Hell Is for Hasterts

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, doing a job some Americans would not do, trimmed the Presidential Hedge.

1 posted on 05/30/2006 5:49:14 PM PDT by TSchmereL

The President ought to kick Hastert in the Ass, and tell him to grow up, and stop supporting criminal actions!

2 posted on 05/30/2006 5:56:21 PM PDT by Northern Yankee ( Stay The Course!)

And how many people on this site were against Gonzales for Attorney General?

Why link Bush to Hastert? If that was correct, he would have given the documents back to the House instead of putting a freeze on them.

The President gave time to get it sorted out but Hastert is the one in the WRONG IMHO along with some other prima dona's in the House. They are not or should not be above criminal law!

3 posted on 05/30/2006 5:56:38 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (Elect Bob Sullivan OK Governor -- Throw out Dem Gov DoLittle Henry in 2006!)

scoundrels all..from what I understand, Jefferson ignored for 9 months a subpeona and the offices were raided as a last resort. If this isn't taken to its logical conclusion, it only reinforces the inside the beltway elitist belief that in Washington, it's one rule for us, and another for the "little people"..try telling local law enforcement they can't search YOUR office for evidence in a crime..

4 posted on 05/30/2006 5:57:44 PM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32 (I'm a Patriot Guard Rider..www.patriotguard.org for info)

Bush's lower approval ratings do not indicate that more Liberals and Democrats disapprove of him...we conservatives are fed up.

W himself may not be concerned about that, but every other Republican in the country should be...

5 posted on 05/30/2006 5:57:55 PM PDT by wvobiwan (If you're not part of the solution, you're obviously a liberal Democrat.)

Hastert in definitely in the wrong, as is Bush. I'd personally like a very PUBLIC review of ALL the laws from which Congress exempts itself.

I bet a lot of laws would change quickly if they applied to Congressmen...

6 posted on 05/30/2006 6:00:12 PM PDT by wvobiwan (If you're not part of the solution, you're obviously a liberal Democrat.)

To: Northern Yankee

With the House hanging tough against the Senate amnesty bill, President Bush sent Karl Rove to the Hill to lobby the House to give in to the Senate.

Is this your idea of President Bush kicking Hastert in the ass and telling him to grow up?

Who is telling whom to "stop supporting criminal actions!?"

7 posted on 05/30/2006 6:00:27 PM PDT by TSchmereL ("Rust but terrify.")

Washington, in general, is becoming more disgusting by the day. The Repubs had better start acting like the conservatives they once were, and stop acting like liberal Democrats, or there will be a Marxist in the White House in 2008 -- the people are getting beyond fed up with the corruption, the lawlessness, and the government in generals' position that flies in the face of the will of the people.

Get with it Repubs -- or you will lose it for us.

8 posted on 05/30/2006 6:03:29 PM PDT by EagleUSA

I agree, Hastert in definitely in the wrong and so is Bush.

Bush is wrong on Amnesty.

Hastert is wrong on William Jefferson.

Sadly, there is no other game in town for conservatives. As wrong as Bush is on Amnesty and Hastert is on Congressional Power, the Democrats are an abomination.

9 posted on 05/30/2006 6:05:14 PM PDT by TSchmereL ("Rust but terrify.")

as is Bush

What, pray tell, has the President done wrong this time? Having the documents sealed was a good move.

10 posted on 05/30/2006 6:06:54 PM PDT by madison10

Whoops, missed the amnesty comment.

11 posted on 05/30/2006 6:08:10 PM PDT by madison10

Amother ranting idiot attacking Hastert for defending the Constitution.

Let the two minute hate begin.

12 posted on 05/30/2006 6:09:08 PM PDT by mrsmith

Read the whole article.

The theory is that Hastert is upset at Bush screwing the House time and again, which he has, upset at his friend Goss being stabbed in the back and left to hang in the wind as suspect in a prostitute ring...and Goss was left horribly out on the line after all the good he did.

While Hastert was DEAD WRONG on this issue, it's easy to understand from an emotional standpoint why he reacted as he did.

Gonzales threatened to quit. Gonzales threatened to quit for a reason. This leads me to believe it's true the W.H. was going to turn the documents over. The question is why. I think it's fair to assume it was an attempt to suck up to Hastert for the amnesty bill.

Gonzales seems to have been the only one to behave properly in this instance. Hastert is anger at the W.H. and would have set a bad precedent by getting those docs, and it seems the W.H. may have been about to leverage them for amnesty legislation. Stinks on both sides but I have more sympathy for Hastert even though I oppose what he did. And some increased respect for Gonzales. BTW, I actually stood by Gonzales for AG when many opposed him.

13 posted on 05/30/2006 6:11:49 PM PDT by Soul Seeker (Deport the United States Senate)

"And how many people on this site were against Gonzales for Attorney General?"

Can't say as I agree with everything he says or does but he does have his head screwed on straight. Good job A.G. A.G.

14 posted on 05/30/2006 6:11:54 PM PDT by Anvilhead (Why is it that people who purport to be noble never are?)

The President threw Hassert a life line to get out of the mess Hassert created. No where in any report is it stated that the FBI will NOT get the info they want. In fact the President is quoted as saying that CONGRESS will be held to account. Many on FR don't care about facts but rather want to crucify Bush for anything and everything.

From Captains Quarters:

Bush Provides Ladder For Congressional Climbdown

George Bush tossed a lifesaver to Denny Hastert and the rest of the imperial Congress today by temporarily sealing the evidence seized from the legislative offices of Rep. William Jefferson, the target of an FBI corruption investigation. Sealing the records gives both branches more time to work out their differences, Bush said, but made clear that prosecutors would eventually gain access to the material:

President Bush personally ordered the Justice Department today to seal records seized from the Capitol Hill office of a Democratic congressman, marking a remarkable intervention by the nation's chief executive into an ongoing criminal probe of alleged corruption. ... In a six-paragraph statement, Bush said he issued the order to give the Justice Department and angry lawmakers more time to work out an agreement on how to resolve the conflict. The materials, which have been described in court filings as two boxes of documents and copies of computer files, will be held by Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, who is not involved in the Jefferson probe, Bush's statement said. ...

"Those who violate the law--including a member of Congress--should and will be held to account," Bush said. "This investigation will go forward, and justice will be served."

Yesterday, Hastert and Pelosi asserted that the Justice Department must cease reviewing the documents and ensure that their contents are not divulged. Once the papers are returned, "Congressman Jefferson can and should fully cooperate with the Justice Department's efforts, consistent with his constitutional rights," the statement said.

This gives all sides in Congress an opportunity to step down from the ledge and save their credibility before the White House pushes this to the Supreme Court -- where Hastert, Pelosi & Co will get derisively shot down for asserting that the Capitol grants sanctuary from law enforcement of any kind. Bush made clear in his statement that he created this 45-day period only for the purpose of dialing down the rhetoric, and not to surrender evidence collected by a valid subpoena authorized by a federal judge. This is often called a "cooling-down" period in union negotiations, but in this case it allows Hastert, John Boehner, and the rest of the GOP leadership an out from their hysterical public statements.

That blantantly dishonest hysteria is evidenced in this latest statement. The notion that Jefferson would cooperate if the materials were returned to him boggles the imagination. He had eight months to release that evidence to prosecutors, which is when the subpoena was first served. Why would he turn the data over to the FBI if Hastert and Pelosi successfully bully the executive branch into declaring Capitol Hill a sanctuary for corrupt politicians?

The responsibility for the raid falls squarely on House leadership, not the FBI. They have known of this matter for months, and the House counsel actually started to collect the material before eventually refusing to comply with the subpoena and the FBI investigators. If the FBI had not acted in opposition to this defiance, the executive would have ceded any authority to enforce corruption laws, now and in the future. Hastert, Pelosi, Boehner, and everyone else demanding the return of the materials argue explicitly for that result -- and the American people should not stand for it.

Will Hastert grab the lifesaver Bush has tossed him? Any smart man would. Two weeks ago, I would have put Denny Hastert into that category. Now I'm not so sure. Captain's Quarters

15 posted on 05/30/2006 6:15:28 PM PDT by Republican Red (Everyone is super stoked on Gore. Even if they don't know it)

The fact is that Bush was going to give William Jefferson's documents back until Alberto Gonzales threatened to quit. Bush should have told Hastert the STFU when Hastert claimed that a validly issued and executed search warrant in a criminal investigation of a felony is "not good enough for Representatives of the House."

But instead, Bush wanted to please Hastert to gain support of his outrageous "illegal amnesty" bill.

Folks, we are witnessing such blatant spinelessness and perversion in the Republican party, I just can't stomach it.

16 posted on 05/30/2006 6:16:00 PM PDT by TSchmereL ("Rust but terrify.")

It sure makes one want to puke doesnt it?

17 posted on 05/30/2006 6:19:42 PM PDT by sgtbono2002

All I have to say after reading this article is:

Et tu, Babbin?

18 posted on 05/30/2006 6:21:05 PM PDT by Txsleuth

I was strongly opposed to Gonzalez for the Supreme Court--and I still am. But I supported his appointment as AG.

What he has failed to do, evidently, is weed the clintonoids out of the Justice Department. He has stood by while Fitzgerald--somehow appointed by the Justice Department although he is a known Democrat stooge--makes a travesty of justice.

So, it's good that Gonzalez has done the right thing in this case. But he has not been a strong AG, and he has not supported his party and his administration in the way that Democrat AGs always have done.

19 posted on 05/30/2006 6:21:53 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)

"the W.H. was going to turn the documents over. The question is why. I think it's fair to assume it was an attempt to suck up to Hastert for the amnesty bill." Not only is it fair to make that assumption, it is as obvious as the nose on Hastert's face.

20 posted on 05/30/2006 6:22:35 PM PDT by TSchmereL ("Rust but terrify.")

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794