|
It's strange to me that Ustwo's straw man argument wasn't just directly replied:
President Bush didn't break the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act; he broke the F.I.S.A., which has been in place for 30 years.
Democrats aren't "blocking" the Patriot Act, it's still in effect and will continue to be in effect until agreed upon by a bi-partisan majority and finalized.
Finally, whether the president lied in 2004 isn't the issue he would be legally charged with. Lying goes to motive and inference of guilt. That's how lies have and will continue to be interpreted by prosecutors and juries. That coupled with Tom Daschle's recent revelations that discussions with the administration specifically ruled out the notion that the authority to use force against Iraq gave him special domestic powers in this regard. But that was a valiant attempt to direct the situation to Clinton lying under oath (about whatever--especially irrelevent given that prosecutors almost always give people the ability to "remember" a more true account before prosecuting for perjury a la repeat visits by current administration officials testifying to the grand jury before initiating a perjury charge) instead of the reality that President Bush has consistently lied to our representatives and public about violating his citizen's 4th amendment rights.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann
"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
|