|
Author
|
Topic: Bush takes one more step toward outright fascism.
|
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 4165 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: 07-23-2004
|
|
Message 1 of 158 (334933)
07-24-2006 4:12 PM
|
|
|
Bush blocked surveillance probe
WASHINGTON - President Bush effectively blocked a Justice Department investigation of the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program, refusing to give security clearances to attorneys who were attempting to conduct the probe, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Tuesday. Bush's decision represents an unusually direct and unprecedented White House intervention into an investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility, the internal affairs office at Justice, according to administration officials and legal experts. It forced OPR to abandon its investigation of the role played by Justice Department officials in authorizing and monitoring the controversial NSA eavesdropping effort. "Since its creation some 31 years ago, OPR has conducted many highly sensitive investigations involving Executive Branch programs and has obtained access to information classified at the highest levels," chief lawyer H. Marshall Jarrett wrote in a memorandum released Tuesday. "In all those years, OPR has never been prevented from initiating or pursuing an investigation." How can conservatives continue to defend this president. He is anti-democracy and therefore by extension anti-American. When he is not being completely ineffective as a leader he is doing everything he can to destroy whatever last thread decency our government had left.
Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 2 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:32 PM | | Jazzns has replied |
|
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5153 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: 05-26-2005
|
|
|
Message 2 of 158 (334962)
07-24-2006 5:32 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by Jazzns
07-24-2006 4:12 PM
|
|
the New World Order?
Clinton squashed a lot of stuff too. Both parties are in on it.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by Jazzns, posted 07-24-2006 4:12 PM | | Jazzns has replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1721 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
|
Message 3 of 158 (334963)
07-24-2006 5:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 2 by randman
07-24-2006 5:32 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
Clinton squashed a lot of stuff too. Oh, then it's totally fine. Stop the presses, boys - anything Clinton did is A-OK! Out of curisosity, though - what did Clinton quash? Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 2 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:32 PM | | randman has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 4 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:37 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
randman
Suspended Member (Idle past 5153 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: 05-26-2005
|
|
|
Message 4 of 158 (334964)
07-24-2006 5:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3 by crashfrog
07-24-2006 5:33 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
Crash, never said it was all fine, but as long as you are misled into thinking the democrats are any different in this regard, we are not making progress. Clinton squashed a lot of stuff, or his administration. Reno, for example,squashed all independent investigations into China-gate and deliberately refused to enforce Congressional subpoenas so that hundreds of witnesses fled the country. She did, however, authorize more trivial legal pursuits such as Clinton's girlfriend, Monica.....they probably did not know about the dress and so figured trotting out the secretary of State to smear her as a stalker would suffice to silence the issue.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3 by crashfrog, posted 07-24-2006 5:33 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
nator
Member (Idle past 2424 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: 12-09-2001
|
|
|
Message 5 of 158 (334976)
07-24-2006 6:39 PM
|
Reply to: Message 4 by randman
07-24-2006 5:37 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
Tell me, rand, how many presidential signing statements did any other president other than Bush do while in office? How many has Bush done?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 4 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:37 PM | | randman has not replied |
|
nator
Member (Idle past 2424 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: 12-09-2001
|
|
|
Message 6 of 158 (334977)
07-24-2006 6:43 PM
|
Reply to: Message 4 by randman
07-24-2006 5:37 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
quote:
Clinton squashed a lot of stuff, or his administration. Reno, for example,squashed all independent investigations into China-gate and deliberately refused to enforce Congressional subpoenas so that hundreds of witnesses fled the country.
Yeah, I remember all the Republican outrage when Reno was made Attorney General, because they said she wasn't independent enough and had ties too close to Clinton. Now it's simply accepted that Gonzales is pretty much Bush's personal lawyer and will do exactly as Bush tells him to do. But anyway, you're missing the point. Reno, who was the Attorney General may have blocked some investigations, but that's sort of her job, isn't it? Bush personally intervened and blocked an investigation.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 4 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:37 PM | | randman has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 11 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 9:49 PM | | nator has replied |
|
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 4165 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: 07-23-2004
|
|
|
Message 7 of 158 (334979)
07-24-2006 6:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 2 by randman
07-24-2006 5:32 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
So your only comment is, "hey look they did it too!". Hey everybody. Don't look at what is behind that door. Remember Clinton? Doesn't it make you mad ... uh ... still. This shit is despicable. We all should be outraged by this if you are not already.
Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 2 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:32 PM | | randman has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 15 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 9:55 PM | | Jazzns has replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1721 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
|
Message 8 of 158 (334991)
07-24-2006 8:22 PM
|
Reply to: Message 4 by randman
07-24-2006 5:37 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
Clinton squashed a lot of stuff Yeah, but what? That's what I asked, remember? "A lot of stuff" isn't specific enough.
Reno, for example,squashed all independent investigations into China-gate "China-gate"? An example of what Janet Reno did is not an example of what Clinton did.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 4 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:37 PM | | randman has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 14 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 9:54 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 9 of 158 (335000)
07-24-2006 8:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 4 by randman
07-24-2006 5:37 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
To be very specific about the difference between the Attorney General squashing an investigation, and the President doing so... Janet Reno used the courts to defend her client, the White House. This is called "working within the system." A legal challenge came up, and Clinton used a lawyer to defend himself in the courts. George W. Bush abused the powers of the executive office to circumvent the court system entirely, and make legal action impossible. To suggest that they are the same thing is like saying that blocking a punch is the same as shooting your opponent. Edited by Dan Carroll, : remove bad link
"We had survived to turn on the History Channel And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied: You're what happens when two substances collide And by all accounts you really should have died." -Andrew Bird
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 4 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 5:37 PM | | randman has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 10 by jar, posted 07-24-2006 9:15 PM | | Dan Carroll has not replied | | | Message 13 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 9:51 PM | | Dan Carroll has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 93 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: the New World Order?
Thought you might be interested in this article. It says that the ABA considers Bush's actions to be "a violation of the constitution and a danger to democracy."
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 9 by Dan Carroll, posted 07-24-2006 8:47 PM | | Dan Carroll has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 12 by randman, posted 07-24-2006 9:50 PM | | jar has not replied |
|
randman
Suspended Member (Idle past 5153 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: 05-26-2005
|
|
|
Message 11 of 158 (335018)
07-24-2006 9:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 6 by nator
07-24-2006 6:43 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
I don't see the difference really, and arguably Bush has more precedence due to this being a time of war. Of course, the fact the "war on terror" is somewhat unending makes presidential power in the time of war a real problem in the long run, but then again, don't blame me..... I'm a North Carolina boy. The imperial presidency really took off under Lincoln. Edited by randman, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 6 by nator, posted 07-24-2006 6:43 PM | | nator has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 20 by nator, posted 07-25-2006 8:31 AM | | randman has not replied |
|
randman
Suspended Member (Idle past 5153 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: 05-26-2005
|
|
|
Message 12 of 158 (335019)
07-24-2006 9:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 10 by jar
07-24-2006 9:15 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
And so were the presidencies of: Lincoln Wilson Roosevelt LBJ Nixon etc, etc,...
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 10 by jar, posted 07-24-2006 9:15 PM | | jar has not replied |
|
randman
Suspended Member (Idle past 5153 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: 05-26-2005
|
Re: the New World Order?
So the AG's client under Clinton was Clinton? Thanks for making my point.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 9 by Dan Carroll, posted 07-24-2006 8:47 PM | | Dan Carroll has replied |
|
randman
Suspended Member (Idle past 5153 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: 05-26-2005
|
|
|
Message 14 of 158 (335022)
07-24-2006 9:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 8 by crashfrog
07-24-2006 8:22 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
Clinton solicited and accepted bribes from communist China, and in return signed executive orders, appointed a Chinese spy to sensitive posts (highest he could without Congressional oversight), transferred missile technology from Defense to Commerce (where he appointed the spy), and took actions that all appear to show he appreciated the campaign donations the government of China funnelled to the DNC. Bush's actions pale in comparison, but that doesn't make them right. Heck, no president ever did what Clinton did.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 8 by crashfrog, posted 07-24-2006 8:22 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 37 by crashfrog, posted 07-25-2006 5:20 PM | | randman has replied |
|
randman
Suspended Member (Idle past 5153 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: 05-26-2005
|
|
|
Message 15 of 158 (335024)
07-24-2006 9:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 7 by Jazzns
07-24-2006 6:55 PM
|
|
Re: the New World Order?
It's hard to be outraged anew by something many of us have been aware of for the past 30 years, namely that the NSA and our government spies on us, and does so regardless of who is in office.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 7 by Jazzns, posted 07-24-2006 6:55 PM | | Jazzns has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 16 by Jazzns, posted 07-24-2006 10:14 PM | | randman has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2