Thursday, July 10, 2008
Nancy Pelosi vs. the Internet
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who would like very much to reimpose the old, so-called, “Fairness Doctrine” that once censored conservative opinion on television and radio broadcasting, is scheming to impose rules barring any member of Congress from posting opinions on any internet site without first obtaining prior approval from the Democratic leadership of Congress. No blogs, twitter, online forums - nothing.
It's not just Pelosi designated social pariahs, conservatives, it is also more moderate Democrats that will be muzzled.
How much longer before these progressives, really just tired old liberals, get booted out in spite of their feel-good marketing of bad ideas?
Go home Nana. Your blatant power grabs are embarrassing. Even to Democrats. Your inability to understand the law is embarrassing to those of all political persuasions.
Rove defies subpoena, skips House hearing
Former top White House adviser Karl Rove on Thursday ignored a subpoena and skipped a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the alleged politicization of the Department of Justice under the Bush administration.
His failure to appear caused the panel’s Democrats to reject the reasons for his absence and Republicans to defend Rove.
“I’ve given Mr. Rove’s written claims careful consideration, and I’ve ruled that those claims are not legally valid and that Mr. Rove is required, pursuant to the subpoena, to be here now and to answer questions,” said subcommittee Chairwoman Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.).
UPDATE: It has already started. This is precious. Look at comment #80 from the self described Crooks and Liars;
Yup. Right f*ckin’ now.
The House MUST act - there is no reason not to, for several reasons:
- Rove is challenging Congress’ rights under the constitution. This CANNOT be allowed to stand. If it does, checks and balances are DEAD.
- During the Watergate scandal, the Supreme Court ruled against Nixon’s claim of executive privilege regarding the tapes. If a president doesn’t have executive protection of records of his own conversations, how can a staff member claim the same privilege?
- Tactically, they have to compel Rove to testify as a first step. Rove will probably refuse to answer questions in the chair, or try to avoid testifying at all via a court injunction invoking executive privilege. Either way, the courts will become involved. Best for Congress to force the issue to avoid further delay, which only helps Rove.
- Politically, it will be highly advantageous to nail Rove during the last months of the election campaign.
I love a good freak show.
An anonymous aide paraphrased Jackson speaking of Obama, "His experience cause temperance in a time of our furtherance. Our master's room will be our tomb if we don't harvest the doom of his brother's legume. This is the range of our change.""
This appears to be in contrast to Hillary's "cut and run" strategy.