Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 29 January 2006 - Pres Bush on FTN!
Various big media television networks ^ | 29 January 2006 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

Posted on 01/29/2006 5:01:14 AM PST by Alas Babylon!

The Talk Shows



Sunday, January 29nd, 2006

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.; Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind.; Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean; former Commerce Secretary Don Evans.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): President Bush.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Chuck Hagel, R-Neb.; Dominique Dawes, Olympic gymnast.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : White House counselor Dan Bartlett; Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del., and Pat Roberts, R-Kan.; former President Carter; former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 109th; benazirbhutto; biden; chairmandean; danbartlett; donevans; facethenation; foxnewssunday; frist; guests; hagel; jimmycarter; lateedition; lineup; meetthepress; mikepence; obama; patroberts; presidentbush; sunday; talkshows; thisweek; thune
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 951-1,0001,001-1,0501,051-1,1001,101-1,149 next last
To: Txsleuth

I saw that, too.. and she thinks we need a socialist system (didn't say socialist but she said do what 36 other countries do and provide healthcare for everyone of our citizens)... uhhh if hospitals didn't lose so much money on carrying for illegal's they wouldn't have to make up the bottom line by charging more to their insured, that is one way government could help -- close our borders!


1,001 posted on 01/29/2006 12:48:54 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 915 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

He wasn't the only one.


1,002 posted on 01/29/2006 12:50:39 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 922 | View Replies]

To: samantha

Sounds like Fla is doing better than WA state; however, we'll take whatever we can get. They just found about 11,500 dead voters on the registration and over 36,000 that were registered in 2 counties.


1,003 posted on 01/29/2006 12:51:58 PM PST by Seattle Conservative (God bless and protect our troops and their CIC. (Seahawks are going to the Superbowl!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 998 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

My Congressman is Mark Foley and we agree with him on about 88 percent of the issues, and I will always support him for that reason. He has to serve the people of Palm Beach County which is liberal, and Rural Central Florida like my County, and he does a lovely tap dance and keeps getting elected because he cares about all his constituents and he knows that we will get on his butt if he strays too far to the left. we can live with that, and he is one of GWB's biggest supporters.


1,004 posted on 01/29/2006 12:52:36 PM PST by samantha (cheer up, the adults are in charge! Soldier in Bucket Brigade Reporting for Duty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 969 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
I am off to have dinner and watch a TV drama be back on line about 6.00pm EST or before maybe to lurk.

If I do not see you before catch you all next Sunday - thanks for company - great thread today.

Will post awards when you get me the info Johnnie, don't rush them to me as I will being the dose on Monday so if I do not have it before 5.00pm EST I doubt I will get round to it before Tuesday.

See you all around FR
1,005 posted on 01/29/2006 12:56:40 PM PST by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 991 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

You get no argument from me.


1,006 posted on 01/29/2006 12:56:50 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 963 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

It didn't seem like many did watch.

He did not break any new ground, but gave reasonable answers to the NSA, Katrina, etc. It was pretty softball.

He did have to praise Bill Clintoon some at the end.

LaEnchilada had a good link to the vids in post 680.


1,007 posted on 01/29/2006 12:57:00 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 834 | View Replies]

To: Seattle Conservative

Thank you, I checked it out. Good information.


1,008 posted on 01/29/2006 1:05:10 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 943 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt; snugs
But any thought that Frist can "nuke at will" is based on a misunderstanding of the parliamentary procedure.

I understand that quite well. However, the filibuster never had any history in judicial nominations, and the one opportunity to banish it from the Senate was wasted by MCLame for no good reason other than "face" time.

I do not believe he cares about the Republican party at all, if he did, he would never have promoted CFR. It nearly cost us the election as well as being fundamentally un-American.

After attaching his no torture amendment to the defense appropriation bill (by doing so forgetting precedent) in order to embarrass the President, the only faith I have in him is that he will do whatever gets him the most publicity.

This filibuster attempt will give him the chance to play king maker again, and I truly wonder if he will be able to restrain himself. /rant

1,009 posted on 01/29/2006 1:05:57 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 821 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah
My question, though, was a direct result of Obama's contention that we send millions to Iran to purchase their oil, which I thought to be incorrect, and we need alternative sources of energy so that we don't have to do this any longer.

