Skip to main content

View Diary: Telecom Immunity Gives Bush Immunity (209 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Damn right--GREAT DIARY! (10+ / 0-)

    Yell Louder, as buhdy says.

    This is the last step in destroying ALL trails of evidence. BushCO has burned some, erased some, and probably thrown some in the Potomac, with lead weights attached to it. If Telecomm Immunity passes, there's no need to impeach, you do realize that, don't you? There will be NO EVIDENCE LEFT.

    Get this word OUT, and get it to Wexler. And bug the crap out of Pelosi and Conyers with it, too. Surely they know about it already, but let's remind them that WE do, too.

    Reality leaves a lot to the imagination--John Lennon

    by o the umanity on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 05:26:30 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  o the umanity... (3+ / 0-)

      here we are again today trying to do something about the crimes of this damn administration!  This will look really nice in the impeachment documents... but who is guilty... George or Dick... George and Dick?  What about Gonzo?  He needs a jail sentence, huh?  What did Rove have to do with it?  

      Wow!  I'm sending this to Wexler's people so they can read it and see if/how it might apply to impeachment.

    •  o the umanity... (4+ / 0-)

      I just sent this link to Brian, who is coordinating the impeachment efforts for Congressman Wexler.  I have his phone number but  can't find it.  Say a prayer that this gets to him.  

      Wow... unbelievable, huh?

      •  ex post facto law? (0+ / 0-)

        The constitution says Congress shall pass no "ex post facto laws."   IANAL, but wouldn't retrospective immunity be an "ex post facto law," and thus unconstitutional?  If it is unconstitutional to retrospectively criminalize something, why would it be constitutional to restrospectively decriminalize something?

        Any lawyers out there?

        •  No, the argument is that if the powers (0+ / 0-)

          weren't expressly granted to or withheld from the executive, the Congress can retroactively say to the Court "we agree the executive has these powers, no harm, no foul".

          Democracy is the only form of government wherein the people receive the government they deserve.

          by tjlord on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 08:59:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  ex post facto (0+ / 0-)

            No, the argument is that if the powers weren't expressly granted to or withheld from the executive, the Congress can retroactively say to the Court "we agree the executive has these powers, no harm, no foul".

            Yes, but the problem with this argument is that Bushco have committed explicit felonies (violations of FISA, and so on), so we're talking about retrospectively letting them off the hook for their felonies.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site