Leahy Threatens White House With Subpoenas

[Purveyor]

Source: The Hill

May 16, 2007

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Wednesday sent a strongly worded letter to President Bush’s counsel Fred Fielding and threatened to issue subpoenas if the White House continues to “stonewall” an investigation into its involvement in the firing of several U.S. attorneys.

“It appears from the evidence gathered by the Committee in five hearings, eight interviews with current and former officials from the Department of Justice and review of the limited documents produced by that Department that White House officials played a significant role in developing and implementing the plan for the dismissals,” Leahy said. “Indeed, the plan seems to have originated in the White House and was formulated by and with coordination of the White House political operation.”

Leahy said the White House has not provided a single document and did not make available a single official to be interviewed as part of the investigation.

“There is evidence that White House officials were deeply involved in what appears to be an effort to impose political influence on federal law enforcement,” Leahy added. “If the White House continues its refusal to provide information to the Senate Judiciary Committee on a voluntary basis, I will have no choice but to issue subpoenas to try to get to the truth in this matter.”




Read more: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/leahy-threatens-white-house-with-subpoenas-2007-05-16.html

[partylessinOhio]

1. Threaten? Just do it!

The democratic congress has now become more unpopular than *. Is it any wonder?

[Dr Fate]

4. But-but- then we would get our powder wet- and the media would attack us!!!

And Republicans would say mean things about us- and then Hillary might not get elected!!!

No- no- best to keep this to polite threats so that we can help Bush run out the clock- after all, "impeachment is off the table."

[partylessinOhio]

10. Democrats have enabled this IdiotInChief to take down America.

Their pockets are filled so what the hell do they care. Kucinich is about the only one of them that has not gained financially.

What a bunch of cowards led by Madame Squeaker!

[Dr Fate]

12. I hate the fact that DEMS have given me so many reasons to entertain that line of thinking.

I cant say for sure that they are "in on it"- but damn if they dont give me all kinds of reasons to at least consider it.

They seem to bhe "running out the clock" as much as anyone else. I've been hearing about these "threats" for months- and now I'm supposed to think that yet another letter is a step towards REALLY fighting Bush?

I've never seen them get tough on Bush on a damn thing-nothing remotely comparable to the ways that they have defeated us time & time again.

Letters? Requests? Big whoop.

[wordpix]

53. impeach the Idiot King & his henchmen, already. Send them to international court

if you can't stomach an impeachment hearing here, Senators!

[MLFerrell]

35. "Threaten? Just do it!"

My thoughts exactly... In fact I was going to post the exact same thing, but I saw that you had beat me to the punch.

[Dr Fate]

2. I thought we had been threatening them with this for months now. Ho-hum.

Pardon my dry powder here, but the perception I'm getting is that we are paper tigers, doing nothing but politely asking these guys to incriminate themselves.

Ignoring all these requests seems to be "misdemeanors"- if not high crimes-in contempt of congress at the least.

What if every Democrat was on TV saying "If they refuse to talk to us, then we will correctly assume they are lying about all of these things. If polite requests wont make them cooperate, then maybe we should look into impeachment investigations..."

I dont really see a big Democratic effort in the media to frame anything as serious violations that are subject to impeachment.

Yeah- I no- "be paitent, keep your powder dry." (AKA- give Bush more time to run out the clock or to manufacture counter-propaganda so that DEMS dont have to get their finger-nails dirty over this...)

[BonnieJW]

85. But who will enforce the subpoenas?

That would be the DOJ. And who from that department will will charge anyone in the WH with contempt of Congress?

[C_U_L8R]

3. Let me know when they start handing out indictments

and impeachments.

Gotta go stock up on pop.

[Dr Fate]

5. Exactly. I'm sure Bush laughs his ass off at Leahey's requests.

I'll believe DEMS are serious about taking down Bush when they are on TV everyday accusing him of lying about impeachable offenses- or soemthing just as strong.

