George W. Bush started displaying dementia the moment he and Cheney entered the White House after stealing the November 2000 elections…and it’s been one dementia-generated scandal after another since then.

There’s “inherent contempt,” but after these dementia-ridden years of the Bush administration and his incessant garbling of the English language, it is obvious that Bush has nothing but “incoherent contempt” for all that We The People hold dear.

when does the statute of limitations come into play?

JML at 43: Here is the link to Cspan videos this past week. Scroll down to House Hearing on Guantanamo Bay Detainees
and check for Tauscher at 2h 36min.

Also check out Lt Col. Stephen Abraham (US Army Reserves Atty & Fmr. Intelligence Officer) as he describes (at 1:53) the lack of provenance for evidence against Guantanamo detainees and the wall he ran into trying to learn about any exculpatory evidence (at 2:07) and his belief that the tribunals were based on “command influence” rather than rule of law.

Montag at 50: Thanks for the FYI. I am sorry to learn Tauscher is less than a stateswoman which makes her “I am a legislator” comment less effective. Philbin’s comment about the judiciary not being political is a few minutes into Tauscher’s comments at 2h 36 min (above link)

Non Sequitur by Wiley

Apparently this is how the “yellowcake from Niger” made it into the State of the Union address…

Marie Roget @ 35

…
I’ve heard Rove described as many things by these folks, “damned polecat” being the gentlest among them…

But isn’t that a compliment among Republicans?

Anyway, I suspect Rove is quite safe, until you hear them calling him a ‘liberal’.

Well, he is Liberal. Didn’t you know that? He drives a Prius hybrid ‘green’ car. Isn’t that a clear indication he’s a Socialist Liberal? I tell ya the man is dangerously Liberal. Heh.

Most Republicans can’t wait until Bush & Co are gone, so they can get back to their politics-as-usual Congressional earmarks and transitioning to lobbyist jobs.

What ought to be more apparent to the general public is that it’s the Congressional Conservative Bush Republicans who are complicit in all this garbage Bush, Cheney, Gonzales et al are doing since they won’t help Dems put an end to it.

I think the Justice Department got lied to and suckered by W and Gonzo…over and over and over again. I think this dispute blew up when the found out about what they were supposedly authorizing.

The WaPo four part series describes Cheney and his habit of working in small groups and excluding those who have the delegated authority and responsibility for policy.

This story is filled with tales of “no disagreement”. The reports are vague about exactly who authorized what and when they so authorized it. All we hear is that the NSA and Bush said it was OK. It’s all about the decider’s authorization. What did Justice know and when did they know it?

You can’t disagree with policy if you don’t know about the policy. This applies not only to Congress, but to the Justice Department as well.

The disagreement that blew up at Justice about the wiretap programs may be about process as well as policy. They may have objected as soon as they found out about it…whatever “it” is.

This wouldn’t be the first time the President and his close circle sandbagged those whose responsibility, authority, and their reputations are on the line.

Has anyone heard Ashcroft talk about what he knew and when he knew it?

Perhaps Justice didn’t disagree previous to the hospital visit time frame because The President and his Attorney (Gonzo) lied to them about the program they were tricked into authorizing.

Which would explain the anger of those on the receiving end of the sandbagging.

kathleen @ 89

An Official Secrets Act, in this country, would be our downfall. Remember, and remember this very well: it was government officials who gave that information to Novak and Miller–likely with the full knowledge and permission of their superiors, the President and Vice-President of the United States. When you give such people the right to do just as they did, but imprison the press for publicizing their failures and their scheming, you have the definition of tyranny.

I seem to remember Sibel Edmonds being precluded from even mentioning what she brought to the attention of Leahy and, I think it was Grassley, concerning an espionage ring within the FBI which was tangentially connected with Dennis Hastert.

Much of what she alleged is in the public domain, yet the governemtn asserted the State Secrets Privilege and now she and others who became privy to her info are forbidden to speak about it.

And that bit of spying here in the US is not known to very many people because of that governmental assertion.

Consider which post might be most critical in analyzing and revising the policies about taxing foreign income of US companies – who two years ago were given a virtual amnesty on bringing back their “foreign” profits to the US with a small fraction of the usual taxes due on them. Which post would be a key member of any panel assessing the impact of non/compliance with int’l tax treaties that apply to US and foreign tax payers.

Oil and defense contractors figure heavily in these discussions. I believe it was Halliburton, for example, which recently “moved” its top two executives to the Middle East (because that’s where their work is, not for tax reasons, of course).

Perhaps not all the empty chairs are empty by chance.