+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 35

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Hello People,

    Now, by no stretch of the imagination, can anyone call Barron's a liberal magazine. So when the writer Thomas Donlan, writes an article entitled:

    "Unwarranted Executive Power:
    The pursuit of terrorism does not authorize the President to make up new laws."

    I think we should pay attention.

    One note, Paul mentioned in another thread that impeachment is a political process
    not a criminal one. Also the process is long and involved, and might not yield much satisfaction for populace as a whole. He is right, but that does not mean the American people should not try and find out the truth.

    On more note, the link to the Barron's article is a pay subscription. I am posting this partical piece from a webblog site. Checking out the site might be interesting, as well.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Barron's calls for impeachment (via Barry Ritholtz at The Big Picture)

    "AS THE YEAR WAS DRAWING TO A CLOSE, we picked up our New York Times and learned that the Bush administration has been fighting terrorism by intercepting communications in America without warrants. It was worrisome on its face, but in justifying their actions, officials have made a bad situation much worse: Administration lawyers and the president himself have tortured the Constitution and extracted a suspension of the separation of powers . . .
    Certainly, there was an emergency need after the Sept. 11 attacks to sweep up as much information as possible about the chances of another terrorist attack. But a 72-hour emergency or a 15-day emergency doesn't last four years . . .

    Willful disregard of a law is potentially an impeachable offense. It is at least as impeachable as having a sexual escapade under the Oval Office desk and lying about it later. The members of the House Judiciary Committee who staged the impeachment of President Clinton ought to be as outraged at this situation. They ought to investigate it, consider it carefully and report either a bill that would change the wiretap laws to suit the president or a bill of impeachment.

    It is important to be clear that an impeachment case, if it comes to that, would not be about wiretapping, or about a possible Constitutional right not to be wiretapped. It would be about the power of Congress to set wiretapping rules by law, and it is about the obligation of the president to follow the rules in the Acts that he and his predecessors signed into law.

    Some ancillary responsibility, however, must be attached to those members of the House and Senate who were informed, inadequately, about the wiretapping and did nothing to regulate it. Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, told Vice President Dick Cheney in 2003 that he was "unable to fully evaluate, much less endorse these activities." But the senator was so respectful of the administration's injunction of secrecy that he wrote it out in longhand rather than give it to someone to type. Only last week, after the cat was out of the bag, did he do what he should have done in 2003 -- make his misgivings public and demand more information.

    Published reports quote sources saying that 14 members of Congress were notified of the wiretapping. [/b]If some had misgivings, apparently they were scared of being called names, as the president did last week when he said: "It was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important program in a time of war. The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy."

    Wrong. If we don't discuss the program and the lack of authority for it, we are meeting the enemy -- in the mirror.[/b]

    See Link

    DeeDee1965

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    622

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

  3. 12-26-2005, 11:07 AM


  4. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    656

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    One note, Paul mentioned in another thread that impeachment is a political process not a criminal one.
    Paul is correct...If the House of Repesentatives feels an act by any elected official is impeachable, they can bring charges and the trial is held by the Senate. Investigations which leads to charges are usually started as a result of concerned citizens writing to their Representatives with an official complaint. If that happens, that is democracy in action and I totally support it. Just as I would totally support a decision by the House not to proceed with charges if they felt they didn't have the support of the citizens of the USA.
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    Also the process is long and involved, and might not yield much satisfaction for populace as a whole. He is right, but that does not mean the American people should not try and find out the truth
    The first part of this is true because you have to look at who be in control if President Bush was impeached.(especially if people want Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and others impeached also) It could take years.
    In the second part do you mean the majority of the American people, the minority of the American people or Americans as individuals?
    I ask this because it would be difficult for the House of Representatives to bring charges without a majority of Representatives being convinced that an impeachable offence has been committed.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by catch-22
    Paul is correct...If the House of Repesentatives feels an act by any elected official is impeachable, they can bring charges and the trial is held by the Senate. Investigations which leads to charges are usually started as a result of concerned citizens writing to their Representatives with an official complaint. If that happens, that is democracy in action and I totally support it. Just as I would totally support a decision by the House not to proceed with charges if they felt they didn't have the support of the citizens of the USA.
    The first part of this is true because you have to look at who be in control if President Bush was impeached.(especially if people want Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and others impeached also) It could take years.
    In the second part do you mean the majority of the American people, the minority of the American people or Americans as individuals?
    I ask this because it would be difficult for the House of Representatives to bring charges without a majority of Representatives being convinced that an impeachable offence has been committed.


    Hi Catch-22,

    I meant the American people as a whole. The entire country deserves to know the truth. Transparency in government, is the right of a free, democratic society. Of course, the citizens, must demand a hearing, and that puts the burden on us to let our representatives know our wishes.