Sending him these letters is a procedural step, I realize that- but it does NOTHING to actually preassure them to comply.

Call me back when Leahey and all the other house-hold names (Hillary? Dean? Kerry? Obama?)are on every TV show informing the people that "Bush's non-compliance suggests they are lying about impeachable offenses" -or some other indicator that DEMS getting serious about this...

I'm almost inclined to think DEMS are just running out the clock- maybe all these requests and threats are just to fool the base into thinking that they are trying to fight Bush.

"Hey- we sent him a letter-didnt you read about it on the internet? SEE-we fought him."

[jimshoes]

6. I expect the standard

Cheney response to this..... Well, you know.
P.S. Memo to Mr. Leahy.. JUST DO IT!

[donkeyotay]

7. The bush crime family must be trembling in fear.

Only 16 more months to stonewall. Wow. All the way up to threatening subpoenas. Cut to the chase, Leahy, they're going to say, "go fish." And then there'll be some hemming and hawing and eventually everyone will decide it's too late and to move forward. This crime family has never been held accountable. They've broken the country and yes, that is why congress has such a low approval rating. I had hoped that there would be some justice, but perhaps not. Some really are above the law.

[Dr Fate]

9. It just occurred to me that perhaps DEMS are the ones doing some of the stonewalling.

Perhaps the DEMS want to "run out the clock" on this just as much as Bush does.

I getting the impression that a knock-down, drag out fight is the last thing DEMS really want.

Maybe the behind the scenes talk goes something like this:

"If we catch Bush in more lies and crimes, then the next thing you know, those loud-mouthed party activists will REALLY be demanding impeachment. Hell, they might even be able to get non-political moderates to see their point join them at that point. Perhaps the compromise is to merely make it *look* like we tried to fight them- then that way no one has to get their fingernails too dirty..."

I hate to have these thoughts, but there they are.

I PRAY to be proved wrong on this.

[orleans]

67. the pukes aren't saying "go fish." they are completely saying FUCK OFF

and that's what we'll all be doing if our "representatives" don't grow a spine.

[L. Coyote]

8. K&R, X-Post: Alberto Throws Paul Under Bus; Ditto James to Alberto

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x890032

[MasonJar]

11. I know it is tempting, having spent six long years suffering under

the cabal, to deride our dems in Congress, but I disagree. They have been holding hearings about almost everything that is crucial. They have exposed enormous and egregious wrongs. The public is now being forced to listen and heed. Let them do their job. They are trying very hard. I personally commend them for doing a yeoman's job on a "kingpin" or two.

[Dr Fate]

13. What if the hearings and letters to Bush are are all we get?

If that is the case, then they will say "See- we tried. We held hearings that were on CSAPN and talked about on the internet, while assuring everyone that impeachment was off the table.Stop saying we didnt fight Bush- we sent him letters and everything..."

Sorry- but "wait and see" "let them do their jobs- they know more than you" "keep your powder dry" is what we heard before and after every single defeat. Frankly, it's almost hard to believe those assurances are still being trotted out after 6 years of that.

The window for benefit of the doubt is closing rapidly. If we dont see blood soon, then more and more people are going to think that DEMS are the ones running out the clock- and that all these hearings and polite letters are just shows to fool the base into thinking there was an effort.

[OwnedByFerrets]

77. DITTO......nt

[anitar1]

16. What have they done so far except have hearings. ?

I have not seen arrests and certainly not subpoenas. I am losing heart over all this. The deal making over trade that Pelosi and friends made the other day did it for me. I think most of them are eager to get in the money saddle. No one is representing me, don't know about the rest of you.They will still be playing this game in Nov.08 imho.In the meantime, our country is falling apart by the day.So where is a special prosecutor? I imagine that the next president who is selected, will change very little. I do not hear any of that bunch talking about how the constitution has been subverted. On second thought, I mean--IF there is a selection next year.Forgive the downer, but this is how I feel. These days I have become an observer. Even fed up with local politicians. They too, seem infected with Bush disease ,commonly known as lying.

[Dr Fate]

20. Well, we issue "press releases" on the internet and hold "conferences" that are on CSPAN3.

We also promised the American people that "impeachment is off the table."

Dont forget the other accomplishments-We have come up with all kinds of encouraging internal talking points like "Keep your powder dry" or "we dont have the votes, so why try?"

OKAY-To be fair, we have held these hearings for CSPAN audiences that have increased the public perception that Bush is corrupt- but I agree with you that the results of even that have been slight and incremental at best.

The public already knew of the vague notion of Bush corruption when they elected us in 06.

[MsMagnificent]

42. What have been the outcomes of those hearings?

Anything concrete, other than the 'Shocked, I tell ya' talk-talk?

For instance, other than those relative few who have resigned (and most if not all before they're questioned), who has been fired or removed? Is, for one example, Lurita Doan still at her job?

Have we ever gotten a substantive explanation why Impeachment is 'off the table'?

Are we seeing a lot of theatre dressed up to look like actual actions and resolutions? Do they think so little of us?

[The Wizard]

62. No one's been fired

for the 9-11 security break down. Don't hold your breath. Bush was fired by the voters, but master criminal Karl Rove rigged one election, and the Supreme Court circumvented the Constitution to name him President in 2000. When the Supreme Court can't obey the law, anarchy is soon to follow.

[EnviroBat]

75. I'm feeling the same way you are...

I'm getting to the point where I can't stand this do-nothing congress. I am disgusted after all of the hard work we've done to get them elected and get this country back to some semblance of sanity, it appears that they are doing nothing short of appeasing criminals. I'm starting to believe they are benefiting somehow from not pushing too hard. I mean, look at what has gone down with Condosleeza, thumbing her nose at a subpoena? What the hell is going on here? There is NO ONE representing US!

[BootinUp]

27. i agree. n/t

[Dr Fate]

30. Answer this honesty- will you be flabbergasted and suprised if nothing comes of this?

Or will you accepet it as par for the course, as part of a well established DEM pattern of "threats" that excite the base for a few days but go nowhere?

I'm not trying to flame or snark at you either- what is your honest answer?

[BootinUp]

31. I'll tell you what I think...

politics is a tough game, I think the Dems and Leahy are playing it pretty well right now. The outcome is hard to predict imho.

[Dr Fate]

32. I asked you specifically- will you be suprised or Flabberagsted if the doubters here are right?

I wont be suprised, and I doubt you will be either- but I'd like your specific answer, if you are willing to share it.

I disagree about predeicting the outcome-it is not hard to predict at all- we have 7 years of precedent of DEMS caving and Bush kicking our asses.

As well, I'm not sure what specifics make you think the "game" is being "played" well at all. I've seen nothing new in our approach or strategy that is different from past 7 years.

Will you really be suprised-will it blow your mind if you are incorrect and we are all 100% justified? taht is my specific question to you, if you care to give an honest answer.

[BootinUp]

34. The answer could be deduced from

my previous post. I will not be surprised since I have no strong opinion on the final outcome. I do have an opinion on the Democratic congress, they are doing very well so far.

[Dr Fate]

37. Fair enough-but if you have no strong opinion, then why disagree or agree in the 1st place?

I DO have a strong opinion on the outcome- I want these threats to be followed through, and I want to see blood as a result. I want to see someone that my apolitical aunts & uncles have HEARD OF go down too, not some bit-player.

But I will not be one tiny bit suprised if this is all a show- I do NOT think the game is being played well at all.

I ask a second time, what are some of the things that you are looking at that makes you thing they are "playing the game" well? You have said they are doing well on this twice- but what are your reasons for that opinion?

[BootinUp]

38. Read the post I agreed with again. Playing the game well

Means the investigations and pressure are resulting in definite strides toward the objective, such as loads of resigning Administration officials, good media coverage of the issue, etc.

[Dr Fate]

40. I'll give you that- but I'd qualify it as small strides, and "decent" media coverage at best.

You and I will both just have to agree that we both hope I am wrong.

My concern is that we are not playing the game well at all, if we were, there we be blood on the seats by now- as it is, we are running out the clock as much as Bush is.

[OnyxCollie]

63. I'm just as anxious as you to see bushco impeached, indicted & imprisoned.

Take a deep breath. And release.

What's missing from the picture is the MSM. Most Americans haven't a clue as to what crimes have been committed and are continuing to be committed. We do, but we're 100 thousand in a nation of 300 million. NONE of what has been revealed in hearings from Waxman, Leahy, and Conyers was known to the general public, aka Joe Sixpack, prior to Dems taking control of Congress. At least not in any presentation that would compel the average American to sit up and take notice. Now, James Comey's testimony is a good start. Those of us who have followed the wiretap scandal knew about this a year and a half ago. We've connected the dots all the way back to 9/11. But to hear him tell it in his own words, that's incredible stuff. Like something right out of The Godfather. Absolutely riveting. This kind of information equals ratings. The MSM are circling sharks, and that's blood in the water. However, before they attack they're going to need a whole lot of chum. Waxman, Leahy and Conyers are doing what they can, but with the MSM behind them, they're pissing up a rope.

As for the rest of Congress, well, I hope for my own sanity that they too are waiting for the MSM to pick up on this, and are not just as bad as the current occupants in the White House. Otherwise, we're fucked.

[Dr Fate]

89. I'll buy that excuse when Pat Leahey goes on TV and says all that to Wolf Blitzer's face.

Until then, "it's the media's fault" has become a catch-all excuse for DEMS who are too frightened to fight Bush.

If "it's the media's fault" then I need to hear some top, household name DEMS adress media bias, as opposed to DUers trotting it out as a catch-all excuse.

The media is indeed biased, but if no top DEMS are SAYING SO, then we have 2 problems, not one.

No sale- if media bias is what is keeping us from fighting Bush, then where are all the DEMS fighting media bias so that they can move forward to the next step?

[OnyxCollie]

90. Should Leahy say all that to Wolf Blitzer's face, it would probably be the last time.

I'm sure Wolf is eager to hear about how piss-poor the media is. Maybe CNN can do a week-long special on how the media fails to report important stories. Or how about this: A special Hardball "Hardballers" segment with Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, Andrea Mitchell, Norah O'Donnell, Sean Hannity, Brit Hume, Chris Wallace and special guest, Judith Miller. A clusterfuck of talking heads. They can ask each other why they talked up the war, why they ignored the wiretapping when it broke, and why they ignored the stolen election. Oh, I bet they can't wait to do it!

If the media doesn't like you, you are not going to be heard. Ask Wes Clark. Ask Dennis Kucinich. Ask Howard Dean what the media can do to a presidential campaign. Ask John Kerry what the media can do. How much coverage did his "botched joke" receive? 'Bout two weeks? James Comey drops bombshell testimony and ABC and CBS don't even cover it. The New York Times sits on the wiretapping scandal FOR A YEAR, THROUGH THE 2004 ELECTION.

The only person to really call the media on their bullshit is Bill Moyers, and Bushco dumped Ken Tomlinson on PBS specifically to fuck with him.

Don't think Leahy knows what's going on? Of course he does. NOBODY ELSE DOES. Not everyone is on DU, or Daily KOS, or even knows what a blog is. Not everyone listens to Diane Rehm, or Randi Rhodes, or Thom Hartmann. Not everyone reads The Nation or Mother Jones. Not everyone watches even Keith Olbermann for chrissakes.

I do those things, and when I watch my local news and read my local paper, I wonder, "WHERE THE HELL IS THE DAMN NEWS?" Maybe four minutes of government/world coverage on the local news. A handful of stories from AP or Reuters in the paper. That's it. When I ask my friends or my co-workers if they've heard any of the big stories, none of them have. And by their reasoning, why should they bother to find out? Does the "payout" of information justify the effort to receive it? No. Most have other priorities; spouses, children, careers. They can't spend all day following bushco. There's other things to do.

I hope I didn't come on too strong in the beginning (just got off work and I'm kinda grumpy). I'm currently doing research for grad school on how the media influences people, so this topic is kinda near & dear to me. But hey, what do I know? Right now, my informed opinion and $2.75 will get you a cup of coffee.

Having looked through some of your posts on this thread, let me add that I feel the Dem's desire to "keep their powder dry" on things like Alito's confirmation was a fucking stupid move.

Edit: typo

[Greyhound]

69. Just what is it that they have done, let alone done well? We're going on 6 months

of "Democratic control" and so far the first shoe hasn't dropped. Under the best circumstances, a legislature has 14 months to get anything done, and thanks to the premature campaign fiasco, that has been considerably abbreviated. So, they have burned through roughly half of the time they were given to institute the changes we demanded and have accomplished exactly nothing.

Do they honestly believe that they can waste this whole term with delays and obfuscation and run for the next election and stay in power?

[Raksha]

44. I'll tell ya what I'll be if the doubters are right...MAD!!!

Surprised, NO! Disappointed, YES...but a lot more than that. Furious is what I'll be, pissed off and with steam coming out of my ears. If the party insiders are playing along with the Bush Mafia by running out the clock, they have knifed their constituents in the back and everyone will know it. And they'll pay for it too.

[BootinUp]

46. Should they have the vote tomorrow then?

Guess how that will go. What is it about this statement: "We don't have the votes to convict" that doesn't register with the average outraged DU'er?

Here's a suggestion, do a petition drive in your own neighborhood, get actual signatures, of course you may not like the results.

[waiting for hope]

45. I remember distinctly Leahy

on NPR threatening to subpoena Gonzo - one week later he was. He's just getting geared up.

[Kablooie]

50. I will be flabbergasted and surprised if ANYTHING comes of this.

Or any other investigation.

All they seem to do is talk but they haven't supeonea ANYONE of importance yet and I see no indications of them doing so.
They know the supeonas will just be ignored and they don't have the guts to do anything stronger.

THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERS ARE NOW THE REASON BUSH CAN DO ALL THIS CRAP.
THEY REFUSE TO TAKE ANY --- ANY --- ACTION!

[rodeodance]

49. nicely said. I need patience.

[wordpix]

54. this is true of some of them: Fine-gold, Waxman, Reid, Leahy---they can't unravel

6 yrs. of criminal wrongdoing in just a few months. They're doing well but I, too would like to see them pick up the pace. The time is now!

[MisterApologist]

14. Senators are aiming for John Nowacki

My website http://misterapologist.blogspot.com/ has been covering John Nowacki (He is scheduled to be interviewed before the Senate Judiciary Committee) and it seems that the Senate has been going "John Nowacki Crazy" today... my counter shows that over 10 unique visits from the Senate with the visits lasting anywhere from 4 minutes to an hour and a half (average about 25). It seems that Mr. Nowacki is not only part of this purge but that the references to his office ( the Executive office of the DOJ) in Kyle Sampsons testimony and now Alberto Obfuscation Gonzales' testimony are putting him directly in the scope of this investigation....

[Mojorabbit]

64. Great info at your blog

Thanks for the link.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

15. Cha-chung!

I'm ready for some REAL Law & Order--hey, this would be a great spin-off---L&O--Political Intent!

[snappyturtle]

17. I think we've been more than patient...

What more do they want? I asked this yesterday here. I do not get it. Today I watched 9/11 Mysteries for the first time. You know, I had sorta forgotten how BAD the 9/11 attack was and all the dumb explanations of the 9/11 Commission was. THAT should have been enough to investigate and had the DEMS done that....I realize we weren't in power, but surely with the adjunct of Senator in front of one's name they could have done something. Now we have the wars, the raping of our constitutional rights, torture,the U.S. Attorney firings, ad infinitum. Again, what do they want?

