TSF!

I’ll never think of this 4th without thinking IMPEACH!!!!!!

Hey neuro!
Hi Laura — this is Impeachment Summer2.0, eh?

Let’s hope its Black Monday for Tricky Dick II.

Good evening, Teddy. (It’s morning in KS). I celebrated the Fourth of July by staying home and not going to see the fireworks in the grass wet from rain and the clouds of mosquitoes at the lake. Had a good time doing that.

When did you live in DC, Teddy? How long have you been in SF?

I think it is time for the people of the United States to exercise their God-given right and declare independence from the evils of the Cheney/Bush administration.

IMPEACH NOW.

I spent my Fourth here at the Lake, Teddy.

isn’t M-word-day the day by which the WH has to explain why they don’t want little sara to testify?

The comment wheel should have tipped me off!!! Doh!!!

EPUd . . .

More from Fred Thompson:

“I’d just say the flies get bigger in the summertime. I guess the flies are buzzing,” said Thompson, who is considering running for president as a social conservative.

In my rural upbringing, I learned where it is that flies tend to buzz . . . usually somewhere around the droppings from the southbound end of a northbound critter.

I’m just sayin’.

‘Course, Fred bein’ such a down-home kind of guy, I’m sure he already knew that.

I logged on to FDL and saw 308 comments on the Late Nite thread, and figured it had to happen soon.

Suzanne @ 8

I spent my Fourth here at the Lake, Teddy.

isn’t M-word-day the day by which the WH has to explain why they don’t want little sara to testify?

I thought it was Wednesday???

Loo Hoo. @ 6

When did you live in DC, Teddy? How long have you been in SF?

I moved here sixteen years ago. I moved to DeeCee the beginning of my junior year in high school (suburban Virginia, really). About twenty years, I guess. With breaks for college and a rural retreat in NC.

neuro @ 5 — Where in KS?

OR around dead or rotting material…..hmmmm

Just can’t stand the idea of going back to work and another week of reading about Republican atrocities? Looking to prolong the holiday spirit with some beauty and an absence of malice? Plants don’t hurt people, especially when viewed thugh a garden kaleidoscope.

Oh, and after that? Impeach now!

““I’d just say the flies get bigger in the summertime. I guess the flies are buzzing,” said Thompson, who is considering running for president as a social conservative.”

I think it would be more appropriate for Fred to run for president as a social disease…

Peterr @ 10

EPUd . . .

More from Fred Thompson:

“I’d just say the flies get bigger in the summertime. I guess the flies are buzzing,” said Thompson, who is considering running for president as a social conservative.

In my rural upbringing, I learned where it is that flies tend to buzz . . . usually somewhere around the droppings from the southbound end of a northbound critter.

I’m just sayin’.

‘Course, Fred bein’ such a down-home kind of guy, I’m sure he already knew that.

Yes, flies are attracted to dead things and poop. Nice analogy there, Freddy!

Peterr @ 10

EPUd . . .

More from Fred Thompson:

“I’d just say the flies get bigger in the summertime. I guess the flies are buzzing,” said Thompson, who is considering running for president as a social conservative.

In my rural upbringing, I learned where it is that flies tend to buzz . . . usually somewhere around the droppings from the southbound end of a northbound critter.

I’m just sayin’.

‘Course, Fred bein’ such a down-home kind of guy, I’m sure he already knew that.

Freudian Slip??? ;-)

Wed is the day she was scheduled to testify but I thought a letter had been sent to the WH over the weekend asking for clarification as to why the WH told little sara not to testify.

Peterr @ 14

neuro @ 5 — Where in KS?

Topeka, home of Brown v. Board of Education and the Westboro Baptist Church.

Maybe Fred imagines he’ll be the Lord of teh flies….

Have a pleasant rest of the night. I’m off to watch a movie if it keeps my interest, or start reading Glenn’s new book if it doesn’t.

See everyone tomorrow.

Madison Guy @ 16

Just can’t stand the idea of going back to work and another week of reading about Republican atrocities? Looking to prolong the holiday spirit with some beauty and an absence of malice? Plants don’t hurt people, especially when viewed thugh a garden kaleidoscope.

Oh, and after that? Impeach now!

Oh my, that’s very cool. I want one, or one nearby.

neurophius @ 17

““I’d just say the flies get bigger in the summertime. I guess the flies are buzzing,” said Thompson, who is considering running for president as a social conservative.”

I think it would be more appropriate for Fred to run for president as a social disease…

Fred is sooooo not ready for prime time. Although Tweety sez he smells real manly, I don’t trust Tweety on the manliness-ness since Mission Accomplished Day.

OT

I need advice, help, etc. My *** may have ***. She has no health insurance but is working on getting some before a diagnosis. Since I have NO trust in insurance companies how do we evaluate and purchase a policy that is actually going to work? Is there any kind of advocacy group online?. I have been working on this for two days. I can’t find one. Thanks.

(MOD NOTE: *Edited for privacy concerns)

Here’s a picture of Bush that I think expresses where he is right now. I think the lazy jerk would rather be impeached than not. Maybe he wants it, long as he doesn’t have to spend any jail time.
Scroll down 5.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/

Fred and his “what, me lobby for a pro-life group?” nonsense could get pretty silly, pretty fast.

I’m guessing that a certain pro-life organization could probably enhance their treasury by offering copies of their signed lobbying contracts (and the resulting check stubs) to certain media outlets.

I’m not sure what the tabloid scandal sheet pay scale is these days, but every little nickel helps.

the skippy’s took a dinner cruise out in the marina in los angeles for the 4th…we watched the fireworks over the water, it was beautiful!

Suzanne @ 20

Wed is the day she was scheduled to testify but I thought a letter had been sent to the WH over the weekend asking for clarification as to why the WH told little sara not to testify.

Yup.

The White House has decided to defy Congress’s latest demand for information regarding the dismissal of nine U.S. attorneys, sources familiar with the decision said yesterday. Such an action would escalate the constitutional struggle and propel it closer to a court showdown.

Senate and House committees have directed President Bush to provide by tomorrow a detailed justification of his executive privilege claims and a full accounting of the documents he is withholding. But White House counsel Fred F. Fielding plans to tell lawmakers that he has already provided the legal basis for the claims and will not provide a log of the documents, the sources said.

snip

Fielding plans to follow up his letter by further asserting executive privilege later this week, the sources said, directing former White House aides Harriet E. Miers and Sara M. Taylor not to testify in response to congressional subpoenas

Laura Doty @ 22

Maybe Fred imagines he’ll be the Lord of teh flies….

Utilizing the same misguided moral compass…!!!

neurophius @ 21

Peterr @ 14

neuro @ 5 — Where in KS?

Topeka, home of Brown v. Board of Education and the Westboro Baptist Church.

Ah, yes, Fred. Back when I was in KC, Fred added me to his “to be picketed list” of parishes. My ushers were really hoping he’d show up . . .

Like the Lake, they intended no violence — but they had some rather pointed questions about loving your neighbor and such that they wanted to ask.

thanks, teddy, was going from memory and couldn’t remember where i saw that

Peterr @ 28

Fred and his “what, me lobby for a pro-life group?” nonsense could get pretty silly, pretty fast.

I’m guessing that a certain pro-life organization could probably enhance their treasury by offering copies of their signed lobbying contracts (and the resulting check stubs) to certain media outlets.

I’m not sure what the tabloid scandal sheet pay scale is these days, but every little nickel helps.

pro-choice?

Madison Guy @ 16

Just can’t stand the idea of going back to work and another week of reading about Republican atrocities? Looking to prolong the holiday spirit with some beauty and an absence of malice? Plants don’t hurt people, especially when viewed thugh a garden kaleidoscope.

Oh, and after that? Impeach now!

Green and psychadelic!

epu-ed from earlier:
me about these.

i was there, but i swear i was sober.

TeddySanFran @ 30

Suzanne @ 20

Wed is the day she was scheduled to testify but I thought a letter had been sent to the WH over the weekend asking for clarification as to why the WH told little sara not to testify.

Yup.

The White House has decided to defy Congress’s latest demand for information regarding the dismissal of nine U.S. attorneys, sources familiar with the decision said yesterday. Such an action would escalate the constitutional struggle and propel it closer to a court showdown.

Senate and House committees have directed President Bush to provide by tomorrow a detailed justification of his executive privilege claims and a full accounting of the documents he is withholding. But White House counsel Fred F. Fielding plans to tell lawmakers that he has already provided the legal basis for the claims and will not provide a log of the documents, the sources said.

snip

Fielding plans to follow up his letter by further asserting executive privilege later this week, the sources said, directing former White House aides Harriet E. Miers and Sara M. Taylor not to testify in response to congressional subpoenas

With Conyers kowtowing to the WH, our only hope resides with Leahy to issue the necessary ‘Contempt of Congress’ citations!!!

Wow, the pictures are great, I’m sorry I missed it:(

Where’s that video of Specter on Wolf Sunday morning saying Valerie FLAME????

TeddySanFran @ 34

Peterr @ 28

Fred and his “what, me lobby for a pro-life group?” nonsense could get pretty silly, pretty fast.

I’m guessing that a certain pro-life organization could probably enhance their treasury by offering copies of their signed lobbying contracts (and the resulting check stubs) to certain media outlets.

I’m not sure what the tabloid scandal sheet pay scale is these days, but every little nickel helps.

pro-choice?

Ooops.

Preview is my friend.
Preview is my friend . . .

Must be bedtime, after a typo like that.

G’nite, all!

<a href=”#comment-807953″ rel=”nofollow”><em>Mary McCurnin @ 26</em></a>
<blockquote>OT

I need advice, help, etc. My *** may have ***. She has no health insurance but is working on getting some before a diagnosis. Since I have NO trust in insurance companies how do we evaluate and purchase a policy that is actually going to work? Is there any kind of advocacy group online?. I have been working on this for two days. I can’t find one. Thanks.</blockquote>

I’m so sorry, Mary. Maybe try legal aid?

(MOD NOTE: *Edited for privacy concerns)

Peterr @ 40

Must be bedtime, after a typo like that.

G’nite, all!

Nite, Reverend!!!

Excandescence Ex`can*des”cence, n. [L. excandescentia.]
1. A growing hot; a white or glowing heat; incandescence.
[R.]
[1913 Webster]

2.Violent anger; a growing angry. [Obs.] –Blount.
[1913 Webster]

Obsolete? I think not…

Mary, try getting her an individual policy from Kaiser. When baby girl’s dad moved to Utah, we had to convert her from his group plan to an individual one. Very little paperwork was involved – I drove down to the business office and completed it in about 20 minutes.

They offer individual plans on the Kaiser Permanente web site.

LS @ 38

Wow, the pictures are great, I’m sorry I missed it:(

Where’s that video of Specter on Wolf Sunday morning saying Valerie FLAME????

Didn’t he also say he didn’t understand the case at all, but that he would agree with Schumer about calling Fitz about the Veep’s and Preznit’s interviews, since those weren’t before a GJury?

(Now that I’ve typed Chuck Schumer’s name, I realize why I always misspell David Shuster’s with an Sch)

So Teddy @ 30. I’m wondering if impeachment is even an option. Wouldn’t Roberts sit in on impeachment hearings as teh judge?

Mary, I wish I had a lead for you. Can’t think of one, but will keep this in mind….Hope it all works out okay.

G’nite everyone. Thank you Teddy for both posts…

Peterr @ 40

Must be bedtime, after a typo like that.

G’nite, all!

g’nite rev

<a href=”#comment-807970″ rel=”nofollow”><em>Loo Hoo. @ 41</em></a>
<blockquote><a href=”#comment-807953″ rel=”nofollow”><em>Mary McCurnin @ 26</em></a>
<blockquote>OT

I need advice, help, etc. My *** may have ***. She has no health insurance but is working on getting some before a diagnosis. Since I have NO trust in insurance companies how do we evaluate and purchase a policy that is actually going to work? Is there any kind of advocacy group online?. I have been working on this for two days. I can’t find one. Thanks.</blockquote>

I’m so sorry, Mary. Maybe try legal aid?</blockquote>

If your state has an insurance commissioner, you might check with them and see if the companies you’re looking at have had any complaints filed against them. I don’t know if they will help you choose a company, but they might be able to steer you away from some bad ones.

Make sure that any waiting period for the policy to be effective is not longer than you can wait.

(MOD NOTE: *edited for privacy concerns)

Suzanne @ 33

thanks, teddy, was going from memory and couldn’t remember where i saw that

Suz, here’s an excellent article at Balkinization!

http://balkin.blogspot.com/200…..might.html

LS @ 38

Wow, the pictures are great, I’m sorry I missed it:(

Where’s that video of Specter on Wolf Sunday morning saying Valerie FLAME????

Here’s the pisser, LS:

http://thinkprogress.org/

TeddySanFran @ 45

LS @ 38

Wow, the pictures are great, I’m sorry I missed it:(

Where’s that video of Specter on Wolf Sunday morning saying Valerie FLAME????

Didn’t he also say he didn’t understand the case at all, but that he would agree with Schumer about calling Fitz about the Veep’s and Preznit’s interviews, since those weren’t before a GJury?

(Now that I’ve typed Chuck Schumer’s name, I realize why I always misspell David Shuster’s with an Sch)

First of all, for Specter to say Flame, it seems to me he is all too familiar with the case and the still ongoing smear of the Wilsons….

I’ve always spelled Shuster, Schuster too. Oops!

thanks ct

Loo Hoo. @ 46

So Teddy @ 30. I’m wondering if impeachment is even an option. Wouldn’t Roberts sit in on impeachment hearings as teh judge?

The Vice President (President of the Senate) presides over impeachment trials in the Senate of all officers but the President. The Chief Justice (recall Rehnquist’s fancy robe?) presides over the Senate trial when the President’s been impeached in the House.

There’s no precedent for impeaching a Veep. So it’s never been decided who presides over a Veep’s impeachment. Presumably, he couldn’t preside over his own, but I bet he’d try — Fourth Branch and all that shit.

Could get fun. There’s no tie-breaking on the final vote, of course, since impeachment requires 67 votes. But the tie-breaking for procedural votes and the presiding could get interesting.

<a href=”#comment-807953″ rel=”nofollow”><em>Mary McCurnin @ 26</em></a>
<blockquote>OT

I need advice, help, etc. My XXXXXX may have XXXXXX. She has no health insurance but is working on getting some before a diagnosis. Since I have NO trust in insurance companies how do we evaluate and purchase a policy that is actually going to work? Is there any kind of advocacy group online?. I have been working on this for two days. I can’t find one. Thanks.</blockquote>

<a href=”#comment-807953″ rel=”nofollow”><em>Mary McCurnin @ 26</em></a>
<blockquote>OT

The insurance co’s cover themselves pretty well with pre-existing conditions..they win..you loose. You probably need experienced legal advice advice.

(MOD NOTE: *edited for privacy concerns)

TeddySanFran @ 45

LS @ 38

Wow, the pictures are great, I’m sorry I missed it:(

Where’s that video of Specter on Wolf Sunday morning saying Valerie FLAME????

Didn’t he also say he didn’t understand the case at all, but that he would agree with Schumer about calling Fitz about the Veep’s and Preznit’s interviews, since those weren’t before a GJury?

(Now that I’ve typed Chuck Schumer’s name, I realize why I always misspell David Shuster’s with an Sch)

Yeah, Teddy. You are really sloppy with the spelling and other details. Dang, you made a mistake and were called on it. If I were called on every mistake I made, I might cry!

Mary, I will say this, although I know little about it: confide in no one about your daughter’s condition. Any in*urance company will seek to determine if you knew of the condition, to exclude it.

Loo Hoo. @ 46

So Teddy @ 30. I’m wondering if impeachment is even an option. Wouldn’t Roberts sit in on impeachment hearings as teh judge?

Impeachment is like an indictment and takes place in the House. The Chief Justice doesn’t participate at all.

The trial then takes place in the Senate and the Chief Justice “presides.” Conviction requires a 2/3 vote. The only punishment upon conviction (which has never occurred) is removal from office, but the removed official remains liable to criminal indictment.

Re: spelling, I am sort of a savant, so it’s really bugged me about Shuster. I didn’t feel specifically called out, since Eli was just saying he’d checked and knew it was right, and I’d been spelling it my way all along. I suppose Dan Abrams has been laughing at all my emails about Shuster with his name misspelled.

But it was nice, just now, to realize why I did it!

Loo Hoo. @ 51

LS @ 38

Wow, the pictures are great, I’m sorry I missed it:(

Where’s that video of Specter on Wolf Sunday morning saying Valerie FLAME????

Here’s the pisser, LS:

http://thinkprogress.org/

Thank you! Yeah, right…he knew exactly what he was saying. Someone remarked that it may be a “talker”…I’m waiting to hear someone else say it. Unbelievable. If he wasn’t familiar with the case, then why would he say it? Just to pretend that it is some kind of obvious mistake? No way. They referred to her as “Flame”, the same way a blogger “flames” a blog – she was an interferer of their criminal, deadly agenda to steal the oil of the Middle East. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..woof!

TeddySanFran @ 54

Loo Hoo. @ 46

So Teddy @ 30. I’m wondering if impeachment is even an option. Wouldn’t Roberts sit in on impeachment hearings as teh judge?

The Vice President (President of the Senate) presides over impeachment trials in the Senate of all officers but the President. The Chief Justice (recall Rehnquist’s fancy robe?) presides over the Senate trial when the President’s been impeached in the House.

There’s no precedent for impeaching a Veep. So it’s never been decided who presides over a Veep’s impeachment. Presumably, he couldn’t preside over his own, but I bet he’d try — Fourth Branch and all that shit.

Could get fun. There’s no tie-breaking on the final vote, of course, since impeachment requires 67 votes. But the tie-breaking for procedural votes and the presiding could get interesting.

I’m certain Roberts would preside over the Veep’s and/or Shrub’s impeachment within the Senate, but, it’s only a figure-head role! Roberts wouldn’t have the opportunity to cast a vote, it’s either the 67 votes or nada!!!

TeddySanFran @ 57

Mary, I will say this, although I know little about it: confide in no one about your daughter’s condition. Any in*urance company will seek to determine if you knew of the condition, to exclude it.

Also, it may be helped by a gluten-free diet.

CTuttle @ 61

TeddySanFran @ 54

The Vice President (President of the Senate) presides over impeachment trials in the Senate of all officers but the President. The Chief Justice (recall Rehnquist’s fancy robe?) presides over the Senate trial when the President’s been impeached in the House.

There’s no precedent for impeaching a Veep. So it’s never been decided who presides over a Veep’s impeachment. Presumably, he couldn’t preside over his own, but I bet he’d try — Fourth Branch and all that shit.

Could get fun. There’s no tie-breaking on the final vote, of course, since impeachment requires 67 votes. But the tie-breaking for procedural votes and the presiding could get interesting.

I’m certain Roberts would preside over the Veep’s and/or Shrub’s impeachment within the Senate, but, it’s only a figure-head role! Roberts wouldn’t have the opportunity to cast a vote, it’s either the 67 votes or nada!!!

Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.

LS @ 63

CTuttle @ 61

I’m certain Roberts would preside over the Veep’s and/or Shrub’s impeachment within the Senate, but, it’s only a figure-head role! Roberts wouldn’t have the opportunity to cast a vote, it’s either the 67 votes or nada!!!

Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.

That’s interesting! Hmmm, Scalia???

Mary MC – you’ve got mail

Teddy, maybe it was a case of an immigration officer at Ellis Island knowing that the sh sound means be quiet, and spelled the name shuster. It’s irregular. I know a Thibodeaux who was spelled Thibodo that way…

Don’t feel bad, savant.

Suzanne @ 44

Mary, try getting her an individual policy from Kaiser. When baby girl’s dad moved to Utah, we had to convert her from his group plan to an individual one. Very little paperwork was involved – I drove down to the business office and completed it in about 20 minutes.

They offer individual plans on the Kaiser Permanente web site.

I was just doing that. She is in San Rafael CA and the hospital and clinics there are the best in the system. Thanks.

Nothing angers me more than the health care corruption in this country.

CTuttle @ 64

LS @ 63

Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.

That’s interesting! Hmmm, Scalia???

I wish. No, it was something that Robert did like advise during Iran-Contra or during Watergate. He was asked about it during his confirmation. In any case, it relates directly to what is happening today. I guess I’ll go find out.

I’m going to see Sicko tomorrow, Mary. Have you seen it yet?

Mary McCurnin @ 67

Suzanne @ 44

Mary, try getting her an individual policy from Kaiser. When baby girl’s dad moved to Utah, we had to convert her from his group plan to an individual one. Very little paperwork was involved – I drove down to the business office and completed it in about 20 minutes.

They offer individual plans on the Kaiser Permanente web site.

I was just doing that. She is in San Rafael CA and the hospital and clinics there are the best in the system. Thanks.

Nothing angers me more than the health care corruption in this country.

Amen, talk to Michael Moore!!!

While you guys were clipping along, I poked at Lil Debby’s tenure. According to Wikipedia (FWTW), she was named ombud 25 Feb’05 and introduced herself to readers 23 Oct ‘05…. Double-Super-Secret ombud for 8 mos?

Perhaps her independent contractor status is to preserve her *hallmark objectivity*. (Oct intro date confirmable, not so much the Feb or independent contractor bit). Seems she’s been elevating everybody’s BP far longer.

LS @ 63

CTuttle @ 61

I’m certain Roberts would preside over the Veep’s and/or Shrub’s impeachment within the Senate, but, it’s only a figure-head role! Roberts wouldn’t have the opportunity to cast a vote, it’s either the 67 votes or nada!!!

Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.

Roberts was involved with Fred Fielding with helping with the Ray-Gun WH in obstructing justice in the Gorsuch Congressional contempt situation. The Constitution mandates that the chief Justice presides over the impeachment..I think the Senate would have the chief Justice preside over the V-P impeachment trial also. I don’t know any reason why Roberts would recuse himself. Even if there was a reason, anyone who would overturn Brown has no respect for the law anyway, wouldn’t recuse himself.

LS @ 68

CTuttle @ 64

That’s interesting! Hmmm, Scalia???

I wish. No, it was something that Robert did like advise during Iran-Contra or during Watergate. He was asked about it during his confirmation. In any case, it relates directly to what is happening today. I guess I’ll go find out.

Cool, please let me know when you find it!!!

Loo Hoo. @ 69

I’m going to see Sicko tomorrow, Mary. Have you seen it yet?

I was on a speaking tour with itsourhealthcare.org. We went to six cal cities. Michael Moore was at the LA rally and spoke. His movie premiered that night. I was invited but was too tired. He seems to be a nice person.

SunnyNobility @ 71

While you guys were clipping along, I poked at Lil Debby’s tenure. According to Wikipedia (FWTW), she was named ombud 25 Feb’05 and introduced herself to readers 23 Oct ‘05…. Double-Super-Secret ombud for 8 mos?

Perhaps her independent contractor status is to preserve her *hallmark objectivity*. (Oct intro date confirmable, not so much the Feb or independent contractor bit). Seems she’s been elevating everybody’s BP far longer.

Interesting, Sunny. The 8 month gap…

LS said,

“Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.”

Not sure what you are referring to, but I was reading an article in the New Yorker about Cheney, which drew upon the New York Post series (which I did not read in its entirety).

Anyway, it was saying that when the openings for Supreme Court positions occurred, Cheney would prepare lists of five recommendations, and Bush would choose a nominee from those lists (although Bush went off on a tangent and nominated Harriet Miers without Cheney’s blessing, but after she was dumped he followed Cheney’s “guidance”).

So it sounds like for the position Roberts filled, Cheney would have come up with a list of five potential nominees, including Roberts, and Bush chose Roberts from that list. Thus Cheney helped Roberts get the job.

That sounds like plenty of reason for Roberts to recuse himself from a Cheney impeachment trial. But of course, going duck hunting with Cheney sounded like a good reason for Scalia to recuse himself from the Cheney energy task force case, yet Scalia did not do so. It remains to be seen whether Roberts, unlike Scalia, has a conscience.

Steve @ 72

LS @ 63

Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.

Roberts was involved with Fred Fielding with helping with the Ray-Gun WH in obstrucying justice in the Gorsuch Congressional contempt situation. The Constitution mandates that the chief Justice presides over the impeachment..I think the Senate would have the chief Justice preside over the V-P impeachment trial also. I don’t know any reason why Roberts would recuse himself. Even if there was a reason, anyone who would overturn Brown has no respect for the law anyway, wouldn’t recuse himself.

Sounds about right, however, it is a nominal figurehead role! The ‘jury’ is not predisposed to listen to or heed the ‘Judge’!!!

Perhaps it takes 8 months for the kool-aid to successful take with no chance of relapsing?

I can’t verify the validity of this, because I’m not familiar with it, but here is something interesting:

http://consortiumnews.com/2005/090605.html

“Reagan’s evasion of those legal restrictions gave rise to the Iran-Contra scandal in 1986, but it’s still not clear the scope of Roberts’s advice. Though some documents show that Roberts opposed White House sponsorship of private contra fund-raising events in 1985, other recommendations that Roberts offered on Iran-Contra issues have been withheld under claims of national security or executive privilege.”

One of these still-secret documents was a draft memo that Roberts prepared for his superiors under the heading “re: establishment of NHAO,” the acronym for the Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office, which became a controversial part of the Iran-Contra Affair. [Washington Post, Aug. 25, 2005]”

I feel safe and protected at the lake.

Suzanne @ 78

Perhaps it takes 8 months for the kool-aid to successful take with no chance of relapsing?

707!!!

Mary McCurnin @ 80

I feel safe and protected at the lake.

Hopefully, we can once again feel safe and protected by our government.

Goodnight all. Thanks for the advice. I’m going to go lay on the futon and watch stupid tv.

Suzanne @ 78

Perhaps it takes 8 months for the kool-aid to successful take with no chance of relapsing?

HA! Suzanne, if there is a California get together of FDL folks, I will try to come. Very generous of you to offer up the cottage. It has such special meaning to us late nighters!

g’nite mary. sleep well

LS @ 79

I can’t verify the validity of this, because I’m not familiar with it, but here is something interesting:

http://consortiumnews.com/2005/090605.html

“Reagan’s evasion of those legal restrictions gave rise to the Iran-Contra scandal in 1986, but it’s still not clear the scope of Roberts’s advice. Though some documents show that Roberts opposed White House sponsorship of private contra fund-raising events in 1985, other recommendations that Roberts offered on Iran-Contra issues have been withheld under claims of national security or executive privilege.”

One of these still-secret documents was a draft memo that Roberts prepared for his superiors under the heading “re: establishment of NHAO,” the acronym for the Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office, which became a controversial part of the Iran-Contra Affair. [Washington Post, Aug. 25, 2005]”

It’s fascinating to see how many of the ‘Usual Suspects’ keep resurfacing within the last thirty years or so!!!

Mary McCurnin @ 83

Goodnight all. Thanks for the advice. I’m going to go lay on the futon and watch stupid tv.

Rest, Mary.

would be great to have everyone up at the little cottage by the creek in the redwoods, loohoo. am just a smidge closer to san jose airport than the monterey airport.

CTuttle @ 86

LS @ 79

I can’t verify the validity of this, because I’m not familiar with it, but here is something interesting:

http://consortiumnews.com/2005/090605.html

“Reagan’s evasion of those legal restrictions gave rise to the Iran-Contra scandal in 1986, but it’s still not clear the scope of Roberts’s advice. Though some documents show that Roberts opposed White House sponsorship of private contra fund-raising events in 1985, other recommendations that Roberts offered on Iran-Contra issues have been withheld under claims of national security or executive privilege.”

One of these still-secret documents was a draft memo that Roberts prepared for his superiors under the heading “re: establishment of NHAO,” the acronym for the Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office, which became a controversial part of the Iran-Contra Affair. [Washington Post, Aug. 25, 2005]”

It’s fascinating to see how many of the ‘Usual Suspects’ keep resurfacing within the last thirty years or so!!!

By design, so it seems….man, they really planned this out didn’t they..

Redrum…..

“Danny’s not here, Mrs. Torrence.”

“Danny’s gone away Mrs. Torrence.”

“Danny, Wake up!!!”

I have never supported the National Rifle Association. Maybe they had a point all along.

neurophius @ 76

LS said,

“Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.”

Not sure what you are referring to, but I was reading an article in the New Yorker about Cheney, which drew upon the New York Post series (which I did not read in its entirety).

Anyway, it was saying that when the openings for Supreme Court positions occurred, Cheney would prepare lists of five recommendations, and Bush would choose a nominee from those lists (although Bush went off on a tangent and nominated Harriet Miers without Cheney’s blessing, but after she was dumped he followed Cheney’s “guidance”).

So it sounds like for the position Roberts filled, Cheney would have come up with a list of five potential nominees, including Roberts, and Bush chose Roberts from that list. Thus Cheney helped Roberts get the job.

That sounds like plenty of reason for Roberts to recuse himself from a Cheney impeachment trial. But of course, going duck hunting with Cheney sounded like a good reason for Scalia to recuse himself from the Cheney energy task force case, yet Scalia did not do so. It remains to be seen whether Roberts, unlike Scalia, has a conscience.

After overturning Roe v Wade and Brown v Topeka Bd of Ed, you say “it remains to be seen whether Roberts has a conscience.” Put down that crack pipe NOW!

Mary McCurnin @ 26

OT
I need advice, help, etc. My *** may have ***. She has no health insurance but is working on getting some before a diagnosis. Since I have NO trust in insurance companies how do we evaluate and purchase a policy that is actually going to work? Is there any kind of advocacy group online?. I have been working on this for two days. I can’t find one. Thanks.

(MOD NOTE: *Edited for privacy concerns)

Mary, go to nyceve’s diary over at the Big Orange Blog. This diary told a lot of people’s stories about junk health insurance, and pre-existing conditions, and so on. She’s very knowledgeable and you may find other of her diaries helpful.

Big Mitch @ 92

neurophius @ 76

LS said,

“Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.”

Not sure what you are referring to, but I was reading an article in the New Yorker about Cheney, which drew upon the New York Post series (which I did not read in its entirety).

Anyway, it was saying that when the openings for Supreme Court positions occurred, Cheney would prepare lists of five recommendations, and Bush would choose a nominee from those lists (although Bush went off on a tangent and nominated Harriet Miers without Cheney’s blessing, but after she was dumped he followed Cheney’s “guidance”).

So it sounds like for the position Roberts filled, Cheney would have come up with a list of five potential nominees, including Roberts, and Bush chose Roberts from that list. Thus Cheney helped Roberts get the job.

That sounds like plenty of reason for Roberts to recuse himself from a Cheney impeachment trial. But of course, going duck hunting with Cheney sounded like a good reason for Scalia to recuse himself from the Cheney energy task force case, yet Scalia did not do so. It remains to be seen whether Roberts, unlike Scalia, has a conscience.

After overturning Roe v Wade and Brown v Topeka Bd of Ed, you say “it remains to be seen whether Roberts has a conscience.” Put down that crack pipe NOW!

Now, now, be nice! I’m sure the pipe contains green herbage, not white crystalline material!!!

Big Mitch @ 92

neurophius @ 76

LS said,

“Someone pointed out yesterday that Roberts would need to recuse himself from something because of advice he gave early in his career…to Fielding perhaps, during Watergate? Something…help me out here.”

Not sure what you are referring to, but I was reading an article in the New Yorker about Cheney, which drew upon the New York Post series (which I did not read in its entirety).

Anyway, it was saying that when the openings for Supreme Court positions occurred, Cheney would prepare lists of five recommendations, and Bush would choose a nominee from those lists (although Bush went off on a tangent and nominated Harriet Miers without Cheney’s blessing, but after she was dumped he followed Cheney’s “guidance”).

So it sounds like for the position Roberts filled, Cheney would have come up with a list of five potential nominees, including Roberts, and Bush chose Roberts from that list. Thus Cheney helped Roberts get the job.

That sounds like plenty of reason for Roberts to recuse himself from a Cheney impeachment trial. But of course, going duck hunting with Cheney sounded like a good reason for Scalia to recuse himself from the Cheney energy task force case, yet Scalia did not do so. It remains to be seen whether Roberts, unlike Scalia, has a conscience.

After overturning Roe v Wade and Brown v Topeka Bd of Ed, you say “it remains to be seen whether Roberts has a conscience.” Put down that crack pipe NOW!

He doesn’t have a “conscience”, he has a “secret”…You are as sick as your secrets..they use that, they have control..everthing you have ever done in your live leads you do this moment, now. It is always now. It is never, not (don’t correct the double negative, because it is a double negative) now.

How about we disagree with the message and not cast aspersions about the messenger.

Suzanne @ 96

How about we disagree with the message and not cast aspersions about the messenger.

Cool! Wilco!!! ;-)

Loo Hoo. @ 91

I have never supported the National Rifle Association. Maybe they had a point all along.

If we did not have the second amendment, we could potentially end up in deep doo, doo. They knew what they were talking about. Don’t doubt that. Doubt the doubter.

Isn’t the 2nd Amendment about all we have left now?

Suzanne @ 78

Perhaps it takes 8 months for the kool-aid to successful take with no chance of relapsing?

Suzanne, very well done.

Mary McCurnin (if you check back in) -

Sorry I can’t help you with specifics but keep asking at the Lake throughout the day/week if you haven’t already………additional eyes and ears on the ground, so to speak.**

Sharing the same distrust of insurance companies has stopped me from purchasing long-term care insurance (even as additional health issues and age pile up) which I know will make the prolonged decision more expensive.

**PS – Just like Margot added her suggestion while I was typing this. *g*

Suzanne -

Did I miss a *really* good dive earlier?

“After overturning Roe v Wade and Brown v Topeka Bd of Ed, you say “it remains to be seen whether Roberts has a conscience.” Put down that crack pipe NOW!”

Well, you know, it was sort of another way of saying, “we haven’t seen any evidence of one so far.”

Good overview of Congressional Subpoenas and How They Are Enforced over at Talk Left.

Includes discussion of Executive Privilege claims vs Contempt of Congress.

Suzanne -

Did I miss a *really* good dive earlier?

no dive tonight

There needs to be a serious effort to impeach Roberts and Alito after we elect a Democratic President. I did not know of this Iran-Contra involvement of his. Alito, of course, should be impeached for his invention of the signing statement.

