillary Clinton's was only 82.8%. Harry Reid's was 89.2%. If you vote for Obama, you wan't this country to get fucked up.
Hurray Senator Feingold! And hurray all Congress members that oppose this elimination of our right to privacy from an invasive government. This should unite ALLL Americans no matter what your race, gender, politics, economics, employment status, et etc etc! All who support this are TRAITORS!
Thank you Sen. Feingold. A true American and defender of Liberty and the Constitution. The Congress has committed offenses against the Constitution. They should be impeached.
Sen. Feingold, a shout out of thanks to you for defending the Constitution (from a Republican who was even thinking of voting Obama - now, not so sure).
Since they violate the Fourth Amendment with FISA, who says that women can continue to have Fourth Amendment rights to privacy to their own bodies. This is also an attack on Rowe vs Wade if you can read between the lines. This is not limited to wiretaps of telephones, but applies to medical records and the like through the same reasoning. When the Talebaptists are fully in charge, they will be able to tap your medical records using the exact same reasoning.
I'm glad someone else noticed this--when Ashcroft was AG--he requested records from al abortion and family planning clinics , supposedly to "use for research on breast cancer" . Yeah, right...
Russ Feigngold has been someone who among a very few people who want to protect our rights, and even called for the presidents power be censured, to be checked to see if he is within the law. That bill failed, but he continues to try to protect our constitutional rights. This man is a hero for our constituttion, anyone who trashes him, does not agree with our constitution and is unamerican and should leave our country.
People who are for this bill are unAmerican, unPatriotic, and dont deserve to be called an American nor have that right to call themselfs an American. They need to exit my country in an orderly fashion and find a dictatorship, because this country is for those who beleive in the constitution and democracy.
MO Ron Paul Supporters, we need to find a candidate to run against (R) Congressman Ike Skelton for the 4th congressional district of Missouri. Skelton supports FISA, real ID, does not support impeachment for the president and VP.
So do you think it was a crime for things to be leaked to the press when Nixon was abusing his powers? Do you think things being leaked to the press thus launching the watergate investigation was criminal?
You are comparing apples with oranges and coming up pineapples. It IS a crime to reveal classified information to anyone, press or not. In Nixon's case, what he did was not classified. However the man who leaked the "Pentagon Papers" should have been prosecuted.
No I am comparing apples to apples. What you are doing is comparing things that are unrelated and comparing the two. What Nixon did illegally was not classified? Really how many people outside his circle knew about this information? You're talking about it being okay for republicans to expose an undercover officer which is a criminal act, while saying its not okay for someone to expose something the government does that is criminal.
The investigation into Abu Grib was classified for a reason. Exposing that investigation to the press put our soldiers at risk. What Nixon did was wrong, but that has NOTHING to do with revealing classified information to the press.
The american people have a right to know what corrupt actions their leaders are taking. What happened at abu ghraib was criminal and nothing would have ever been done if it wasn't for that leak. It was the actions at Abu Ghraib that puts our soldiers at risk not the knowledge of it. Corruption doesn't seem to matter to you does it?
You are lying to yourself if you believe that. What happened at Abu Ghrib was a crime. It was being investigated by the military and those involved were going to be punished. What was leaked to the press was the ACTUAL INVESTIGATION along with all the pictures. Something was being done. The leak was solely for the purpose of embarrassing the President and the military. It was leaking classified information for political advantage which hurt our efforts and harmed our soldiers in the field.
The investigation into Abu Grib was classified for a reason. Exposing that investigation to the press put our soldiers at risk. What Nixon did was wrong, but that has NOTHING to do with revealing classified information to the press.
Republicans are using fear to try and manipulate Americans into giving up their civil rights. Between this and Bush's horrible mismanagement of the economy, I'm embarrassed to be a Republican. It seems the GOP is falling victim to its own least common denominator. For the first time since the Nixon impeachment, I'm voting Democrat, for Obama who seems to be less liberal than Clinton (I know that sounds funny, but read his book Audacity of Hope and you'll see he's really a moderate).
The NY Times had a good article on this today, just google "error fbi unauthorized wiretapping". In essence, the FBI and the NSA both, uh, "accidentally" spied on average Americans hundreds of times since the wiretapping begun. Lovely.
Lol so how can they unintentionally be wiretapping Americans? I don't know what's worse you claiming it wasn't intentionally meaning they somehow accidentally did it and so they had no purpose to wiretap the Americans in question. What exactly are you claiming? They unintentionally wiretapped Americans and didn't have a case in which they had probable cause to do so? Seems like someone is out of control
If I am wiretapping a suspected terrorist and he calls an American citizen, the citizen would be caught on tape as well. The government has reasons to wiretap me or you. They are focused on catch and prevent attacks.
That wasn't what was happening though they were jumping on the next person and then the next. Without having a case there is no probable cause to start wiretapping the guy on the other end of the phone and his phone calls as well and so on and so forth.
I rest my case. Your obsession with Clinton is much as it was during his presidency. Most of Clinton's work was foiled by right-wing Congressional conservatives who simply refused to accept the fact that he was President. These men, paid to work for the public trust, spent eight years working diligently to paralyze any and all Clinton policies, including anti-terror initiatives that would have gone a long way towards thwarting the September 11 attacks. Now you want to blame Clinton? Shame on you
This is my last post on this, because you and I have hijacked this thread and frankly, arguing with a dittohead is not that challenging. So here's a question for you.
What were Congressional Republicans more concerned with during the Clinton Presidency? Impeaching him for getting a blow job, or helping him fight Islamic jihadists?
And once the Bush administration entered office, which were they more concerned with, their economic agenda and a war with Iraq, or Islamic jihadists? Just think.
You are deliberately ignoring the failure of the Clinton administration for eight years, and blaming the President for not solving the problem in eight months. Clinton was not impeached for getting a "blow job". Clinton was and is a sexual predator. He victimized countless numbers of innocent women. Democrats who supported him at the quintessential hypocrites. He lied under oath to both a federal judge and a grand jury. He lacked the common decency to simply resign, but lied to the people.
Private lives are complicated. Didn't affect his job. Whitewater should have been focus of media, not his sex life.don't want gov't in my bed & don't want to be in theirs. Also, Clinton implicitly warned Bush about Osama when they met after election. This is documented fact.Bush chose to ignore warning.
No one cared about Clinton's private life until he sexually harassed several women and ended up getting sued. He lied to a federal judge and then continue to obstruct the investigation. There was nothing the President could have down to prevent 9-11. Warnings are not actionable intelligence. There was no specific creditable threat to act upon.
So you're saying lying about something totally irrelevant to the case is a greater crime than the perjury Scooter Libby committed when lying about the outing of a CIA operative, while under oath, and was relevant to the case. Remember Clinton did commit perjury while Scooter did. There was plenty President Bush could have done. He was given a plan or as Condi said a "list of actionable items" for a plan of action against terrorism and to focus on al-qaida instead the administration ignored it
Lying is lying regardless of who does it or for what reason. Scooter Libby was the victim of a faulty memory. The prosecutor KNEW who outed Plame. The guy confessed to it. That is where the investigation should have ended. Oh, no, he had to get someone from the Whitehouse. Tell me why he did not indict the man who confessed.
Oh so its a faulty memory when its a republican right? Your rationalizations get worse by the minute. Okay so you're saying if three guys rob 3 banks only the first guy is responsible? Plames identity was leaked to multiple sources by multiple sources each source is responsible. You're becoming idiotic. I could just imagine you working for the government and you and 3 buddies leak nuclear secrets to three different countries under your logic only one person would be responsible.
That whole case is bogus anyway. Everyone knew that she worked for CIA. She was not really an uncover operative. She has lied like her husband has lied. You want to talk about leaks. How about the Abu Grib investigation? Classified! The Foreign Surveillance program? Classified! Who do you think leaked them to the NY times in a time of war?
ahh yes this old canard wrong no one knew she worked for the CIA her neighbors didn't know no one outside the CIA and the government knew. Yes she was undercover the former head of the CIA said so, General Hayden said so. I think they know with greater authority than someone as ignorant as you. Her husband did not lie and she has not lied. You're basically saying its okay to out operatives if it hurts someone who speaks out but its not okay if its something embrassing to your adminiistration
She did lie. She claimed that she had no part in her husband being selected for the mission when she wrote a memo suggesting her husband. I am not saying the outing an operative is right. The guy who outed confessed. Once she is outed, there is no going back. If a Whitehouse official is asked about her, he cannot say yes or no, just no comment, which is a yes.
No she said she didn't send him. Her husband had experience in the area it was ultimately her bosses who chose her husband not her. It didn't work as you describe you act as if they were questioned later on. Multiple administration officials told multiple reporter even before Novak that she was an operative the article hadn't been published yet and already several in washington got that information.
It was not a witch-hunt. Fitzgerald was independent unlike Ken Starr. Fitzgerald was appointed by your acting AG and was obstructed by Libby who changed his story and perjured himself. You seem to have no problem that Armitage was a Bushie and a Reagan holdover. Seems like a lot of Reagan's ilk were criminal in nature.
If Fitzgerald was "independent", then why wasn't Armitage charged and prosecuted? Could it be that a crime was NOT committed in the revealing of Plame's CIA connection? Scooter was prosecuted and convicted. What more do you want?
A crime was committed. Armitage said he slipped up in his conversation with novak and came out and told investigators it was Rove who confirmed the knowledge. He could have just said no he didn't hear that or no. Rove and Libby also leaked to Miller and cooper. Scooter didn't serve any time what punishment did he really get?
You are so misinformed. He was strip of his license to practice law and fined quite heavily. He was given some prison time, but the President commuted the sentence. It was not a crime worthy of prison since it was a "process crime".
Oh wow he was stripped of his license big whoop the guy already had money not like the fine hurt his pocket. That's a slap on the wrist that's not punishment. He will not serve any jail time. Okay Weddel I dare you to lie to investigators, perjur yourself and then tell me you don't deserve jail time. He obstructed the investigation and perjured himself. You wanted more punishment for Bill Clinton for obstruction didn't you? Once again you are being partisan and saying its okay for repubs.
I never claimed that. I am not "you guys". She said she had NOTHING TO DO with him being selected. That was a LIE, and there is documentation to prove it.
And what has Bush been doing? But he's not lying about sex. He's been lying about stuff that's really important to the welfare of our country. I don't see anyone spending millions of dollars to gather evidence against him. Well maybe punishing a man for committing a sex act is more important to Americans than killing hundreds of thousands of people needlessly.
You keep missing the point. Clinton was never punished for committing a sex act. Get it straight! He was sexually harassing several women. We have not "needlessly" killed anyone.
It was sex! It had nothing to do with his job as president. It was something to be left to the civil courts if necessary. And Bush lied us into a war. He threatened us that Iraq could attack us with an Atom bomb that could be delivered within 24 hours. I watched that when I knew that Iraq couldn't get a payload to Israel. They had planes that could fly to Israel, but none that could deliver a payload there. He lied us into an unnecessary war and he's been lying about it ever since.
You are attempting to rewrite history. President Clinton was being sued for sexual harassment, which is a crime. HE LIED to the federal judge. HE OBSTRUCTED the investigation. It was for those crimes he was impeached. President Bush did not lie. He spoke of possibilities. No one could be certain what Saddam's potential was. This is why we had to remove him. It took 18 months to invade. A lot can be done in that time to hide or even move the weapons.
We found in Iraq exactly what the inspectors said was there. Did you ever read the inspectors report before the war? The media keeps saying Saddam wasn't cooperating. He was belligerent, but he was cooperating. The inspectors were told to leave by the U.N. because of the bombing. Bush invaded Iraq because Saddam was a threat to the oil cartels. They wanted to keep oil prices high for the profits of Exxon, BP, Shell. We pay for the war and they get rich. Hundreds of thousands die.
Actually, we found several things that the inspectors did not find. It is a fact that Saddam was not cooperating. He was stalling for time. It took us 18 months of negotiation before we invade. More than enough time to cover his tracks. It is a fact he was developing biological and chemical weapons. Saddam was not a threat to oil cartels, but was to our allies.
He was stalling? I never thought that him allowing the inspectors in before the invasion was stalling. The weapons inspectors told the administration they needed more time instead the administration told them to get out and we started bombing. Colin Powell and Rice said back in 2003 that Saddam was no threat to anyone outside his country. Search youtube for Rice Colin Powell. Which time were they lying to us back then or when they told the nation he had weapons?
No one was lying. They were making assessments of intelligence. No one knew for sure what he had. Not even the inspectors because he was resisting the whole process. After 9-11, we had to change our whole attitude towards Iraq.
Actually that was the civil case he was being sued for sexual harrassment and that case was dismissed on a 12(b)6 motion for failing to state a claim for which relief could be granted. Yes Clinton lied in the civil case about Monica Lewinsky that immaterial to the case and was thrown out by the judge. Clinton was caught in a perjur trap as the lie he told to the grand jury was over the lie he told in the civil suit. The whole case was built to manufacture something to get Clinton with.
Attempted rape is a crime. Do a little more research on Bill and you will see, if your honest, a true sexual predator. Lying is lying regardless of what one is lying about.
Sitting on his hands doing nothing to prevent it is plenty of reason to blame the current president. Why is it the greatest attack on America happened on his watch after he ignored intelligence, ignored bin laden/al qaida, and dismantled a lot of our antiterrorism programs when he entered office. Terrorism has been a problem for a long time. How about the anthrax attacks we ever catch those guys? We ever catch those directly responsible for 9/11?
Bush is president for 8 months, not 8 years like Clinton. So they hand him a list of things he should do but that they did not do because they did not want to take the risks. NICE?
Take risks? So its better they sit with their thumb up their asses right? You are laughable you can't even make one salient point. 8 months is quite a bit of time to get stuff done. So you're saying its totally okay to ignore something because you don't want to take risks while at the same time you blame Clinton for not doing something about the Cole even though we didn't know Bin Laden was fully responsible until he left office and the attack happened 2 months before he left.
I am not saying anything about what Clinton did or did not do. Of course, he wants to shift blame to the President. Tell me, why didn't we know about Bin Laden and the Cole? I thought Clarke was the MAN and he had all the answers. You are the one who keeps contradicting yourself.
Clinton isn't shifting blame to anyone you are. It takes time to verify things you know, actual investigations, etc something the administration failed to do on 9/11. I'm not contradicting myself at all youve shown yourself to be a rabid partisan. You're saying everything a republican does even if its criminal is okay but if its a democrat then its bad
I am not saying that at all. I don't like anything the President has done with the exception of the war of terrorism. However Bush-Haters like you want to blame him for EVERYTHING! You are going to have a really tough time when he is not in office. You are biased by your hate.
I don't hate the man I hate his policies, i hate his criminal acts. The only one biased by hate is you. You show yourself to be a rank and file partisan who does very little research and spouts out long unsubstantiated diatribe and smears. I don't see you disagreeing with any of his policies but typical backpeddle.
Well, then you need to read better. I have defend the President's strategy on the war. I think he has made lots of mistakes in the execution of the war. As for crimes, everything he does the Democrats paint as a crime. Find the people who leaked classified information the NY times. That has REALLY hurt our efforts in Iraq. The so-called outing of Plame is nothing compared to that. Yet, do Democrats howl to find the guilty one?
