Comments (88)

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 12:56 PM:

Shorter Bush:

"Karl is losing his sh*t trying to keep ahead of all of the lies."

burly man wrote on May 24, 2007 1:06 PM:

drug out is what i want to do whenever that puzzlwit speaks

glennpdx wrote on May 24, 2007 1:09 PM:

A lie takes more time to explain than the truth...

drational wrote on May 24, 2007 1:10 PM:

Its also a slow process when DOJ obstructs the investigation by delaying and withholding documents from congress, when they "forget" critical information(Gonzales, Sampson and Goodling), and when they mislead investigators (All of them). Add to that making unreasonable conditions for WH personnel testimony. Bush is dragging this out, and Kudos to congress for staying on top of this scandal.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/24/11430/9446

gjdodger wrote on May 24, 2007 1:12 PM:

Sure.

1) Top aide tells one story.

2) Cabinet level official tells different story.

3) Subpeonas fly.

4) Cabinet level official meets with another top aide to make sure stories don't conflict.

5) Second top aide reveals conversation.

6) Subpeonas fly,

etc.

goat wrote on May 24, 2007 1:12 PM:

Bush responded "I thought it was interesting how you started your question, ‘over the months,’ I think you said, ‘over the last months'... this __Iraqi war__ is taking a long time…. kind of being drug (sic) out, I suspect for political reasons… as I mentioned it the other day, it’s 'grand political theater.'"

Lisa wrote on May 24, 2007 1:14 PM:

Hey George, if the AG was being truthful, this could have ended a long time ago. If you let your friend AG step down, it could have been over a month ago. I am sick of this whole thing too George and I wish it was over. Maybe if there wasn't so much intent to not recall the facts it could have been over long ago.

Lisa wrote on May 24, 2007 1:14 PM:

Hey George, if the AG was being truthful, this could have ended a long time ago. If you let your friend AG step down, it could have been over a month ago. I am sick of this whole thing too George and I wish it was over. Maybe if there wasn't so much intent to not recall the facts it could have been over long ago.

Lisa wrote on May 24, 2007 1:15 PM:

Hey George, if the AG was being truthful, this could have ended a long time ago. If you let your friend AG step down, it could have been over a month ago. I am sick of this whole thing too George and I wish it was over. Maybe if there wasn't so much intent to not recall the facts it could have been over long ago.

Jimmmm wrote on May 24, 2007 1:16 PM:

What an asshole.

Mark Richards wrote on May 24, 2007 1:17 PM:

Is being "drug out" another instance of classic put-on Texas rancher high school dropout English language mangling, or a true faux-pas that deserves literal interpretation?

What should, in a land of true Justice, drag out is the eventual time to be served in a cold cement cell. However, and we all know, this will only happen in a fantasyland. Here we have a fine federal government where all the players are tightly entwined and happily in bed together. Lest any be found out the investigations drag on, the minions drop, until finally we can no longer stand to hear from them any more.

Then we forget, and repeat the cycle later.

gcs wrote on May 24, 2007 1:21 PM:

Awwww, poor Georgie. he lost interest in the Attorney Firing scandal, so he wants it ended. He said no laws were broken so now everyone has to move on. Why? Because he says so. Screw him.

Do I really need to point out for this spoiled bastard the EIGHT GOODDAMNED YEARS the Republicans gave Clinton a legal colonoscopy until they "found" something.

This son-of-a-bitch is begging for an impeachment hearing, to be followed by a criminal trial.

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 1:23 PM:

What is this scandal really about? Greg Palast has been all over the real story since 2004 when he reported on BBC ... take a look at http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/interviews/061

Hint: when the Sampson emails gloat that no US MSM has picked up the Palast story, um, maybe you want to take a look at the Palast story. When the Goodling testimony starts with a reference to caging, um, maybe you want to take a look at the caging issue.

In response the MSM does no investigation. Indeed, they complain when too much reporting is required (read the interview. Note the tough questioning today at the press conference about the Card/Gonzo hospital visit). No more what did you know and when did you know it moments. See, the reporters for 60 minutes just read talking points now. Otherwise how are they gonna get a gig on the sunday talk shows? You can reach them at 60m@cbsnews.com

In response Leahy's office has dismissed Griffin as merely "an interim appointment." This, ironically, is exactly what Rove et al proposed as the strategy to keep Griffin in office. Then, of course, we gum it to death.

