citizensforethics.org— Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics In Washington (CREW) won a ruling in court from District Court Judge Henry Kennedy allowing them to press for the infamous missing emails.
Nov 10, 2008View in Crawl 4
This will go about as well as that warrant for Bush in Vermont.Now the question is, will Obama's administration be fully compliant with the Federal Records Act? I'm getting pretty suspicious of him, now that it appears he'll be tossing Executive Orders out like candy once he takes office. What happened to that whole thing of working to roll back all that power that Bush amassed for the office of the President?
Wow, all this assumption that I'm a Bush fan? Is that because I disagree with Obama's policies?I guess not agreeing with Obama = Bush lover in your weak little child-like mind. Unfortunately for you reality isn't that black and white.Too bad you weren't teaching at a certain Haitian school, last week. It would have done the gene pool a favor.
Hang these traitors now! ALL OF THEM! bush n co, bernanke paulson, all of the house and senate members who repeatedly helped destroy the constitution, and somehow all of the international banking families that's been pillaging us since 1913! If the law doesn't do it, citizens will revolt and shoot these greedy tyrants on the street where they stand!
Not a valid question, an irrelevant question.Changing the subject is a classic apologist tactic. The outcome of the CREW lawsuit determining whether or not the CURRENT president has the power to ignore the Presidential Records Act will naturally determine whether or not FUTURE presidents have that power.
Almost forgot:Do you even know how to properly use apologist? I'm wondering because I haven't offered any defense of Bush, his ideals, or his policy, in the least. The guy was a less than stellar president whose presidency was marked with countless f**k-ups and f**k-overs. However, that does not mean that the person replacing him as a rebuke of Bush's administration will be a glorious president by default. Or is that idea just too much for you?I guess I'm correct in assuming that one must have a massive blind hatred of the man, to the point of rallying to see him to see him executed for treason (or some bulls**t like that) in order to not be called a Bush backer, neo-con, or apologist.Now, if being a registered republican who voted for a third party candidate in each of the last three presidential elections makes me a Bush apologist, then fine...I can deal with that I suppose.
Closed AccountNov 11, 2008
This will go about as well as that warrant for Bush in Vermont.Now the question is, will Obama's administration be fully compliant with the Federal Records Act? I'm getting pretty suspicious of him, now that it appears he'll be tossing Executive Orders out like candy once he takes office. What happened to that whole thing of working to roll back all that power that Bush amassed for the office of the President?
Closed AccountNov 11, 2008
Wow, all this assumption that I'm a Bush fan? Is that because I disagree with Obama's policies?I guess not agreeing with Obama = Bush lover in your weak little child-like mind. Unfortunately for you reality isn't that black and white.Too bad you weren't teaching at a certain Haitian school, last week. It would have done the gene pool a favor.
cheney4nazisNov 11, 2008
Hang these traitors now! ALL OF THEM! bush n co, bernanke paulson, all of the house and senate members who repeatedly helped destroy the constitution, and somehow all of the international banking families that's been pillaging us since 1913! If the law doesn't do it, citizens will revolt and shoot these greedy tyrants on the street where they stand!
swrostmoreNov 11, 2008
Not a valid question, an irrelevant question.Changing the subject is a classic apologist tactic. The outcome of the CREW lawsuit determining whether or not the CURRENT president has the power to ignore the Presidential Records Act will naturally determine whether or not FUTURE presidents have that power.
Closed AccountNov 11, 2008
Wow, you are a dolt.
Closed AccountNov 11, 2008
Almost forgot:Do you even know how to properly use apologist? I'm wondering because I haven't offered any defense of Bush, his ideals, or his policy, in the least. The guy was a less than stellar president whose presidency was marked with countless f**k-ups and f**k-overs. However, that does not mean that the person replacing him as a rebuke of Bush's administration will be a glorious president by default. Or is that idea just too much for you?I guess I'm correct in assuming that one must have a massive blind hatred of the man, to the point of rallying to see him to see him executed for treason (or some bulls**t like that) in order to not be called a Bush backer, neo-con, or apologist.Now, if being a registered republican who voted for a third party candidate in each of the last three presidential elections makes me a Bush apologist, then fine...I can deal with that I suppose.
nattybumpoeNov 11, 2008
Finally! The news returns to what is going on in the country!