RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and

RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Sanity -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 5:30:16 PM)
[yawn] Could it be... he delegates authority? [/yawn] quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle http://balkin.blogspot.com/2007/03/so-much-for-unitary-executive.html INTERESTING. If BUSH wasn't AWARE of the removal of USAs, how could they be serving at HIS pleasure?

farglebargle -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 5:35:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity [yawn] Could it be... he delegates authority? [/yawn] Well, I don't see the LAW permitting him to do that, do you have a citation? It doesn't say "Serves at the pleasure of the Attorney Generals Chief of Staff". If the President DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE REMOVALS, then how can it be said that they were serving at HIS PLEASURE?

servantforuse -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 5:45:36 PM)
Could someone explain something to me. Why was it ok for Bill Clinton to fire all 93 A G's when he took office, but it is wrong for George Bush to fire 8 of 93 A G's six years into his term ? He felt they weren't doing the job and they were let go. They do serve this administration, or did.. This has happened since George Washington was President...It is not illegal and it certainly is not a scandal.

servantforuse -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 5:51:43 PM)
The liberals on here are making my head spin and i'mnot thinking clear right now. As for my previous post we are talking about Federal prosecuters and not the A G.....

Sanity -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 5:56:15 PM)
What pisses me off is that the President doesn't come out breathing fire and asking the same question. I guess that if there's one thing I really dislike about W it's that, he's too damn nice. Here, the Libs are huuuge hypocrites, and the Prez just sits on his thumbs... it's been like this ever since he was elected.

Sanity -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 5:59:10 PM)
Where's the LAW that says the President can look out over the rose garden. Maybe it's illegal for him to do that too. Hmm? quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Well, I don't see the LAW permitting him to do that, do you have a citation?

servantforuse -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 6:00:57 PM)
Your'e right sanity. He is being a wimp on this issue and several others. These Prosecuters are appointed, not elected.

SirDiscipliner69 -> What is the problem with telling the truth? (3/24/2007 6:02:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Could someone explain something to me. Why was it ok for Bill Clinton to fire all 93 A G's when he took office, but it is wrong for George Bush to fire 8 of 93 A G's six years into his term ? Just put them all under oath and tell Us all about it. What is the problem with telling the truth? Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

SirDiscipliner69 -> Sure you been in the same century as most of Us? (3/24/2007 6:04:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity W it's that, he's too damn nice. Here, the Libs are huuuge hypocrites, and the Prez just sits on his thumbs... it's been like this ever since he was elected. Sure you been in the same century as most of Us? Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

servantforuse -> RE: Sure you been in the same century as most of Us? (3/24/2007 6:08:06 PM)
Why didn't Bill Clinton go under oath to explain his firing of all 93 prosecuters?? Talk about a double standard.

Sanity -> RE: Sure you been in the same century as most of Us? (3/24/2007 6:08:54 PM)
Ooh, owch... I'm not sure I can ever recover from a zinger like that quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 Sure you been in the same century as most of Us? Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

Sinergy -> RE: What is George Bush hiding?????? Can you say "Impeach"? (3/24/2007 6:09:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Here we go again is right. Same response. BS. We went over this all in another thread. Fake document, by a politically motivated hack, where you can't get anyone to take any of it serious. FirmKY Such a lucid refutation of 62 points of evidence which could be used in a court case. "Yer honor, everything the prosecution just said is bullshit" Joe Pesci, My Cousin Vinny Sinergy

servantforuse -> RE: What is George Bush hiding?????? Can you say "Impeach"? (3/24/2007 6:18:48 PM)
I guess my question won't be answered. Why is it ok when Clinton fires 93 prosecutors and it's wrong for Bush to fire 8??

farglebargle -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 6:23:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Could someone explain something to me. Why was it ok for Bill Clinton to fire all 93 A G's when he took office, but it is wrong for George Bush to fire 8 of 93 As we're learning from the Paperwork, George Bush didn't Fire the 8 USAs. And that may be yet another problem. If the USAs serve at his pleasure, then only he can ask them to go, and it looks like he didn't even delegate the responsibility, he DID NOT KNOW ABOUT IT AT ALL ( according to Tony Snow )... That aside. It's not asking the USAs to go. It's LYING about their performance records, in some lame attempt to spin ASKING them to go. IF Bush had ONLY asked them to go, and not chose to lie about them not being up to performance expectations, this wouldn't be an issue. quote: A G's six years into his term ? He felt they weren't doing the job and they were let go. They do serve this administration, or did.. This has happened since George Washington was President...It is not illegal and it certainly is not a scandal. However, as John Ashcroft pointed out on numerous occasions, the USA's oath is NOT to the President, it is to the Constitution. We have, from what I gather, TWO cases where USAs investigating crimes allegedly committed by "Loyal Bushies" ( Friends Of Jack Abrhamoff in one, and Alberto Gonzales in the other ) were obstructed along the way. Obstruction of Justice is a crime. Lying is a crime. ( under 18 USC 1001, 18 USC 371, et. al. ) I don't see where the Constitution delegates to anyone the authority to LIE.

farglebargle -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and (3/24/2007 6:27:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Where's the LAW that says the President can look out over the rose garden. Maybe it's illegal for him to do that too. Hmm? quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Well, I don't see the LAW permitting him to do that, do you have a citation? I hate having to explain to people that the way our government works is that the Feds are ONLY Permitted to do EXACTLY what they are told, by the Constitution, Amendments and Laws promulgated by The People via their representatives in The Legislature. Therefore, THERE IS NO FREE WILL in any Federal Employee or Officer's authority. They ONLY get to go "By The Book", with EVERYTHING ELSE being, by the 9th and 10th Amendments, reserved to The People. IF it's not explicitly granted by law, there is no authority to delegate. IF they wanted the Attorney General to make the call, the Constitution and Law wouldn't say "At the pleasure of The President". It would say, "At the pleasure of The President, or his lawfully designated representative". OR It would say, "At the pleasure of the Attorney General". But it doesn't.

Sinergy -> RE: What is George Bush hiding?????? Can you say "Impeach"? (3/24/2007 6:28:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Seatonstomb You have only yourselves to blame for electing him once after his brother fixed it for him the first time. We(Brits) are guilty of electing American Puppet PM like Blair and Thatcher. I did not vote for Monkeyboy. In fact, the state I live in didn't either. It just upsets me that my state is sullied from the shit-bomb detonated by Dumbfuckistan. Sinergy

farglebargle -> RE: What is George Bush hiding?????? Can you say "Impeach"? (3/24/2007 6:31:09 PM)
( The Financial Auditor in me would like to point out that the results of any election in the US are laughable. )

Sinergy -> RE: What is George Bush hiding?????? Can you say "Impeach"? (3/24/2007 6:33:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse I guess my question won't be answered. Why is it ok when Clinton fires 93 prosecutors and it's wrong for Bush to fire 8?? I never said any of them had a problem firing people. Clinton got rid of the President Born With A Silver Foot In His Mouth's attorneys when he took over the Presidency. This actually is something people who take jobs in Washington D.C. for a particular party accept and understand could or will happen. Monkeyboys people publicly stated that they were all fired for non-performance, which is slander. He could have just fired them, everybody would have gone "political firings" and not thought twice about it, but since he decided to illegally trash their reputation when he did so, he crossed a line somewhere. This line would be because the branch of government he is in charge of includes law enforcement. Sinergy p.s. Monkeyboy lives under a strange mental defect where he honestly believes he is above the law.

servantforuse -> RE: What is George Bush hiding?????? Can you say "Impeach"? (3/24/2007 6:41:12 PM)
The non performance is an issue. These attorneys work for this administration and were not prosecuting certain cases. They were not doing the job this administration wanted them to do. If they think they were slandered they should sue. They know the law, they are lawyers and will not do so.

FirmhandKY -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (3/24/2007 6:49:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY It's a show trial. Just as the Plame hearings were show trials. Might you then explain this: Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1495077.ece If that is not hypocracy showings what might be? Your ease of assuming facts not in evidence is what is showing. Of course that was a show trial as well. It was wrong then. It is wrong now. The criminalization of political dissent is one of the worst things to happen to our republic in the last 50 years. FirmKY

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875