You can write to Senator Leahy and let him know what you think of his approach to the disenfranchisement of black voters -- particularly those in the military -- at senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov.

moon wrote on May 24, 2007 1:24 PM:

Wrong again Georgie! We learned yesterday that laws WERE broken.

modmom wrote on May 24, 2007 1:25 PM:

The goal of stacking the Justice Dept and USA's with political operatives loyal to bush is all about controlling the elections. Is it any wonder that opposition researcher Tim Griffin, who was responsible for disenfranchising Af Am voters in Florida (including those servicing overseas in the military) was rewarded with a USA position in Arkansas? Why Arkansas? What better place to dig dirt on Hillary.

The problem is we are not going to get out of this mess until we fair fair and verifiable elections. One has to wonder why the Dems are not pusing the election integrity agenda, after experiencing 2000, '02, '04 and '06 (we should have won more seats!)

May I suggest this Mark Crispin Miller vlog on why the Holt Bill will not correct our defunct system:

The Holt Bill is the first time that any legislation will mandate and lock in secret vote counting.
Experience at the local level with audits, recounts, and litigation, and the recent dismissal by the House Administration Committee of three Federal Election Contests, has shown us that once there is a secret vote count, there is no effective remedy.

Unfortunately, this bill is being supported by groups who have looked only at the candy coating, and not at the poison concealed within.

It would be a terrible mistake to discard democracy in the name of purported incrementalism or so-called political realities.

Holt/Lofgren is a direct descendent of HAVA, and is even more harmful and dangerous. The author of HAVA is in prison, and HAVA should have been repealed and repudiated on that basis alone, not amended or revised.

Please take a few moments to watch Mark Crispin Miller's deconstruction of Holt, and think about it carefully. This is something that once done, cannot easily be undone.

Thank you.

http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com/

the vlog is on the right. :)

bill in turkey wrote on May 24, 2007 1:26 PM:

Hmm - investigation dragged out or 'gummed up'.

What about Scholzmann deciding to go on vacation instead of testifying? Couldn't someone in the administration stopped him from doing that?

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 1:27 PM:

I'm wresting with the larger issuee -- Bush's denial is openly accepted as gospel. How long will it take for the deluded in the Senate to march to the WH and demand the President's resignation? Given the DNC captulation to Bush on Iraq funding -- they could have shut off funding by refusing to pass money, something the President can't make COngress do -- I see little inclination for the GOP to take a risk when the DNC cannot stand up to whawt is risky: This President's recklessness.

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 1:28 PM:

Griffin is alleged by Palast and Kennedy to have committed a felony(ies). Remember what happened to Clinton?

From the Arkansas State Bar website:

Q. I want to file a complaint against a lawyer. What do I do?

A. Contact the Arkansas Supreme Court’s Committee on Professional Conduct at 625 Marshall Street, Little Rock, AR 72201,or call 501-376-0313 or 800-506-6631. You will receive a complaint form and a letter explaining the complaint process and telling you what documentation you should provide.

Peter wrote on May 24, 2007 1:30 PM:

"Drug out" is what they learn 'em at Choate. That n' ropin' dogies, yup. What an idiot.

MANIMAL! wrote on May 24, 2007 1:31 PM:

Hey George: I'd imagine the investigation would have been a lot shorter if your administration wasn't planting political operatives in the DOJ for nefarious purposes in the first place.

TomR wrote on May 24, 2007 1:35 PM:

----
George Bush, sounding somewhat exhausted, bemoans how long the U.S. attorney scandal is dragging on -- or being "drug out," in his view.
----

Yeah, this accountability stuff just won't go away.

- Tom

Ron Hurst wrote on May 24, 2007 1:36 PM:

Bush is relying on the short attention span of the American people and the spinelessness of Democrats in Congress.
We should rename our country the U.S.of A.D.D!!!
"If it ain't a sound byte I ain't got time"

Monica Goodling wrote on May 24, 2007 1:36 PM:

Hello George,
Did you know that stealing votes (caging) is a felony? They didn't teach us that at Regent, but I just learned that it was, which is why I spilled the beans yesterday while I was under immunity. My complexion doesn't do well in confined spaces. I hope yours does.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4594

anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 1:44 PM:

Yesterday, we learned that White House liaison to the DOJ was doing her job in such a corrupt manner that she was actually breaking the law.

We also learned that the Attorney General was witness tampering--another crime.

And we learned that the Deputy AG committed perjury when he spoke about the AG firings. This? Also a crime.

We learned that the White House was heavily involved in these firings.

What we still don't know is why these highly qualified USAs were fired, and who made the decision to fire them (we also don't know who in the White House gave the White House liaison instructions to break the law, but that's a totally new can of worms).

Gosh, given all the crimes committed by the AG, Deputy AG and the White House liaison, I'm sure the White House's reason for firing the USAs is totally legal. Totally legal decisions typically lead to obstruction of justice and perjury.

Yep, we should just let this go. I'm sure they had a good--and totally legal--reason for firing these USAs, even if they won't tell anybody.

ferher wrote on May 24, 2007 1:44 PM:

Drugs.

Just say "No," Mister President. Remember, you know how to say "No" to drugs. You've said it before.

Sniff. Sniff.

xargaw wrote on May 24, 2007 1:52 PM:

I am so sick of having my intelligence insulted by this man and his party. His lies and spin are beyond rational thought. How can these reporters sit there and allow him to spew his pathetic excuses and fantasy fear mongering? This is the most shameful period in the history of our country. Are there no patriots?

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 1:53 PM:

Rovian talking point: The investigation is being "dragged out." In other words, make it appear as though Dems are the ones dragging this out for their own political gain, when in fact, the WH is the true stonewaller. This is just so typical and transparent, and why no one calls them on it is UN fn REAL!!!! Take your own illegalities (obstructing justice) and make it look like the other side's defect (political theater).

SC: "much" ---much ado about everything

As usual, drrational beat me to the punch, and what he said is right on.

jeffgee wrote on May 24, 2007 1:54 PM:

Time for a terror alert. Oops, already done. Rehashed AQ in Iraq stories. AQ wasn't in Iraq until Bush sent the troops.
He does sound tired. I'll bet he's dyin' for a drink.

roadworrier wrote on May 24, 2007 1:56 PM:

I think we need to stop fixating on this DOJ circus as it's being presented and look instead at what these bastards are currently doing and are planning to do before the next election. Assuming that the current "light" on these rodents is making them more cautious, it would be simple-minded to believe that they will just go away and discontinue their destruction of our republic.

Who do we watch from now on? What can we expect them to do next? Their agenda hasn't changed, just the names of the players.

Spencer's Mom wrote on May 24, 2007 1:57 PM:

Georgie bemoans...

Gonzo comforts...

Monica gets teary...

This administration sure is getting emotional these days! Guess it's finally hitting home that their days of freedom are numbered.

Oversight's a bitch, huh kids?

PEACE

Redshift wrote on May 24, 2007 1:57 PM:

Hey, Mr. Bush -- this could go a lot faster if you would:

1. Tell your people to supply the requested documents instead of pretending Congress has no legal oversight role.

2. Tell your people to go testify to the people's representatives instead of forcing a subpoena.

3. Fire everyone who is involved in illegal activity, improper politicization of government work, corruption or gross incompetence, in keeping with the oath of office you swore (hint: it wasn't to protect and defend the Republican Party.)

Of course, if you were actually going to do that, it might be polite to give incoming President Pelosi a heads-up, since there wouldn't be anyone left, including yourself.

Spike wrote on May 24, 2007 1:58 PM:

>>How long will it take for the deluded in the Senate to march to the WH and demand the President's resignation?

Sorry, but he has taken out insurance, called Dick Cheney, to stop anyone from considering that for too long. Boot Bush, get Cheney. Who thinks that improves anything?

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 1:58 PM:

jeffgee

"I'll bet he's dyin' for a drink."

Yeah, too bad he had to wait till after his press conference to have one.

drational wrote on May 24, 2007 2:00 PM:

The "political theater" is the praise placed on Monica Goodling at her hearing yesterday, AFTER she had admitted to illegal Hatch Act violations in hiring decisions, and for which she was given immunity.

DAN LUNGREN, R-CALIF: I think you have acquitted yourself well, and have shown people who are here or watching elsewhere why people in the Justice Department thought you were worthy of your job.

J. RANDY FORBES, R-VA: So far throughout this hearing, there not only is no evidence of wrongdoing but there is no allegation of any wrongdoing on your part.
FORBES: … I want to say you have succeeded in doing what you set out to do today and that is showing your commitment and your good character that led you to a career in public service.

TOM FEENEY, R-FLA: … And I would say that millions of Americans now know a lot more about you, and they're proud to have somebody like you serving in government, and they understand that this is a huge sacrifice.

STEVE KING, R-IOWA: I will say that this is a circus without a cause, and it's time to drop this issue.

REP. TRENT FRANKS, R-ARIZ.: …I think we are all fortunate to have had your presence in the Justice Department.

Xman wrote on May 24, 2007 2:01 PM:

If my family members exhibited all the forgetfulness, lying, etc. things the bushies have, I would seek a "durable power of attorney" to handle their care and their business affairs.
I would probably also have them in adult pampers, rubber sheets and a drool cup.

Gramma Millie wrote on May 24, 2007 2:02 PM:

Poor George. He really is dumber than a fifth grader.

Big Mitch wrote on May 24, 2007 2:06 PM:

There is still time for members of the House Judiciary Committee to submit questions to Monica Goodling. Someone should ask her this: (1)After you crossed the line and dug up political information about non-political appointees, with whom did you share the information? (2)Who knew that you were doing this? (3)Did you create written evaluations of candidates containing political information? (4)Who saw these evaluations? (5)Did anyone direct you to seek this information? (6)What sources did you use to obtain this information?

Please visit the Schapira blog, "What we know so far ..." at http://schapira.blogspot.com

"... and tell 'em Big Mitch sent ya!"

Mike wrote on May 24, 2007 2:07 PM:

Someone should compile a list of what Bush has found "interesting" in press conferences.
I've noticed that whenever the President says something "is interesting", he invariably follows with prickish insinuations about the questioners lack of honesty and candor. Then he proceeds along this misdirection and fails to answer the question.

Legalize wrote on May 24, 2007 2:12 PM:

Totally, George. The whole unchecked power thing is a bitch.

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 2:14 PM:

no, when he says something is "interesting", that usually means it is question he has a canned response to. "interesting, I remember this coming up in the prep seesion...interesting"

bordersmuggler wrote on May 24, 2007 2:20 PM:

drational @May 24, 2007 02:00 PM

Very nice job compiling those comments. Their Dem opponents in '08 need to incorporate them in their campaigns, showing in prime time these incumbents extolling official corruption.

DAN LUNGREN, R-CALIF - R.I.P. '08

J. RANDY FORBES, R-VA - R.I.P. '08

TOM FEENEY, R-FLA - R.I.P. '08

STEVE KING, R-IOWA - R.I.P. '08

REP. TRENT FRANKS, R-ARIZ - R.I.P. '08

Elisabet wrote on May 24, 2007 2:21 PM:

GWB, near the end of the clip: "but if there had been wrongdoing, it will be addressed, the way we'd hoped it would be."

?? Did he mean, The way Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and myself hoped it would be?

That way being, whatever means necessary to protect themselves.

wagonjak wrote on May 24, 2007 2:22 PM:

Great moments in Presidential History:

"The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself!"
–FDR

"The only weapon I have to control y'all is fear itself!"
–GW Bush

bobh wrote on May 24, 2007 2:33 PM:

would you people shut up about impeachment. the democrats have proven they have no stomach for it. i'd still vote for them IF they were going to fuck him over on war funding but theyre FOLDING on that too. its disgraceful.

JEP wrote on May 24, 2007 2:35 PM:

I think Bush meant that he is running out of drugs, the bottle of "self delusion" pills and the vial of injectable "victory in Iraq" are sitting empty on the bedstand...

spamonwry wrote on May 24, 2007 2:35 PM:

Well, if ANYONE understands "drug out," it would be George Bush, our little psycho- and socio-path "glorious leader," and "decider."

JEP wrote on May 24, 2007 2:37 PM:

"would you people shut up about impeachment."

Absolutely NOT!

Hank Gillette wrote on May 24, 2007 2:38 PM:

Of course, if it wasn't being dragged out (by the White House and DOJ), there would likely be enough evidence to impeach and/or imprison Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Gonzales.

Ian wrote on May 24, 2007 2:40 PM:

George never actually says who is doing the "drugging out" of the investigation, as many people have already noted, he is.

Tom L wrote on May 24, 2007 2:42 PM:

Listening to the President alongside reading CSPAN's producers' text/graphic commentary is like watching the Colbert Report. His apparent disregard for what we and everyone already know, and oblivousness of what we and everyone can glean from what he says, is too sad to be funny any more. CSPAN is supposed to be nonbiased but does a better job qualifying the president's own remarks than the press corp responsible for interrogating him. "Grand political theater" indeed - absurdist theater. What a cruel, cruel joke the president and the press corp have become.

joe wrote on May 24, 2007 2:43 PM:

we have 600 days left to impeachment the decider!!!!!

Matthew wrote on May 24, 2007 2:48 PM:

Whatever happened to the stock administration response about not commenting on ongoing investigations? Oh, I see, except when you need to spin the story when it's getting dangerously close to home. His entire time in office needs an ongoing investigation. As far as I'm concerned he is obstructing justice by using his bully pulpit to lie and obfuscate. He should be gagged. He already gags me.

Spencer's Mom wrote on May 24, 2007 2:48 PM:

Posted by: drational
Date: May 24, 2007 02:00 PM

I quite agree. While watching yesterday's Monica lovefest from the Repubs, I couldn't help being reminded of the end of the movie "Quiz Show" where the man who testified to accepting the answers for the game show "21" was getting praised by all for his "heart-felt" statement and his honesty.

Until one brave congressman disagreed, and berated him as the liar he truly was.

I know, a movie reference is sad, but that scene kept popping into my mind over and over again as I watched yesterday.

PEACE

MichaelAOlson wrote on May 24, 2007 2:50 PM:

How long before George W. Bush is drug out?

Steve5117 wrote on May 24, 2007 2:52 PM:

For a movie reference why not "Wag the Dog".

harry ad mires wrote on May 24, 2007 2:55 PM:

I just had to drop in and say:

Isn't he the BEST PRESIDENT EVER!

Tony Prentakis wrote on May 24, 2007 3:04 PM:

Peter said:
"Drug out" is what they learn 'em at Choate.

Alas, and I am ashamed to say it, Dubya went to Andover. So did his Poppy and at least one of his brothers. Yankee patrician families tend to do that sort of thing.

714Day wrote on May 24, 2007 3:04 PM:

Makes me want to grab the bow-legged fool by the shoulders and slap some sense into him.
I feel like that alot. I want to make sure my feelings are "drug out" for everybody, though. It's the only constructive thing I can do with them.

the truth will out wrote on May 24, 2007 3:08 PM:

ok. now I'm going to quote my 90 year old father
(a lifelong republican)

"w" ....... (long list of grievances).... should br strung up by the testicles!"

Dave wrote on May 24, 2007 3:15 PM:

Same old response we've been hearing all along from George:

Na na na na na--na, na na na na na--na (set to the familiar musical tone denoting defiance)

I may be incompetent. I may be a liar. I may be an a**hole. But I'm the United States President. I'm going to do what I like. What can *you* do about it?

Congress can vote no-confidence. They can continue investigating. But it's obvious these folks don't have the guts to impeach me. Ha Ha.

Na na na na na--na, na na na na na--na

Rick Rettberg, Esq. wrote on May 24, 2007 3:22 PM:

During the Senate Watergate hearings, the difficult questioning was handled by the committee's counsel. That would have been a far better choice for the HJC. She would have divulged a lot more information if she had been handled by a skilled cross-examiner.

rlogan wrote on May 24, 2007 3:37 PM:

It's the country that is the disgrace.

For suffering an illiterate criminal gangster as president.

TomR wrote on May 24, 2007 3:38 PM:

----
George Bush, sounding somewhat exhausted, bemoans how long the U.S. attorney scandal is dragging on -- or being "drug out," in his view.
----

Well, with some convictions we can end it quickly. How's that sound?

- Tom

Sally wrote on May 24, 2007 3:44 PM:

I have always lived in Texas. "Drug out" is something you might hear in Texas. But not from people with a formal education. And I doubt they use that terminology at Andover or Yale. My former in-laws, a family that has been ranching for generations, would never use such poor grammar.

Dave wrote on May 24, 2007 3:50 PM:

I agree yesterday's cross examination of Monica Goodling would have gone a lot further if we had house representatives with better cross-examining skills. Listening to chairman John Conyers interviewing was almost pathetic. We need more of type of Artur Davis, Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin. (The Senate seems to have better lawyers than the House.)

litigatormom wrote on May 24, 2007 4:21 PM:

I have a question. When a scandal gets "drug out," does that mean:

1. the scandal was caused by someone who was on drugs?

2. the scandal can only be tolerated by ingesting some drugs?

3. the person describing the scandal as being "drug out" is speaking under the influence of drugs?

litigatormom wrote on May 24, 2007 4:22 PM:

I have a question. When a scandal gets "drug out," does that mean:

1. the scandal was caused by someone who was on drugs?

2. the scandal can only be tolerated by ingesting some drugs?

3. the person describing the scandal as being "drug out" is speaking under the influence of drugs?

Books Alive wrote on May 24, 2007 5:07 PM:

Rep Adam Schiff is excellent at questioning the witness, too. He went straight to Gonzales' jugular during that hearing. It's too bad Davis and Schiff are almost the last two Dems. But it was helpful that several yielded to Davis yesterday.

In the Senate, Sheldon Whitehouse's days as a USA, recent as they are, make him an exceptionally intense cross-examiner. Remember that he produced a visual for the Gonzales hearing that showed the proliferation of "busybodies" in the White House who have contact with DoJ matters.

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 5:08 PM:

Mr. Bush must have confused his daily regime ("drug out") with his frustration that Congress has finally remembered that its job includes overseeing the executive branch, and that his reluctance to recognize that has "dragged out" the press coverage of his politicization of the Justice Dept.

Anonymous wrote on May 24, 2007 5:22 PM:

Everyone should apologize to Choate Rosemary Hall in Wallingford, CT. JFK attended Choate. Mr. Bush attended Phillips Academy in Andover, MA, as did his famously eloquent father. Any bets on whose English faculty is more highly rated?

Sharon A wrote on May 24, 2007 5:33 PM:

Why only a few days ago, Ol' Gonzollypop was grinnin' ear t' ear that he had "weathered" the storm -- or what not. It was a regular media fait accompli.

And now Dubya says it's being drug out.

Is the fait accompli coming apart at the seams?

cal1942 wrote on May 24, 2007 5:41 PM:

'Interesting'

I remember when Nixon said something like ...'Watergate has gone on long enough, it's time to put aside ...'

Can't remember if it was State of the Union or a statement at the start of a news conference ... whatever

Anyway, 'interesting'

Sharon A wrote on May 24, 2007 6:02 PM:

Mr. Bush, you've "drug" out your QUACKmire in Iraq a bit long, ya know -- just as you "drug" out your response to Katrina.

uncle vester wrote on May 24, 2007 6:07 PM:

"My trial wuz in th' mornin' an' they drug me outta bed
Asked me how I pleaded not guilty I said
Not guilty I said
You got the wrong man
Nuthin' touched th' trigger but th' Devil's right hand"

apologies to Steve Earle
sc=sticky - getting a bit sticky?

JNagarya wrote on May 24, 2007 6:40 PM:

">>How long will it take for the deluded in the Senate to march to the WH and demand the President's resignation?"

"Sorry, but he has taken out insurance, called Dick Cheney, to stop anyone from considering that for too long. Boot Bush, get Cheney. Who thinks that improves anything?

"Posted by: Spike
Date: May 24, 2007 01:58 PM"

You're new to this issue? Both are impeached at the same time.

Too complicated for you?

JNagarya wrote on May 24, 2007 7:00 PM:

"would you people shut up about impeachment. the democrats have proven they have no stomach for it. i'd still vote for them IF they were going to fuck him over on war funding but theyre FOLDING on that too. its disgraceful.

"Posted by: bobh
Date: May 24, 2007 02:33 PM"

Can the Democrats impeach without sufficient votes?

No, they cannot.

So stop being a jerk demanding that which is not at present possible.

SC = wind. As in, You are propounding a wind-egg.

Mike Valentine wrote on May 24, 2007 7:08 PM:

No way this guy stays the whole term. What a sweaty pig. Impeach

big jonny wrote on May 24, 2007 7:23 PM:

How "drug out" was Whitewater?

How "drug out" was that whole thing with the last sorry chick named Monica?

How "drug out" was Kenneth Starr's fine work?

Funny how it switches from one party to another and suddenly we're talking about "Political Theatre" and not "Justice".

margaret wrote on May 24, 2007 8:12 PM:

I listened to his press conference on the radio, and he sounded so angry, so "hot" under the collar, petulant, bellicose, rarin' for a fight, and soooo un-presidential. He sounded a bit unhinged.

Code word: "shirt" how apro pos, as in hot under the collar of that shirt!

Denise wrote on May 25, 2007 11:18 AM:

I agree, this IS being drug out, but in the manner of "gumming it to death", not in the manner of "political theatre." The bad guys are keeping this thing going so we are tied up and not looking at the other issues that will have even longer lasting effects -- more caging, for example. But what really has me troubled is the recent debate and subsequent vote on the Iraq was funding. Did anyone ask how much of the 100 billion or so actually goes to the troops themselves, and how much is going to private contractors (Halliburton, et al)? A recent article in Truthout (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/051107A.shtml) described some really troubling testimony a couple of weeks ago by a former employee of a private contractor. He described the huge, huge waste that is going on in Iraq in order to further line the pockets of the private military. This, I think, is the thing they don't want us to focus on.

Rove, Cheney, and so on do not want this war to end because of the huge profits they and their friends are making through the Halliburtons of the world, AND the oil companies.

There really IS a vast right wing conspiracy, but right now it is one that is focused on maximizing profits at the expense of our young people in the line of fire, and our country's economic and political future.

SC: Soap, as in, this is not a soap opera, it is the real thing.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 25, 2007 1:34 PM:

YO WHORE-FOR-HAY, el presidente por viva,

If this is nothing and long and drawn out for nothing . . . Have your staffers go up before both Judiciary Committees and testify under oath and supply the docs requested and be done the whole this by next Friday.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 25, 2007 1:40 PM:

PS. I am glad the bird shit on you during this press conference. I would have enjoyed doing the same . . . But must remain content with the vicarious experience.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 25, 2007 1:41 PM:

PS. I am glad the bird shit on you during this press conference. I would have enjoyed doing the same . . . But must remain content with the vicarious experience.

Anonymous wrote on May 25, 2007 4:09 PM:

The goal, in my view, in draggnig this outs is to delay the "good information" that would launch the DNC into overwhelmng control. If the RNC can delay release of enough information, their losss won't be as bad. I do not understand why the DNC is "agreeing/cooperating" with this glacial approach to fact finding. This is bizarre watching the DNC slowly review these issues.

Marnie wrote on May 25, 2007 8:23 PM:

Lets see.
Bush literally hired Hollywood to stage his Mission Accomplished speech. With staging, lights, sounds, casting and costumes.
And his considers the investigation of the criminal activities of public servants to be theater???

Well, his comment does, once again, remind us where his values lie.

Me_again wrote on May 26, 2007 12:46 PM:

What Bush did was, with intent to do so, was to establish a hierarchy of political favoritism, whereby people loyal to Bush could prosecute the innocent based upon nothing more that political affliction.

Bush wanted to pursue bogus claims of voter fraud, bogus claims of political wrong doing of people belonging to the Democratic Party and YET the press seems to see nothing wrong with the ALAMING way Monica Goodling was appointing lawyers via political affliction.

Why isn’t Monica being sued by lawyers who didn’t get a job in the DOJ but were highly qualified for a position there, simple based upon all the self admitted illegal questioning that Monica used at Bush's direction though Gonzales who allowing her to use it? This is a government establishment – the last place one would expect to find discrimination, but that is want was being used in the DOJ.

That already should subject Bush to matters of impeachment. Bush was doing something criminal with intent to do something criminal – Bush has this misguided interpretation of “political theater” because it’s Bush’s “political theater” if it’s anybody’s “theater”. Bush appears to believe that “serve at the pleasure of the president” means to use whatever illegal means necessary to stay in office

What Bush did in the DOJ makes Watergate look like nothing but a small time misdemeanor.

And yet our national press and the lawyers of American ssem to see this as just another round of Bush’s criminal ways, no big deal, it's becomea an acceptable behavoir of the Bush and GOP, and yet nothing like this would ever be tolerated in ANY over office in American, state, federal or otherwise.

What kind of “loyal Bushie” oath did Chief Justice Roberts give Bush? Maybe we should asked. American should really be concerned about all of Bush appointees, they are neither, fair, ethical are just people and affect everything in Ameican.

Michael Douglas wrote on June 6, 2007 4:23 PM:

Karl Rove is in the security trailer off in the back screaming into the mike for Dubya's concealed T-Coil ear implant: "No! Trailblazer I didn't say "political theater"! I said "partisan melodramatics"! God! Stop trying to sound so gotdam'd intelligent... they ain't buying it!"

epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 3:25 AM:

Hi all!
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
G'night