Fuck you, wolfie.

[Craig3410]

Flipping through the channels, I see Leslie on with the bottom line "Did Clinton do It?"

And I'm going to take a wild guess what he's talking about... :mad:

Even if Clinton did do it, he did it...

wait for it...

hold on...

LEGALLY!

He actually went through the actual channels to do it legally; something your fuckbuddy * wouldn't do in a million years.

[LSparkle]

1. And he got ol' battleaxe "Vicki" Toensing to back him up

Good for Jeff Toobin for not joining in the chorus ...

[radio4progressives]

7. You're missing the issue...

Everybody is playing the partisan party game here.. Clinton had no right to do this either IF he did and it appears he might have IF they didn't do the FISA after the warrant-less search.

But here's the Issue: Domestic Spying (eaves dropping, search and seizure of personal property including private information) in violation of Constitutional protections under the 4th amendment and the so called Presidential Authority to violate citizen civil liberties on warrant-less search and seizure.

No PRESIDENT should have the authority and power - i don't care what party s/he is and all DU members should be vigilant in universal condemnation of such abuse of power and overreach. Otherwise we'll all just be a bunch of hypocrites seemingly more concerned with party leaders over the concerns and welfare of our constitution and democracy.

[radio4progressives]

2. Yes..in the Aldridge Aimes Espionage case apparently...

:shrug:

[MrModerate]

3. The MSM is a herd . . . and lazy besides

Like herd animals, they tend to run in the same direction. Their owners will be exerting tremendous force to keep them from pursuing the I-meme.

But can you imagine stopping a school of fish from turning at the same time? Good luck!

I'm feeling a slight tingling of optimism here. Be kind to me.

[BuyingThyme]

4. Yes, fuck these lying animals.

CNN's Wolfie & Jeff Toobin said that "inherent authority to order wiretaps" means "inherent authority to order wiretaps outside the law."

They're actually making the case that because somebody once said, under oath, in a hypothetical context, that Clinton had and "inherent authority," it must have been a hypothetical inherent authority outside the law, thus a real violation of the Constitution.

Then some evil bitch called in to talk about something she didn't know about in an effort to support the cause.

Wolfie, Jeff, & Bitch, you are criminals. You are dangerous, dangerous enemies of this nation.

[SkiGuy]

5. Let's look at it this way

Let's say Clinton did do it illegally (which is incorrect, but that's not the point) so is the fact that Clinton did it (illegally per repugs) making it OK that Bush is? I don't get it?
They keep bringing up Clinton. Great. So if you (repugs) are saying it was illegal and then EQUATING it to Bush, then that means you are admitting that Bush is guilty of a crime.

[still_one]

6. That is the point I try to make

If joe murders someone, a defense that since joe did it I can do it doesn't cut it

Will the democrats stop getting side tracked PLEASE

Excellent point

[rateyes]

10. I'll tell you what...

let's impeach Clinton and Bush, and remove them both from office....oh, wait, Clinton's not IN office. Bush is. IMPEACH the criminal, and his little VP, too!

[still_one]

12. shhhh

don't tell the neocons that, they obviously don't realize it

[radio4progressives]

8. Exactly So... we need to knock down that straw man "Clinton did it" canard

don't let that SIDE TRACK from the principle illegality involved.

[SkiGuy]

9. perhaps

But in a perverted way isn't it self incriminating? Let them bring up Clinton, Carter all they want.

[LSK]

11. im sure Wolfie will bring up HR1555, Sec 309

Certainly he will mention that. :crazy:

[politicasista]

13. ...and his monotonous voice

:boring: