View Story | 49 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
i'm not the one obsessed with the telecom immunity issue. I just find it amusing that other people can be so obsessed with it, when it means absolutely nothing without a threat to impeach or prosecute.
Since "smart" people like you seem to scorn the idea, why don't you tell me why I should care about telecom amnesty?
Also, you intend to follow me into every diary I write to shit in the pond? Insecure much?
Head to Heading Left, BlogTalkRadio's progressive radio site!
by thereisnospoon on Thu May 01, 2008 at 03:22:04 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
And I'm insecure, which is why I scoffed at this diary (and hundreds of others over the last year and a half arguing for the imperative to impeach).
The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.
by DHinMI on Thu May 01, 2008 at 03:27:43 PM PDT
whatever, DH. What about out-of-office prosecution?
Look, I haven't hit the impeachment gong for a long time. I can go either way on it, and both arguments pro and con are fairly convincing to me.
All I'm saying is that the fight over telecom amnesty is more than a little silly without any realistic threat to hold the Administration accountable. Bush is the target, not AT&T.
by thereisnospoon on Thu May 01, 2008 at 03:29:56 PM PDT
by daliscar on Thu May 01, 2008 at 03:33:12 PM PDT
Civil Damage, plus Atty's fees, is nothing to sneeze at. Perhaps a trillion dollars in total.
The 4th Amendment: It's not just for dope dealers anymore.
by ben masel on Thu May 01, 2008 at 04:11:01 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 49 comments