Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I appreciate honesty and I appreciate people doing what they believe is right even when I disagree.
|
ace...its hard for me to take you seriously when you make comments like this.
I could provide numerous posts of yours where you KNOW that democrats have acted for partisan reason or personal gain rather than what they believe is right. I wish I had your insight into the decision-making process of individuals I dont know personally. It gets tiresome to hear that only Republicans are altruistic.
As to why I dont respond to all of your questions....you said yourself that you dont post facts and figures..you post editorial opinions.....sometimes I respond to the misinformation you extract from those opinions and pose as questions..and sometimes I choose not to respond because, IMO, it wont add to a discussion of facts.
Back on topic:
Quote:
|
Congress is considering serious legislation on this subject. I want them to understand the ramifications of what they do.
|
Congress has held as many or more legislative hearings on the subject in the last 1-1/2 years than during a comparable period of the previous 3-4 years of Republican control.
What more do you want them to do?
If they propose bills you dont like, I can only guess that you might say it is for partisan purposes or personal gain rather than what they believe is the right thing to do.
more response by way of further threadjack:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I have distinguished between investigations, executive privilege (which I would defend regardless of who is in the WH), rhetoric, political grandstanding, and few other things.
|
another example of misinformation.
Democrats in Congress have never questioned the use of executive privilege when applied as it has been done throughout history.
What the Democrats have questioned is Bush's expansive new application of executive privilege to include conversations/documents between two staff level persons and not directly involving the president.
By law, the Attorney General was required to file a charge of Contempt of Congress with the US District Court after the House voted on the charge as a result of WH staff failing to appear...and let the federal judiciary determine the extent to which executive privilege may be applied. The AG did not do so...based on WH recommendations that even filing a charge with the Court would violate executive privilege. Congress has been left with no real recourse now other than a civil complaint against the WH staff in question and the Court is no closer to adjudicating the issue of expansive claims of executive privilege.
IMO, that is a perversion of the law.