I missed that. In that case Obama is wrong. If he were to modify his statement to say we send millions (or, more likely, billions) ot the islamic states in the Middle East for their oil, then he might have a point. However, that is one of the prime arguments behind lifting the ban on exploration in ANWR and off of our own coasts, such as the areas off California and Florida.

By "alternative sources of energy" he probably means the fantasies of powering the world with solar cells and windmills, but his friends the Kennedy's object to the windmills (in their back yard) and solar cell production creates horrible toxic run off of things like Galium Arsenide. Not nice. Then his friends like Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer are blocking oil exploration off the coast of California, so we're screwed on all fronts. Of course, Jeb Bush is doing his bit to block oil exploration off the coast of Florida, but I don't think that he is doing it out of conviction, just political necessity.

Sad, isn't it? We need to light up 1,000 more nuclear power plants in order to cut down on pollution (and global warming, if such a thing exists), but his party is owned, lock stock and barrel, by the econazi's and he can't say that. He just dances around the edges with stupid and ineffective slogans instead of actually addressing the problem.

1,010 posted on 01/29/2006 1:08:42 PM PST by Phsstpok (There are lies, damned lies, statistics and presentation graphics, in descending order of truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1000 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn; Miss Marple

Add me to the weekly newswatch list, but I have to tell you I have come to dispise Neal Gabler over the past couple of months, he has become more and more dispicable.

####

I guess we are hopeless addicts and need an intervention. I ask myself every Saturday why I am subjecting myself to this show.

I just did a very quick Google about Neal Gabler, because he is not introduced on Newswatch as being employed by anyone. He has been writing very nasty articles for a long time. One that will make you laugh is all about the jihadism of Karl Rove.

Gabler has serious paranoid delusional problems.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/102504E.shtml

Karl Rove: America's Mullah
By Neal Gabler
The Los Angeles Times

Sunday 24 October 2004

This election is about Rovism, and the outcome threatens to transform the U.S. into an ironfisted theocracy.

Even now, after Sen. John F. Kerry handily won his three debates with President Bush and after most polls show a dead heat, his supporters seem downbeat. Why? They believe that Karl Rove, Bush's top political operative, cannot be beaten. Rove the Impaler will do whatever it takes - anything - to make certain that Bush wins. This isn't just typical Democratic pessimism. It has been the master narrative of the 2004 presidential campaign in the mainstream media. Attacks on Kerry come and go - flip-flopper, Swift boats, Massachusetts liberal - but one constant remains, Rove, and everyone takes it for granted that he knows how to game the system.

Rove, however, is more than a political sharpie with a bulging bag of dirty tricks. His campaign shenanigans - past and future - go to the heart of what this election is about.

---snip---


1,011 posted on 01/29/2006 1:08:53 PM PST by maica (We are fighting the War for the Free World. Democrats and the media are not on our side.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 852 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

precisely... This was a great (you fill in the blank )set up because some of their previous questions have not been too far off this made up scenario.


1,012 posted on 01/29/2006 1:10:03 PM PST by samantha (cheer up, the adults are in charge! Soldier in Bucket Brigade Reporting for Duty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 985 | View Replies]

To: snugs

My wife said she doesn't remember her granny making Yorkshire pud.
She made made some mean kidney dishes which aren't American staples. :):)


1,013 posted on 01/29/2006 1:13:43 PM PST by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 979 | View Replies]

To: maica

~LOL~ Thanks for the read.. why is it these liberal reporters think they are so much smarter than 99% of the population?


1,014 posted on 01/29/2006 1:15:09 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1011 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
However, the filibuster never had any history in judicial nominations, and the one opportunity to banish it from the Senate was wasted by MCLame for no good reason other than "face" time.

Not only do I agree it has no precedent (other than the unpleasantries of the 108th Congress), it is IMO an unacceptable imbalance of paower in favor of the Senate, away from the Office of the President.

But there is opportunity to remedy the threat. As I noted, the GOP Senate leadership has a number of judicial candidates "on deck," even out of Committee, that the Senate DEM leadership has indicated will be filibustered if brought up for debate and vote.

