Bush personally intervened to quash an investigation of Jack Abramoff

[Wurm]

The problem with an administration as blatantly criminal as Bush's is that there are so many scandals and near-scandals and situations-that-aren't-scandals-yet that it's hard to keep track of them all.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/18/125725/984

No doubt we'll see some support (excuses, lies) from wolfux, colorado rider, chance, et al.

 

[Hypnospin]

but what of applying the benefit of the doubt or innocence before guilt is proven, does this not apply to elected officials? even if it sure doesn't to the enemy combatants of (insert salute of your choice here) der repubulik.

after all, maybe these are only theoretical scandals, and like the proponents of teaching "intel-ah-gent de-sign" in the public schools we must keep an open mind.

like delay said, he was not guilty of any wrongdoings, as if this term somehow does not implicate one as being subject to the law...

if these things are to be handled anything like the way feeble congressional investigations let the money trail cool for the enron friends and family, we can be assured they are home free, or at most meet with the relatively minimal sentences of the white collar criminal.

but this is starting to ******** even those who are now disenfranchised wavers of the good ol' bush god 'n country banner, as there is only so much wool to lamely pull over their collective eyes.

The problem with an administration as blatantly criminal as Bush's is that there are so many scandals and near-scandals and situations-that-aren't-scandals-yet that it's hard to keep track of them all.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/18/125725/984

No doubt (excuses, lies) from assholes et al.

 

[lyotard]

however could bush have done this, when he states in direct qoute here
http://www.thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/
"i don't know" abramoff.
even though records show:
-photos of them together
(even though these were reported as "purged from the internet" in an attempt at damage control)
-details of intimate conversation
-200+ contacts with the bush team
-membership in the bush "pioneer" club
perhaps it is just a case of ignorance being presidential bliss.
or is that presidential perogative...

one caution to the viewing of this video, you must be able to tolerate queasy squirming, as a good bit of that goes down...

The problem with an administration as blatantly criminal as Bush's is that there are so many scandals and near-scandals and situations-that-aren't-scandals-yet that it's hard to keep track of them all.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/18/125725/984

No doubt we'll see some support (excuses, lies) from wolfux, colorado rider, chance, et al.

 

[lyotard]

however could bush have done this, when he states in direct qoute here
http://www.thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/bush-bobs-and-weaves/
"i don't know" abramoff.
even though records show:
-photos of them together
(even though these were reported as "purged from the internet" in an attempt at damage control)
-details of intimate conversation
-200+ contacts with the bush team
-membership in the bush "pioneer" club
perhaps it is just a case of ignorance being presidential bliss.
or is that presidential perogative...

one caution to the viewing of this video, you must be able to tolerate queasy squirming, as a good bit of that goes down...

The problem with an administration as blatantly criminal as Bush's is that there are so many scandals and near-scandals and situations-that-aren't-scandals-yet that it's hard to keep track of them all.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/18/125725/984

No doubt we'll see some support (excuses, lies) from wolfux, colorado rider, chance, et al.

 

[Wurm]

Lies, compounded lies, and more lies from the BushCo's.

It seems that's all they're able to do since they began their regime based on a fraudulent election in 2000.

Their arrogance and distain for the rule of law is breathtaking.

 

[davidmc]

Lies, compounded lies, and more lies from the BushCo's.

It seems that's all they're able to do since they began their regime based on a fraudulent election in 2000.

Their arrogance and distain for the rule of law is breathtaking.

To wit:
"Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said, "I think if we're going to be intellectually honest here, this really is the kind of thing that Alexander Hamilton was referring to when impeachment was discussed."

On Dec. 17, after the story of Bush's domestic spying broke in the New York Times, the president conceded that he had ordered the National Security Agency to intercept Americans' communications without seeking judicial approval. Unrepentant, the White House insisted that Bush had been granted such authority by the post-9/11 congressional resolution authorizing "all necessary force" in the fight against terrorism, and that the president would continue to order warrantless searches.

The next day, during a public discussion with Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., former Nixon White House counsel John Dean called Bush "the first president to admit to an impeachable offense." Boxer took Dean seriously enough to consult four presidential scholars about impeachment.

"This startling assertion by Mr. Dean is especially poignant because he experienced firsthand the executive abuse of power and a presidential scandal arising from the surveillance of American citizens," she wrote to them. "Given your constitutional expertise, particularly in the area of presidential impeachment, I am writing to ask for your comments and thoughts on Mr. Dean's statement."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/12/22/impeach/