I am starting to feel a strong sense of Watergate Deja Ve.

things both foreign and domestic begin to crumble.
there are resignations, especially by "the finest public servants I've ever known.") Like Haldeman and Erlichmann, a short time later they're headed for prison.
Explosive and dramatic revelations of blatant wrongdoing sink the vice president. He is gone almost overnight and quickly forgotten. the threat of prison time is also over his head.
finally, information long kept secret causes shockwaves throughout Washington, including from one end of Congress to another...There is a drumbeat for resignation or impeachment, and nations around the world opine that the president is finished.
And, in the last act, those who were the president's closest advisors and friends go to the White House and explain that there is no alternative to resignation....anything else will plunge the country into a constitutional crisis and possibly chaos.

But I don't think Bush has even the minute, tiny amount of decency that Nixon had. He could defy the Supreme Court even as the tanks are rolling up Pennsylvania Avenue.

please tell me i am way way off base here..

but I don't, so I can't.

...who will stand with Bush, and who against him?

I've been feeling Deja Vu for a long time based on my memories of the seventies - this crowd Cheney and Rumsfield etc have been very successfully at creating the same conditions as then. A recession based on a war we cannot win - worries about the environment, the war, and all the talk of the corporations taking big profits from the war and then outright corruption on the part of the administration coming to light of day. I'm just amazed at how successfull they've been at creating the same nightmare after a period of prosperity??

:toast:

Those who do not learn from the past are bound to repeat it.

I'm just amazed that there is a scandal every week and still they manage to hold on. Somebody please explain how that was possible in ten years from now...

but no war on TV, and not so much protest.

I can't believe I'm seeing this crap twice in one lifetime.

office as the soldiers come to get him shouting, "I'm the president! I'm the president! I'm a war time president and you have to do what I say!" (Stomping his feet like the spoiled little brat that he is.)

So it cannot happen at least until 2006 - if even then. There is so much S@#% to take care of that precious time may not be spent until the end of 2008.

I agree with John Dean that all of the transgressions are worse than Watergate - the question is where or where to start. So much crime, so little time.

The first significant difference is that, unlike 30 years ago, the republicans in congress today are part of a giant criminal enterprise, with bush as the "front man." Bush and his cabal feel so protected by this congressional "firewall" that they now freely admit their crimes as well as their intention to continue their lawless actions.

Another difference is the role the domestic press plays. 30 years ago, there were thousands of people operating the mass media. Today there are five, all of whom are bush "pioneers" who follow the orders faxed to them every day from the white house.

Yet another difference is the makeup of the electorate. Thirty years ago, there was a strong middle class thanks to an abundance of well-paying manufacturing jobs. Today, there are relatively few manufacturing jobs, well-paid or otherwise. We're in a situation approaching that of pre-revolution France, with the obscenely wealthy living in their gated communities and a level of homelessness never dreamed of thirty years ago.

However this shakes out, it won't be like anything seen in this country before.

I think the media is slowing coming to realize that the majority of people aren't buying their soft-selling of this administration. The supposedly-36% approval rating of dim-son is no mandate for their skewed coverage. I'm starting to see the momentum slowly build in coverage of the WH's dirty business, although the pundits are still trying to make an effort to spin the truth, hoping to hang onto as much of that "36%" as possible.

The difference is--and this is huge--that this time he has a republuican House AND senate to back him up that Nixon dodn't have or basically this will go the same nowhere that all the other surefire Silver Bullets have gone.
There's more smoking guns in the Bush administration than in all of John Wayne's movies together but they still havent gotten even close to him yet.
Judging by past performance they'll stonewall--Bush won't say ANYTHING, just hide behind Mcclellan--until things die down and theyre paid stoooges inn the media and internet can sell the case that Bush had the right to leak classified info.
Expect a surprise, like another Swiftnboat atttack although that rersponse is getting a little hackneyed and clidhed.
If nothing elese. lets hope this kills Bush's pretend image as a "nice guy" He's a backstabbing lying weasel from the word GO.

Waas's excellent article goes to show that the Bush administrations main strategy is: Insulate Bush. Unless he REALLY fucked up,, which is entirely possible with the overconfident bastards.
So the question, again, like Watergate, is: What did Bush know and when did he know it?

Even through the worst of Watergate "management" never really lost control of anything in DC. The Dem's and Repugs are colleagues. It may seem hard to understand but they do all protect one another if possible to keep all of their gravy trains rolling in. They don't like outsiders who can't be controlled sniffing around town. Lot of skeletons.

This deal is out of "managements" control. Everyone is scared.

Don

not good

I'd like to see this revised deja vu...

Georgie, sitting behind a desk, leaning into it, in his best petulant voice saying, "I am not a leaker..."

I agree there are some differences, but there’s A LOT of similarities you cannot deny.

What all do we have?

-People searching for sources of leaks. CHECK

-Whistleblower retaliation. CHECK

-Anti-war demonstrations. CHECK

-Fighting for women’s rights. CHECK

-Fighting for environmental protection. CHECK

-Corporate corruption. CHECK

-Illegal wars (Cambodia and Laos back then). CHECK

-Misuse of the FBI and CIA. CHECK

-Sacrificing liberties in the interest of national security. CHECK

-Bribery, money laundering and illegal campaign contributions. CHECK

-Keeping stuff covered up for “national security reasons.” CHECK

-Illegal NSA domestic wiretapping. CHECK

-The Justice Department, grand juries, Independent Counsels and Federal Prosecutors investigating everything. CHECK

-A Vice President who deals in funny money business. CHECK

-Obstruction of justice. CHECK

-Impeachment committees being set up around the country and states and city councils passing resolutions. CHECK

Also, don’t Rice, Rove, Libby, Card, Hadley, Gonzales, McClellan, Goss, etc. remind you so much of Kissinger, Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Haig, Mitchell, Liddy, Hunt, McCord, and Ziegler?