For nearly two years, I have been watching intently the consistent and continuous dismantling of the Constitution by the President. Through December of 2006, the Congressional Republicans enabled the President both actively by passing legislation and passively by failing to fulfill their Constitutional oversight responsibilities.

When control of both houses of Congress was unexpectedly transferred to the Democratic Party in the 2006 midterm elections, I was cautiously optimistic that there might be some change in the operation of the federal government. Instead, the Bush Administration continue to daily violate the Constitution, Congressional Republicans remain more loyal to their party than to their country and Congressional Democrats have failed to exercise the full powers provided to Congress by the Constitution.

Accordingly, it quickly became clear that the Congressional Democrats would be unable to enact any legislation or stop the occupation of Iraq until 11/18 – not November 18, but until the eleven Republican Senators needed to stop their party’s unprecedented use of filibuster and the eighteen Republican Senators needed to override a veto of that legislation crossed the aisle. It’s simple arithmetic that leaves Congressional Democrats with two – and only two – effective powers: stalemate and subpoena.

For whatever reason, Congressional Democrats have been timid – too timid, in my opinion – in their use of these weapons. Although Congressional Democrats have undertaken an oversight role by issuing subpoenas and holding hearings, each new revelation of incompetence and wrongdoing only leaves me thinking ‘Well, that’s finally enough.’ But it never is.

More HERE

What DOJ has become about is advancing the cause of the loyal Bushie interests from Civil Rights to the Criminal Division. It has been irreversibly turned into a Sopranoesque cabal.

The policy is as usual—lie and redact; redact and lie; target Democrats for prosecution as a survey has shown has happened from 4 to 1 to 10 to 1 in some districts.

peas!

As with the judges and lawyers convicted of war crimes at Nuremburg for abusing the legal system, there should be legal consequences for knowingly gutting the system of law on which our government and our rights and lives depend.

That, in part, is what the immunity fight in Congress – nominally over FISA – is all about. It’s not just about violating FISA, and it’s not only about immunity for telcos.

LOL,

You capture ‘their’
drollery most
admiraby.

How might you
frame the approximate
same regarding DFH
or ‘progressive’
‘asperity’?

scribe at 46 –
We have done a very bad job of highlighting the level of disgust in the establishment in thiscountry — mainly because they don’t tend to be the sorts of people who carry big sticks and speak loudly. ….

To paraphrase Nixon, Establishment types don’t need to carry big sticks and speak loudly.

A quiet comment, raised eyebrow, or non-invitation from one of them is usually enough, because it comes from a position of strength and because “everyone” knows there are minions out there to enforce the decision.

But, in light of a comment such as Katzenbach’s and Schwartz’s today, we may well see the Establishment move as one, in the way schools of fish and flocks of birds do. When they change direction, they do it almost in unison. Today’s op-ed is reflective of the change in mindset which has taken place, and a signal that it is ok to manifest that change in mindset with a change of direction.

This will be Topic One over the Thanksgiving table, in the polite and refined way they do it.

Watch.

And, digressing a bit, a nice way to frame the debate for your Thanksgiving table is, paraphrasing a Kos diary earlier today (now off the screen):

Michael Vick is in prison for torturing some dogs, but the Attorney General will not say it is wrong to torture humans, because he cannot define torture.

Biodun @ 11

FYI–

Rachel Paulose’s new job in DC is legal policy adviser to AG Mukasey and his (Mukasey’s) deputy…

They are putting her in the closet. This is a Quebec government term for getting rid of embarrassing and incompetent civil servants that can’t be fired. Put them in an office with no windows, give them no work, and make it so uncomfortable they will quit. Some never quit, but the cost to the public is much lower than actually allowing them to screw up their work. I think this would be the best way of handling Federalist and other ‘moles’ in the next administration. If they can’t be fired, bury them in the basement.

Except that Ms Rachel CAN be fired. As a USA, she “serves at the pleasure of the President” as we have been reminded many times.