    Many question have been raised, from many quarters, in this country about the wiretapping; its legality, its necessity, and its effectiveness.

    I think the Barron's article puts the case plainly, and enumerates the reasons for, at the very least, a hearing on the subject.

    DeeDee1965

  6. #5
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    DeeDee, where did you get the idea that just because Thomas Donlan works at Barron's, he must be a Bush supporting conservative?

    .

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    DeeDee, where did you get the idea that just because Thomas Donlan works at Barron's, he must be a Bush supporting conservative?

    .
    Hi Grim,

    What is your point??

    DeeDee1965

  8. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,682

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    DeeDee, where did you get the idea that just because Thomas Donlan works at Barron's, he must be a Bush supporting conservative?

    .
    Her point is that in spite of Barron's typically being a conservative publication, they realize that there is a ever-growing number in the conservative movement that are beginning to want to have this sort of information and article.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    656

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    [/b]

    Hi Catch-22,

    I meant the American people as a whole. The entire country deserves to know the truth. Transparency in government, is the right of a free, democratic society. Of course, the citizens, must demand a hearing, and that puts the burden on us to let our representatives know our wishes.

    Many question have been raised, from many quarters, in this country about the wiretapping; its legality, its necessity, and its effectiveness.

    I think the Barron's article puts the case plainly, and enumerates the reasons for, at the very least, a hearing on the subject.

    DeeDee1965
    Thanks, DeeDee1965
    Do you believe the whole country really cares? When just over half of the eligible voters of this country voted in the last elections! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Jan14.html
    What do you suppose would have been the result of the 2004 elections if the 40% who chose to abstain, had voted? It's important because it would have given a clear mandate to the successful candidate.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    Hi Grim,

    What is your point??

    DeeDee1965
    I'm questioning your point DeeDee.

    You said

    Now, by no stretch of the imagination, can anyone call Barron's a liberal magazine. So when the writer Thomas Donlan, writes an article entitled:

    "Unwarranted Executive Power:
    The pursuit of terrorism does not authorize the President to make up new laws."

    I think we should pay attention.
    You are saying that because Thomas Donlan works at Barron's, he must be a conservative who backs Bush, and I'm asking you where you determined that the man is a conservative and/or Bush supporter? You implied that this man's words should be more credible than others might be, and based on you also stating that Barron's is NOT a liberal publication... well...

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by catch-22
    Thanks, DeeDee1965
    Do you believe the whole country really cares? When just over half of the eligible voters of this country voted in the last elections! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Jan14.html
    What do you suppose would have been the result of the 2004 elections if the 40% who chose to abstain, had voted? It's important because it would have given a clear mandate to the successful candidate.
    Hi Catch-22,

    I do not think the whole country really knows what is going on. But the fact remains, the citizenry of a free republic, require the truth in order to retain their republic.

    I know voter turn out is abysmal in comparison with other countries. That does not mean we do not look for the truth, and spread it to as many people as will listen.

    "Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world. For, indeed, that's all who ever have." -Margaret Mead

    We have to keep going, we just do. ;)

    DeeDee1965

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    656

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    "Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world. For, indeed, that's all who ever have." -Margaret Mead
    DeeDee1965
    How could I disagree with what you say when I see things like this?Off topic, but no apologies! :)

  13. 12-26-2005, 08:49 PM


  14. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    I'm questioning your point DeeDee.

    You said

    You are saying that because Thomas Donlan works at Barron's, he must be a conservative who backs Bush, and I'm asking you where you determined that the man is a conservative and/or Bush supporter? You implied that this man's words should be more credible than others might be, and based on you also stating that Barron's is NOT a liberal publication... well...
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    Hello People,

    Now, by no stretch of the imagination, can anyone call Barron's a liberal magazine. So when the writer Thomas Donlan, writes an article entitled:

    "Unwarranted Executive Power:
    The pursuit of terrorism does not authorize the President to make up new laws."

    I think we should pay attention.
    Grim,

    Read the above, carefully.

    DeeDee1965

  15. #13
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    Grim,

    Read the above, carefully.

    DeeDee1965

    I understood it the first time... Just because Barron's is considered by you to be a non liberal publication is one thing, but where did you get the impression, or where did you learn that the author is a conservative?

    You couldn't be suggesting that every writer on Barron's staff is a Bush supporting republican, so with that in mind, why should we pay close attention to this writers words? Is he a Bush supporting conservative? If so, where did you get that information from?

    .

  16. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Hi Grim,

    I am not going to debate political leanings of the author of this article. For those on this board who understand why I started this thread, I hope they will respond with their thoughts and opinions. If you do not want to discuss the content of the article, that is your right.

    I will not digress into an arguement about the author.

