Friday, March 14, 2008
Monday, March 3, 2008
Here we go folks...
As I have been posting on this subject for what seems like my entire adult life, we are about to see an end to the FISA telecom immunity story for good. When the House caves in finally and gives Bush the immunity bill he has been terrifying the country that he needed, that will be the end of it. We will never fully know what the president and the NSA were doing. We will never know if it actually was illegal. We will never know the full scope of this story. Remember people, this wasn't the president wiretapping the Democratic National Committee building to hear what his opponents were up to. This was your president casting a huge data mining net over the entire country to see what YOU were up to. Hope you haven't bought any Noam Chomsky books recently or you might be getting a knock on the door soon. What this also enables is future president's, whether Republican or Democratic, to do the same damn thing all over again. This is a sad day for our fading "democracy". Please pour a little from your 40 oz tonight in loving memory.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin
UPDATE: Here's blue gal's piece on C&L about how Bush will bury his legacy for future generations to never look into. Good times.
Friday, February 29, 2008
What a shocker....
Attorney General Mukasey will not probe the contempt of Josh Bolton or Harriet Miers because no crime was committed. Silly Congress, testifying before a grand jury is for people who break the law, not people who work in the Executive Branch of government. As we all know, if the President commits a crime it ceases to be a crime. With all the controversy swirling around Gov. Seigelman's case, these two nitwits should be in jail already. It's gonna be a long time before I trust my government again.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
What a crybaby....
Here's your President:
Once again people, say it with me. If no crime was committed, then why the immunity? Have you ever heard of anyone who needed immunity for something that wasn't illegal? He can't even say if they did "help" the government because that would automatically prove the standing of these lawsuits. As we have seen, our Judicial branch refused to hear one case because of standing. Bush uses the word "believed" to have helped. Then he cries, "unfair"! Really? Like getting sent to prison for 8 years for political reasons?
The government said to those who have alleged to have helped us that it is in our national interests and it's legal. It's in our national interest because we want to know who's calling who from overseas into America. We need to know in order to protect the people.
It was legal. And now all of a sudden plaintiffs attorneys, class-action plaintiffs attorneys, you know I don't want to try to get inside their head; I suspect they see, you know, a financial gravy train are trying to sue these companies. It's unfair. It is patently unfair."
Once again notice the very interesting choice of words, "alleged to have helped us". If they didn't help us, why does Bush care if they get immunity? If they get sued for 5 billion, Bush can then give the telecoms 5 billion in subsidies or whatnot. That's not the real point, the real point is no trials. If trials happen, then disclosure happens. Then impeachment and jail sentences follow.
Finally, I LOVE hearing Bush talk of financial "gravy trains". Not that the Iraq war hasn't been one huge gravy train for Halliburton, Blackwater, Betchel, KBR, etc. It's almost too much hypocrisy for one's brain to fathom.