The Crime was ABU Ghraib the crime was the warrantless wiretapping end run around FISA. All of that was illegal and they tried to cover it up because it was embarrassing. Why is it okay for them to out our intelligence operatives? We still don't even know the true extent of the damage of outing Plame and the front organization brewster jennings. She was involved in counter-proliferation and the admin destroyed it how is that not going to hurt our antiterrorism fight?
I'm an independent weddel. So you're saying the American people shouldn't know when they're government is committing crimes? Yeah I see why you love republicans commit crimes that hurt our country's reputation cover up the crimes and then when the crimes get out blame the leakers instead of the people committing the crimes. I thought our system was based on Justice not criminality?
The investigation was classified. The crime was being investigated. It was a military matter being handled by the military. Leaking the investigation and the photographs to the press was a crime. It was an action that made fight the war more difficult. It cost us countless soldiers' lives. All the Plame incident did was give her a book deal.
It wasn't being handled it was totally ignored until the story broke. Leaking it to the press was not a crime. It was the crime itself the torturing of people at abughraib that put our soldiers at risk. You're warped. The plame ordeal compromised our counterproliferation programs. Good lord where do you pull this out of your ass? You're saying its perfectly okay for republicans to break the law.
Now you are just making things up to avoid the truth. It was not being ignored, but investigated. In fact, it was the actual INVESTIGATION that was leaked, pictures and all. Whether or not there was torture was not the point. Revealing the investigation put our soldiers at risk and probably extend the length of the war. I never said is was "perfectly Okay" for anyone to break the law.
I'm not making things up just like the whole attorney firing scandal it was not investigated by the white house or the government until it was leaked. No the crime is what put our soldiers at risk. You have stated several times its okay for republicans to break the law because its in our "best interest". Its the crime that's the problem not the investigation.
It goes beyond the firings more is being known that those who were fired wouldn't game elections and prosecute democrats over republicans. Gonzales lied under oath multiple times. We're talking about abuse of the public trust something you guys railed on over Clinton when you have a partisan corrupt DOJ that puts all prosecutions at risk
Again, you just make these things up. The US attorneys that were fired actually prosecuted MORE Democrats than Republicans. That had nothing to do with them being replaced. Gonzales NEVER lied under oath. If he did, they would have indicted him for it. You need to stop believing everything the Liberal Democrats tell you. No prosecutions were "at risk". There was no crime or ethical violation. It was just more of Democrat witch-hunt to get at the President.
Gonzales lied many times under oath ranging from the hospital meeting with Ashcroft to his not knowing who was involved in the process of the firings. I'm not believing what "liberal democrats" tell me. I watched the hearings which is probably something you never did. There were many ethical violations involved including the politicization of the DOJ. Why do you think the DOJ is in shambles and many career prosecutors stepped down from the dept?
I watch the hearings as well and they were a disgrace. Gonzales should have told them to take a hike. They were fishing for something and found nothing. The Justice Department is political and always has been. The Justice Department is not in shambles. Liberals in the department are leaving because they don't agree with the President.
They were not a disgrace republicans and democrats were calling for Gonzales's resignation. The only disgrace was Gonzales and his staff who all contradicted one another in their testimony. The DOJ is not a political entity. It has always prided itself on being independent. When John Ashcroft was AG the first thing he told staffers and the US Attorneys was that we don't serve the president we serve the country. The DOJ was in violation of the hatch act for its hiring practices.
You're just one republican talking point after the other aren't you weddel. Nothing you have said has been correct at all. Monica Goodling was put in charge of hiring by Gonzales and she stated she broke several laws regarding hiring of staffers and attorneys. It wasn't liberals leaving the department it was career prosecutors who had been doing their job for years. If there was nothing wrong going on why did the top 7 people in the department of justice resign?
Goodling did not fire anybody, the Attorney General did. If she unintentional broke some of the assign "laws" regarding hiring, then they should prosecute her for that. Fact is, those "laws" are constantly ignored by Democrats. As for why people resign, I guess they did not like who was in charge.
The attorney general couldn't even admit who actually did the firing. He testified her had delegated his authority out elsewhere. The career guys resigned because they saw their departments being torn apart by partisans with no interest for their actual departments. Really which democrats violated the Hatch Act weddel?
Do you really think that staffers hired by Democrats are not ALL liberal Democrats? Again, the Attorney General said on numerous occasions, he was the one who fired them, and he accepted responsibility for the decision. Others handled compiling the list and seeking input from others. There was no law broken and unethical conduct or abuse of authority.
Staffers of the DOJ are supposed to be impartial now you tell me which other administrations had a totally partisan DOJ other than Nixon? So obstructing justice by firing Carol lam who was looking into Duke Cunninham and members of the CIA totally fucking up her case isn't considered a problem?
Every Department of Justice has partisan to some extent. If they were not, then the incoming presidents would not ask all the US attorneys to resign. Carol Lam was not the one doing the investigations. These are all handled by career prosecutors. No investigations or prosecutions were affect by the resignations. This was all done properly and well within the President's authority. It was a witch-hunt pure and simple.
Yeah that's horseshit and you know it. They replace them because it is normal it has nothing to do with being partisan or not. They may be handpicked by the president but they do not work directly with members of the white house to push partisan cases against "enemies". DOJ has been cut off for some extent from the white house because of the Nixon affair. And yet look how far the investigations went when Carol Lam was gone. The fact is the white house tried interfering.
They are replaced for political reasons, and you know it. They could have been the BEST of best, but were replaced because the Whitehouse changed parties. Like I said, no investigations were affected because they are never handled by the US attorneys. The fact is the attorneys who were replaced prosecuted more Democrats than Republicans. No one was interfering with anything, except padding a few resume' before the administration is over.
Oh yeah he would have been indicted by who? DOJ? You're kidding right the current AG already said he wouldn't do anything about Meyers and Rove completely ignoring the subpoenas which is against the law and would get either you and I thrown in jail if we did it. Gonzales and Mcnulty both claimed the firings were due to poor job performance and then backtracked when it ended up not being true. Then couple with that the emails that the white house lost and you think this was all proper?
It is ALL PROPER. The President can fired a US Attorney for being fat and ugly if he wants to. It is a political appointment. They were asked to resign for performance reasons. What they were are NONE of the Congress business. You cannot subpoena White House advisers to the President. It is call the separation of powers and executive privilege.
There was nothing proper about it weddel if it was proper there would have been no reason for them to lie over and over again about the reasons. They were not dismissed for performance reasons even Gonzales recanted that reason when he was shown to be lying. Yes you can subpoena advisers to the president. If the president didn't coach the advisers on what to say and didn't talk to them as he claims then executive priveledge does not even apply. Congress has every right to use their authority
Not only that but even if they claimed executive priveledge you stil lhave to show up to the subpoena and give your reasons for not answering questions. You cant just blow it off and not show up that kind of shit would land you or I in jail for that kind of contempt. If things get as drastic and Myers and Rove still do not appear they could use the Inherant Contempt clause and have Myers and Rove arrested on the spot by the Sergeant at Arms
Actually, you don't have to show up. You can blow them off and that is what Gonzales should have done in the first place. Neither the Congress nor the person being asked to resign is entitled to a reason. They serve "at the pleasure of the President". Clinton fired ALL 93 at one time for nothing more than political reasons. The Republicans did not subpoena his administration for the reasons. They all know the reasons.
Yes you actually have to show up you can't just blow them off. If you or I blew off a subpoena we would be found in contempt and thrown in jail. I love how you fall back on the Clinton canard. Yeah and Bush Jr fired all of Reagan's Attorneys when he entered office and George W fired all of Clintons. You're making a straw man argument. It is normal for the incoming president to replace the prior president's attorneys its not normal to fire your own appointees midterm for political reasons.
You are simply wrong about this. This is nothing more than a political witch-hunt. The President can give ten reasons or no reason. They picked these people for whatever reason so that they could replace them. It happens ALL the time in politically appointed positions. The Democratic Congress is just spoiling for a fight, and frankly I am glad the administration told them to shove it.
This was no witch hunt weddel no matter how much your partisan hackery tells you there is. Why was the Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility looking into the Attorney firings and DOJ hiring practices in general if this was some witch hunt? The fact remains the majority of those fired had outstanding performance reviews and were being replaced by internal white house cronies with little litigation experience and no ties to the communities they were posted in.
There is nothing wrong with that. US attorneys with "outstanding" performance reviews can still be asked to resign to make a vacancy for someone else. It happens all the time. The Democrats were pressuring the Inspector General and OPR to make these bogus investigations.
Watch his R eye- Can't one real person out there see what I'm seeing?
drumheadcircle 2 months ago
This guy is scum.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard,
How do you figure that?
OxTheWriter 1 year ago
@OxTheWriter Please review some of the soul score cards on my page to better understand.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@OxTheWriter I have a guide on my page to better understand the soul development of each individual that is mentioned on my page. Please feel free to read it so you can understand a bit more about soul development.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@OxTheWriter This information is on page 3 of my profile comment section: Enjoy... Highest and Lowest Soul Level running for Governor:
Highest = John Stephen (R) 64, of New Hampshire
Lowest = Tom Foley (R) 20, of Connecticut
Highest and Lowest Soul Level running for Senate:
Highest = Rand Paul (R) 54
Lowest = Russ Feingold (D) 9
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. Soul level running? That doesn't make any sense. By the way, the constitution clearly said church and state is supposed to be separated. This isn't a Christian founded nation like you and many others make it out to be.
Reason and logic should be the qualities that a politician should have while seeking office. Not "soul finding." Russ Feingold stands as one of the better constitutional minds.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@mortalhellion This has nothing to do with Christianity so I don't know where you go that from. It's about morale and integrity....
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. "Soul level" as you put it and your entire profile leads me to conclude that your statements have much to do with religion. That or you're just plain nuts.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@mortalhellion
Your conclusions are off. You’re telling me that if one talks about the “Soul” then one must be referring to Religion or a religious belief? That utters nonsense. I think you’re the one that’s having a hard time separating the two because I’m not religious by any means.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@mortalhellion You need to read more carefully before making assumption that clearly has nothing to do with what I’m talking about.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. Yep. You're nuts.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@mortalhellion And your stupid.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. Your statements and profile suggests you have some strange belief in some New Age bullshit rather than using reason. And you call me stupid? Somehow you may want to re-examine how the real world works rather than have some fixation on spiritual light found in everything.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@mortalhellion Again you're dumber then I thought. Nothing New Age, just another conclusion that you came up with because you have no clue.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. What are you talking about? I'm making it plain and simple for slow-minded folks like yourself to see. You do not use "soul level scores" to determine a man's qualifications. Not some New Age belief or some other religious nonsense. You use reason to conclude a man's worth. These are your own words, retard: "I have a guide on my page to better understand the soul development of each individual that is mentioned on my page."
Now fuck off.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@mortalhellion Again stupid words from a stupid person. go away troll....
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. It looks like you lose in this thread.
Keep on preaching, loser.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@mortalhellion Wow, winner and a loser? Your Ego is totally out of control. Again more stupid words from a very stupid person. You have no clue and please go away troll.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. You don't know the definition of the word "troll" means. A troll is someone who makes one inane comment and leaves the comments page, vanishing without any prolonged debate.
So you lose again.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@mortalhellion Keep Trolling alone body, your doing a wonderful job at it.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
@AbelVanguard. Keep being an idiot. You're doing a better job than anyone else. You've run out of debate and now name-calling. Not much ammo left in the debate, have you?
mortalhellion 1 year ago
@OxTheWriter Page 4 not 3, sorry for the mistake.
AbelVanguard 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Vote republican November 2nd if you care about Americas traditional values, about this once thriving countries thriving economy...about the preservation of the FREE MARKET. Fight against the murder of unborn children! Fight against the legalization of Marijuana! Fight against leaders that didn't make time to allow our troops, the backbone of our country, vote! This is it Wisconsin, take back the day, lets restore this state one vote at a time!
TanMann6969 1 year ago
Alex Jones _IS_ the Illuminati. Turn off his garbage & enjoy your family, nature & planet Earth. His worldview is toxic.
UncleSamLovesAmerica 1 year ago
@DrWizardMan
Dumb ass.
PistolPackingPatriot 1 year ago
Go Russ! Beat Johnson!
saadasim 1 year ago 2
Russ is implying here that it's only INTERNATIONAL messages that da gubmint can snoop on. Wake up and smell the concrete people! Da gubmint can, already is, and has been for a long time snooping on ALL your emails, phone calls whether landline or cellular network, etc. They're even monitoring your TV viewing habits, and every keystroke on your computer. Get in the game people. Stand up and take your freedom back before it's too late! Watch Alex Jones Channel here at YouTube.
PistolPackingPatriot 1 year ago
@PistolPackingPatriot ? I can't tell if your being sincere or sarcastic.
LightJehuety 1 year ago
@LightJehuety
100% sincere. It is far worse than I stated below. We are in serious trouble. We are under an absolutely monstrous tyranny that goes far beyond the universal invasion of privacy over our telecomms and internet. We are chattel, pure and simple. And senator Feingold is most definitely part of the problem, as are nearly all Democrats and Republicans, for they all dance to the strings of One puppetmaster. End the Fed. Abolish the IRS, CFR, IMF, UN, Say NO to the NWO.
PistolPackingPatriot 1 year ago
@PistolPackingPatriot ...lol "Alex Jones".
LightJehuety 1 year ago
@LightJehuety
Yup. Just what I figured. Go ahead and laugh at my "tin foil hat," just as your weak mind has been conditioned to do. They all laughed at Galileo and the Wright brothers too. But it turned out the Earth IS round, and man CAN fly. Too bad so many Americans like you just won't wake up. There are none so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Just take your blue pill like a good little sheep and go back to sleep. Nighty-nite, little sheep.
PistolPackingPatriot 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PistolPackingPatriot Haha calm down dude i just think that Alex Jones is a sensationalist joke, I don't think your stupid or anything, but Alex jones is a bit crazy. Also I'm not American I'm Canadian. You just made an extreme assumption from me saying " ...lol Alex Jones".
LightJehuety 1 year ago
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings."
John F. Kennedy
O-bomb-a, you are not change, you are another George Bush, you voted for the Patriot act, and for funding the war. What ever happened to Kennedy being you ideal?
GOOGLE: RON PAUL(He supported Nader after he lost his campaign as well.)
imanerd36 3 years ago 4
I agree. Judging by their actions, I saw Obama and McCain were too similar and therefore, not worthy of a vote.
Both voted to give amnesty to the telco companies that spied on americans at the behest of the government. Both voted for the first wall street bail out. Both voted, repeatedly, to continue funding for the Iraq war.
Also, like McCain, he didn't take the nuclear option of the table in regards to Iran, Afganistan or Pakistan.
chunga777 2 years ago 2
they should atleast have warrent imo
ty99999returns 3 years ago
I took my Obama bumper sticker off because he voted to not only let the Bush administration and the telecom companies off, but leave James Risen holding the bag for bringing awareness to the domestic spying. Nobody should have been let off the hook for blatant betrayal.
Hitler was only successful because he stripped civil liberties away. As this slowly happens to us, we'll then be unable to fight back against authoritarian corruption and greed. Compromise is inevitable, but that was betrayal.
knowfedirs 3 years ago
would you buy a used car from this man?
rw5791 3 years ago
Absolutely. He stands for openness and honesty from government officials.
flintstone9812 2 years ago 3
lol my surname is feingold lol! Legend Russ!
jonathanjwf 3 years ago
Whats it going to take before the people get fed up with the power structure in Washington wiping their ass with our constitution. The general misrepresentation and self interest in politics in this country will come to a head more than likely in my life time. I just hope there is enough left of our constitution to protect ourselves when that time arrives.
bayzik 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
russ feinslow is a creepy nosy bych and he will get what he deserve for deceiving americans along with john mclame.
derrickjenkins 3 years ago
how is he deceiving you?
powerforthesakeofit 3 years ago
What you got against a man who wants government to be open and honest??
flintstone9812 2 years ago
Sen. Feingold was the only member of the Senate to vote against the Patriot Act. This man has integrity.
Shlufi 3 years ago 6
carcabe, that is one of the most enlightened thing i've read on youtube. i just don't understand why the libs can't understand that logic.
corpsman69 3 years ago
THANK YOU, Senator Feingold, for standing up for my Constitutional Rights, where the majority of others in congress only worry about what they can get put into their pockets!!! Feingold does not belong said in the same sentence as McCain! Feingold is for the country's liberty. McCain is for his own narcissistic fame. Although they worked on some bipartisan legislation together, they are not the same!!!
kroses 3 years ago
Russ Feingold has been building the government his whole adult life. Surprise, Senator.
carcabe 3 years ago
The Usa government has had the entire Internet taped since the 70's the problem is them not following the proper laws and constitution. They have always had the file about everything you have ever done on the Internet its about following the proper steps like warrants before accessing that info that is the debate.
xiola6969 3 years ago
If the telecoms use fisa to violate the civil liberties of innocent Americans they will be caught charged and prosecuted on criminal charges to the full extend of the law. Fisa only grants them immunity to lawsuits. The funny part is the corrupt thought they had gotten full license to spy on Americans with out being held accountable. They should learn how to read better. Money doesn't do you much good in the big house aka prison and fisa is not 100% immunity.
xiola6969 3 years ago
roflmao
Man as long as American people obsess over Celebrities, and Trivial Bullshit, then yeah Fisa will be 100% Immune. Oh and Money does good in prison, thats how people get to eat.
KageTrauma 3 years ago 3
What change is Obama talking about, huh, huh? Don't vote for him. He is the most liberal member of the entire senate. His score was 95.5% in 2007. Hillary Clinton's was only 82.8%. Harry Reid's was 89.2%. If you vote for Obama, you wan't this country to get fucked up.
michaeljackson200 3 years ago
You will probably follow by saying McCain is just as bad and has equally poor plans for the outcome of this country (if you were objective).
powerforthesakeofit 3 years ago
Dude, I don't like McCain either, but it would be more stupid to vote for Obama than him. It is a fact that Obama does not explain change.
michaeljackson200 3 years ago
Interesting... i always associated the name feingold with evil due to mccain/feingold destroying the FEC rules.
I'll have to look more into feingold and see what hes all about. I like what he's saying here but i dont trust him.
Claytrainor 3 years ago 3
Hurray Senator Feingold! And hurray all Congress members that oppose this elimination of our right to privacy from an invasive government. This should unite ALLL Americans no matter what your race, gender, politics, economics, employment status, et etc etc! All who support this are TRAITORS!
tazkcmo 3 years ago 5
Bravo! Mr. Feingold - you are the shit - it only takes a few like you to spearhead an AboutFace Command.
hiwaymanx 3 years ago
I agree... Paul/Feingold... has my vote. Gravel/Feingold has my vote. Barr/Feingold has my vote.
roibasses 3 years ago
Thank you Sen. Feingold. A true American and defender of Liberty and the Constitution. The Congress has committed offenses against the Constitution. They should be impeached.
roibasses 3 years ago 3
Sen. Feingold, a shout out of thanks to you for defending the Constitution (from a Republican who was even thinking of voting Obama - now, not so sure).
EncompassedRunner 3 years ago
FEINGOLD IS THE BEST
ProPiracyAccount 3 years ago
Trust us. Riiiight.
Meanwhile, Rove was politicizing the entire Justice Dept. I can't imagine why anyone would have a problem with that. ;)
GrownupPhan 3 years ago
RUSS FEINGOLD FOR PRESIDENT!
KDelphi5950 3 years ago 2
Since they violate the Fourth Amendment with FISA, who says that women can continue to have Fourth Amendment rights to privacy to their own bodies. This is also an attack on Rowe vs Wade if you can read between the lines. This is not limited to wiretaps of telephones, but applies to medical records and the like through the same reasoning. When the Talebaptists are fully in charge, they will be able to tap your medical records using the exact same reasoning.
milofonbil 3 years ago 2
I'm glad someone else noticed this--when Ashcroft was AG--he requested records from al abortion and family planning clinics , supposedly to "use for research on breast cancer" . Yeah, right...
KDelphi5950 3 years ago
Supposedly. Yes.
milofonbil 3 years ago
Russ Feigngold has been someone who among a very few people who want to protect our rights, and even called for the presidents power be censured, to be checked to see if he is within the law. That bill failed, but he continues to try to protect our constitutional rights. This man is a hero for our constituttion, anyone who trashes him, does not agree with our constitution and is unamerican and should leave our country.
scorpianscorpian 3 years ago 3
People who are for this bill are unAmerican, unPatriotic, and dont deserve to be called an American nor have that right to call themselfs an American. They need to exit my country in an orderly fashion and find a dictatorship, because this country is for those who beleive in the constitution and democracy.
scorpianscorpian 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm from Madison,WI and I hate this dick weed... He is a McBush lover and would NEVER settle for an VP spot with Obama.
MichaelBearwalf 3 years ago
Feingold would be an excellent VP for Obama.
TheAusChap 3 years ago 2
Except Obama supports this legislation, unlike Feingold.
cynicist 3 years ago 10
RUSS FOR PRESIDENT 2016!
scj16 3 years ago 20
God I love this man. Best senator in the senate, and he's from WI too.
Blitzkreig19 3 years ago
Russ Feingold great American
Democracy1st 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MO Ron Paul Supporters, we need to find a candidate to run against (R) Congressman Ike Skelton for the 4th congressional district of Missouri. Skelton supports FISA, real ID, does not support impeachment for the president and VP.
Jeff000000000000000 3 years ago
So do you think it was a crime for things to be leaked to the press when Nixon was abusing his powers? Do you think things being leaked to the press thus launching the watergate investigation was criminal?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
You are comparing apples with oranges and coming up pineapples. It IS a crime to reveal classified information to anyone, press or not. In Nixon's case, what he did was not classified. However the man who leaked the "Pentagon Papers" should have been prosecuted.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
No I am comparing apples to apples. What you are doing is comparing things that are unrelated and comparing the two. What Nixon did illegally was not classified? Really how many people outside his circle knew about this information? You're talking about it being okay for republicans to expose an undercover officer which is a criminal act, while saying its not okay for someone to expose something the government does that is criminal.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
The investigation into Abu Grib was classified for a reason. Exposing that investigation to the press put our soldiers at risk. What Nixon did was wrong, but that has NOTHING to do with revealing classified information to the press.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
The american people have a right to know what corrupt actions their leaders are taking. What happened at abu ghraib was criminal and nothing would have ever been done if it wasn't for that leak. It was the actions at Abu Ghraib that puts our soldiers at risk not the knowledge of it. Corruption doesn't seem to matter to you does it?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
You are lying to yourself if you believe that. What happened at Abu Ghrib was a crime. It was being investigated by the military and those involved were going to be punished. What was leaked to the press was the ACTUAL INVESTIGATION along with all the pictures. Something was being done. The leak was solely for the purpose of embarrassing the President and the military. It was leaking classified information for political advantage which hurt our efforts and harmed our soldiers in the field.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
The investigation into Abu Grib was classified for a reason. Exposing that investigation to the press put our soldiers at risk. What Nixon did was wrong, but that has NOTHING to do with revealing classified information to the press.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
1. The Patriot Act 1 and 2
2. HR bill 1955
3. Repeal of Posse Comitatus Act
4. Military Commissions Act
5. Department of Homeland Security
Its not FASCISM when we do it. Vote Democrat or Republican in 2008, and lets give legitimacy to these laws and acts. Fascism is here to stay.
putittogether 3 years ago
Republicans are using fear to try and manipulate Americans into giving up their civil rights. Between this and Bush's horrible mismanagement of the economy, I'm embarrassed to be a Republican. It seems the GOP is falling victim to its own least common denominator. For the first time since the Nixon impeachment, I'm voting Democrat, for Obama who seems to be less liberal than Clinton (I know that sounds funny, but read his book Audacity of Hope and you'll see he's really a moderate).
ninunaia 3 years ago
Grow up! No one would do that unless they had a reason. Common Sense and A Sense of protecting the greater cause should prevail.
SparklestheClown 3 years ago
The NY Times had a good article on this today, just google "error fbi unauthorized wiretapping". In essence, the FBI and the NSA both, uh, "accidentally" spied on average Americans hundreds of times since the wiretapping begun. Lovely.
alicia1996 4 years ago
The FBI is not intentionally wiretapping Americans.
4951WEDDEL 4 years ago
Lol so how can they unintentionally be wiretapping Americans? I don't know what's worse you claiming it wasn't intentionally meaning they somehow accidentally did it and so they had no purpose to wiretap the Americans in question. What exactly are you claiming? They unintentionally wiretapped Americans and didn't have a case in which they had probable cause to do so? Seems like someone is out of control
PogueMoran 3 years ago
If I am wiretapping a suspected terrorist and he calls an American citizen, the citizen would be caught on tape as well. The government has reasons to wiretap me or you. They are focused on catch and prevent attacks.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
That wasn't what was happening though they were jumping on the next person and then the next. Without having a case there is no probable cause to start wiretapping the guy on the other end of the phone and his phone calls as well and so on and so forth.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
That is what unintentional means. They were not the intended target.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Which is exactly what I just said and what i said is exactly what is happening. Making targets out of unintentional targets
PogueMoran 3 years ago
No, that is not what they have done.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Maybe these companies shouldn't worry about lawsuits if it's for national security.... right??? Oh wait they're not in it for us.
catbuffalo 4 years ago
i need dick in my mouth!
verysexymeanie 4 years ago
I beg your pardon?
PalluxoMediaOfficial 4 years ago
I rest my case. Your obsession with Clinton is much as it was during his presidency. Most of Clinton's work was foiled by right-wing Congressional conservatives who simply refused to accept the fact that he was President. These men, paid to work for the public trust, spent eight years working diligently to paralyze any and all Clinton policies, including anti-terror initiatives that would have gone a long way towards thwarting the September 11 attacks. Now you want to blame Clinton? Shame on you
getplaning 4 years ago
This is my last post on this, because you and I have hijacked this thread and frankly, arguing with a dittohead is not that challenging. So here's a question for you.
What were Congressional Republicans more concerned with during the Clinton Presidency? Impeaching him for getting a blow job, or helping him fight Islamic jihadists?
And once the Bush administration entered office, which were they more concerned with, their economic agenda and a war with Iraq, or Islamic jihadists? Just think.
getplaning 4 years ago
You are deliberately ignoring the failure of the Clinton administration for eight years, and blaming the President for not solving the problem in eight months. Clinton was not impeached for getting a "blow job". Clinton was and is a sexual predator. He victimized countless numbers of innocent women. Democrats who supported him at the quintessential hypocrites. He lied under oath to both a federal judge and a grand jury. He lacked the common decency to simply resign, but lied to the people.
4951WEDDEL 4 years ago
Private lives are complicated. Didn't affect his job. Whitewater should have been focus of media, not his sex life.don't want gov't in my bed & don't want to be in theirs. Also, Clinton implicitly warned Bush about Osama when they met after election. This is documented fact.Bush chose to ignore warning.
deerrule 4 years ago
No one cared about Clinton's private life until he sexually harassed several women and ended up getting sued. He lied to a federal judge and then continue to obstruct the investigation. There was nothing the President could have down to prevent 9-11. Warnings are not actionable intelligence. There was no specific creditable threat to act upon.
4951WEDDEL 4 years ago
So you're saying lying about something totally irrelevant to the case is a greater crime than the perjury Scooter Libby committed when lying about the outing of a CIA operative, while under oath, and was relevant to the case. Remember Clinton did commit perjury while Scooter did. There was plenty President Bush could have done. He was given a plan or as Condi said a "list of actionable items" for a plan of action against terrorism and to focus on al-qaida instead the administration ignored it
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Lying is lying regardless of who does it or for what reason. Scooter Libby was the victim of a faulty memory. The prosecutor KNEW who outed Plame. The guy confessed to it. That is where the investigation should have ended. Oh, no, he had to get someone from the Whitehouse. Tell me why he did not indict the man who confessed.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Oh so its a faulty memory when its a republican right? Your rationalizations get worse by the minute. Okay so you're saying if three guys rob 3 banks only the first guy is responsible? Plames identity was leaked to multiple sources by multiple sources each source is responsible. You're becoming idiotic. I could just imagine you working for the government and you and 3 buddies leak nuclear secrets to three different countries under your logic only one person would be responsible.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
That whole case is bogus anyway. Everyone knew that she worked for CIA. She was not really an uncover operative. She has lied like her husband has lied. You want to talk about leaks. How about the Abu Grib investigation? Classified! The Foreign Surveillance program? Classified! Who do you think leaked them to the NY times in a time of war?
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
ahh yes this old canard wrong no one knew she worked for the CIA her neighbors didn't know no one outside the CIA and the government knew. Yes she was undercover the former head of the CIA said so, General Hayden said so. I think they know with greater authority than someone as ignorant as you. Her husband did not lie and she has not lied. You're basically saying its okay to out operatives if it hurts someone who speaks out but its not okay if its something embrassing to your adminiistration
PogueMoran 3 years ago
She did lie. She claimed that she had no part in her husband being selected for the mission when she wrote a memo suggesting her husband. I am not saying the outing an operative is right. The guy who outed confessed. Once she is outed, there is no going back. If a Whitehouse official is asked about her, he cannot say yes or no, just no comment, which is a yes.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
No she said she didn't send him. Her husband had experience in the area it was ultimately her bosses who chose her husband not her. It didn't work as you describe you act as if they were questioned later on. Multiple administration officials told multiple reporter even before Novak that she was an operative the article hadn't been published yet and already several in washington got that information.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
And yet the one man who confess what not charged with outing her! I wonder why? Come on, you know it was a witch-hunt from the beginning.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
It was not a witch-hunt. Fitzgerald was independent unlike Ken Starr. Fitzgerald was appointed by your acting AG and was obstructed by Libby who changed his story and perjured himself. You seem to have no problem that Armitage was a Bushie and a Reagan holdover. Seems like a lot of Reagan's ilk were criminal in nature.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
If Fitzgerald was "independent", then why wasn't Armitage charged and prosecuted? Could it be that a crime was NOT committed in the revealing of Plame's CIA connection? Scooter was prosecuted and convicted. What more do you want?
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
A crime was committed. Armitage said he slipped up in his conversation with novak and came out and told investigators it was Rove who confirmed the knowledge. He could have just said no he didn't hear that or no. Rove and Libby also leaked to Miller and cooper. Scooter didn't serve any time what punishment did he really get?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
He was punished enough for what he did.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
How the hell was he punished? He got investigated and then let off the hook that's not punishment.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
You are so misinformed. He was strip of his license to practice law and fined quite heavily. He was given some prison time, but the President commuted the sentence. It was not a crime worthy of prison since it was a "process crime".
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Oh wow he was stripped of his license big whoop the guy already had money not like the fine hurt his pocket. That's a slap on the wrist that's not punishment. He will not serve any jail time. Okay Weddel I dare you to lie to investigators, perjur yourself and then tell me you don't deserve jail time. He obstructed the investigation and perjured himself. You wanted more punishment for Bill Clinton for obstruction didn't you? Once again you are being partisan and saying its okay for repubs.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
She submitted his name for the job. She lied about it later to cover up the fact. But, oh, no, she never lies.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
She suggested his name she didn't lie about it. You guys claim she was the one who sent him but thats not the case.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
I never claimed that. I am not "you guys". She said she had NOTHING TO DO with him being selected. That was a LIE, and there is documentation to prove it.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Wheres your documentation weddel you have never posted any documentation.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Documentation of what?
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
And what has Bush been doing? But he's not lying about sex. He's been lying about stuff that's really important to the welfare of our country. I don't see anyone spending millions of dollars to gather evidence against him. Well maybe punishing a man for committing a sex act is more important to Americans than killing hundreds of thousands of people needlessly.
bashia 4 years ago
You keep missing the point. Clinton was never punished for committing a sex act. Get it straight! He was sexually harassing several women. We have not "needlessly" killed anyone.
4951WEDDEL 4 years ago
It was sex! It had nothing to do with his job as president. It was something to be left to the civil courts if necessary. And Bush lied us into a war. He threatened us that Iraq could attack us with an Atom bomb that could be delivered within 24 hours. I watched that when I knew that Iraq couldn't get a payload to Israel. They had planes that could fly to Israel, but none that could deliver a payload there. He lied us into an unnecessary war and he's been lying about it ever since.
bashia 4 years ago
You are attempting to rewrite history. President Clinton was being sued for sexual harassment, which is a crime. HE LIED to the federal judge. HE OBSTRUCTED the investigation. It was for those crimes he was impeached. President Bush did not lie. He spoke of possibilities. No one could be certain what Saddam's potential was. This is why we had to remove him. It took 18 months to invade. A lot can be done in that time to hide or even move the weapons.
4951WEDDEL 4 years ago
We found in Iraq exactly what the inspectors said was there. Did you ever read the inspectors report before the war? The media keeps saying Saddam wasn't cooperating. He was belligerent, but he was cooperating. The inspectors were told to leave by the U.N. because of the bombing. Bush invaded Iraq because Saddam was a threat to the oil cartels. They wanted to keep oil prices high for the profits of Exxon, BP, Shell. We pay for the war and they get rich. Hundreds of thousands die.
bashia 4 years ago
Actually, we found several things that the inspectors did not find. It is a fact that Saddam was not cooperating. He was stalling for time. It took us 18 months of negotiation before we invade. More than enough time to cover his tracks. It is a fact he was developing biological and chemical weapons. Saddam was not a threat to oil cartels, but was to our allies.
4951WEDDEL 4 years ago
He didn't need to develop them, we gave them to him. Ha!
bashia 4 years ago
True, but not relevant. He was developing biological weapons. It is a fact you cannot simply dismiss.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
He was stalling? I never thought that him allowing the inspectors in before the invasion was stalling. The weapons inspectors told the administration they needed more time instead the administration told them to get out and we started bombing. Colin Powell and Rice said back in 2003 that Saddam was no threat to anyone outside his country. Search youtube for Rice Colin Powell. Which time were they lying to us back then or when they told the nation he had weapons?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
No one was lying. They were making assessments of intelligence. No one knew for sure what he had. Not even the inspectors because he was resisting the whole process. After 9-11, we had to change our whole attitude towards Iraq.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Actually that was the civil case he was being sued for sexual harrassment and that case was dismissed on a 12(b)6 motion for failing to state a claim for which relief could be granted. Yes Clinton lied in the civil case about Monica Lewinsky that immaterial to the case and was thrown out by the judge. Clinton was caught in a perjur trap as the lie he told to the grand jury was over the lie he told in the civil suit. The whole case was built to manufacture something to get Clinton with.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Attempted rape is a crime. Do a little more research on Bill and you will see, if your honest, a true sexual predator. Lying is lying regardless of what one is lying about.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Man I got sucked in. Crazy how every issue seems to get switched around into a discussion of Clinton's sex life
bashia 4 years ago
Sitting on his hands doing nothing to prevent it is plenty of reason to blame the current president. Why is it the greatest attack on America happened on his watch after he ignored intelligence, ignored bin laden/al qaida, and dismantled a lot of our antiterrorism programs when he entered office. Terrorism has been a problem for a long time. How about the anthrax attacks we ever catch those guys? We ever catch those directly responsible for 9/11?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Bush is president for 8 months, not 8 years like Clinton. So they hand him a list of things he should do but that they did not do because they did not want to take the risks. NICE?
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Take risks? So its better they sit with their thumb up their asses right? You are laughable you can't even make one salient point. 8 months is quite a bit of time to get stuff done. So you're saying its totally okay to ignore something because you don't want to take risks while at the same time you blame Clinton for not doing something about the Cole even though we didn't know Bin Laden was fully responsible until he left office and the attack happened 2 months before he left.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
I am not saying anything about what Clinton did or did not do. Of course, he wants to shift blame to the President. Tell me, why didn't we know about Bin Laden and the Cole? I thought Clarke was the MAN and he had all the answers. You are the one who keeps contradicting yourself.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Clinton isn't shifting blame to anyone you are. It takes time to verify things you know, actual investigations, etc something the administration failed to do on 9/11. I'm not contradicting myself at all youve shown yourself to be a rabid partisan. You're saying everything a republican does even if its criminal is okay but if its a democrat then its bad
PogueMoran 3 years ago
I am not saying that at all. I don't like anything the President has done with the exception of the war of terrorism. However Bush-Haters like you want to blame him for EVERYTHING! You are going to have a really tough time when he is not in office. You are biased by your hate.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
I don't hate the man I hate his policies, i hate his criminal acts. The only one biased by hate is you. You show yourself to be a rank and file partisan who does very little research and spouts out long unsubstantiated diatribe and smears. I don't see you disagreeing with any of his policies but typical backpeddle.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Well, then you need to read better. I have defend the President's strategy on the war. I think he has made lots of mistakes in the execution of the war. As for crimes, everything he does the Democrats paint as a crime. Find the people who leaked classified information the NY times. That has REALLY hurt our efforts in Iraq. The so-called outing of Plame is nothing compared to that. Yet, do Democrats howl to find the guilty one?
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
The Crime was ABU Ghraib the crime was the warrantless wiretapping end run around FISA. All of that was illegal and they tried to cover it up because it was embarrassing. Why is it okay for them to out our intelligence operatives? We still don't even know the true extent of the damage of outing Plame and the front organization brewster jennings. She was involved in counter-proliferation and the admin destroyed it how is that not going to hurt our antiterrorism fight?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
So it is OK to reveal classified information that actually risks American soldiers lives? I can see why you love Democrats.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
I'm an independent weddel. So you're saying the American people shouldn't know when they're government is committing crimes? Yeah I see why you love republicans commit crimes that hurt our country's reputation cover up the crimes and then when the crimes get out blame the leakers instead of the people committing the crimes. I thought our system was based on Justice not criminality?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
The investigation was classified. The crime was being investigated. It was a military matter being handled by the military. Leaking the investigation and the photographs to the press was a crime. It was an action that made fight the war more difficult. It cost us countless soldiers' lives. All the Plame incident did was give her a book deal.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
It wasn't being handled it was totally ignored until the story broke. Leaking it to the press was not a crime. It was the crime itself the torturing of people at abughraib that put our soldiers at risk. You're warped. The plame ordeal compromised our counterproliferation programs. Good lord where do you pull this out of your ass? You're saying its perfectly okay for republicans to break the law.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Now you are just making things up to avoid the truth. It was not being ignored, but investigated. In fact, it was the actual INVESTIGATION that was leaked, pictures and all. Whether or not there was torture was not the point. Revealing the investigation put our soldiers at risk and probably extend the length of the war. I never said is was "perfectly Okay" for anyone to break the law.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
I'm not making things up just like the whole attorney firing scandal it was not investigated by the white house or the government until it was leaked. No the crime is what put our soldiers at risk. You have stated several times its okay for republicans to break the law because its in our "best interest". Its the crime that's the problem not the investigation.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
I never said the Republicans could break the law. What law was broken by firing the US attorneys? NONE!
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
It goes beyond the firings more is being known that those who were fired wouldn't game elections and prosecute democrats over republicans. Gonzales lied under oath multiple times. We're talking about abuse of the public trust something you guys railed on over Clinton when you have a partisan corrupt DOJ that puts all prosecutions at risk
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Again, you just make these things up. The US attorneys that were fired actually prosecuted MORE Democrats than Republicans. That had nothing to do with them being replaced. Gonzales NEVER lied under oath. If he did, they would have indicted him for it. You need to stop believing everything the Liberal Democrats tell you. No prosecutions were "at risk". There was no crime or ethical violation. It was just more of Democrat witch-hunt to get at the President.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Gonzales lied many times under oath ranging from the hospital meeting with Ashcroft to his not knowing who was involved in the process of the firings. I'm not believing what "liberal democrats" tell me. I watched the hearings which is probably something you never did. There were many ethical violations involved including the politicization of the DOJ. Why do you think the DOJ is in shambles and many career prosecutors stepped down from the dept?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
I watch the hearings as well and they were a disgrace. Gonzales should have told them to take a hike. They were fishing for something and found nothing. The Justice Department is political and always has been. The Justice Department is not in shambles. Liberals in the department are leaving because they don't agree with the President.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
They were not a disgrace republicans and democrats were calling for Gonzales's resignation. The only disgrace was Gonzales and his staff who all contradicted one another in their testimony. The DOJ is not a political entity. It has always prided itself on being independent. When John Ashcroft was AG the first thing he told staffers and the US Attorneys was that we don't serve the president we serve the country. The DOJ was in violation of the hatch act for its hiring practices.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
You're just one republican talking point after the other aren't you weddel. Nothing you have said has been correct at all. Monica Goodling was put in charge of hiring by Gonzales and she stated she broke several laws regarding hiring of staffers and attorneys. It wasn't liberals leaving the department it was career prosecutors who had been doing their job for years. If there was nothing wrong going on why did the top 7 people in the department of justice resign?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Goodling did not fire anybody, the Attorney General did. If she unintentional broke some of the assign "laws" regarding hiring, then they should prosecute her for that. Fact is, those "laws" are constantly ignored by Democrats. As for why people resign, I guess they did not like who was in charge.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
The attorney general couldn't even admit who actually did the firing. He testified her had delegated his authority out elsewhere. The career guys resigned because they saw their departments being torn apart by partisans with no interest for their actual departments. Really which democrats violated the Hatch Act weddel?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Do you really think that staffers hired by Democrats are not ALL liberal Democrats? Again, the Attorney General said on numerous occasions, he was the one who fired them, and he accepted responsibility for the decision. Others handled compiling the list and seeking input from others. There was no law broken and unethical conduct or abuse of authority.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Staffers of the DOJ are supposed to be impartial now you tell me which other administrations had a totally partisan DOJ other than Nixon? So obstructing justice by firing Carol lam who was looking into Duke Cunninham and members of the CIA totally fucking up her case isn't considered a problem?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Every Department of Justice has partisan to some extent. If they were not, then the incoming presidents would not ask all the US attorneys to resign. Carol Lam was not the one doing the investigations. These are all handled by career prosecutors. No investigations or prosecutions were affect by the resignations. This was all done properly and well within the President's authority. It was a witch-hunt pure and simple.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Yeah that's horseshit and you know it. They replace them because it is normal it has nothing to do with being partisan or not. They may be handpicked by the president but they do not work directly with members of the white house to push partisan cases against "enemies". DOJ has been cut off for some extent from the white house because of the Nixon affair. And yet look how far the investigations went when Carol Lam was gone. The fact is the white house tried interfering.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
They are replaced for political reasons, and you know it. They could have been the BEST of best, but were replaced because the Whitehouse changed parties. Like I said, no investigations were affected because they are never handled by the US attorneys. The fact is the attorneys who were replaced prosecuted more Democrats than Republicans. No one was interfering with anything, except padding a few resume' before the administration is over.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Oh yeah he would have been indicted by who? DOJ? You're kidding right the current AG already said he wouldn't do anything about Meyers and Rove completely ignoring the subpoenas which is against the law and would get either you and I thrown in jail if we did it. Gonzales and Mcnulty both claimed the firings were due to poor job performance and then backtracked when it ended up not being true. Then couple with that the emails that the white house lost and you think this was all proper?
PogueMoran 3 years ago
It is ALL PROPER. The President can fired a US Attorney for being fat and ugly if he wants to. It is a political appointment. They were asked to resign for performance reasons. What they were are NONE of the Congress business. You cannot subpoena White House advisers to the President. It is call the separation of powers and executive privilege.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
There was nothing proper about it weddel if it was proper there would have been no reason for them to lie over and over again about the reasons. They were not dismissed for performance reasons even Gonzales recanted that reason when he was shown to be lying. Yes you can subpoena advisers to the president. If the president didn't coach the advisers on what to say and didn't talk to them as he claims then executive priveledge does not even apply. Congress has every right to use their authority
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Not only that but even if they claimed executive priveledge you stil lhave to show up to the subpoena and give your reasons for not answering questions. You cant just blow it off and not show up that kind of shit would land you or I in jail for that kind of contempt. If things get as drastic and Myers and Rove still do not appear they could use the Inherant Contempt clause and have Myers and Rove arrested on the spot by the Sergeant at Arms
PogueMoran 3 years ago
Actually, you don't have to show up. You can blow them off and that is what Gonzales should have done in the first place. Neither the Congress nor the person being asked to resign is entitled to a reason. They serve "at the pleasure of the President". Clinton fired ALL 93 at one time for nothing more than political reasons. The Republicans did not subpoena his administration for the reasons. They all know the reasons.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
Yes you actually have to show up you can't just blow them off. If you or I blew off a subpoena we would be found in contempt and thrown in jail. I love how you fall back on the Clinton canard. Yeah and Bush Jr fired all of Reagan's Attorneys when he entered office and George W fired all of Clintons. You're making a straw man argument. It is normal for the incoming president to replace the prior president's attorneys its not normal to fire your own appointees midterm for political reasons.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
You are simply wrong about this. This is nothing more than a political witch-hunt. The President can give ten reasons or no reason. They picked these people for whatever reason so that they could replace them. It happens ALL the time in politically appointed positions. The Democratic Congress is just spoiling for a fight, and frankly I am glad the administration told them to shove it.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago
This was no witch hunt weddel no matter how much your partisan hackery tells you there is. Why was the Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility looking into the Attorney firings and DOJ hiring practices in general if this was some witch hunt? The fact remains the majority of those fired had outstanding performance reviews and were being replaced by internal white house cronies with little litigation experience and no ties to the communities they were posted in.
PogueMoran 3 years ago
There is nothing wrong with that. US attorneys with "outstanding" performance reviews can still be asked to resign to make a vacancy for someone else. It happens all the time. The Democrats were pressuring the Inspector General and OPR to make these bogus investigations.
4951WEDDEL 3 years ago