Posted on 01/12/2006 5:14:27 AM PST by OXENinFLA
I called the arrogant lout's office this morning and really let rip. Among other things I demanded that he reveal the list of individuals and interest groups he had colluded with in preparing for these hearings.
Got it and understand now..Thank you..
How is he ever going to prove that? Who cares anyway? There is no law against consulting with an attorney.
why is he still asking questions?? We already know that Feind-gold isn't going to vote for him
Does he love his own voice that much?
Watch Alito's fingers.....he has his hands clapsed, but his fingers are working like crazy when he talks
He's talking about NSA eavesdropping and FISA
Russty is more concerned with hearing his on voice than hearing what Alito has to say.
DiFi's is the pro-death crowd.
He's troubled and concerned. Can we add a puzzled to that?
Thanks - I meant it as a funny comment. I guess I didn't do a good enough job. :)
Check out this website I found - it is really good!
www.rightofgray.blogspot.com
Jes he does
Keep in mind that the Executive Branch is of EQUAL POWER with the Legislative.
The executive has special powers, even in time of war. In the Federalist Papers you can find continual references that the survival of the republic is of utmost of importance.
Feingold wants Alito to side with Bush's use of power.
He also doesn't have a clue in how to present the facts of a case correctly either
Feinstgold keeps saying criminal .. and that the President is spying on Americans
He seems to forget the part about Americans receiving phone calls from KNOWN terrorists that want to MURDER Americans
Alito can say "Yes I want to impeach Bush" and Feind-Gold wouldn't vote for him
Why is ths jerk torturing him with these questions.
...in other words, the Senate has become a house of political party prostitutes.
Feingold pushing hard for IMPEACHMENT
HUGELY distinguishable! I figure there is terrirotry between FISA and what the President is doing, and as even Jean Harman says, either the law has to change (not a bad idea), or some other rationale needs to be developed lest the government encroach on the people's right under the 4th. It's a sticky issue, but Congress can address it. RIght now they are playing politics with it, and it's going to be a loser for them at that level.
It's a very serious matter, but I really disresepct the fact that the DEMs are trying to flesh the issue out in this venue. Sure, discuss the process and make sure the judge can see arguments on both sides, then get on.
Others have hit on this, and what the DEMs are doing is using this venue for what they think will be political advantage. I'm convinced Alito will balance the rights of the people and the powers of the branches of government quite well.
Alito - admits this is an awesome isuue, sometimes even not justiciable. Alito is giving answers that are so good and so forthcoming - awesome, just awesome.
And Feingold admits this issue is really outside the bounds of this hearing. Russ, if it's not justiciable, all it means is "it's up to Congress and the President to set the boundary." I doubt that will be the case where an individual has a personal 4th amendment claim, BTW.
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.