F = 7 subjected to failed cloture motions in 108th Congress
4 = "1 of 4" that DEMs offered to let GOP choose which 3 to dump
S = Positive mention in Specter's May 9, 2005 speech

M = MOU of 14 will not vote against cloture
m = MOU of 14 makes no promise regarding cloture
R = Post-MOU, Reid indicates desire to filibuster

C = Out of committee & on the Senate's Executive Calendar
U = Unanimous consent to debate - date TBD
D = Democrats offer to debate - date TBD
v = Debate and vote scheduled
V = Vote -on the nomination- concluded
x = Nomination returned to the President - President renominated
X = Nomination returned to the President - President capitulated

       --S  --  C--  Boyle, Terrence W.       (4th Cir)
       ---  -R  ---  Haynes, William James II (4th Cir)
       F4S  M-  CUV  Owen, Priscilla          (5th Cir)
       F-S  --  CUV  Griffin, Richard A.      (6th Cir)
       F-S  --  CUV  McKeague, David W.       (6th Cir)
       --S  --  -DV  Neilson, Susan Bieke     (6th Cir)
       F--  mR  ---  Saad, Henry W.           (6th Cir)
       F4S  mR  C--  Myers, William Gerry III (9th Cir)
       F4S  M-  CUV  Pryor, William H.        (11th Cir)
       F4S  M-  CUV  Brown, Janice Rogers     (D.C. Cir)
       --S  --  CUV  Griffith, Thomas B.      (D.C. Cir)
       ---  -R  --x  Kavanaugh, Brett M.      (D.C. Cir)
       ---  --  ---  Payne, James Hardy       (10th Cir)
       ---  --  ---  Smith, N. Randy          (9th Cir)
       ---  --  ---  Chagares, Michael A.     (3rd Cir)
Last updated, January 26, 2005

Owen: Cloture passed 81-18 on May 24. Confirmed 55-43 on May 25.
Brown: Cloture passed 65-32 on June 7. Confirmed 56-43 on June 8.
Pryor: Cloture passed 67-32 on June 8. Confirmed 53-45 on June 9.
Griffin: Confirmed 95-0 on June 9.
McKeague: Confirmed 96-0 on June 9.
Griffith: Confirmed 73-24 on June 14.
Neilson: Confirmed 97-0 on October 27.
Myers: Out of Committee on March 17.
Boyle: Out of Committee on June 16.
Kavanaugh: Returned to the President on December 22, Renominated on January 25.
Payne: Nominated on September 29.
Smith: Nominated on December 16.
Chagares: Nominated on January 25.

Additional source material


1,015 posted on 01/29/2006 1:17:53 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1009 | View Replies]

To: Texican72

Except that it was God asking, and you know deimocRats don't believe in God, so therefore, the question wasn't really asked.


1,016 posted on 01/29/2006 1:18:46 PM PST by concretebob (We should give anarchists what they want. Then we can kill them and not worry about jail-time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn

Over 1000 posts and NOBODY gave me a smackdown summary of Jua n Williams. Guess he had the day off. I'm t.v. deprived and can't watch the shows.


1,017 posted on 01/29/2006 1:19:03 PM PST by stumpy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1014 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok

I absolutely agree !


1,018 posted on 01/29/2006 1:21:39 PM PST by Reily (Reilly (Dr Doom))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 908 | View Replies]

To: Morgan in Denver

Unless you live inland in Florida. I lived in Broward County for 31 years and I enjoyed the Ocean to look at but not to smell, it always seemed to smell like dead fish and rotting mangroves. I love freshwater Lakes,rivers and streams better, and there are lakes in Florida like Okeechobee that I cannot see across. Rodguy can probably tell you about the medicinal benefits of Ocean Water,Saltwater, and there is not much that is prettier than the Sun rising/setting on The Ocean with Palm Trees waving in the breeze. The only thing I can think of to rival that is Skyline Drive Virginia in October or Twilight in October over Lake Ontario with a bird on the wing. i am not sure about Colorado, but I know it is Beautiful Country with lots of freshwater Lakes,Rivers.


1,019 posted on 01/29/2006 1:23:25 PM PST by samantha (cheer up, the adults are in charge! Soldier in Bucket Brigade Reporting for Duty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 988 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn

Especially that gnome Gabler!!!


1,020 posted on 01/29/2006 1:26:12 PM PST by maica (We are fighting the War for the Free World. Democrats and the media are not on our side.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1014 | View Replies]

To: stumpy

>>Over 1000 posts and NOBODY gave me a smackdown summary of Juan Williams.

Hey, nobody gave me a CLUE what President Bush said on FTN either.


1,021 posted on 01/29/2006 1:29:26 PM PST by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth
they would all get together and get a bus service of some kind, to go out and pick these people up, don't you??

That would actually require thinking. What makes you think that businessmen, particularly the types that run places like Burger King, are capable of that sort of thing?

Now, a real entrepreneur would get several old buses, fire them up and then approach the local businesses in such an area with a proposition.

Problems or opportunities. It depends on your mind set what you see.

1,022 posted on 01/29/2006 1:30:22 PM PST by Phsstpok (There are lies, damned lies, statistics and presentation graphics, in descending order of truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 495 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Excellent info!

I am not sure that either the Dems or Frist would allow that to happen for less than a Supreme Court nominee at this point. IMHO Frist is a wuss, and the dems will have to have something to use if Ginsburg retires.

My major point is that we had the resources available to stop this ridiculous tactic (it might have taken Cheney's vote to break a tie) and McCain for vanity nixed it.

It is just a Senate rules change, so the scenario could arise again. In the meantime, I believe it colored the President's thinking when he nominated Miers, and has overshadowed the entire nomination process.

Once again cboldt, what a good post. Bookmarked for future reference!


1,023 posted on 01/29/2006 1:33:35 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1015 | View Replies]

To: Seattle Conservative

Our Supervisor of Elections in my County is a Dem, but he is a totally fair individual and he is old school, and even though the County is majority Pubbie, he always get re-elected. He is probably a Dino because every Prayer Breakfast,Flag Day commemoration, anything to do with honoring America,the Flag,Soldiers,etc he is at and is very respectful. He does not do it because he is a Politician, he does it because that is the kind of person he is. I believe his family would disown him if he changed parties,and so we have adopted him. It is the one Office out of two in the County that Pubbies do not hold.


1,024 posted on 01/29/2006 1:35:33 PM PST by samantha (cheer up, the adults are in charge! Soldier in Bucket Brigade Reporting for Duty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1003 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
There was no trial. Ames and his wife entered a plea bargain.

I'm not surprised, but I think I remember there being an evidentiary ruling allowing the results of the search of his house to be used before that.

1,025 posted on 01/29/2006 1:38:27 PM PST by Phsstpok (There are lies, damned lies, statistics and presentation graphics, in descending order of truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: snugs
"Do you think we will make the 1,000 mark?"

I am NEVER going to catch up :-((

1,026 posted on 01/29/2006 1:43:53 PM PST by cake_crumb (Leftist Credo: One Wing to Rule them All and to the Darkside Bind them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 900 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter

From what I saw Juan said a few incoherent things and everyone seem to be mute, then Brit smacked him a little but seemed subdued and got the last word in refuting Juan's stupid DNC talking point. It was a little boring so we may have to watch the repeat to get anything out of it. I think the IED attack on the ABC reporter kind of left everyone feeling a little blue today.


1,027 posted on 01/29/2006 1:44:30 PM PST by samantha (cheer up, the adults are in charge! Soldier in Bucket Brigade Reporting for Duty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1021 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
MR. RUSSERT: Is it appropriate to call the President of the United States "the greatest terrorist in the world"?

YEah, I saw that, I was playing off it. They never have the guits to talk that jive to his face.

1,028 posted on 01/29/2006 1:45:11 PM PST by Flavius Josephus (Enemy Idealogies: Pacifism, Liberalism, and Feminism, Islamic Supremacism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
I am not sure that either the Dems or Frist would allow that to happen for less than a Supreme Court nominee at this point.

It's up to GOP Senate leadership. They control what comes to the floor. SCOTUS nominations can't be as easily hidden from public view, as can Circuit Court nominees.

It is just a Senate rules change, so the scenario could arise again. In the meantime, I believe it colored the President's thinking when he nominated Miers, and has overshadowed the entire nomination process.

I absolutely agree that the tactic colors the President's choices, and it is why the practice chaps me so. It erects a supermajority hurdle, set by Senate whim (see history of cloture, below), instead of the simple majority envisioned by the Constitution. Given the evolution of the relationship between the Senate and the President, especially the farily rich panoply of scenarios that have played in the judicial nomination/confirmation arena, the issue is not a "mere rules change" at this point. Sure, that's where it eventually will get embodied (and I think the change belogs in Rule XXXI, mirroring Rule XXX - and not by modification of the cloture rule, Rule XXII). But until the Senate agrees that its supermajority requirement is "Constitutionally infirm," the terms of discussion don't much matter.

Gold / Gupta Summary of Cloture & Filibuster

Senate Rules from 1789 to 1806 permitted calling the question with a simple majority. See http://rules.senate.gov/history.html, Rule IX. This rule was removed in 1806, and in its place was a requirement to obtain unanimous consent to move to the vote. One objecting Senator could stifle the vote.

The cloture rule was first implemented in 1917, on a bipartisan 76-3 vote. (p226). With the concurrence of 2/3rds of the Senators voting, debate would be limited and taking the vote would be set for a time certain. This matches common parliamentary procedure and was published in Robert's Rules of Order in 1876.

In 1949, on a 63-23 vote, the threshold for passing cloture was modified to 2/3rds of the Senators duly chosen and sworn. (p229).

In 1959, a 77-22 vote returned the margin for passing cloture to the original 2/3rds of the Senators present and voting. (p247). Rule XXII was expanded to include rules changes - this is where the "2/3rds of Senators present and voting are required to change the rules" rule comes from. The 1959 changes are referred to as the "Johnson (LBJ) Compromise."

In 1975, Senator Pearson introduced a proposal to change the threshold to 3/5ths of Senators present and voting. (p257). That proposal did not pass. In the same year, Senator Byrd's proposed revision to 3/5ths of all Senators passed on a 56-27 vote, meeting the 2/3rds of the Senators present and voting threshold for implementing a rules change. (p259).

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Gold_Gupta_JLPP_article.pdf

1,029 posted on 01/29/2006 1:50:27 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1023 | View Replies]

To: stumpy

See # 632 and decide how it could be reported. Juan was totally incoherent.


1,030 posted on 01/29/2006 1:51:18 PM PST by maica (We are fighting the War for the Free World. Democrats and the media are not on our side.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter
Hey, nobody gave me a CLUE what President Bush said on FTN either.

Yep. After all the ranting and raving and screaming about "Why doesn't Bush fight back HE shows up on a Sunday and NO one talks about it. Frustrating.

1,031 posted on 01/29/2006 2:01:17 PM PST by MNJohnnie (Is there a satire god who created Al Gore for the sole purpose of making us laugh?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1021 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Given the evolution of the relationship between the Senate and the President, especially the farily rich panoply of scenarios that have played in the judicial nomination/confirmation arena, the issue is not a "mere rules change" at this point. Sure, that's where it eventually will get embodied (and I think the change belogs in Rule XXXI, mirroring Rule XXX - and not by modification of the cloture rule, Rule XXII). But until the Senate agrees that its supermajority requirement is "Constitutionally infirm," the terms of discussion don't much matter.

Guess I shouldn't have said "mere"..LOL

I realize that this is a very complex matter, but in the end, the Senate is given the power to regulate itself. I believe that whether the Dems like it or not, a simple majority vote can legally drop filibusters on judicial nominees.

Preventing legislative filibusters is an entirely different matter. I believe this is where the debate on the required supermajority comes into play, and the existing rules of the Senate would apply...

1,032 posted on 01/29/2006 2:01:50 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1029 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie; Graymatter

Check post 1007...there wasn't a lot to the interview.


1,033 posted on 01/29/2006 2:03:14 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1031 | View Replies]

To: stumpy

I get the replay in an hour... that is if I can take watching an interview with Howard Dean.


1,034 posted on 01/29/2006 2:04:00 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

Everyone on Fox seems to think Stevens will retire before long.


1,035 posted on 01/29/2006 2:05:19 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1023 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Another visit to the Sunday Morning TalkShow thread and another round of histrionics from the chief Bush sycophant and apologist on FR. Obviously you don't think before you post and have a habit of getting all worked up over nothing. On a more serious note, you make no effort to advance the conservative agenda or GOP politics, and for good reason. You have no comprehension what American politics is all about and your juvenile posts prove that. You've shown no interest in discussing the issues that drive conservatism, but you do like to bloviate. As I told you before, you're nothing but a wishy-washy centrist. Btw, if you really want to see a babbling fool, just take a look in the mirror.


1,036 posted on 01/29/2006 2:06:57 PM PST by Reagan Man (Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 824 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn

At 86, he is not going to have much choice. Bush should have at least one more Supreme Court nomination, and depending on Ginsburg's health, possibly two.


1,037 posted on 01/29/2006 2:08:39 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1035 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

Thanks! Glad to see it wasn't a total waste of the President's time.


1,038 posted on 01/29/2006 2:10:56 PM PST by MNJohnnie (Is there a satire god who created Al Gore for the sole purpose of making us laugh?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1007 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

To me it seemed he did very well, but not the stellar performance he had at K-State.


1,039 posted on 01/29/2006 2:11:56 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1038 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
IMHO , Jn.12:4-6 has always pertained:"then saith one of his diciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief and had the bag, and bare what was put therein."
1,040 posted on 01/29/2006 2:14:25 PM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita
Kind of makes you wonder where all this fussing and screaming came from in Nov and Dec on this thread about "Bush not fighting back against the Sunday Shows". Should do more of the KSU stuff. He did this and it doesn't work nearly as well. It's ok but not real great. Probably appeals to the 16 people who watch See-BS. The questioning is so utterly infantile. Cannot imagine any where else in life, out of of Junk Journalism, where, so many egos grow to such grotesque size on so little actual intellectual ability.
1,041 posted on 01/29/2006 2:19:46 PM PST by MNJohnnie (Is there a satire god who created Al Gore for the sole purpose of making us laugh?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 631 | View Replies]

To: eeevil conservative

Just tell your beau that if there are ever wedding bells...we get to be your cyber-bridesmaids....LOL


1,042 posted on 01/29/2006 2:21:57 PM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 939 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
There was no trial. Ames and his wife entered a plea bargain.

I'm not surprised, but I think I remember there being an evidentiary ruling allowing the results of the search of his house to be used before that.

There may be, but I'm not aware of it. My belief stems from a GAO report, portions below.

        REPORTNUM:   GAO-01-780
            ACCNO:   A01392
            TITLE:   FBI Intelligence Investigations: Coordination Within
                     Justice on Counterintelligence Criminal Matters Is Limited
             DATE:   07/16/2001
          SUBJECT:   Domestic intelligence
                     Electronic surveillance
                     Federal intelligence agencies
                     Interagency relations
                     Law enforcement agencies
                     Military intelligence
                     Search and seizure

... These officials suggested that the application of the primary purpose test had not raised potential coordination problems between the FBI and the Criminal Division until the Aldrich Ames case. In 1994, Aldrich H. Ames, a Central Intelligence Agency official, was arrested on espionage charges of spying for the former Soviet Union and subsequently Russian intelligence. The FISA Court authorized an electronic surveillance of the computer and software within the Ames' residence. In addition, the Attorney General had authorized a warrantless physical search of the residence. At that time, FISA did not apply to physical searches. DOJ obtained a guilty plea from Ames who was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Criminal Division and FBI officials said that some in DOJ were concerned that, had the Ames case proceeded to trial, early and close coordination between the FBI and the Criminal Division might have raised a question as to whether the primary purpose of the surveillance and searches of Ames' residence had been a criminal investigation and not intelligence gathering. According to these officials, had this question been raised, a court might have ruled that information gathered using the FISA surveillance and/ or the warrantless search be suppressed, thereby possibly jeopardizing Ames' prosecution. To date, this issue remains a matter of concern to the FBI and OIPR. OIPR officials indicated that while such a loss had not occurred because Ames had pleaded guilty, the fear of such a loss, nonetheless, was real. ...

Stemming, in part, from concerns raised over the timing and extent of coordination on the Aldrich Ames case, the Attorney General in July 1995 established policies and procedures for coordinating FBI foreign counterintelligence investigations with the Criminal Division. 19 One purpose of the 1995 procedures was to ensure that DOJ's criminal and counterintelligence functions were properly coordinated. However, according to Criminal Division officials and conclusions by the Attorney General's Review Team, rather then ensuring proper coordination, problems arose soon after the Attorney General's 1995 procedures were promulgated. As discussed, those problems stemmed from the FBI's and OIPR's concerns about the possible consequences that could damage an investigation or prosecution should a court make an adverse ruling on the primary purpose issue.

In January 2000, the Attorney General promulgated coordination procedures, which were in addition to the 1995 procedures. 20 These procedures were promulgated to address problems identified by the Attorney General's Review Team during its review of the FBI's investigation of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Criminal Division officials believed that the 2000 procedures had helped to improve coordination, especially for certain types of foreign counterintelligence investigations.

According to DOJ officials, following the conviction of Aldrich Ames, OIPR believed that the close relationship between the FBI and the Criminal Division had been near to crossing the line between intelligence and criminal investigations, thereby risking a decision against the government if a court had applied the primary purpose test. To address the concerns raised, in part, by the FBI's contacts with the Criminal Division in the Ames case, the Attorney General promulgated coordination procedures on July 19, 1995.

^19 Attorney General memorandum dated July 19, 1995, 'Procedures for Contacts Between the FBI and the Criminal Division Concerning Foreign Intelligence and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations.'

^20 Memorandum for the Attorney General, dated January 18, 2000, 'To Recommend that the Attorney General Authorize Certain Measures Regarding Intelligence Matters in Response to the Interim Recommendations Provided by Special Litigation Counsel Randy Bellows.'

http://www.fas.org/irp/gao/gao-01-780.html


The "Gorelick Wall Memo" (March 1995) is on the subject of data sharing between working groups (as is the AG's memo dated July 19, 1995), but Gorelick's memo is focused on two cases.

http://www.cnss.org/9.11commissionintelligence.htm

1,043 posted on 01/29/2006 2:21:59 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1025 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
Guess I shouldn't have said "mere"..LOL

You didn't, I inserted that. IIRC, your phrase was "just a rule change" or similar.

I believe that whether the Dems like it or not, a simple majority vote can legally drop filibusters on judicial nominees.

I agree.

Preventing legislative filibusters is an entirely different matter. I believe this is where the debate on the required supermajority comes into play, and the existing rules of the Senate would apply.

The rules apply both, to legislation and nominations - and to treaties too. But the treaties rule is set up in a way that renders the cloture rule moot. The nominations rule could be similarly adjusted, leaving the cloture rule as it is, for legislative matters.

I that that once one looks at and understands the principles behind those three rules, the adjustment that I advocate makes the most sense. Just the same, it's a tough leap in practice because it forever kills the use of cloture to stifle voting on a nominee. I think it's a better fix that a Parliamentary Ruling from the Chair on a Point of Order.

1,044 posted on 01/29/2006 2:27:53 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1032 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah

Very interesting...I didn't know that about McCain and Feingold...I wasn't watching the Senate back then, I think...

BTW..don't you think it is kind of like the "Road" movies with McCain?

McCain/Feingold
McCain/Clinton
McCain/Lieberman
McCain/Graham

sheesh!!


1,045 posted on 01/29/2006 2:29:46 PM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 962 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Thanks for your insight.


1,046 posted on 01/29/2006 2:30:29 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1044 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Oh...I didn't know that...that is too bad he is a good writer...and could get close to Mark Steyn...but whenever he gets anywhere near a lib....

he just goes totally squishy. I guess that is what McCain likes about him....


1,047 posted on 01/29/2006 2:33:28 PM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 966 | View Replies]

To: samantha

LOL....David Gregory IS a hemorrhoid on Bush's butt and Scott McClellans!!


1,048 posted on 01/29/2006 2:36:05 PM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 974 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok

Okay....you are right...but, since he is a twit, he doesn't get credit....LOL


1,049 posted on 01/29/2006 2:37:33 PM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 976 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

I thought the president's defense of wiretapping terrorists on FTN today was very good. Very forceful. He echoed a lot of the points made here in FR.


1,050 posted on 01/29/2006 2:39:21 PM PST by cake_crumb (Leftist Credo: One Wing to Rule them All and to the Darkside Bind them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1043 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 951-1,0001,001-1,0501,051-1,1001,101-1,149 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson