View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:41 am Post subject: Democrats Are Set to Subpoena |
|
|
Published on Friday, November 10, 2006 by the Los Angeles Times
Democrats Are Set to Subpoena
The new majority is expected to hold hearings on military spending and the Iraq war -- just for starters.
by Richard B. Schmitt and Richard Simon
WASHINGTON - Rep. Ike Skelton knows what he will do in one of his first acts as chairman of the Armed Services Committee in the Democratic-led House: resurrect the subcommittee on oversight and investigations.
NEW MAJORITY: Democratic Sens. Charles E. Schumer of New York, Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Richard J. Durbin of Illinois head to a celebration.
(Dennis Cook / AP)
The panel was disbanded by the Republicans after they won control of Congress in 1994. Now, Skelton (D-Mo.) intends to use it as a forum to probe Pentagon spending and the Bush administration's conduct of the Iraq war.
It has been 12 years since Democrats were in control of both the House and Senate. But they are looking to make up for lost time, and in some cases, make the Bush administration and its business allies sweat.
With control of every committee in Congress starting in January, the new majority will inherit broad powers to subpoena and investigate. And that is expected to translate into wide-ranging and contentious hearings.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1110-01.htm |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Satori

Joined: 09 Dec 2005 Location: Above it all
|
Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005
|
Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yup. The key is to be somewhat selective about what to go after so as not to seem petty, but to also not be afraid to do what must be done to restore the primacy of Law. Impeachments must happen. Before people get their red panties in a bunch poo in their blue panties, undertsand that impeachment is a process, not a conclusion. We need them as a vehicle to the kind of depth of investigation that will happen only due to that process, a process that addresses the fundamental primacy of the Constitution over the presidency. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003 Location: Retired
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
I doubt much will happen. The Democrats have too many skeletons in their closet. Business as usual...with maybe a few small timers thrown to the wolves.
Last edited by TheUrbanMyth on Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:45 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
laogaiguk

Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Location: somewhere in Korea
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
EFLtrainer wrote: |
. Impeachments must happen. . |
And should happen...on the Democractic side. Due to the voter fraud whereby they gained control of the House and Senate. |
You should be careful People who don't know about you and EFLtrainer (or anyone and EFLtrainer for that matter) might think you are serious.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003 Location: Retired
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guess I should have put a smiley there.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
laogaiguk

Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Location: somewhere in Korea
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
As for the OP, as much as I would love to see Bush go through impeachment, watch him SUFFER and squirm for the crap he has done (him and his cronies), you have to ask yourself if impeachment would be the best choice for America right now? I think it would do more harm than good. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Octavius Hite

Joined: 28 Jan 2004 Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
If I were the Dems I would start with three things: 1. Downing Street Memos and the "reason" for the war 2. Halliburton and war profiteering (we would all love to see an old time hangin' for war profiteering) 3. Cheney and the energy policy meetings he held with Big Oil.
These three things would not only find total sympathy with the American public but they could cripple the Republicans in the next cycle. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
laogaiguk wrote: |
As for the OP, as much as I would love to see Bush go through impeachment, watch him SUFFER and squirm for the crap he has done (him and his cronies), you have to ask yourself if impeachment would be the best choice for America right now? I think it would do more harm than good. |
The OP is not necessarily calling for impeachment. I support the subpoenas. That is not equivalent of supporting an impeachment process. Of course, if it is found, that Bush has violated the Constitution and there are real, solid grounds for an impeachment then it is up to those in Congress to do so. The U.S. is involved in a war, and it needs to focus on helping the troops get out of Iraq, stabilizing Iraq as best as they can, and working on passing legislation that helps the country. If I think Bush deserves to be impeached based on his abuse of power, yes I do. Do I think it is the best course of action? No, I don't. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
laogaiguk wrote: |
As for the OP, as much as I would love to see Bush go through impeachment, watch him SUFFER and squirm for the crap he has done (him and his cronies), you have to ask yourself if impeachment would be the best choice for America right now? I think it would do more harm than good. |
Why? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Octavius Hite wrote: |
If I were the Dems I would start with three things: 1. Downing Street Memos and the "reason" for the war |
That we were lied to about the war is established. Codifying the abuses would be useful, however.
Quote: |
2. Halliburton and war profiteering (we would all love to see an old time hangin' for war profiteering) |
Are any of you aware that GB 41, or whatever number he is, was on the board of directors of a company subsumed into Halliburton (can't recall the name.... a subsidiary now active in Iraq) until it was bought by Cheney's Halliburton? That means that the Bush family has direct ties to Halliburton, not just Cheney. I had no idea. I will locate the video.
Are you further aware that Cheney actually still has options of some sort that are being further engorged with cash, or were, even after takig office and claiming he had no stake?
Quote: |
3. Cheney and the energy policy meetings he held with Big Oil. |
No brainer. The "war" in Iraq knocked all the obstacles out of the way for the US/Big Oil to control the oil flow. The recent election may have tossed a wrench into things. Given Pelosi's presumptive pronouncements, maybe not. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
canuckistan Mod Team


Joined: 17 Jun 2003 Location: Training future GS competitors.....
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Halliburton's completely unrestrained feeding at the gov't trough and no-competition awarding of contracts for starters. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
canuckistan wrote: |
Halliburton's completely unrestrained feeding at the gov't trough and no-competition awarding of contracts for starters. |
You're not going to get them on the no-competition awarding of contracts since that was granted in 1998 by a different President.
You'd have to stick to the abuse of it. Anyway, it's not the company's fault they didn't suffer any competition. That's the gov't's. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kuros wrote: |
canuckistan wrote: |
Halliburton's completely unrestrained feeding at the gov't trough and no-competition awarding of contracts for starters. |
You're not going to get them on the no-competition awarding of contracts since that was granted in 1998 by a different President. |
Given the "war" didn't begin until 2003, I'm having a hard time following. Do tell. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|