..charges?..is that the same as royalties?
Posted on 01/22/2006 9:22:31 AM PST by wouldntbprudent
Washington -- House Democrats warned President Bush, top leaders of his administration and officials of the National Security Agency on Friday that if the political climate changes they could face criminal prosecution for ordering and carrying out warrantless domestic eavesdropping.
"These are clearly crimes and the statute of limitations extends beyond this president's term,'' which will end in January 2009, said Rep. Jerry Nadler D-N.Y., at an ad hoc hearing called by House Judiciary Committee's Democrats to assail Bush's contention that his order for warrantless domestic wiretaps on American citizens is legal.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Well if he did anything ILLEGAL then he should be prosecuted, but the case has not been made that he did anything Illegal.
Reeeeeeeeally? Who's going to bring those charges?
Bring it on Party Of Osama!
Bring it on....
Bring charges against Clinton and Carter. :D
These evil freaks are more interested in prosecuting the guy trying to save us from terrorists than from the terrorists.
Keep it up, fatboy. The Republicans want to protect America and the Democrats want to protect terrorists.
That'll really play well.
Myopic one issue types who will take their ball and go home if they don't get each of their whims humored should take note.
A Democratic House WILL impeach Dubya. Do your part and keep the Congress GOP.
These people are taking a pretty big gamble. If Osama makes good on his next threat, they will have committed political suicide.
God just continues to bless Republicans by making the polical opposition stupider every day.
..charges?..is that the same as royalties?
Are the Dem'crats making THREATS?
Can't carry out a threat unless you are carrying enough moral authority to make it stick. And besides the moral authority, it helps considerably if you possess the clout to enforce the rules.
If the first responders and the military aren't on board to act, then all these threats sound kind of hollow.
Yes, but only if they go after Clinton and Gore, too. (And possibly Carter.) The difference is (and it's a big difference) that the 'Rats did this sort of thing for POLITICAL gain, and the President has been doing it to fend off terror attacks on our country. (And whatever did Hillary do with all that FBI information she ILLEGALLY took?)
Translation: When the Democrats retake the Senate and the House we are goning to impeach President Bush and yada, yada, yada..............
The only problem is pigs will fly and hell will freeze before the Dimwits will every regain power.
Uh, Jerry, so is treason. If you're so willing to chomp at the bit to have politically-motivated prosecutions, maybe you should be looking over your shoulder, because the guiding force behind your remarks is clearly your desire to aid and abet the enemies of the United States. If you can threaten political prosecutions, then you should be prepared to be on the receiving end of such threats. You'd make a great target for one of those show trials that you and your fellow travelers are so fond of...
Must... restrain... myself... from... making... Nadler... jokes...
Remember just after 9/11 when W was going to visit the ruins of the WTC for the first time and Nadler was trying to stay thisclose to him? If the President had said, "I will do anything but intercept phonecalls from terrorists to keep you safe" he would have been pilloried. Losers.
Does anyone have a good picture of Nadler? What a freak.
I just wrote the journalist asking that he read "Bodyguard of Lies" the story behind the successful Normandy invasion fakeouts, all of which were top secret and needed to be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.