This is NOT ABOUT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. This is about IGNORING SUBPOENAS!

helderheid

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 10:39 AM
Original message

This is NOT ABOUT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. This is about IGNORING SUBPOENAS!

Fucking neo-cons. AGH!!

http://www.cspan.org/watch/cs_cspan3_rm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS3

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Deep13

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 10:42 AM
Response to Original message

1. Executive privilege equals no legislative oversight on the "president"...

...or the rest of the executive branch.

Good thing executive privilege does not exist.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mediaman007

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 10:45 AM
Response to Original message

2. What a "Good-old-boy" Club...on a amendment vote

The Democrats feature Whites, Blacks, men, women (a cross section of America). The GOP: white men!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mod mom

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 10:46 AM
Response to Original message

3. I wish they would yield you the floor to point that out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TahitiNut

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 10:53 AM
Response to Original message

4. The White House claims a willingness to answer questions (in 'private') ....

... at the very same time they claim that answering such questions (in 'public' and under oath) violates "Executive Privilege."

This is a repudiation of their own stance - a contradiction. 'Executive Privilege' is wholly related to confidentiality - and the privilege to keep such information from Congress. They cannot logically both agree to disclosure and claim to not disclose. In essence, they're asserting a 'privilege' to LIE ... without penalty.

It's batshit insane.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Swamp Rat

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #4

6. B I N G O

Edited on Wed Jul-25-07 10:55 AM by Swamp Rat

:applause:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LSK

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 10:54 AM
Response to Original message

5. but the Clenis claimed executive priviledge

:eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

radfringe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 11:09 AM
Response to Original message

7. but there's no underlying crime

the republic logic at it's best...

because there was no underlying crime - the subpoenas should not have been issued in the first place - therefore there's no contempt for ignoring the subpoenas

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bigtree

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #7

8. that's why Conyers alleged an underlying crime in his remarks today

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

radfringe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #8

9. I know it, you know it and Conyers knows it

but since when do facts apply to republic spin? :evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Mon Apr 29th 2024, 01:41 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

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.