Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Republicans "fix" Bush failure to obey law by creating a new law...

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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 07:24 PM
Original message
Republicans "fix" Bush failure to obey law by creating a new law...
...that basically allows him to break the law.

:banghead:

"WASHINGTON - Four Republican senators introduced a bill Thursday that they hope will end the furor over President Bush's surveillance program by writing it into law.

One of the bill's chief sponsors, Sen. Mike DeWine (news, bio, voting record) of Ohio, said the bill requires the president to go to court as soon as possible to get approval for wiretapping and other forms of monitoring.

"It does not ... give the president a blank check," DeWine said, while authorizing "a limited, but necessary, program."

The proposal came under immediate criticism from advocacy groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union"

Yahoo Link

So they think Bush will follow a new law when he just ignored the old one? Boy are THEY gullable! And they seem to have no problem violating the constitution - no doubt anticipating the votes of Roberts and Alito to allow the President to remain above the law and ignore the constitution.

If 45 days is the time frame needed, why the heck can't they still go to the FISA court? Why do they want to bypass it altogether? Because they want to spy on people who are NOT involved in terrorism and they couldn't justify their activities to FISA. What are they really doing - corporate spying to enhance their cronies profits? Somehow money is involved. Does Bush EVER do anything when money isn't involved?

Our only hope is that the ACLU will be successful in making their case to have this monstrosity ruled unconstitutional.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Come on Sherrod attack the little weasel Deswine on this one
Make him an accomplice with the criminal imperial president
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. Why do they have to pass a new law if Bush wasn't breaking the old one?

I thought he had the authority. If what he is doing is perfectly legal, why create a new law?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. "'as soon as possible' to get approval "
Does 'As Soon As Possible' translate to possibly equaling (or exceeding) Rumsfeld's guess of a 70-year war on terror?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. ACCOMPLICES AFTER THE FACT!
the banana republican-run congress is now officially a rubber-stamp sham.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
5. Banana Republicans
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
6. Sure...
And when their lawless chimpo's gonna break this "new" "old" one...
These accomplices will be back with a "new" "old" "old" one...
Then, when their lawless chimpo's gonna break that "new" "old" "old" "old" one...
His accomplices will be back with a "new" "old" "old" "old" one...

Round 'n round, the criminals spin.
Send The Cabal of Liars to The Hague.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
7. Real good example they're setting for our kids...
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rocknrule Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
8. If they had been in power in 1995
they would've changed the law to say that it's OK to blow up federal buildings in order to get McVeigh off the hook
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emdee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-16-06 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. But, he did the deed under the old law, right?
Isn't a new law for future use and not to cover the past actions?
Well, if it were any of us that would be true, of course.
emdee
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 Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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