16 Federal officials impeached...NO REPUBLICANS - WRONG!!!!!

[brickcitybrother]

Thanks for the detailed information. I still think talking about the political affilliation of Judges is the same as talking about the favorite teams of an NFL referee.

FK - I think you're partly correct. Judgeships are a very political appointment - Witness both the Roberts and Alito confirmation hearings ... as well as ... the Bork, Thomas, Wood, Miers... etc. The only thing that has even the greater potential for being politically motivated... Impeachments. lol

[yourdaddy]

Just Google William Belkbap, and read the biography. He was a democrat member of Congress from Iowa, then appointed by Ulysses S. Grant, to be Secretary of War. Lincoln was a Republican, but I don't think Grant was.

[brickcitybrother]

Just Google William Belkbap, and read the biography. He was a democrat member of Congress from Iowa, then appointed by Ulysses S. Grant, to be Secretary of War. Lincoln was a Republican, but I don't think Grant was.

Excuse me.... Perhaps you would like to READ ... what the White House Biographical page says about Grant? It says he was a REPUBLICAN. But then again, maybe you don't trust the George W. Bush White House's information. Click if you dare http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/ug18.html

Perhaps you'd prefer the Ulysses Grant homepage

http://www.mscomm.com/~ulysses/

Or you could try Minnesota's College of St. Scholastica ...

http://faculty.css.edu/mkelsey/usgrant/index.html

Or you could admit that Grant was a republican... Then again ... if you don't know what party one of our president's came from ... perhaps I need to stop the debate/discussion.

As far as Belknap... He WAS a democrat early in his career ... did not like it and then switch to the REPUBLICAN PARTY ... he then accepted over $24,000 in bribes.

P.S. Its Belknap and NOT Belkbap... in case someone cuts and pastes or google/yahoo for your post.

[Felicia Katt]

the only obfuscation that is going on here is that rather than focusing on all of the many present Republicans who are either indicted, or under investigation; Libby, Rove, Delay, Frist, Ney et al, we are talking about a long dead Republican.

Congrats, Yourdaddy. You took the heat off them for a little while. But its back on and this time, if you can't stand it, get out of the kitchen.

FK

[brickcitybrother]

the only obfuscation that is going on here is that rather than focusing on all of the many present Republicans who are either indicted, or under investigation; Libby, Rove, Delay, Frist, Ney et al, we are talking about a long dead Republican.

Congrats, Yourdaddy. You took the heat off them for a little while. But its back on and this time, if you can't stand it, get out of the kitchen.

FK

FK - Astute observation. I think between you, me and yourdaddy. You should get the prize for maintaining focus.

[chefmike]

Senator Specter says the "I" word re shrubya...

Specter Skeptical of Domestic Spy Program Sun Jan 15, 10:03 AM ET

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee expressed skepticism Sunday over President Bush's domestic eavesdropping program, joining a chorus of Republicans and Democrats who are questioning its legal justification.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who will hold hearings next month on the decision to allow the National Security Agency program without court approval, said he has told Bush administration officials that he believes they are on shaky legal ground.

Bush has pointed to a congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that authorized him to use force in the fight against terrorism as allowing him to order the program. The program authorized eavesdropping of international phone calls and e-mails of people deemed a terror risk.

"I thought they were wrong," Specter said on ABC's "This Week." "There still may be different collateral powers under wartime situations. That is a knotty question."

A number of members of Specter's committee, including GOP Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, have expressed doubt about the administration's legal basis. The hearings, planned for early February, will feature Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Specter, speaking in general terms, noted that impeachment and criminal prosecution are possibilities in the event a president acted unconstitutionally.

But Specter added: "I don't see any talk about impeachment here. I don't think anyone doubts the president is making a good-faith effort. He's acting in a way that he feels he must."

abcnews

"He's acting in a way that he feels he must."
I'm sure that tricky Dick (resigned in disgrace before being impeached) Nixon felt just the same.

[yourdaddy]

Well, EXCUSUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSE ME !!!!! I just thought Grant might have been a dem. That wasn't the gist of my post. But Boy, you libs are defending another Proud Republican, General Ulysses S. Grant. Don't we make the best Presidents?

[Felicia Katt]

Well, EXCUSUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSE ME !!!!! I just thought Grant might have been a dem. That wasn't the gist of my post. But Boy, you libs are defending another Proud Republican, General Ulysses S. Grant. Don't we make the best Presidents?

The "gist" of your post was that only Democrats were impeached. That was flatly wrong. More "gist" implied that all 16 were guilty. That was also way off. Still more "gist" was that only Democrats had scandals and that Nixon was somehow noble in his resignation. Way way off.

Your "gist" is anyone elses jest. it can't be taken seriously because its so provably wrong.

Your excused. Now go


FK

[brickcitybrother]

You're excused. And in no way was my response partisan. I just wanted the set your partisan ways straight ... since they were more crooked than 'Tricky Dick's' C.R.E.E.P. friends.

[chefmike]

The only impeachment that matters...

Blue Mass. Group

Reality-based commentary on politics and policy in Massachusetts and around the nation
Holy crap! A Republican Senator says the "I" word!

Our rights as citizens,The dissemination of truth, And, Impeachment

Whether or not Specter is sincere is probably not as important as having it said at all. If we do not seek Impeachment, we are threatening our right to have a secure, meaningful Constitution.
Figuring that my NSA file is probably already quite stuffed, I will chance my opinion here, to comment on two statements in this thread:

"So many of us quickly forget 911 and the resultant devastation to this country...but we do know that we havn't been hit since 911 , so he must be doing something right."

"Don't ever underestimate the political skill of Republicans to use reverse psychology for political purposes"

Having patiently waited for Democrats to finally find their elusive 'backbone,' it appears that we are now poised to stand tall. I suggest that we dust off our brains, and bombard the Internet with all of the 'things' we have conveniently forgotten, or, been too troubled to dare say in public.

As far as Presidential Authority goes 'in times of war', I suggest that we define the validity and origins of the phrases used by the Bush White House to defend their usurping of our Constitution in regards to limitation of power and the stripping of our rights granted within it's Articles.

Are we truly at war? What about the "War on Terror?" Consider the possibility that this has largely been inflated through the spurious actions of a megalomaniacal body of Cheney-Rumsfeld led hawks in Washington aided by people like Hughes and Rove to keep their 'need to know' agenda in check. The WHIGS psyops tool has served them well. Even Bin Laden, in his very last statement to America(which was never released here in full)warned us to look closely at our own government to find the real truth; adding that America could easily be bled dry financially through our Actions alone.

Next, what about our abiding citizens who so want to believe that justice is being served, that the events of the past five years have been necessary? They have been 'guided' through tactics such as fear.

Consider the spread of fear, with 'terror levels' and statements such as "it's not a matter of if, but, when." Think of people we know that have truly become spooked. This is far worse than what was seen in the years of the 'cold war.' Far worse than Vietnam. Think of all the families who will never recover. They have effectively been destroyed. Others will follow in the wake. This is our greatest sin. What Constituional protections have been disallowed in this debacle?

It is my determination that if the Democrats are finding their backbone, the awareness level of the American Public is about to do a 180 if the truth is forced to come out.

As this unfolds, people will not be too happy to have had fear forced upon them. As the cloud of deception lifts, there are a good many Americans who will be abhorred at what comes to light. It will be seen that our country has been divided on purpose, that those of strong faith have been used, their deep religious leanings have been mocked--as tools for the personal agendas of an Administration that has needed the blinded backing of a 'majority,' even if that 'majority' has in truth also been inflated. Mocking dissenters and instituting a news-blackout has allowed the agenda to continue. Fear is a powerful tool. It is an Orwellian tactic that has led too many Americans to gladly give up freedom in order to be free.

This amounts to treasonous acts. ANY ADMINISTRATION THAT FORCES SUCH ACTIONS UPON IT'S CITIZENS is willfully stripping them of their Constitutional rights. How dare they call US traitors if we ask questions, or dissent!

I, for one, refuse to accept the statement that we are "at war." No one 'declared war' on the United States. We are in Iraq solely because certain people, with the grand designs they helped to formulate many Administrations ago, KNEW they would have their 'in' with a Bush presidency. No one will EVER convince me that 9-11 took Washington by surprise. This is AS FAR AS I WILL GO HERE, yet, I suggest that people start truly educating themselves of the facts surrounding the origins of this 'war on terror.' Consider who we really should be fearing, then, consider why "we havn't been hit since 911."

Google the chatter on the 22nd Amendment. Wonder how far presidential privilege is willing to go to keep their agenda on the table. DO NOT GIVE THEM THE CHANCE TO SHUT DOWN ANY MORE CITIES to 'prove' we are still targets, or, allow them to avert our attention from what's REALLY going on. We must NOT delay.

Consider what Syria and Iran means at this junction, as Iraq is no longer important to the Administration. Keep up with the news on which countries we are condemning, which ones we are courting, and ask yourself : "WHY?" Look for the news that cannot be blacked-out on the Internet.

While you're at it, find out what 'depleted uranium' really is. I apologize for suggesting this, for, it is the one topic I wish I was ignorant about.

Considering the aforementioned 'reverse' psychological machinations of the current administration, realize that the only way to stop the machine is to gather up all the wrenches we can muster to throw at it from all sides, all angles, every minute of every day from here on in.

Be good citizens. Let our reps know the time has come to take back America.!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by: swampfox @ January 18, 2006 at 04:02:32 EST