It should be done very quickly in 2009. While the GOP is on the ropes after their stinging defeat at the polls in November. While goodwill is still high.

Without their impeachment, very little progress will be made. The Supremes will undo all: universal health insurance, public campaign financing, oil-company nationalization, Halliburton confiscation, Hague referrals. All the good things we need done, these Supremes will undo.

Impeach Roberts
Impeach Alito.

LS @ 98

Loo Hoo. @ 91

I have never supported the National Rifle Association. Maybe they had a point all along.

If we did not have the second amendment, we could potentially end up in deep doo, doo. They knew what they were talking about. Don’t doubt that. Doubt the doubter.

I disagree with the self-arming of the masses! The Whiskey Rebellion is a good example! Iraq’s unregulated Militias is a classic counter-point! Weapons beget violence!

From Novakula’s column, which mocks Stephen Hadley’s “scouting trip” to Capitol Hill after Lugar’s abandonment of the Preznit:

As the first in a succession of Republican senators to be critical of Bush’s Iraq policy, Hagel feared the worst when he returned home to conservative Nebraska for Fourth of July parades. Instead, he was pleasantly surprised by cheers and calls for the troops to be brought home. Perhaps a White House scouting trip into the American heartland might be worthwhile.

I think this holidaze was very eye-opening for our “representatives.”

CTuttle @ 86

LS @ 79

I can’t verify the validity of this, because I’m not familiar with it, but here is something interesting:

http://consortiumnews.com/2005/090605.html

“Reagan’s evasion of those legal restrictions gave rise to the Iran-Contra scandal in 1986, but it’s still not clear the scope of Roberts’s advice. Though some documents show that Roberts opposed White House sponsorship of private contra fund-raising events in 1985, other recommendations that Roberts offered on Iran-Contra issues have been withheld under claims of national security or executive privilege.”

One of these still-secret documents was a draft memo that Roberts prepared for his superiors under the heading “re: establishment of NHAO,” the acronym for the Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office, which became a controversial part of the Iran-Contra Affair. [Washington Post, Aug. 25, 2005]”

It’s fascinating to see how many of the ‘Usual Suspects’ keep resurfacing within the last thirty years or so!!!

Perhaps we can impeach him for past crimes?

thank you SunnyN.

teddy, you got popcorn ready for this week? the little hairs on the back of my neck are telling me that it may be a wild ride in DC.

TeddySanFran @ 105

There needs to be a serious effort to impeach Roberts and Alito after we elect a Democratic President. I did not know of this Iran-Contra involvement of his. Alito, of course, should be impeached for his invention of the signing statement.

It should be done very quickly in 2009. While the GOP is on the ropes after their stinging defeat at the polls in November. While goodwill is still high.

Without their impeachment, very little progress will be made. The Supremes will undo all: universal health insurance, public campaign financing, oil-company nationalization, Halliburton confiscation, Hague referrals. All the good things we need done, these Supremes will undo.

Impeach Roberts
Impeach Alito.

But the impeachment of Abu needs to be now. First.

TeddySanFran @ 105

There needs to be a serious effort to impeach Roberts and Alito after we elect a Democratic President. I did not know of this Iran-Contra involvement of his. Alito, of course, should be impeached for his invention of the signing statement.

It should be done very quickly in 2009. While the GOP is on the ropes after their stinging defeat at the polls in November. While goodwill is still high.

Without their impeachment, very little progress will be made. The Supremes will undo all: universal health insurance, public campaign financing, oil-company nationalization, Halliburton confiscation, Hague referrals. All the good things we need done, these Supremes will undo.

Impeach Roberts
Impeach Alito.

Ahmen!!

The more I learn the more depressed I get. For example, the power of pardon, in effect, puts all the president’s men above the law. He can give them all a daily pardon for everything they’ve done in the past 24 hrs.

Worse yet, some very smart people, e.g., John Dean, think that the Constitution authorizes presidential “self-pardons,” which puts the president above the law and, in effect, makes him an emperor. Very depressing.

TeddySanFran @ 107

From Novakula’s column, which mocks Stephen Hadley’s “scouting trip” to Capitol Hill after Lugar’s abandonment of the Preznit:

As the first in a succession of Republican senators to be critical of Bush’s Iraq policy, Hagel feared the worst when he returned home to conservative Nebraska for Fourth of July parades. Instead, he was pleasantly surprised by cheers and calls for the troops to be brought home. Perhaps a White House scouting trip into the American heartland might be worthwhile.

I think this holidaze was very eye-opening for our “representatives.”

One can only hope our respective congresscritters listened to what their constituents are demanding, and, they will act upon those demands!!!

CTuttle @ 112

TeddySanFran @ 107

From Novakula’s column, which mocks Stephen Hadley’s “scouting trip” to Capitol Hill after Lugar’s abandonment of the Preznit:
I think this holidaze was very eye-opening for our “representatives.”

One can only hope our respective congresscritters listened to what their constituents are demanding, and, they will act upon those demands!!!

What a refreshing concept! ;-)

Suzanne @ 109

[snip]
the little hairs on the back of my neck are telling me that it may be a wild ride in DC.

From your keyboard to Dog’s ears! Let’s just hope it’s a *good* wild ride ’cause there ain’t been many of that variety runnin’ around loose recently. I’m with wigwam in the depression camp at the moment.

My real heroes are now the rank-and-file American voters, who are well to the left of the average Democratic congressman. Who’d a thunk it?

Where we especially need eyes wide open is among the Senatorial congresscritter.

Waccamaw @ 114

Suzanne @ 109

[snip]
the little hairs on the back of my neck are telling me that it may be a wild ride in DC.

From your keyboard to Dog’s ears! Let’s just hope it’s a *good* wild ride ’cause there ain’t been many of that variety runnin’ around loose recently. I’m with wigwam in the depression camp at the moment.

me too. hence – no dive tonight. just didn’t have it in me to do so.

CTuttle @ 106

LS @ 98

If we did not have the second amendment, we could potentially end up in deep doo, doo. They knew what they were talking about. Don’t doubt that. Doubt the doubter.

I disagree with the self-arming of the masses! The Whiskey Rebellion is a good example! Iraq’s unregulated Militias is a classic counter-point! Weapons beget violence!

To go out on a limb, with much respect for your position, I put forth this: Under the rule of Pappa Doc Duvalier (with the support of the US government with which it could not be possible), in Haiti, the practice of registering and removing the “arms” of the populace, resulted in the defenseless murder by the government and resulted in the deaths of countless innocent victims.

All five of the Republican presidents since Eisenhower have been involved in crimes against the Constitution:
– in a position of command responsibility: Nixon, Reagan, and Bush-43
– as a direct participant: Nixon (and likely Reagan and Bush-43)
– as a pardoner obstructing justice and accountability: Ford, Bush-41, and Bush-43.
Republicans are congenital monarchists who simply don’t understand republics.

wigwam @ 113

CTuttle @ 112

One can only hope our respective congresscritters listened to what their constituents are demanding, and, they will act upon those demands!!!

What a refreshing concept! ;-)

Novel idea!!! Why didn’t somebody think of that before!!! ;-) With that, I must bid a fond adieu to the Lake! Aloha Oe!!!

CTuttle @ 120

wigwam @ 113

What a refreshing concept! ;-)

Novel idea!!! Why didn’t somebody think of that before!!! ;-) With that, I must bid a fond adieu to the Lake! Aloha Oe!!!

Dream on.

wigwam @ 119

All five of the Republican presidents since Eisenhower have been involved in crimes against the Constitution:
– in a position of command responsibility: Nixon, Reagan, and Bush-43
– as a direct participant: Nixon (and likely Reagan and Bush-43)
– as a pardoner obstructing justice and accountability: Ford, Bush-41, and Bush-43.
Republicans are congenital monarchists who simply don’t understand republics.

holy moly

LS @ 118

CTuttle @ 106

I disagree with the self-arming of the masses! The Whiskey Rebellion is a good example! Iraq’s unregulated Militias is a classic counter-point! Weapons beget violence!

To go out on a limb, with much respect for your position, I put forth this: Under the rule of Pappa Doc Duvalier (with the support of the US government with which it could not be possible), in Haiti, the practice of registering and removing the “arms” of the populace, resulted in the defenseless murder by the government and resulted in the deaths of countless innocent victims.

CTuttle @ 120

wigwam @ 113

What a refreshing concept! ;-)

Novel idea!!! Why didn’t somebody think of that before!!! ;-) With that, I must bid a fond adieu to the Lake! Aloha Oe!!!

Sleep well.

g’nite ct

Suzanne @ 122

wigwam @ 119

All five of the Republican presidents since Eisenhower have been involved in crimes against the Constitution:
– in a position of command responsibility: Nixon, Reagan, and Bush-43
– as a direct participant: Nixon (and likely Reagan and Bush-43)
– as a pardoner obstructing justice and accountability: Ford, Bush-41, and Bush-43.
Republicans are congenital monarchists who simply don’t understand republics.

holy moly

An interesting perspective, isn’t it?

George Mason anticipated the imperial power conferred by the
plenary power of pardon, and James Madison replied that impeachment
offers a sufficient remedy:

George Mason argued that the President might use his pardoning
power to “pardon crimes which were advised by himself” or,
before indictment or conviction, “to stop inquiry and prevent
detection.” James Madison responded: “[I]f the President be
connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there
be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of
Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found
guilty … .”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..edoc_3.htm

Suzanne @ 122

wigwam @ 119

All five of the Republican presidents since Eisenhower have been involved in crimes against the Constitution:
– in a position of command responsibility: Nixon, Reagan, and Bush-43
– as a direct participant: Nixon (and likely Reagan and Bush-43)
– as a pardoner obstructing justice and accountability: Ford, Bush-41, and Bush-43.
Republicans are congenital monarchists who simply don’t understand republics.

holy moly

O….K…a…y…

Ummmmmm.

Hmmmmmm..

I refuse to use the word “enough”, because Gingrich is the one to recommend the Democrats use the words, “Had Enough”. Why would you use the words of a Republican”?

IMPEACH is the word.

Suzanne -

Because it can’t be said often enough………thank you for your wonderful mod skills. I have absolutely no idea of the knowledge base that must be required but can surely appreciate it!

LS @ 121

CTuttle @ 120

Novel idea!!! Why didn’t somebody think of that before!!! ;-) With that, I must bid a fond adieu to the Lake! Aloha Oe!!!

Dream on.

Would that we could all dream on! I do remember a time as a kid when I thought that Donovan was right. And that John Lennon was right. How did it all go so wrong? Time for some more of that.

Maybe it just requires people to be together on the streets. Brotherhood and Sisterhood.

LS @ 126

Suzanne @ 122

holy moly

O….K…a…y…

Ummmmmm.

Hmmmmmm..

I refuse to use the word “enough”, because Gingrich is the one to recommend the Democrats use the words, “Had Enough”. Why would you use the words of a Republican”?

IMPEACH is the word.

Ahmen!

And, if I read James Madison correctly, he is saying that if you even “suspect” that the president might be obstructing justice with a pardon or commutation, impeach his ass before the week is out. And, incidentially, if there are enough votes in the Senate, he’ll get removed from office. The unstated message is: “Don’t stop to count votes in the Senate. The very first order of business is to get his ass impeached.”

I think there is also a subtext that once you impeach him, the pardon is now within “a case of impeachment” and therefore is void. But IANAL, and will defer to our law mavens on that one.

LS @ 126

Suzanne @ 122

holy moly

O….K…a…y…

Ummmmmm.

Hmmmmmm..

I refuse to use the word “enough”, because Gingrich is the one to recommend the Democrats use the words, “Had Enough”. Why would you use the words of a Republican”?

IMPEACH is the word.

Had Enough?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAkEdWXwRaE

waccamaw, thank you. it is not just me working backstage – there is an entire mod squad of people who volunteer helping out.

speaking of helping out, don’t forget to use the donate buttons or snail mail to help the lake cover the upcoming hearings (fingers and toes still crossed there will be impeachment hearings that include a suspension of both boosh and the vice as discussed by the founding fathers at the philadelphia convention).

wigwam @ 115

My real heroes are now the rank-and-file American voters, who are well to the left of the average Democratic congressman. Who’d a thunk it?

(((((American Voters)))))

Gotta get some Zs. G’night everyone.

Wigwam, 129,

Amen!

And, if I read James Madison correctly, he is saying that if you even “suspect” that the president might be obstructing justice with a pardon or commutation, impeach his ass before the week is out. And, incidentally, if there are enough votes in the Senate, he’ll get removed from office. The unstated message is: “Don’t stop to count votes in the Senate. The very first order of business is to get his ass impeached.”

Duuuuuuudddddddeeeeeetttteee…or what..ev…er …!!!!!

nite wigwam

From wikipedia William O. Douglas, (the last Supreme Court Justice to be impeached.)

While Douglas’s efforts on behalf of the Parvin Foundation were in fact legitimate, his ties with the Foundation (which had been financed by the sale of the infamous Flamingo Hotel by cas*no financier and Foundation founder Albert Parvin) proved too much for then-House minority leader Gerald R. Ford to pass up. A number of additional factors came into play; besides being long disgusted with Douglas’s lifestyle, Ford also had seen Douglas protege Abe Fortas resign because of ties with a similar foundation, and had a political axe to grind as the Senate had failed to confirm Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell to succeed Fortas on the Court.

Thus, in April 1970 he moved to impeach Douglas, the first major modern era attempt to impeach a Supreme Court Justice. This was despite careful maneuvering by House Judiciary Chairman Emanuel Celler and the complete lack of proof that Douglas had done anything criminal (efforts by Attorney General John N. Mitchell and the Nixon administration to gather evidence to the contrary not withstanding).[4]

The hearings began in late April 1970, and Ford was the main witness, attacking Douglas’ “liberal opinions,” his “defense of the “filthy” film I Am Curious (Yellow), and his ties with the aforementioned Parvin. Additionally, he was criticized for accepting $350.00 for an article he wrote on folk music for the magazine Avant Garde. The magazine’s publisher had served a prison sentence for the distribution of another magazine in 1966 that had been deemed pornographic.

Describing Douglas’ article, Ford stated, “The article itself is not pornographic, although it praises the lusty, lurid, and risqué along with the social protest of left-wing folk singers.” Ford also attacked Douglas for the article in Evergreen Magazine, which was infamous for its proclivity for pictures of naked women.

The Republican congressmen refused to give the majority Democrats copies of the magazines, prompting Congressman Wayne Hays to remark ““Has anybody read the article — or is everybody over there who has a magazine just looking at the pictures?” [5]

When it became clear that the hearings were a farce, they were brought to a close, and no public vote on the matter was taken.

This effort and the struggles over the Fortas, Haynesworth, and Carswell nominations marked the beginning of the modern era of more partisan battles over Supreme Court nominees.

(MODNOTE: *Edited to allow through spam filter)

Would that we could all dream on! I do remember a time as a kid when I thought that Donovan was right. And that John Lennon was right. How did it all go so wrong? Time for some more of that.

Maybe it just requires people to be together on the streets. Brotherhood and Sisterhood.

Some of us ‘kids’ never stopped believeing in that. Even if we were’t the original DFH, we’ve got the right idea. *grins* I’m glad to have you lot as mentors though.

Wigwam, 129,

Amen!

“And, if I read James Madison correctly, he is saying that if you even “suspect” that the president might be obstructing justice with a pardon or commutation, impeach his ass before the week is out. And, incidentally, if there are enough votes in the Senate, he’ll get removed from office. The unstated message is: “Don’t stop to count votes in the Senate. The very first order of business is to get his ass impeached.

BINGO, KABLAMO, DING, DING, DING..Saweeeettttt!!!

LS @ 134,

I simply don’t see impeachment for high crimes as optional. Seems to me like it is a duty that duly elected and sworn-in Congressmen and Senators have to undertake.
Otherwise, what is the constitution? What is the country but landscape and inhabitants? It only means something if you do your sworn duty. Whether it gains or loses you votes does not matter, and if it does you’re in the wrong job.

Oy, on an entirely differnt note, just met the daughter’s new boyfriend. Bandana over his head, tied in the back. Said “pleased to meet you”.

This is about the third time I’ve been modded out of a posting, and I know not why?

I posted a long quote (too long?) about William O. Douglas a supreme court justice who Congressman Jerry Ford tried to impeach. It was from Wikipedia, and it gives you an interesting idea about impeachment of SCJs.

i freed big mitch’s comment… everyone refresh

big mitch, think spam terms, like cas*no, p*ker, drug names like v*agra and c*alis

I’ll try, but for now the comment is not appearing.

I was just off looking at Texas Betsy’s pix of the FirepupPicnic. May that rainbow be a portent of things to come!

Suzanne -

Check went off in snail mail this past Thursday; hope whatever problems have caused slow processing of this method of payment in the past have been resolved.

and then there are the porn spam terms, pen*s to contend with.

Big Mitch @ 136

From wikipedia William O. Douglas, (the last Supreme Court Justice to be impeached.)

While Douglas’s efforts on behalf of the Parvin Foundation were in fact legitimate, his ties with the Foundation (which had been financed by the sale of the infamous Flamingo Hotel by cas*no financier and Foundation founder Albert Parvin) proved too much for then-House minority leader Gerald R. Ford to pass up. A number of additional factors came into play; besides being long disgusted with Douglas’s lifestyle, Ford also had seen Douglas protege Abe Fortas resign because of ties with a similar foundation, and had a political axe to grind as the Senate had failed to confirm Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell to succeed Fortas on the Court.

Thus, in April 1970 he moved to impeach Douglas, the first major modern era attempt to impeach a Supreme Court Justice. This was despite careful maneuvering by House Judiciary Chairman Emanuel Celler and the complete lack of proof that Douglas had done anything criminal (efforts by Attorney General John N. Mitchell and the Nixon administration to gather evidence to the contrary not withstanding).[4]

The hearings began in late April 1970, and Ford was the main witness, attacking Douglas’ “liberal opinions,” his “defense of the “filthy” film I Am Curious (Yellow), and his ties with the aforementioned Parvin. Additionally, he was criticized for accepting $350.00 for an article he wrote on folk music for the magazine Avant Garde. The magazine’s publisher had served a prison sentence for the distribution of another magazine in 1966 that had been deemed pornographic.

Describing Douglas’ article, Ford stated, “The article itself is not pornographic, although it praises the lusty, lurid, and risqué along with the social protest of left-wing folk singers.” Ford also attacked Douglas for the article in Evergreen Magazine, which was infamous for its proclivity for pictures of naked women.

The Republican congressmen refused to give the majority Democrats copies of the magazines, prompting Congressman Wayne Hays to remark ““Has anybody read the article — or is everybody over there who has a magazine just looking at the pictures?” [5]

When it became clear that the hearings were a farce, they were brought to a close, and no public vote on the matter was taken.

This effort and the struggles over the Fortas, Haynesworth, and Carswell nominations marked the beginning of the modern era of more partisan battles over Supreme Court nominees.

(MODNOTE: *Edited to allow through spam filter)

as I said, Mitch, refresh your page because here it is.

the refresh comments button will not suffice – you have to do a hard refresh of the page

Waccamaw @ 145

I was just off looking at Texas Betsy’s pix of the FirepupPicnic. May that rainbow be a portent of things to come!

Suzanne -

Check went off in snail mail this past Thursday; hope whatever problems have caused slow processing of this method of payment in the past have been resolved.

thank you :) there is hope that all the kinks have been worked out in time for this donation drive

Margot @ 138

LS @ 134,

I simply don’t see impeachment for high crimes as optional. Seems to me like it is a duty that duly elected and sworn-in Congressmen and Senators have to undertake.
Otherwise, what is the constitution? What is the country but landscape and inhabitants? It only means something if you do your sworn duty. Whether it gains or loses you votes does not matter, and if it does you’re in the wrong job.

You can’t be serious! Answer your own questions.

Anyway, the mention of wiki is there, and William O. Douglass so others can find it if they wish.

Gerry Ford always defended his decision to lead an impeachment fight against Wm. Douglass, even while he was V.P. to Nixon. His argument was that Supreme Court Justices serve during “good behavior” while the grounds for presidential impeachment are more narrow; viz., treason, bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors.

Even thus, his case against Douglas (described in the Wiki article as a “farce”) was based on conduct committed in office. I think an impeachment for a crime committed before confirmation is impossible, with the possible exception of perjury at the confirmtion hearing. Which is what we witnessed.

ahh, now I understand. Thank you Suzanne.

LS,
We have no king here. The rule of law is King. If that is easily tossed aside, if it’s disregarded, well…

WELL! If Rove can talk to the Aspen Institute,

http://www.aspendailynews.com/article_20591

why the f*ck can’t he talk to Congress?

‘Haps some of you with louder voices than I can pass this question to the appropriate people.

others things that can get your comment caught in the filters: words that contain words within that are in the spam filters – two that come immediately to mind are the words soc*al*st and the word spec*al*st, both containing within the prescription drug name c*al*s

sometimes the delay is the mod trying to find the where and why the filter caught.

there is a length limit – we do like comments to be shorter than the front pagers post. there is also a link limit, i believe it is three (?).

hope that clarifies further.

Margot @ 151

LS,
We have no king here. The rule of law is King. If that is easily tossed aside, if it’s disregarded, well…

We have no king. End of story. Period, punctum, done, end of the road, all she wrote, blow this popstand, I’m the hell outtta here,…..

Fantasy…how do we reclaim the world?????

To all a good night. It’s starting to get dark here in Anchorage!

Here’s a quote from the rovian interview I ref’d @ 12:52:

“Yes, we will be redefining the mission because the goal of the surge was to get us to a place where we could redefine the mission,” said Rove. “Our goal is to be in a place where the United States’ principle role is to help protect the territorial integrity of Iraq, to hunt down al-Qaida and Jihadist elements, to assist and train the Iraqi army, and to provide force protection to our assets there.” [my bold]

Go read the whole thing and be prepared to spit tacks (or worse)!

g’nite mitch

Waccamaw @ 157

Here’s a quote from the rovian interview I ref’d @ 12:52:

“Yes, we will be redefining the mission because the goal of the surge was to get us to a place where we could redefine the mission,” said Rove. “Our goal is to be in a place where the United States’ principle role is to help protect the territorial integrity of Iraq, to hunt down al-Qaida and Jihadist elements, to assist and train the Iraqi army, and to provide force protection to our assets there.” [my bold]

Go read the whole thing and be prepared to spit tacks (or worse)!

Go read it where?

judas forkin priest – the goal of the mission was not success – it was just to be able to go further down that dead end road.

loohoo, from his the link provided at 12:52.

Suzanne -

“her” link

Never gave a thought to the s*x-identifier aspect when I chose the name. *g*

Hello, i’m back now and ready to go to sleep. Had to catch up on Moral Orel on the Cartoon Channel.

Hope you liked the fireworks, see you Monday!

g’nite, firepups!

Suzanne @ 161

loohoo, from his the link provided at 12:52.

i edited it before your comment.

g’nite teddy – sleep well and thanks again

waccamaw – it now is embedded in my mind as xx and not xy

Suzanne -

*g*

Are we the only pups still hangin’ on for the nite?

Did not that Aspen stuff make you want to throw *really* heavy objects?

Here’s a quote from the rovian interview I ref’d @ 12:52:

“Yes, we will be redefining the mission because the goal of the surge was to get us to a place where we could redefine the mission,”

Go read the whole thing and be prepared to spit tacks (or worse)!

Waccamaw,
Oh, I think that’s *quite* sufficient- blap!

Suzanne @ 159

judas forkin priest – the goal of the mission was not success – it was just to be able to go further down that dead end road.

That, is the most perfect statement I’ve heard. Dang. That is a song, a speech, a message.

lots of empty hammocks at the lake in the early morning hours, waccamaw. usually slows way down about this time.

thank you ls.

SunnyNobility -

Pretty soon the mission is gonna simply be, “Redefine”……….to infinity. Fits with the thug’s “few words” framing.

Wait………….haven’t we tried that one already? /s

“Our goal is to be in a place where the United States’ principle role is to help protect the territorial integrity of Iraq, to hunt down al-Qaida and Jihadist elements, to assist and train the Iraqi army, and to provide force protection to our assets there.”

what assets have been taken by force? the only one that comes to mind is the one that is also called black gold, texas tea.

Waccamaw,

If you’re where I think you might be, you’re on sunrise watch about now.

Loo Hoo. @ 46

So Teddy @ 30. I’m wondering if impeachment is even an option. Wouldn’t Roberts sit in on impeachment hearings as teh judge?

Yes, but his role is mainly as a Parliamentary role…he has no power to make rulings regarding evidence or points of fact. Only two Chief Justices have ever served this roll: Chief Justices, Salmon P. Chase presided over the Senate trial of President Andrew Johnson in 1868, and the late William H. Rehnquist presided over the trial of President William Clinton in 1999.The Chief Justice presides over the impeachment trial of the Vice President if the Vice President is serving as Acting President (a Senate rule, not provided for by the Constitution).

Nixon tried to argue that impeachment had to be modelled after a criminal Judicial Trial and the Supremes suggested that the fact that the Constitution held that the Congress be the SOLE determiner of impeachment and guilt precluded any greater role of the judge.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/506/224/

about time for this tired firepup to head off to bed. see ya tomorrow night, same bat time, same bat channel – g’nite all.

nite Suzanne

Thank you so much Cinnamonape.

Night sweet Suzanne.

SunnyNobility @ 174

Waccamaw,

If you’re where I think you might be, you’re on sunrise watch about now.

Spot on, darlin’. Wish we could say the same wrt our country; a little sunlight would go down real well about now.

Nite, Suzanne

wigwam @ 119

All five of the Republican presidents since Eisenhower have been involved in crimes against the Constitution:
– in a position of command responsibility: Nixon, Reagan, and Bush-43
– as a direct participant: Nixon (and likely Reagan and Bush-43)
– as a pardoner obstructing justice and accountability: Ford, Bush-41, and Bush-43.
Republicans are congenital monarchists who simply don’t understand republics.

Yeah, but.. but… CLINTON LIED ABOUT A BLOW JOB!!!!!!!!

(what WERE we to tell the CHILDREN??!!!)

Jacqrat @ 180

Yeah, but.. but… CLINTON LIED ABOUT A BLOW JOB!!!!!!!!

(what WERE we to tell the CHILDREN??!!!)

Indeed. It would be far easier to explain how we lost the constitution than to admit we tolerated a sexual peccadillo between two consenting adults.

Jacqrat -

Up late or up early?

Waccamaw, days are already shorter. No light here yet, though I’m a bit west.

Way OT. The other day I noticed you were bemoaning lack of acidity in tomatoes. You might want to check out the Garden Web site and the tomato man who takes lots of heritage tomato plants to the state farmers market on one or two weekends in the spring. Too late for this year, obviously, but he knows his varieties and he might be able to advise what might work for you.

If you can’t find him, I’ll scare up a link.

SunnyNobility -

Maybe you know whereof the Waccamaw. *g*

You’ve a kind heart (and a good memory). Took a quick (as it get on dial-up) check for the site and bookmarked it for a long look later in the day. Not sure if there’s anything close-to-home specific but sounds as tho’ you think there might be. Thankee muches.

Hello! Anyone still up across the big pond?

Cindy Sheehan is running against Nancy Pelosi unless Pelosi draws the plans for impeaching George Bush.

Here’s a link for more here …

Good morning, pups. Today in the NYT Nicholas Kristof says W is letting Darfur rhyme with Rwanda and Bosnia, and Paul Krugman says what’s standing in the way of universal health care is fear-mongering by special interest groups.

http://mgpaquin.wordpress.com/

The coffee and tea are ready, and the biscuits (some with herbs from the garden) are out of the oven. Have a good Monday. 560 days to go.

Waccamaw, that Garden Web site is a treasure. They have forums on just about anything and everything you might be interested in, including an entire forum devoted to tomatoes. Fair warning — you might get lost in there, and we’d hate to lose you!

Faux news has Bill Maas;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..55351.html

*we’ve* got Keith O.

What goes ’round, and all that………….*g*

Marion – Boo yah! I’ll get there sometime today………well, maybe, depending on what the Ladies of the Lake serve up. Lor’, it’s getting harder and harder just to keep up here w/o more wonderful places to visit.

cancer_cures @ 186

Cindy Sheehan is running against Nancy Pelosi unless Pelosi draws the plans for impeaching George Bush.

Here’s a link for more here …

I saw that too…can Blue America support a Independent over a Democrat?

It’s obvious that our “system” of “democracy” does not serve the people.. the governed, but those who have power, economic power. Our government is used to control, oppress, strike fear in the people and to enrich those in power, those who have power.

Our government and constitution is a failure. This administration has shown how our constitution can be subverted and an empire which serves the property classes can masquerade as a democracy. Hooey… Time for a new American revolution.

When you see Sicko… you can see how other nations care for their people. They are not as wealthy or powerful as this one, yet offer a better life, to their people, who are happier and all live longer. We have been screwed for a century or more making no real progress except perhaps women’s suffrage and abolishing slavery. But racism is alive and well. And profits are up.

Many people become despondent when they realize what deep doo we are in and how the system is so set up to continue in the direction it has been going, that little can be done except revolution.

Look at the corrupt electoral process and the sorry lot of candidates we have to choose from.

Look at the corrupt media which supports power, which is little more than a propaganda arm of the rich and powerful.

Look at the corrupt military which sucks our resources, manufactures threats and makes the military industrial complex wealthy beyond belief. Who are the enemies coming to conquer us? As hideous as terrorism is… those who resort to it, largely want the US out of their countries and lives.

Look at the corrupt medical system in the US which is about profits and not health of the people.

Every institution in America that you look at is corrupt. Even academia has turned into a profit center for invention, loans, consulting, endowment investment.

The justice system is corrupt, judges, prosecutors, lawyers. We house 2.3 million people in prisons, 80% for victim less crimes. We now live in a “national security state” which removed our freedoms and enriches those in the “security sector.”

As Moore says we live in a ME society not a WE society… each person for themselves. That is the American Mantra.. ME FIRST.

We have many brilliant and powerless people out that and we talk to ourselves on the internet now. Our people would rather drink beer, get tattoos, listen to noisy pop music, attend rip off sporting events of over paid atheletes, drive huge polluting cars, wave their flags, and stuff their faces with a poor excuse for food.

We are screwed. And the rich are laughing all the way to their offshore villas on their private jets and mega yachts.

The system is broke beyond repair. Face it.

Good morning. It looks like Abramoff scandal is back. In the NYT and WaPo there’s editorials about it, both blaming Dems in Congress for not cleaning it up like they said they would.

Am I wrong, but I thought that the Abramoff scandal was a prime example of the Gonzo DOJ sitting on investigations into Repugs. There hasn’t been any indictments in the two years since it came out, and it was said that as many as 60 were involved. Apparently, Gonzo put the whole thing in the lap of a inexperienced lawyer and then took away her resources and told her to take her time.

Mornin’ all!

Waccamaw, that site IS addictive. Nice diversion into normalcy (as once we knew it), when reality overwhelms. Sun’s up and Land of Nod time for me. g’nite. I do indeed know whereof the Waccamaw -nice.

150 killed in Iraq yesterday, far away from the surge.

GeorgeSimian @ 192

Good morning. It looks like Abramoff scandal is back. In the NYT and WaPo there’s editorials about it, both blaming Dems in Congress for not cleaning it up like they said they would.

Am I wrong, but I thought that the Abramoff scandal was a prime example of the Gonzo DOJ sitting on investigations into Repugs. There hasn’t been any indictments in the two years since it came out, and it was said that as many as 60 were involved. Apparently, Gonzo put the whole thing in the lap of a inexperienced lawyer and then took away her resources and told her to take her time.

NICE!!! The LAW is King

The KING is DEAD!!!

GeorgeSimian @ 192

Good morning. It looks like Abramoff scandal is back. In the NYT and WaPo there’s editorials about it, both blaming Dems in Congress for not cleaning it up like they said they would. [snip]

Ain’t like we didn’t see that one comin’ ten miles down the road. All ya gotta do is turn on the idiot box and hear same song, second verse. They let georgie poo muck it for seven YEARS (with their mouths shut) and then act like Dems are supposed to fix his messes in six MONTHS. Lots of stooopid runnin’ around loose out there. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Iraqis warn of consequences of U.S. troop drawdown
Iraqi officials warned on Monday that an early withdrawal of U.S. troops could tip the country into all-out civil war after the New York Times said debate was growing inside the White House over a gradual drawdown.

I love GOP morality laws apply to Democrats and non GOPers only. Well to be fair GOPers who are the wrong color, sex, religon… actually laws apply to anyone who isn’t a white male protesant born again GOPer. (sorry Clarence Uncle Tom Thomas you will never be a member of the club).
Scooter trial, Karl Rove doesn’t want Monica to testify hey its a Liberal Conspircy for what ever reason please fill in the blank they are innocent, all born again GOPers are. Its all a plot by Liberals to stop God’s work therefore we are justified when we break the law and torture people. If were caught it didn’t happen, if convicted we won’t serve Time we are justifed in breaking the law because the evil Liberals do. Two wrongs make a right. Just follow orders logic and justice like reality have Liberal biases. The Ends justify the means.

Mornin’ pups!

Waccamaw and Georgesimian @192 and 197, isn’t the coincidence interesting?

And no, NYT, Congress doesn’t need an ethics office in the worst way. It needs it in the best way. Working.

Arianna up on Morning Joe.

Good morning from Phila!

Chris Bowers lives here?

morning all!

eg – yes, i think bowers (and atrios, and many more) is in philly. center of blogtopia, i believe.

Candy the Crow on Washington Journal -

Don’t that jus’ put ya off ya’r breakfast? And after Marion went to all that trouble with those lovely herb biscuits.

Wasn’t that a wonderful W. C. Fields line about Philly

New thread…

Mary McCurnin @ 26

OT
I need advice, help, etc. My *** may have ***. She has no health insurance but is working on getting some before a diagnosis. Since I have NO trust in insurance companies how do we evaluate and purchase a policy that is actually going to work? Is there any kind of advocacy group online?. I have been working on this for two days. I can’t find one. Thanks.

(MOD NOTE: *Edited for privacy concerns)

Hi Mary:

dmac told me I’d find you around these parts. I’m a healthcare blogger. Please email me off list and I’ll try to help you navigate the insurance questions. My blog is Universal Health, and my email address is on the About page.