May 21, 2007

Start Using It?

The nutroots that control the Democratic Party haven't stopped using it since January 21, 2001. Why should we be surprised that they have turned their sites on Alberto Gonzales -- despite the fact that he is not accused of a single high crime or misdemeanor, merely carrying out a policy the nutroots dislike?

The Gonzales hearings have made plain for all to see that the highest law enforcement officer in the land is unwilling to tell the truth under oath. He doesn't recall, or he doesn't know, or he answers questions with questions, evading the issues. He can't remember his own name, his job title, details of meetings or decisions or strategies.

* * *

Let's not be shy. Let's get the "I" word -- IMPEACHMENT -- out there loud and clear. Say it, SHOUT it -- it has a good patriotic feel to it. And yes, in fact, the attorney general CAN be impeached. It is legal, it is proper, it is time.

Here is your ammunition for impeachment -- a video, a petition, a whole campaign to get the House Judiciary Committee to launch this action, NOW. We and our friends and partners at Democracy for America want and need your help.

Don't just be angry, don't just be annoyed, don't yell at the ones you love. IMPEACH GONZALES.

Let's see -- these folks were quite supportive of a president who couldn't remember having sex with a federal employee in the office, using his office to actually obstruct justice, misusing FBI files, and other actual high crimes and misdemeanors -- but they are more than willing to go after this administration and its officials for firing employees who serve at the pleasure of the president. I guess though, that it is the party, not the facts, that matter to such folks.

Posted by: Greg at 10:26 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Perjury

Posted by: Dan at Tue May 22 00:32:37 2007 (IU21y)

2 Illegal domestic spying.

Posted by: Dan at Tue May 22 00:37:09 2007 (IU21y)

3 No perjury, and the program was, in fact, legal under federal law.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Tue May 22 11:15:08 2007 (39aMb)

4 Wrong on both counts, RWR. He lied about the US attorney scandal, and he lied about the Spying program (and more, but those will suffice for the impeachment). And the warrantless domestic spying was NOT legal - as has been admitted by all credible rightwing sources (except under the unitary executive theory, which I don't accept, and you shouldn't, either, because I don't think you'd like the way it would work under a Democratic president).

Posted by: Dan at Tue May 22 12:53:59 2007 (IU21y)

5 No, Dan -- there is Supreme Court precedent allowing exactly that sort of surveilance provided that the evidence collected is being used for national security purposes, not for prosecutions.

I even recall two Democrats who used precisely such powers -- Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Jimmy Carter. They were right then, and the Bush administration is right now.

And there is NO PERJURY.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Tue May 22 13:13:34 2007 (F7csV)

6 Pre-FISA. You lose.

On perjury, he said there weren't concerns about the NSA program, and then it turns out they tried to take advantage of a sick Ashcroft. Pathetic behavior he lied about. Perjury.

Posted by: Dan at Tue May 22 14:00:57 2007 (IU21y)

7 Actually, I'd disagree -- there were no concerns on the part of the White House about the program.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Tue May 22 14:21:39 2007 (qAmhO)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
8kb generated in CPU 0.0058, elapsed 0.0141 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0096 seconds, 36 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]