tpmmuckraker.com — The Bush administration may have broken over two dozen federal laws and regulations -- some of them multiple times -- according to an unreleased report from the House Judiciary Committee Democrats. "The misconduct I have found is not only serious, but widespread," reads a draft summary of the report by Ranking Member John Conyers (D-MI)
Jul 31, 2006 View in Crawl 4
bryaneddsAug 1, 2006
The problem is not who's in charge of politics. The problems IS politics.<a class="user" href="http://www.mises.org">http://www.mises.org</a>
thehighchildAug 1, 2006
ShintaGlad some asshat believes it. You wouldn't believe the money this Admin has spent trying to brainwash this nation. You're a shining example of how low the intellectual threshold really is in this country.Be proud! Not many can go day-to-day with little to no capacity for reasoning. AND you can use a computer! Praise Jesus!
okcomputer1982Aug 1, 2006
@biggfreddyWhile I agree that the Democrats do not stand up for what they believe in, don't you agree that the regardless of political alignment, regardless of what happened in the past, the rule of law need to be protected. If Bush and company broken the law, let them be investigated. It's not a political issue. Either America is a law abiding place or not. If not, well, I guess it is pretty clear that we are no longer the "best country in the world, huh." Heck, i know I would leave if I could.
Closed AccountAug 2, 2006
Democrats charged Newt Gingrich with over 300 counts of law breaking activity when he was the Speaker of the House. Newt went to court on several of those charges. He was found guilty of not a thing. "The Bush administration may have broken over two dozen federal laws and regulations -- some of them multiple times -- according to an unreleased report from the House Judiciary Committee Democrats." May have?!?! Don't they even know?Get it yet?
vixiecronAug 2, 2006
"It's a very subjecting thing what is reasonable..."Wow. Read as "It's a very subjective thing what is reasonable...I should proofread more thoroughly.
hallsofmandosAug 3, 2006
That is a terrible argument. Are we to do nothing because this is the way it has always been? What I basically hear (and not just from you, so please do not misconstrue this as a personal attack, it is not) is this: "Politicians have always been corrupt, Democrats and Republicans alike, so why should we stand up against it now when we did not do so in the past?" That attitude will insure that the trend continues. Unfortunately for Republicans, it was their guy in office when public outcry against this trend (yes it has been going on for a very long time) reached critical mass. I, and many others I hope, understand that the situation will not be remedied completely with a shift from Republican to Democrat. Of course, it IS a step in the right direction for the short-term, but a goal for the long term would be to begin the implementation of policies that would shift the power away from the various corporate lobbies in this country and into the hands of the people. Sadly, with the attention span in this country being so short, it will likely need a miracle for such long-term strategy to ever be considered, let alone implemented.Just remember in November (and every election): Do not think that you are throwing away your vote if you choose to note vote for a major party. Your vote is your voice, whether or not you side with the winning team.
vixiecronAug 3, 2006
If you think so, *vote*. ~half still do not.
vixiecronAug 3, 2006
I guess I should answer your first question explicitly...I am worried when one branch of government violates the constitution such as doing something I would consider 'unreasonable' wrt. the fourth amendment. However, when I see other branches of government putting the offending branch back in their place and I see 'reasonable' behavior continuing from then on (until the next outrage of the week), then no, I'm not particularly worried then. I see the system of checks and balances and I see it (eventually) working as intended. I see some gray areas between the powers of different branches of government, of course. However, I see these being minimized by more specific legislation. Legislation being part of the system of checks and balances in the first place, I see the system again (eventually) working as intended and so again I'm not particularly worried. Therefore, in not so many words, I'm not worried.