    DeeDee1965

  17. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    633

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    DeeDee...

    I will take this portion of the article to discuss (not trying to discredit, simply discuss).

    "Some ancillary responsibility, however, must be attached to those members of the House and Senate who were informed, inadequately, about the wiretapping and did nothing to regulate it. Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, told Vice President Dick Cheney in 2003 that he was "unable to fully evaluate, much less endorse these activities."


    If one read why Sen. Rockefeller said he could not fully evaluate much less endorse, one would understand it was because the Senator claimed he was not qualified to make such judgements. It was not because he was not informed adequately. The problem I see here is he has accepted a position on a commitee that he has admitted he is not qualified to make judgements on the information they are required to have presented to them.

    Congress created the law (FISA), it should also have created a mandate that if one is going to serve on the Committee that will receive notification, then they must be QUALIFIED to review and make decisions on the information required by the law.

    I am not trying to claim the actions where all legal and fully meet the requirements, that is another discussion. I am saying the information presented appears to have been what was required and the Senator said he was not qualified to decide, yet that was his job.

  18. #16
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Barron's: Investigate A Possible Impeachable Offense

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    Hi Grim,

    I am not going to debate political leanings of the author of this article. For those on this board who understand why I started this thread, I hope they will respond with their thoughts and opinions. If you do not want to discuss the content of the article, that is your right.

    I will not digress into an arguement about the author.

    DeeDee1965

    Why not just say that you assumed that he was a conservative because he writes for Barron's, but you really don't know. By assuming the man is a conservative that supports Bush, it makes the article seem more relevant and credible, as your opening statement implies.

    No debate necessary.

    .

Similar Threads

  1. Have the righties name One Impeachable Offense ...
    By Liberal and Proud in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-16-2015, 08:57 AM
  2. Impeachable
    By conserv4ever in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 06-02-2014, 07:02 AM
  3. Is lying to congress an impeachable offense?
    By SnappyDan in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-18-2011, 12:14 PM
  4. If this isn't death Penatly offense, what is?
    By SnappyDan in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-15-2011, 09:55 AM
  5. Impeachable Offense?
    By pwrone in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-12-2010, 03:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Add / Edit Tags
accepted, accurate, act, action, actions, activities, acts, add, administration, admit, admitted, advice, aff, afford, age, agen, ain, allowed, american, animal, another, answer, appears, approval, argumentative., article, ate, ation, attacks, attention, author, authority, bad, barron, based, bet, better, bit, blame, blatant, bored, bring, bro, brother, called, calls, care, carefully, cares, case, catch, cer, che, checking, cheney, citizenry, citizens, claim, claims, cli, clinto, close, coming, comments, commit, communication, comparison, complain, con, concerned, cons, conservative, constitutional, content, continue, corporations, correct, couldn, countries, country, cover, credible, current, dan, date, day, debating, decision, defines, demand, democrat, democrats, des, desk, dick, dick cheney, didn, difficult, discuss, discussing, doesn, don, effective, elected, electio, eme, emergency, endorse, enemy, entire, expert, experts, face, feel, feels, felons, felt, field, final, find, fisa, fully, gain, good, great, grim, groups, growing, had, hand, hands, hasn, held, helping, hey, hide, hiding, his, holds, house, html, huma, human, ignore, ime, impeached, important, individuals, information, investigate, investigations, involved, ion, issue, jan, job, john, judge, judiciary, judiciary committee, kennedy, kerry, last, law, lawyer, leads, legal, letter, liberal, likes, lis, listen, lol, long, losing, lying, mails, making, margaret, matter, mea, measure, meet, meeting, members, mentions, mind, more, movemen, movement, need, ner, new york times, nixon, note, notification, numbers, office, official, officials, only, order, par, part, party, passed, patriots, paul, peace, pelosi, person, personally, picked, picture, piece, place, point, por, pos, position, post, posted, posting, power, presiden, president, problem, process, public, pursuit, qualifications, qualified, question, questions, quote, raising, read, real, reason, reasonable, reasons, receive, removed, requirements, research, respect, respond, responsibility, rest, returns, review, rice, rio, riots, rise, rope, run, safe, safety, scared, seats, secretly, seem, sen, senate, senator, sept, serve, set, sexual, shameful, signed, simply, site, sorry, source, sources, sparen, speaking, specifically, staff, stage, staged, star, stop, stories, successful, sul, supporter, supporting, supports, suppose, taken, talk, tech, ted, terrorist, they, thread, threats, ticket, tied, ties, time, times, tired, told, tor, tortured, totally, transparent, types, unqualified, url, usa, vehicle, vice, vice president, view, virginia, voted, wait, week, west, wire, won, worse, writes, writing, wrong, year, years, york

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •