Waxman To RNC: Turn Over Your E-Mails

[Psychoblues]

What is all the secret shit about? Haven’t these e-mails been asked for before? Or is that the investigation reveals a deeper and broader base of deception?



"Earlier this month, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee made public a secret PowerPoint presentation created by Karl Rove’s office with polling data and other information about the 2006/2008 elections.

Last January, that presentation was presented to dozens of political appointees at the General Services Administration by Rove deputy Scott Jennings. When Jennings concluded his presentation, GSA chief Lurita Doan “allegedly asked them how they could ‘help “our candidates” in the next elections.’”

Committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) issued a letter today to the Republican National Committee to turn over all email communications by White House officials relating to the presentation."


More: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/04/waxman-rnc-emails/

Jeesh, trying to get pertinent information from this administration is like pulling chicken teeth. Guess who the chickens really are?

[stephanie]

Too bad......Aint happening....
You come after my private emails....And.

Does anybody know WHO think progress website is????

Don't bother...

http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/alaskamomma/dancing_bear.gif

[Psychoblues]

Are you drunk or just telling lies again, staphy?



Too bad......Aint happening....
You come after my private emails....And.

Does anybody know WHO think progress website is????

Don't bother...

http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/alaskamomma/dancing_bear.gif

I have no ability or desire to come anywhere close to your emails. WTF are you talking about?

[stephanie]

Are you drunk or just telling lies again, staphy?




I have no ability or desire to come anywhere close to your emails. WTF are you talking about?

Does anyone know WHO thinkprogress website is????

Dont' Bother....:laugh2:

[Psychoblues]

As per freakin' usual, staphy, you avoid the question.



Does anyone know WHO thinkprogress website is????

Dont' Bother....:laugh2:

Are you drunk or just telling lies again?

[theHawk]

What is all the secret shit about? Haven’t these e-mails been asked for before? Or is that the investigation reveals a deeper and broader base of deception?



"Earlier this month, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee made public a secret PowerPoint presentation created by Karl Rove’s office with polling data and other information about the 2006/2008 elections.

Last January, that presentation was presented to dozens of political appointees at the General Services Administration by Rove deputy Scott Jennings. When Jennings concluded his presentation, GSA chief Lurita Doan “allegedly asked them how they could ‘help “our candidates” in the next elections.’”

Committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) issued a letter today to the Republican National Committee to turn over all email communications by White House officials relating to the presentation."


More: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/04/waxman-rnc-emails/

Jeesh, trying to get pertinent information from this administration is like pulling chicken teeth. Guess who the chickens really are?

I don't get it, why would anyone have to turn over their emails to some Committee chairman? People aren't allowed to support a political candidate? Can't get to that link from work, its blocked.

[Dilloduck]

I don't get it, why would anyone have to turn over their emails to some Committee chairman? People aren't allowed to support a political candidate? Can't get to that link from work, its blocked.

No worries---it's just PB and the libs trying to distract everyone from the fact that they won't stop the war.

[Gaffer]

Just another ramdom shotgun pellet.

[Mr. P]

What is all the secret shit about? Haven’t these e-mails been asked for before? Or is that the investigation reveals a deeper and broader base of deception?



"Earlier this month, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee made public a secret PowerPoint presentation created by Karl Rove’s office with polling data and other information about the 2006/2008 elections.

Last January, that presentation was presented to dozens of political appointees at the General Services Administration by Rove deputy Scott Jennings. When Jennings concluded his presentation, GSA chief Lurita Doan “allegedly asked them how they could ‘help “our candidates” in the next elections.’”

Committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) issued a letter today to the Republican National Committee to turn over all email communications by White House officials relating to the presentation."


More: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/04/waxman-rnc-emails/

Jeesh, trying to get pertinent information from this administration is like pulling chicken teeth. Guess who the chickens really are?

A letter? :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: Maybe they should try a Subpoena, no wait, that would need to be for evidence in a crime...hummmm they just wanna watch a presentation. Oh well, maybe they can rent it.

Hey lets see how big a deal we can make outta "We asked for private e-mail and they won't give it to us". :laugh2:

I'm wondering when these MORONS are going to start doing the Countries business. 6 years of pot shots and obstruction is enough already.

[avatar4321]

A letter? :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: Maybe they should try a Subpoena, no wait, that would need to be for evidence in a crime...hummmm they just wanna watch a presentation. Oh well, maybe they can rent it.

Hey lets see how big a deal we can make outta "We asked for private e-mail and they won't give it to us". :laugh2:

I'm wondering when these MORONS are going to start doing the Countries business. 6 years of pot shots and obstruction is enough already.

Please, they dont need a crime to investigate Republicans. They are Republicans. That means they are guilty already.

[Psychoblues]

Zactly, a4321. Many will never forget the chase of President Bill Clinton for perceived and never substantiated "crimes". The bj got him. I will never forget the day I heard about the bj.



Please, they dont need a crime to investigate Republicans. They are Republicans. That means they are guilty already.

I'll also never forget about the hundreds of millions spent on dead end investigations, no indictments, false accusations and the words of tom delay and trent lott as follows:

"You can support the troops without supporting the President."

Republicans are such hypocrits. Don't you think?

[stephanie]

:lol: WELL...at least you admitted the reason for all the Dems...BS..

Like we didn't already know...

Keep it up, the American people will tire of it...all the useless investigations, all the waste of their money for them, and see the Democrat party has no ideas, no new thoughts except to play class warfare, no new ideas except to raise their taxes....
The American people needed to be reminded of this....

The Best of all.......People seeing Pelosi trying to embarrass the President, kissing up to a swine like Assad, who is sponsoring and sending people over to kill our troops in Iraq, and is accused by the UN of killing the leader of Lebanon....

You all are screwed...and it only took 4 MONTHS...:laugh2:



See ya all in 2008:dance:

[Psychoblues]

I think they are already tired of it, staphy.




:lol: WELL...at least you admitted the reason for all the Dems...BS..

Like we didn't already know...

Keep it up, the American people will tire of it...all the useless investigations, all the waste of their money for them, and see the Democrat party has no ideas, no new thoughts except to play class warfare, no new ideas except to raise their taxes....
The American people needed to be reminded of this....

The Best of all.......People seeing Pelosi trying to embarrass the President, kissing up to a swine like Assad, who is sponsoring and sending people over to kill our troops in Iraq, and is accused by the UN of killing the leader of Lebanon....

You all are screwed...and it only took 4 MONTHS...:laugh2:



See ya all in 2008:dance:


The shallowness and subsequent enormous expense (financial and political) of the right-wing shadow boxing is killing us almost beyond repair. The American people will prevail minus the overeaching demands of the unindoctrinated and the uneducated. If you think the chimp is a genious, wait 'till the election cycle gets real warmed up. I see mostly idiots beyond the capabilities of even the Criminal In Chief lining up for consideration by the rightwingers and neocons.

Some folks love America for what it is and has stood for through all these years. Some folks get their kicks in the Twilight Zone.

[Birdzeye]

They were conducting official government business but using "private" email accounts, to make an end run around freedom-of-information laws. It doesn't pass the smell test.

I'm sure you'd be mad as hell if the Democrats tried to pull a stunt like that.

[Dilloduck]

They were conducting official government business but using "private" email accounts, to make an end run around freedom-of-information laws. It doesn't pass the smell test.

I'm sure you'd be mad as hell if the Democrats tried to pull a stunt like that.

Are you postively sure that democrats don't already conduct "official goverment business" using private e-mail accounts?

[typomaniac]

Are you postively sure that democrats don't already conduct "official goverment business" using private e-mail accounts?Nobody in an official capacity should do so, regardless of party. At best it's an ethics violation.

[glockmail]

....
I'll also never forget about the hundreds of millions spent on dead end investigations, no indictments, false accusations and the words of tom delay and trent lott as follows:.... If Billy Bob and Hillary had come clean from the get-go then it wouldn't have costed 70 mil.

[Birdzeye]

Are you postively sure that democrats don't already conduct "official goverment business" using private e-mail accounts?

No I'm not, and if they are doing it, I'd say that they're being underhanded too. It lends the appearance of impropriety, regardless of who does it.

It's also dumb. I believe email records can be subpoenaed, regardless of which server or IP was used.

[Birdzeye]

If Billy Bob and Hillary had come clean from the get-go then it wouldn't have costed 70 mil.

Now it's BushCo's turn to come clean.

[glockmail]

Now it's BushCo's turn to come clean. Just like he did with the National Guard records? What did that get him? Did Kerry do the same? Answers: more baseless acusations, and no.

IMO Bush should tell these Damnocrats to shove it.

[Birdzeye]

Just like he did with the National Guard records? What did that get him? Did Kerry do the same? Answers: more baseless acusations, and no.

IMO Bush should tell these Damnocrats to shove it.

Fine. Then you've just lost any moral authority to ever ask any Democrat to "come clean," since you seem to believe it's only them who should bear that burden.

[manu1959]

Fine. Then you've just lost any moral authority to ever ask any Democrat to "come clean," since you seem to believe it's only them who should bear that burden.

democrats claim the moral and ethical high ground on every issue....no need to ask them....they always do the right thing...

[glockmail]

Fine. Then you've just lost any moral authority to ever ask any Democrat to "come clean," since you seem to believe it's only them who should bear that burden.Democrats have been working for 6 years to turn every Bush non-issue into a scandal in revenge for Bill Clinton's impeachment, and have gotten no where every time. They are the ones with no moral authority.

[Birdzeye]

Just like he did with the National Guard records? What did that get him?

What he deserved. His records left a lot of people scratching their heads, wondering how he got an honorable discharge despite a spotty attendance record and getting grounded for refusing to take a physical.


Did Kerry do the same? Answers: more baseless acusations, and no.


Kerry has done the same, but of course the right wing media didn't see fit to report on that.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200506090006



IMO Bush should tell these Damnocrats to shove it

He's told the Democrats, and the nation, to shove it on many occasions.

[Birdzeye]

Democrats have been working for 6 years to turn every Bush non-issue into a scandal in revenge for Bill Clinton's impeachment, and have gotten no where every time. They are the ones with no moral authority.

And we've seen that Republicans have been working hard to manufacture bogus scandals about Nancy Pelosi from the minute she became Madam Speaker. I don't s'pose you think they have some kind of "moral authority" in spite of that conduct?

[manu1959]

Kerry has done the same, but of course the right wing media didn't see fit to report on that.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200506090006




or here.........http://www.slate.com/id/2099700/

[glockmail]

What he deserved. His records left a lot of people scratching their heads, wondering how he got an honorable discharge despite a spotty attendance record and getting grounded for refusing to take a physical.



Kerry has done the same, but of course the right wing media didn't see fit to report on that.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200506090006



He's told the Democrats, and the nation, to shove it on many occasions.

Bush's records leave a lot of Democrats scratching their heads as there is nothing incriminating.

Kerry, on the other hand, never let his full record out to the public, instead letting the Boston Globe sanitize reality for him. And you fell for that?

How exactly did Bush tell the nation to "shove it"?

[glockmail]

And we've seen that Republicans have been working hard to manufacture bogus scandals about Nancy Pelosi from the minute she became Madam Speaker. I don't s'pose you think they have some kind of "moral authority" in spite of that conduct?
So her latest act of treason in Syria is no problem for you?

[Birdzeye]

So her latest act of treason in Syria is no problem for you?

No more than Gingrich's act of treason in '98 was.
[/sarcasm]


FLASHBACK: Gingrich Thrust Himself Into Mideast Questions As Speaker, Bashed White House Policy
By Greg Sargent | bio
Paging CNN...

One politician who's been getting some airtime as a critic of Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria is former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. A few days ago he hammered Pelosi for going abroad in defiance of the White House's wishes, saying that such defiance of the White House by Congressional leaders was "very dangerous."

But as Speaker himself in May of 1998, Gingrich aggressively inserted himself into American foreign policymaking abroad when he took a high-powered Congressional delegation to Israel. He openly denounced the White House's Middle East policies and made public comments in direct defiance of the White House. Right before his trip he even described then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright as an "agent for the Palestinians."

In other words, despite the fact that the White House opposed her trip to Syria, Pelosi -- who claims she delivered the White House's message, unlike Gingrich -- has in many ways been more respectful of the White House than Gingrich was on his trip abroad. Yet CNN somehow can still ask without any irony whether Pelosi is on her way to becoming the "most controversial House Speaker yet."



http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/apr/06/flashback_gingrich_visited_israel_as_speaker_blast ed_presidents_foreign_policy

[glockmail]

No more than Gingrich's act of treason in '98 was.
[/sarcasm]




http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/apr/06/flashback_gingrich_visited_israel_as_speaker_blast ed_presidents_foreign_policy

Nice deflection, but my question is still to be answered by you.

[Birdzeye]

Nice deflection, but my question is still to be answered by you.

No deflection. My link shows that Speaker Gingrich did the same thing in '98 that Pelosi is being accused of treason for doing now; yet I don't remember hearing any outrage from the right wing over Newt's doing it.

And I did answer your question. It's not my problem if you didn't like the answer.

[manu1959]

No deflection. My link shows that Speaker Gingrich did the same thing in '98 that Pelosi is being accused of treason for doing now; yet I don't remember hearing any outrage from the right wing over Newt's doing it.

And I did answer your question. It's not my problem if you didn't like the answer.

so you are ok with what newt and pelosi did....

[avatar4321]

Hey Psycho... looks like you've been had

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070405-114824-8778r.htm


It was the conspiracy theorist's conspiracy theory, with Karl Rove -- adviser to President Bush and "evil genius" to the political left -- right at the center.
"Rove personally connected to e-mail scandal," read the Saturday headline on liberal blog Daily Kos, trumpeting a photo of Mr. Rove taken in Chattanooga, Tenn., in late February.
Mr. Rove, according to the liberal blogosphere, had set up an independent e-mail system so that he and other Republican operatives could communicate outside of the White House's e-mail system, which is backed up automatically for record-keeping.
The problem, apparently, is that it wasn't a conspiracy but rather a marketing ploy using April Fool's Day for cover.
The photo, widely disseminated via the Internet, showed Mr. Rove with a folder labeled "Coptix" under his arm. Writers for some of the most widely read blogs deduced that Coptix, a Chattanooga-based Internet design company, had been hired by Mr. Rove for his e-mail scheme.
"This picture of Karl Rove is a crime scene!" said the satire site Wonkette.com.
Earlier this week, a Coptix executive announced that the whole thing had been an April Fool's joke. Josiah Roe, an executive vice president at Coptix, said a small group of Coptix executives doctored a photo of Mr. Rove and, using computer software, placed the folder under his arm. They then planted the photo on a local Chattanooga blog, they said, and allowed the conspiracy to disseminate.
"We watched the misinformation filter upward and outward," Mr. Roe wrote in a column posted late Tuesday on the Web site for the Chattanooga Times Free Press, which is a Coptix client. "This has driven tens of thousands of visitors to our Web site. ... We consider our Web marketing experiment a success."
Coptix is tangentially associated with the Republican National Committee (RNC) and had become a topic of interest to left-wing blogs even before this prank. Coptix is affiliated with another Chattanooga-based Web company named Smartech, which is employed by the RNC.
Mr. Rove and other White House officials do use outside e-mail accounts, owned by the RNC, which are hosted on Smartech's Web servers. Coptix backs up some of Smartech's information, which is called "backup DNS hosting."
Outside e-mail accounts used by Mr. Rove and other White House officials have drawn the attention of congressional Democrats. Rep. Henry A. Waxman, California Democrat, wrote to the RNC Wednesday asking the committee to turn over all e-mails "that relate to the use of federal agencies and federal resources for partisan political purposes."

I have to say this is freaking hilarious watching Psycho freak out about an april fools joke.

[Birdzeye]

so you are ok with what newt and pelosi did....

Asked and answered already. :rolleyes:

[manu1959]

Asked and answered already. :rolleyes:

i will take that as a yes?

[Birdzeye]

i will take that as a yes?

Take it however you want. You seem to have made up your mind anyways. :rolleyes

I see you don't appear at all outraged at Gingrich's behavior back in '98, so I guess your outrage is selective.

[manu1959]

Take it however you want. You seem to have made up your mind anyways. :rolleyes

I see you don't appear at all outraged at Gingrich's behavior back in '98, so I guess your outrage is selective.

you seem to have made up your mind as well....you also seem to presume what i belive.

they were both wrong for trying to undermine the president....

what say you?

[glockmail]

No deflection. My link shows that Speaker Gingrich did the same thing in '98 that Pelosi is being accused of treason for doing now; yet I don't remember hearing any outrage from the right wing over Newt's doing it.

And I did answer your question. It's not my problem if you didn't like the answer.

I didn't see where you answered, just your dodge.

So Pelosi's latest act of treason in Syria is no problem for you. Is that your position?

[Birdzeye]

I didn't see where you answered, just your dodge.

So Pelosi's latest act of treason in Syria is no problem for you. Is that your position?

If you're trying to needle me into losing my temper, fuhgeddaboutit. I'm not in the mood for such crap. I answered your dumb question; if you didn't like the answer, that's your problem.

[glockmail]

If you're trying to needle me into losing my temper, fuhgeddaboutit. I'm not in the mood for such crap. I answered your dumb question; if you didn't like the answer, that's your problem. I'm just trying to understand your position that you are so obviously ashamed of.

[typomaniac]

I didn't see where you answered, just your dodge.

So Pelosi's latest act of treason in Syria is no problem for you. Is that your position?You know perfectly well that Pelosi didn't commit treason until a court or the Senate proves otherwise.

So ask a real question or pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up.
:coffee:

[manu1959]

You know perfectly well that Pelosi didn't commit treason until a court or the Senate proves otherwise.

So ask a real question or pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up.
:coffee:

the real question that has been asked was: are you ok with what pelosi did.....a simple yes or no will work....

[glockmail]

....pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up.... I see you have no problem being a low class boor. How ironic.

[Birdzeye]

I see you have no problem being a low class boor. How ironic.

Oops. Empty personal attack; must mean there's no reasoned argument.

[manu1959]

Oops. Empty personal attack; must mean there's no reasoned argument.

that would complete the hat trick then...

[Birdzeye]

that would complete the hat trick then...

But not my hat trick.

[glockmail]

Oops. Empty personal attack; must mean there's no reasoned argument. I'm glad that you see it my way. :clap:

[Birdzeye]

I'm glad that you see it my way. :clap:

Re-read post #43.

[glockmail]

Re-read post #43. Re-read post 41.

[Birdzeye]

Re-read post 41.

Post #41 contains no personal attacks; post #43 does.

[glockmail]

Post #41 contains no personal attacks; post #43 does.Maybe in your bizzaro world, but in the real, "eye for an eye" world when someone attacks me I don't ignore it.

So if I tell you to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up" then you don't consider yourself as just being attacked? :lame2: I'll remember that when you and I have our next conversation.

[Birdzeye]

Maybe in your bizzaro world, but in the real, "eye for an eye" world when someone attacks me I don't ignore it.

So if I tell you to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up" then you don't consider yourself as just being attacked? :lame2: I'll remember that when you and I have our next conversation.

If he had told you to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up, asshole," THAT would be a personal attack.

Sheesh, for someone who can dish it out, you sure have a thin skin.

[glockmail]

If he had told you to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up, asshole," THAT would be a personal attack.

Sheesh, for someone who can dish it out, you sure have a thin skin.

OIC, so if a liberal tells a conservative to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up", then the conservative simply has a thin skin, but if the conservative responds in kind, then it constitutes a personal attack.

[Birdzeye]

OIC, so if a liberal tells a conservative to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up", then the conservative simply has a thin skin, but if the conservative responds in kind, then it constitutes a personal attack.

In this case, the (presumed) liberal told the conservative to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up," whereupon the conservative (that be you) replied with, "I see you have no problem being a low class boor. How ironic."

The bolded part IS a personal attack.

You need to learn the art of the finessed insult, which is technically devoid of any personal attack. If you're good at it, as my father was, you will have the person you just insulted laughing.

[glockmail]

In this case, the (presumed) liberal told the conservative to "pour yourself a nice hot cup of shut the hell up," whereupon the conservative (that be you) replied with, "I see you have no problem being a low class boor. How ironic."

The bolded part IS a personal attack.

You need to learn the art of the finessed insult, which is technically devoid of any personal attack. If you're good at it, as my father was, you will have the person you just insulted laughing. My father told me that when pushed, push back. Apparently yours told you to giggle. But then again, my father is a real man.

[typomaniac]

My father told me that when pushed, push back. Apparently yours told you to giggle. But then again, my father is a real man.Who married a real close relative, by the sound of things.

[glockmail]

Who married a real close relative, by the sound of things. That's why Birdie's Pa was giggling?

[Birdzeye]

My father told me that when pushed, push back. Apparently yours told you to giggle. But then again, my father is a real man.

Now see? You have potential. You just subtly cast doubt upon my dad's masculinity. Good job! [/sarcasm]

Actually, my father taught me, Illegitimi non carborundum (don't let the bastards get you down).

[loosecannon]

I'm just trying to understand your position that you are so obviously ashamed of.

So let's turn the question around:

Are you OK with Reagan negotiating with our enemy Iran in 1980? You know arms for hostages, but not until after the innaugeration?

Or Newt's interference in foreign affairs?

Pelosi did nothing wrong, nothing to take issue with. This is a non story, lacks merit and a basis in reality.

So why do you have an issue with Pelosi's actions?

Is it because Bush's admin is crumbling under the strain of real scandals?

[typomaniac]

Now see? You have potential. You just subtly cast doubt upon my dad's masculinity. Good job! [/sarcasm]I thought mine was better... :(

[glockmail]

Now see? You have potential. You just subtly cast doubt upon my dad's masculinity. Good job! [/sarcasm]

Actually, my father taught me, Illegitimi non carborundum (don't let the bastards get you down). So your Dad only liked gays from respectable families? :dunno:

[glockmail]

So let's turn the question around.... No, let's focus on the issue at hand instead of trying to deflect it.

[glockmail]

I thought mine was better... :( Beaten by a redneck, inbred hick at your own game?

[lily]

No, let's focus on the issue at hand instead of trying to deflect it.

Great idea, if I remember correctly it was:


Originally Posted by glockmail
I didn't see where you answered, just your dodge.

So Pelosi's latest act of treason in Syria is no problem for you. Is that your position?

Whcih is bascilly when did you stop beating your wife. :lame2:

[avatar4321]

So we still discussing this April Fools joke?

[glockmail]

Great idea, if I remember correctly it was:



Whcih (sic) is bascilly (sic) when did you stop beating your wife. :lame2:

:confused:

[typomaniac]

So we still discussing this April Fools joke?Why are you so interested in continuing to discuss glockmail? :laugh2:

[glockmail]

Why are you so interested in continuing to discuss glockmail? :laugh2: Very :lame2:

[Abbey Marie]

Is Waxman the guy with the ginormous nostrils?

:D

[glockmail]

Is Waxman the guy with the ginormous nostrils?

:D The hairy ginormous nostrils.

[Abbey Marie]

The hairy ginormous nostrils.

Imagine seeing those things on the pillow next to yours? :eek: :scared:

[glockmail]

Imagine seeing those things on the pillow next to yours? :eek: :scared: Geezer. I almost lost my lunch. http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/puke3.gif

[Baron Von Esslingen]

I didn't see where you answered, just your dodge.

So Pelosi's latest act of treason in Syria is no problem for you. Is that your position?

Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

I failed to see where you proved a case of treason, therefore your question is moot. Treason doesn't apply just because you say so.

Next case.

[glockmail]

Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

I failed to see where you proved a case of treason, therefore your question is moot. Treason doesn't apply just because you say so.

Next case.

Is this even in the right thread? Where did this come from?

[Birdzeye]

Is this even in the right thread? Where did this come from?

It's a helluva lot more relevant than the mindless wisecracks about Waxman's nostrils, not to mention that it was a reply to one of your previous posts where you mentioned treason.

Your memory is pretty crappy.

[glockmail]

....

Your memory is pretty crappy. Must be all that liberal hogwash I've been reading from you.
:laugh2:

[avatar4321]

Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

I failed to see where you proved a case of treason, therefore your question is moot. Treason doesn't apply just because you say so.

Next case.

How is unconstitutionally engaging with a hostile regime and giving them comfort not giving them aid and comfort?

[glockmail]

How is unconstitutionally engaging with a hostile regime and giving them comfort not giving them aid and comfort? You forgot to mention espousing the current Democrat Agenda that contadicts official US policy: timelines for troop withdrawal and removing funding from the war effort. Clearly treasonous.

[typomaniac]

You forgot to mention espousing the current Democrat Agenda that contadicts official US policy: timelines for troop withdrawal and removing funding from the war effort. Clearly treasonous.:bsflag:

[Birdzeye]

How is unconstitutionally engaging with a hostile regime and giving them comfort not giving them aid and comfort?

Please explain specifically how anybody is "unconstitutionally engaging with a hostile regime and giving them comfort."

[glockmail]

:bsflag: The truth bothers you, don't it?

[typomaniac]

This from someone who claims that only conservatives know how to pray properly and that liberals are just blaspheming...

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/aliens/abduct.gif

[Birdzeye]

Hey, Typo, do you think we should perform a kindness and introduce Glockie to "the truth?" :laugh2:

[typomaniac]

Hey, Typo, do you think we should perform a kindness and introduce Glockie to "the truth?" :laugh2:That sounds almost cruel enough to be worthy of Saddam. :cool:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

How is unconstitutionally engaging with a hostile regime and giving them comfort not giving them aid and comfort?

You failed to prove that point as well (the point about it being unconstitutional). The leader of the Legislative branch has every right to investigate and explore our nation's foreign affairs since they are constitutionally obligated to fund it. Doing so out of ignorance, like the DO NOTHING 109th Congress used to do, no longer applies.

If talking to our enemies is treason then what is this?

http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/vcs/dennert/archives/rumsfeld_saddam.jpg

[Gunny]

You failed to prove that point as well (the point about it being unconstitutional). The leader of the Legislative branch has every right to investigate and explore our nation's foreign affairs since they are constitutionally obligated to fund it. Doing so out of ignorance, like the DO NOTHING 109th Congress used to do, no longer applies.

If talking to our enemies is treason then what is this?

http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/vcs/dennert/archives/rumsfeld_saddam.jpg

Could you possibly be more dishonest? Saddam Hussein was not an enemy of the US at the time that photo was taken. Not even a good try.

[glockmail]

Hey, Typo, do you think we should perform a kindness and introduce Glockie to "the truth?" :laugh2: :snore: