Dems are showing weakness by not issuing subpoenas now

[montanacowboy]

Go ahead and flame if you want to, but this is our time, now to strike them down and show strength and purpose and decisiveness.

As long as we keep trying to negotiate with the criminals our position weakens while theirs strengthens

If we let this moment pass us by, it won't come again folks and every hearing and investigation we take forth from now on will be meaningless and hollow.

[Kelly Rupert]

1. ?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070322/ap_on_go_pr_wh/fired_prosecutors

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. They are playing chess

they are following the careful model of Watergate.

Read a time line

The eerie similarities are not only on Bush's side

[shadowknows69]

11. I see that Nadin but there's something to be said for doing it now

This administration has called every hand we lay and thus far I've seen a lot of folding going on. Time to come out with a big bet before the flop.

[WinkyDink]

12. Today WAS the big bet. It's Bush's bluff being called, and he's got nothin'.

[shadowknows69]

14. He has his usual refusal to comply

and the ever popular "I have no recollection of that Senator". I wan't to hear from a Dem leader what happens when Bush refuses to let Karl and Harriet come out to play. Who is going to send Federal Marshalls to come get them and bring them to the hearings? That's the bet we need to lay. Comply or else.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. I'm going to make a suggestion

apart of readying a Watergate Time line

Go watch Amazing Grace.

It will definitely give you an amazing education on how the parliamentary system works, and this silly think called alliance building

Now a second note, have you written your congress person yet? Rule of the mob and all, but still, HAVE YOU?

[shadowknows69]

22. I know a fair deal about Watergate

And you're right. It's frustration and impatience. I have put my calls in to the Clinton/Schumer switchboards. Chuck seems to be on the right page. I don't even know what Hil is up to other than being a candidate.

[Dr Fate]

29. And "rope a dope" too- dont forget that classic internal talking point. n/t

n/t

[Beelzebud]

3. Actually they're giving the Bushies rope to hang themselves with.

[Dr Fate]

28. Yes- and keeping their powder dry too. AND playing "rope-a-dope"

Also they are "waiting for them to fall on their own swords"

Someone above mentioned the "chess match"- I might add that we are using "judo" as well.

Did I forget any of our internal talking points or did we cover them all?

Hey you may be right, but I always get a kick out of these same old rehashed internal talking points that come out whenever someone disagrees with DEM strategy.

;)

[Atman]

4. No. It's a game of chicken, and they're still 1/4 mile apart.

The dems, though, just switched from a VW to a Hummer, and I think The Bushies should be afforded the opportunity to veer of their foolish course voluntarily first. I don't have a problem with this -- yet.

.

[Norquist Nemesis]

Not yet, IMO. Now, if they come to some lame "agreement"

using the subpoenas as leverage for the deal, then yes I'll agree.

[AlCzervik]

5. the senate judiciary committee voted yes on subpoenas and the house and senate Dem's

were very smart about how they did this--it was coordinated and now both houses are on board.

[Swede]

6. They have the Bushies feet to the fire.

Enjoy the squirming,have a little patience.

[montanacowboy]

8. I hope all of you are right

but we have been disappointed over and over and over again

I am hard pressed to have optimism

[thereismore]

7. They are playing it just right. It's a game of chicken. Bush** actually

blinked first when he offered his "reasonable proposal." Let him feel the pressure.

[solara]

13. And Bush*ts "reasonable proposal" was flawed at best

Panic and hubris don't go too well together.



INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT INCARCERATE :patriot:

[bigtree]

9. It's always about how tough we on the outside are

and how weak the Democrats are for not doing something or another at the precise moment and the precise way someone wants.

Pathetic, 'blame the Democrats first' sophistry.

[Virginia Dare]

10. No flames, I understand your impatience and frustration..

but I'm all for giving the assmonkey more rope to hang himself with.

[sharp_stick]

15. I think we let them squirm a bit

Now that both the House and Senate have permission to do it, I'd let the WH know that we are offering their people another chance to talk on the record. When they say no than you issue the subpoenas.

IMO if they just fire them off right away snowjob will whine on and on about how the Dems never gave them a chance and are now forcing months or years of court battle. If we give them a couple of days to continue to bitch and moan about needing to be off the record and allowed to lie the Democrats are justified in talking about a WH stonewall that they have to use the courts to get get through.

It won't be a short fight, if the subpoenas are issued today it will be months before the case gets anywhere.

[Dr Fate]

31. Squirming? More like using this spare time to manufacture defenses, distractions & counter-scandals.

How generous of us.

[sharp_stick]

36. If the Dems hit them with subpoenas today

shrub goes to court tomorrow and we wait, and we wait. Just because they have subpoenas in hand doesn't mean that rover and the rest of the dirtbags will be testifying before this goes through several different courts. We'll be lucky if this is over in less than a year.

We have to use that time to continue to hammer home the fact that Democrats believe in the rule of law and Separation of Powers while the pukes believe in cronyism and Stalinist crushing of personal freedom.

[MGKrebs]

16. The internet is a double-edges sword.

It let's us monitor up-to-the-minute details, but then also time seems to stretch out. We expect things to happen instantaneously.

Only a few hours has passed since the House approved subpoenas. Is it possible that they might be formulating their questions, and arranging meeting rooms, and working out whether or not there will be press? Maybe they are compiling and distributing the info they do have. Somebody has to go through the thousands of pages of documents they got on MONDAY to see what all is in there. House or Senate subpoenas? Meetings with lawyers about different scenarios, you know, all that ducks in a row kind of stuff.
Oh yeah, and run the country too.
Or maybe even some 'Pubs are working on a deal with the WH?

[Jonathan50]

17. Actually this whole mess is the fault of the Democrats..

If the Democrats had not let Iran Contra slide "for the good of the country" the Republicans would never have thought they could get away with such an audacious plan.

We keep hearing repeatedly in the MSM about Clinton pardoning Mark Rich, but how often do we hear of GHW Bush's preemptive pardon of Cap Weinberger in order to save his own scrofulous hide?

And if the Democrats had reinstated the Fairness Doctrine during Clinton's terms, the overwhelming noise machine of the Republican Mighty Wurlitzer would never have been able to poison the political discourse in the way it has for the last decade and a half.

"A license permits broadcasting, but the licensee has no constitutional right to be the one who holds the license or to monopolize a... frequency to the exclusion of his fellow citizens. There is nothing in the First Amendment which prevents the Government from requiring a licensee to share his frequency with others.... It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount."

U.S. Supreme Court, upholding the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 1969.

[MGKrebs]

23. Oh please.

Why do some insist on blaming Dems for Republican crimes? Don't we have enough legitimate problems without having to make shit up?

Dems are responsible for not providing sufficient clues to the Republicans that they can't break the law? There were several convictions of Iran Contra figures by the way, later pardoned by a Repub president.
Even if, as you say, the Dems somehow would have discouraged Repubs from breaking the law so flagrantly, we would more likely be talking about how to beat the Repub juggernaut rather than how to take advantage of all these scandals.

And the Fairness Doctrine? The reason it was yanked (at least partly) was because news organizations were gradually not reporting ANYTHING controversial because they would have to report both sides. That doesn't serve the public either. The Fairness Doctrine is no magic elixer to a free press. It would have been better to try to fix it rather than kill it, but let's not kid ourselves that it caused Rush Limbaugh. It may have allowed Limbaugh to happen, but it could have and should have just as easily allowed Air America, Mike Malloy, Al Franken, and Jerry Springer to happen. The problem there is whether it is news or entertainment, and the fairness doctrine wouldn't have regulated any of that if it was "entertainment". Not only that, the Fairness Doctrine didn't/wouldn't make anybody listen to what they listen to and make one thing more popular than another.

[Jonathan50]

26. I have no idea how old you are...

But I have been watching the Democrats lay down for the Republicans ever since GHW Bush made a secret deal with the Iranians not to release the hostages until Reagan was inaugurated.

As to the fairness doctrine, it would be far preferable to have a MSM that just avoided politics altogether than one that was all Republican talking points all the time.

In an America with the fairness doctrine a Rush Limbaugh or a Michael Savage or a Sean Hannity couldn't happen. Wouldn't that be superior to the situation we have today?

[MGKrebs]

34. Well just blame the Republicans for crying out loud.

This whole mess is NOT the Dems fault.

Sure they could have done things differently, even better.
They could have been more vigilant.
They could have been more courageous.
They could have been more astute.

But this whole mess is the Republicans fault. They have done what they have done. They are responsible for it.

[Jonathan50]

42. The Democrats have been the enablers of the Republican abusers.

That's the way I see it..

[Jonathan50]

18. The whole sordid affair will end up at the SCOTUS

After lethargically wending its way through the courts.

And then the felonious five (with one replacement) that put Bush in the White House in the first place will simply stonewall the whole thing.

I'll be astounded if the MSM pursues this with anything remotely resembling the vigor and tenacity with which they pursued the Clenis.

[MGKrebs]

24. I don't think so.

I believe both committees voted for subpoenas without objection, meaning Repubs are on board too. Cornyn, Specter, and Kyl have all indicated they want testimony under oath. I am confident they are trying to convince the WH to find a way to make this happen. I doubt a judge will ever rule on this if it goes to court- there will be so much pressure from Repubs predicting (probably correctly) disaster if they don't settle this with testimony under oath. I think the live TV part may or may not happen though.
Just my opinion.

[Jonathan50]

27. Bush is going to stonewall this..

It's what he does.

It doesn't matter what the Congressional Republicans think, Bush is going to do what he wants when he wants to do it.

[MGKrebs]

35. Even Bush has needs and desires.

This one may dance right up to one he seems to hold very dear: His legacy.

[Jonathan50]

39. Bush's legacy is already crap and besides he doesn't care anyway..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html


The president told Woodward: "I am prepared to risk my presidency to do what I think is right. I was going to act. And if it could cost the presidency, I fully realized that. But I felt so strongly that it was the right thing to do that I was prepared to do so."

Asked by Woodward how history would judge the war, Bush replied: "History. We don't know. We'll all be dead."

[MUAD_DIB]

19. Prehaps they will give them a few days to "sweat it" a little.

[Dr Fate]

32. OR- maybe we are giving them spare time to manufacture defenses, distractions & counter-scandals.

Not on purpose mind you- but that is what Team Bush is working on right now- the longer we wait, the more defenses, distractions & counter-scandals Rove can create.

[MGKrebs]

37. I doubt anyone is "waiting".

Those who will have to ask the questions are most likely trying to get their ducks in a row so that they can evaluate the B.S. they will likely encounter.

[MUAD_DIB]

43. Wait til Monday. If the WH have been praticing theirlies on this

then they will have been doing it for more than just this weekend.

What's important is that the questioners have all of the evidence, or knowledge of the missing evidence before them, before they rush to do anything.

Think Fitzmas.



Fools rush in.

[Dora]

20. Oh, you're so right. As soon as we THINK it, it should be so!

After all, if we want subpoenas NOW, then subpoenas should happen NOW. God forbid that there be any TIME taken to identify recipients, and then even MORE TIME taken to actually draft, create, and issue the subpoenas.

:sarcasm:

Due process takes time.

We're not just in the game, we're calling the shots. Subpoenas will be issued, and questions will be asked.

If you want instant gratification, call a masseur.

If you want a subpoena, then cross your legs and wait. We'll get there.

[Dr Fate]

30. I can understand why people dont trust DEMS to fight Bush properly.

They just finally learned how to do it a few months ago- many people still dont trust the DEM strategists who only recently figured out how to fight these guys.

I dont have a problem with people nipping at their heels and demanding they do something big ASAP. It seems better than just sitting back and counting on them to do it right.

I also want to see action sooner rather than later- why do we need to give the GOP/media MORE time to manufacture distrations, defenses and counter-scandals?

[Dora]

44. I agree with sooner rather than later.

However where some see paralysis, I see prudence.

[Cha]

25. I hope it's because they're

getting all their fookin' Ducks in a row..lame that they are.

[Justice Is Comin]

33. I'm content with the subpoenas

being approved now. That was the big one.

Had they wussied out on insisting they would use subpoenas and locked and loaded, I would have been bouncing off the walls. But this is now only a get on your knees and beg position.

There is going to be an oath, a transcript and it will be public the easy way or the hard way. Leahy and Conyers just agree to give them a few days to see which they prefer.

I'm loving the squirming going on. Meanwhile all the whistleblowers just keep lining up in the wings.

The nuts are firmly secured in the vice.

[The Stranger]

38. Democrats?!? Decisiveness?!?!?!?

:rofl:

[tom_paine]

40. I am afraid I agree

Maybe their strategy of "playing politics" (which I suppose is the most charitable way I can describe it) instead of making a principled, immediate stand for the Constitution, will yet work in the long run.

But what will be left by then? We have to hope that something will be left after the Loyal Bushies have eaten through the Treasury like termites, and destroyed America's image as a nation which is more good than evil (actually, we used to be quite a bit more good than evil, now it's 40-60 and sinking fast :grr: )among other things.

I agree with you montanacowaboy, and maybe it will play out that way in the end. All hope is not lost. Patience.

Not a good start, though. On that we agree.

[AtomicKitten]

41. Or perhaps they are being deliberate

... and getting the process right.

[mmonk]

45. No flame. You are correct.

[Terri S]

46. I hope they're using the time to gather evidence

Lord knows there's ample evidence out here.. are they as informed as those here at DU, Muckraker, et al? Can I dare hope they are even more so?

I have been so terribly disappointed by the lack of backbone, but there's still the nagging belief that they know what they're doing with this. Maybe it's just stupid naivité on my part, but I keep saying to myself.. there's a reason this time... there's a good reason this time...