Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama is protecting democrats who knew of the wiretaps and their illegality, I also expect....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:39 PM
Original message
Obama is protecting democrats who knew of the wiretaps and their illegality, I also expect....
Edited on Tue Apr-07-09 08:59 PM by uponit7771
...him to put issues that arent close to fixing the economy and health care on the back burner.

After those issues are passed along with energy, not addressing wiretapps et al would be more than disappointing.

Democrats losing netroots and grass roots would be beyond stupid.

BTW: I gave Bush more than 3 months even knowing he was a rich, apathetic asshole...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. nice try
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I'd give it a 7.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billyoc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Out of 100.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. I've seen enough knee jerk reactions to Obama to give him the benefit of the doubt...
...and he's only been in office 3 months...I'll give him more time before I lose all faith but the way this issue is CURRENTLY being handled is stupid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. "this issue" is basic to our fucking FREEDOMS
GET A FUCKING CLUE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. After you get some decaf man, calm down. The knee jerk reactions on this board to Obama has been...
....highlighted many times, I'm will to give the guy some time...not a lot of time but....some time.

I gave Bush more than 3 months
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. get over yourself
Edited on Tue Apr-07-09 09:21 PM by Skittles
I'm sick of the code words "knee jerk", "poutrage", etc. to describe LEGITIMATE CONCERNS REGARDING VERY SERIOUS ISSUES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think it will work out as it should.
One of the things that caught my eye is this....

"the Department Of Justice's second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes.

This is a radical assertion that is utterly unprecedented. No one — not the White House, not the Justice Department, not any member of Congress, and not the Bush Administration — has ever interpreted the law this way."
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush

I'm wondering if this ridiculous argument was done to force the judge to rule against the Obama Administration on this? I wrote to the White House and sent them this particular article.

Now, I wait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. yes
the DOJ is not going to NOT defend the lawsuit. The court will determine whether the arguments are valid. If they are not, then the court will reject them and rule in favor of the plaintiffs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. If the lawsuit was won would it set up a precedent that anyone can sue the govt. over anything?
I am very unhappy about this but also see the other side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. You can ALREADY sue the government over anything this would mean that you can't if they say...
...national security.

It's an asinine argument
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. I wouldn't doubt it, the justice dept has purposefully blown cases before IMHO
.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Like Ted Stevens? Obviously Bush's DOJ protecting a Repub by incompetently prosecuting him. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Its incredibly obvious they messed up to keep poor Teddy from a conviction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-07-09 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Exactly, they might of well just pimp slapped the judges and pee'd on the court floor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC