All you have to do to resolve the spying issue: Think Clinton instead of

Bush. Whatever the Rethugs would have done if Clinton had done the same thing AND SAID THE SAME THINGS IN RESPONSE TO BEING CRITICIZED for his actions, that's what MUST be done with Bush.

"criticism of the prez is unpatriotic during wartahm, doncha know. prezdint clintn is deserves our support and we will defer our disagreements until this war is successfully brought to a victorious close in 40 years."


that's EXACTLY what they would say. now why would you think anything else?

:sarcasm:

was the "oath." The canoodling wasn't the Constitutionally wrong part---Lord knows, there were plenty of precedents---but it was the lying/prevaricating under oath that snapped the trap shut on him. For nothing, not even the 9/11 Commission (where Bush and Cheney had to appear TOGETHER and off the un-sworn---already suspicious) has the fake cowboy had to swear to tell the truth. That is the Rubicon that has to be crossed for any censure/impeachment efforts to proceed.

If he won't be sworn to truth-telling, he has only to resort to the same-ole-same-ole lying of a politician...the same way he got elected and the way he "governs."

Otherwise, I agree with the original post...the circumstances and stakes are much different of course, horribly so now, but much of the template is already there....

I owuld say the template is actually Nixon since what Bush has done is a naked power grab to restore the imperial presidency. Clinton's was just, well, naked...

and everything to do with a 80 million dollar witch hunt to find something, anything, to hang on President Clinton's neck.

Think about this... with all the investigations on Clinton... Whitewater, Filegate, Travel Office Gate, Vince Foster, etc. ad nausuem... there was not ONE conviction, not ONE indictment of any member of the Clinton White House.

Give me 80 Million to investigate BushCo...

strongly enough with you and with alarimer.

Forgive my hasty reply...when it comes to the long, drawn-out awful Ken Starr thing, it was blatant witch-hunt (Hillary, tho much maligned, was right-on about the "vast, right-wing....") And with Mr. Foster and Susan McDougall et al the situation was a huge waste and fraud on us, purporting to be investigative. It was awful.

I responded to the OP above just in the isolated light of the current messes, and with my mind toward the lynchpin of the Chimp in Chief's political demise (a la Nixon, alarimer :) ) I was thinking just from this point forward. If we can turn the Congress this Fall, hey, the sky's the limit. I wouldn't balk over some Very Thorough Investigations of GOP activities in DC and abroad, along with a look at elections. Do I want some very prominant Executive Branch (and Pentagon) feet held to the fire? You betcha.

Sorry to mislead with my earlier post.

while wearring a blue dress.

What part of "wiretap" did you NOT understand when Clinton passed it in 1996?

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/4-15-96/fbiwiretaps.html

"The 1994 law required sweeping changes to the nation's telecommunications infrastructure, forcing companies for the first time to build wiretap capabilities"

My country is filled with morons who cheer Clinton but bash Bush.
It's just unreal to watch sometimes.

without a warrant?