Talk of insisting that the administration honors subpoenas seems a bit lame....it's only a little better than doing nothing.

[Dr Fate]

18. Maybe they are trying to fool the base into thinking they are fighting.

I hate to think that- but I've been hearing talk of these polite "threats" for what seems like months now.

I'd love to see all the DEMS in a non-stop media blitz- accusing them of "lying" or "hiding impeachable offenses"- THAT would do a whole lot more than a letter that few Americans will ever even hear about. I know the letters are procedural steps- that is fine- but it is not enough to get the public riled up.

I'm almost to the point where I really dont believe the DEMS are serious about fighting these guys.

I'm like you- I feel we have been paitent for months now- years really.

[rudy23]

19. Don't forget to make it look good, Dems. Land a few punches, and don't go down till the 5th round.

Either our prominent Democrats are complicit, or they are the most ineffective, impotent, bumbling group of politicians ever assembled.

At least 70% of the country is behind them, and they're afraid to go to the bathroom without asking permission. Maybe people are right, maybe these aren't the people to trust the security of our nation with! (obviously the current crop isn't exactly up to snuff, either)

[Dr Fate]

21. And dont hurt the DLC/Hillary in '08 by making "moderates" think DEMS are "far left" rabblerousers.

Which is a BS argument to begin with- you know- the popular internal talking point that taking on Bush's crimes or opposing the war will somehow turn moderate voters against DEMS in 08.

[tom_paine]

23. Oh God, I hope you are wrong. Because then we are in a pre-1776 condition.

And that's the end of it.

I have resisted this idea for that very reason. If the system, the Old American Republic is dead, starved of even the smallest portion of honoraable men and women in positions of power necessary (and believe you me, I think that "necessary number" is pathetically low, maybe 30% or even 20%...but if this is true we don't even have that) to maintain our Republic.

I hope those who believe this line of thinking are wrong.

For if not, then all we have is ourselves and the Declaration of Independence.

That's it. Read the Declaration. Then read it again. And again. And again...

[Dr Fate]

25. I've being praying that I am wrong ever since I put down my pom-poms in Novemeber of 2004.

It's a strange place to be, to pray that you are wrong about complacent, spineless DEMS, yet to have those thoughts confirmed over and over and over and over and over again.

AGAIN- perhaps I need to "keep my powder dry" and am totally jumping the gun and not being fair to Pat Leahey here- but if 2000 to present history is my guide, I'm not.

[tom_paine]

22. No more threatening! DO IT!

Condisleeza is already GUILTY of refusing a subpeone. Send the FBI over there and drag her Imelda-Marcos-ass out IN HANDCUFFS!

ENOUGH playing "nice" with TYRANTS, CRMINALS, and MURDERERS!

[Dr Fate]

24. Yup. I would even take it a step further.

Have 10 or so household DEMS go on TV, and say that if they dont show up on the dates provided, then:

"impeachment investigations will begin-whether we have the votes or not- it's the only choice we will have left after multiple examples of contempt of congress. If he has nothing to hide, then Bush can clear the air on the given dates, or he can discuss this from the implication of hig-crimes and misdemeanors- the choice is his..."

Something like that. It's a threat that the GOP/media WILL take to heart, b/c whether Bush's acts are impeachable or not is the LAST thing they want being discussed.

Letters? Mild threats? Who cares- they will happily discuss that or happily ignore it and blow it off.

[Mark Twain Girl]

41. Agreed. If any politican hits us with a "healing the nation" pass on criminality

thuggery and deception... I'm going to lose my mind. Agreed, the time is long past for threats -- time for action.

DO IT!!

[wordpix]

55. we will only heal when this criminal cabal is held accountable!

:patriot:

[lonestarnot]

26. I would like to be the officer of the Court/ Congress delivering that one!

Heh heh heh!

[wordpix]

56. yeah, must've felt great, hahaha

[acmavm]

28. DON'T anybody get their hopes up here. It'll be just like the withdrawal

timetable and the secret trade deal.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[Dr Fate]

29. If true-will DU's usual pom-pom wielding excuse makers even pretend to be suprised?

I know some folks will continue to make excuses, but will anyone even PRETEND to be suprised at that point?

I think you might be right- "Impeachment is off the table"- and the last thing the conservative DEMS want is more reasons for activists and even moderates to amp up demands that the table be re-set.

I think DEMS, by their constant inaction and false starts are giving us ammo to accuse them, rightfully or not, of "running out the clock" as much as anyone.

Threats? Big Whoop. I've been hearing about these "threats" of a knock-down, drag-out fight for months now. Really for years.

[rateyes]

33. Issue the damned things already! nt

[MGKrebs]

36. Bush has no oral authority in Iraq because he did not get a consensus, he did not

exhaust diplomatic solutions, and lied.

Leahy must take this step by step and build the foundation with real stones. Skipping steps means having to then go backwards.









At least I hope that's what's going on.

[Dr Fate]

39. I agree- but what particular steps would he be skipping if he forgoes yet one more threat...

...and just goes ahead and issues the subpoeana?

Havent DEMS already issued several threats of this nature?

Hanst Bush already said that he will not comply to formal or informal requests of these types?

Procedurally speaking, where is it written that we must issue several non-binding threats before we actually follow through?

Public perception- do we really think the public would find it unfair, or that we are "skipping steps" if DEMS just move forward, minus the talk?

Exactly what foundational stones are missing here if we just go ahead and issue these things, minus more preliminary threats?

[republikkkon]

43. cosign with dr fate

seriously, when clinton got impeached for lying about a blow job is there any doubt left that dems are at best pussys... at worst complicit?

there isn't in my mind.

message to dems - quit talking and do something. cowards.


:mad:

[SharonRB]

47. Make like Nike and just do it, Patrick, just do it

[rodeodance]

48. about time!!----next step is to carry through on the threat.

[tomp]

51. hey pat, while you're at it see if you can find out...

...who sent the fucking anthrax.

you asshole, there's not a moment to lose and hasn't been since 12/12/00, arrgghh!!!!!!! (visualize tomp pulling out his hair)

[Cronopio]

52. As Tuco says, if you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk. nt

[wordpix]

57. Leahy is being ever the gentleman but with this cabal, you have to be rough & tough

Who are Dems scared of, AWOL Monkeyking to whom everything's a big joke or Cheneyfudd with his big gun shooting defenseless birds just let out of a cage? :grr:

[Kablooie]

58. He's not being a gentleman, he's being a pussy!

The Dems aren't able to do ANYTHING about Bush and Cheney except complain.
They are, apparently, completely neutered in regards to bringing anyone to justice.

We are all royally fucked.

[progressoid]

59. At this pace, they'll get to the bottom of this in time for the election...

the 2010 election.

[NastyRiffraff]

60. Y'know, it's very easy to sit behind a keyboard

..and say "DO IT NOW OR YOU'RE ALL PUSSYS"

Were it that easy. How about wiretapping? Does anyone seriously think the WH is NOT wiretapping Democrats in Congress? And threatening them with the results?

I'm not talking about them finding out about illegal acts. If a Dem commits one of those, there's a process for finding that out, and prosecuting him or her.

But Repub wiretapping is not about illegal acts...although they're sure to exploit that. It's about someone sleeping around, someone who's gay, someone whose past, like most of us, isn't perfect. And if revealed, not only the target, but a lot of people involved will get hurt.

What would you do if that happened to you? It's VERY easy to say "to hell with them..bring it on" if it's just you. What if it's your wife or husband, daughter or son, mother or father?

I'm not saying that's true in every case, nor am I saying that in a lot of cases Democrats shouldn't stand up and be bold I'm saying these thugs will stop at NOTHING. (And I mean nothing). What if your wife, mother, son, daughter were threatened? What would you do?

There's a reason for wiretapping Americans. Spying on protestors and liberal groups is just the tip of the iceburg. Think Soviet Union. Think Nazi Geramany. And then add technology.

What would you do if not you, but your loved ones were threatened? Say "bring 'em on"?

[hayu_lol]

61. I appreciate all of you who have said: Quit with the damn letters already...

send the Marshalls with the Subs. Rove, Bush, and Cheney aren't reading your damn letters. Letters give them time to stall and shred.

[OnyxCollie]

68. Or have someone else open their mail.

These are the most dangerous people in the world. It should be clear to all that to go against the WH in any meaningful manner is to put your life (or someone in your family) at risk. What about the white powder sent to Edwards?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3249633

It tested negative for anthrax, but positive for someone doesn't like him a whole lot. This was the second package. What happens the next time? Did Waxman yet have an investigation on the anthrax letters?

Obama requests a security detail. Jim Webb carries a loaded pistol.

BTW, did I miss some important event? Why have I heard and read about Kennedy's assassination today? I'm starting to feel like I'm being spun. "There are no conspiracies. Go back to sleep."

[Greyhound]

70. What you've said is not far fetched and may well be true,

but our nation, and with it a good part of the world, is at stake and every single one of these people wanted to sit in the big chair.

They wanted to get in the game and make a difference and those are the stakes. If you want security, go into real estate or sell life insurance, if you want to be a player you take the risk knowing full well that everybody is playing for keeps. They also knowingly placed their friends and families at risk, do you think the "terrorists" that founded this country thought that they and their families would be spared if they lost?

I think that we who are led, have the luxury of ignorance, but anyone that wants a role on the world stage knows that death is frequently the result. They make decisions that kill people every day, that is the nature of the beast.

[lovuian]

65. DO IT

this is getting really old its like they are purposely delaying

[Canuckistanian]

66. Over 1000 subpoenas against the Clinton administration

Five or so against Bush's administration.

Wake me up when it approaches 100.

[radfringe]

71. Dear Senator Leahy

enough with the "threats" of subpoenas, you know the loyal bushies will ignore the threat.

Just issue the damn subpoenas, and tell House Speaker Pelosi to set the table with dinnerware appropriate for IMPEACHMENT

[FiftysLost]

72. Country

Hate to be the one to tell you but....We have already lost our beloved country. It is to late. Dem's and re-pubs are one and the same. Banks and corporations own our country and our politicians.

[bklyncowgirl]

73. Issue the damn subpoenas already--"pretty please" does not work.

This is an administration devoid of conscience or shame. The only way to deal with them is to hit them hard.

Please, no more beating around the bush.

[Vinca]

74. Subpoenas mean nothing to this crowd. What's Plan B?? nt

[Lost4words]

76. just do it, IF THEY DONT COMPLY ARREST THEM!

NOW !

8643

[On the Road]

80. So Leahy Should -- What? --

ask the DC Chief of Police to arrest the president?

[Greyhound]

82. I think that the Secret Service has jurisdiction in that case, but yes.

A subpoena is not an invitation, it is an order and failure to comply with it bears very severe consequences.

[Lost4words]

84. it used to anyway

8643

[Lost4words]

83. no,.. your way is better, lets just sit here, dont you ever get angry?

[On the Road]

88. You Criticized Leahy for Not Arresting Bush

I have no idea how that is supposed to happen.

[deepthought42]

78. Yes, he should take action, and not just send letters and threats...

but am I sooooo fucking tired of people saying "they're wimps, we're doomed, the Dems suck, etc".... Either do something about it, or shut the fuck up.

thanks for pissing me off... I'm out of here...

[ckramer]

79. Grab a chair!

Go go go!

[bamacrat]

81. Its a start, the WH will thumb their noses though.

[Ilsa]

86. Bring it on. Please!

[Greyhound]

87. Kick, good discussions ahead...

:kick: