Attribute this to my ignorance of legal intricacies, but, how can conversations about the fired USA's be considered executive privilege? Is it executive privilege to discuss inappropriate and from what I can see, an illegal practice of firing atty's during ongoing investigations? Besides what I read/ hear from the limited news I get over the pond, I'd like clarification on this one, as this seems too blatant an abuse for words...
Thanks
--Anthony
Patrick Fitgerald Targeted by Bush Administration for Firing
U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald was ranked among prosecutors who had "not distinguished themselves" on a Justice Department chart sent to the White House in March 2005, when he was in the midst of leading the CIA leak investigation that resulted in the perjury conviction of a vice presidential aide, administration officials said yesterday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031902036.html
Oh, this is getting better by the day!
In reference to the DOJ: "This is just a made-up scandal by the Democrats." Tom DeLay, The Today Show this morning.
"I was never charged with violating any ethics." It was those nasty Democrats who were after him for the past twelve years, and they finally succeeded. GOP, the Party of No Responsibility.
Posted by Judith at March 20, 2007 05:22 AMEven though Speaker Nancy "Armani shawl" Pelosi says "impeachment is off the table," Rep. Dennis Kucinich disagrees.
In a recent YouTube piece Kuchinich says:
"This House cannot avoid its constitutionally authorized responsibility to restrain the abuse of Executive power," Kucinich said on the floor Thursday. "The Administration has been preparing for an aggressive war against Iran. There is no solid, direct evidence that Iran has the intention of attacking the United States or its allies."
Kucinich added, "Since war with Iran is an option of this Administration and since such war is patently illegal, then impeachment may well be the only remedy which remains to stop a war of aggression against Iran."
"I'm asking you. Do you think it's time?"
Yes Rep. Kucinich. A thousand times, yes, impeach the son-of-a-bitch and be done with it.
Posted by Christopher at March 20, 2007 06:04 AMI'm curious, Christopher - what does Pelosi's choice of outerwear have to do with anything? Have Armani shawls been deemed "anti-progressive" somehow? Could you point me to the memo that tells us which designers are "bad" and which are "allowable" for progressives, so none of us make the same (apparently) dreadful faux pas? As the self-appointed fashion police for female politicians, you need to give us all the lowdown so that we, too, can judge our female representatives on their looks rather than their substance. And you might consider branching out and policing the male politicians as well - remember what fun the "earth tones" debate was in 2000? Ah, good times...
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 08:07 AMiamcoyote, As the self-appointed defender of the do-nothing Democratic leadership, including AIPAC's queen, Hillary Clinton, I think you answered your own question.
Posted by Christopher at March 20, 2007 08:44 AMAn obfuscation worthy of Rove, honey. I say you've got a thing for judging women on what they're wearing and how they look, and you say I'm a Hillary/AIPAC lover? You should be on Fox News! You're THAT good!
You didn't answer the questions, though. Who are the discerning progressives wearing this year? And when will you expand your schtick to include the male progressive fashion show? We're all breathless in anticipation of your Spring picks, sweetie.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 08:56 AMAs I said before Pumpkin, your obsession with me is mildly curious but I suppose in your case, negative attention is better than no attention at all.
Now run along: your broom is departing is 10 minutes.
Posted by Christopher at March 20, 2007 09:05 AMcyt, Pls s mmbr f th wlkng dd. nc wmn chvs ths lf-stg, sh fcss pn spndng mny ndlssly, whl gnrng hr fmly, ths tht sh lvs. n nthr wy, Pls hts hr fmly, bt prtnds t lv vryn tsd hr fmly, nd trs t mprss thm by fllwng Stnc rls f hrrchy. Ths s th smpl dfntn f sprtl Jzbl/whr; snd fmlr?
S, w hr th mldy: Jzbl fr Prsdnt! f s, w gnn s whl lt mr xpns thn rmn: hw bt xtrvgnt 757's? yh.
Cyt, 'm s GLD y'r stll hr; rlly cn't d mch thnkng wtht yr flshnss:)
[Editor: ignore=off]You still haven't answered the question, princess, and I'm just dying to know. How is your obsession with female politicians' clothing and looks any different from the right wing punditry's obsession with Al Gore's earth tones in 2000? It's a valid question, isn't it? Why do you avoid it?
And knowing I'm female, why do you insist on making allusions to broomsticks (a really cute way of calling me a witch, I must say, sweetie darling) rather than actually answering the question? You seem to have proven my point.
I guess what I'm asking, really, is why do you find it necessary to denigrate women at all? Are you afraid of them? Do you hate women? Or just progressive women? I'm genuinely curious, because your descriptions of Pelosi are almost exactly the same descriptions of her one might read at right wing sites.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 09:18 AMOnce a woman achieves this life-stage, she focuses upon spending money needlessly, while ignoring her family, those that she loves. In another way, Pelosi hates her family, but pretends to love everyone outside her family, and tries to impress them by following Satanic rules of hierarchy. This is the simple definition of a spiritual Jezebel/whore...
Once again scout is up to his old antics about sucessful women politicians being "whores" and "Jesebels"!
Truly pathetic scout, truly pathetic!
House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee Chairwoman Linda Sanchez called a meeting to authorize subpoenas for five current and former White House and Justice Department officials this morning...
Karl Rove and Harriet Meirs are among them!
Raw Story has it!
SoS, looks like Christopher's got a new friend, doesn't it? I think they'll be very happy together! *snicker*
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 09:52 AMAll right, SoS! I wonder if there's any legal way for Rove to avoid testifying?? Where's dj when you need him?
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 09:57 AMcyt, hw s t tht y'r ld frnds rmn frnds?
Gr? Y mn th crp tht nvntd th ntrnt nd glbl wrmng? Crp, y knw bt th frmr, nd wld thnk tht y wld ls knw tht w hv cycls f c gs nd wrmng, s, hw crdbl s Gr? bt s crdbl s tht lttl pnk tht cn't spll 'ptt?' yh.
S, ys, y CN cmpr th Gry n t th wlkng dd, Pls.
7, rlly, mst clm Pls, s m wthn vwng dstrct f hr ffdm, lbt sdly, nd wthn th ppr Jzbl dmn f Fnstn nd Bxr; ys, trgs t hv thr kllrs ll wlkng hnd-n-hnd wthn thr llsns f dmnnc. Wll, s t nt wrttn tht y wll b rld by chldrn nd wmn? hp y'r hppy wht C hs gvn th wrld: dmns f Stnc trsh. S frghtnd, tht thy cn't rmmbr th grd pn dt f wthdrwl frm rq, nd rfs t stnd p fr th smpl rghts f ppl n ths cntry frst, nd n thr cntrs nxt.
nd, 7, s y thnk t's ll bt ldy tryng t gt hd? Hr fmly nds hr, bt sh wnts t prty-ll-nght-lng. Y sw wht hppnd t Brtny? Wll, th Jzbl ds th sm thng t ll f th ppl: smply l, twstd dffrntly.
d, dn't gt yr mnpsl-hypr-snstv-dndr ll rsd p; smply thnk, nd 'll rspnd. Why s t tht y'r lwys tryng t kll m ff? Jst lk Jzbl: 'm K, nly f gr wth yr trsh-tlk.
ltr
[Editor: ignore=off]Wow, SoS - it looks like your guy Kyl's amendment to Feinstein's "Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act of 2007" failed miserably. Ya think Bush will veto?
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 10:10 AMiamcrapola - Like I said, for you, negative attention is better than no attention at all.
Posted by Christopher at March 20, 2007 12:32 PMStill afraid to answer the question, eh, princess? That's okay, we already know the answer.
Bush is going on tv to say "Heckofajob Abu G" this afternoon. This oughta be good.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 12:45 PMchrs, thnk jst fgrd t why cyt s jst btng mldly, wtht psn: t's y tht sh lvs! 'mcrpl,' yh, tht's ttlly sck!
[Editor: ignore=off]iamcrapola, You can take comfort knowing at least there's one person nuttier than you and his name is George W. Bush. Pssst, in the meantime, loosen the weave -- it's cutting off the blood to your tiny brain.
Posted by Christopher at March 20, 2007 03:12 PMThere's that weave thing again! WTF is a "weave," something to do with hair? So, your idea of a good political argument is to pretend I have bad hair? Hilarious! Thank you for proving my point - I look forward to your upcoming assessment of Bush's clothing and hairstyle at today's speech.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 20, 2007 03:32 PMI'm sure you will, Pumpkin. As I said before, your obsession with me is mildly curious and more than a bit peculiar.
Posted by Christopher at March 21, 2007 05:22 AM