Congress proposes law repealing Identities Protection Act of 1982

[satireV]

:sarcasm: ON

In a move reminding one of the Terri Schiavo issue, Congressional Republicans led by Sen. Bill (Kitty vivisectionist) Frist and Rep. Tom (The Hammer) DeLay have proposed repealing the Identities Protection Act of 1982.

The announcement was made just hours after it was revealed Karl Rove, Deputy Chief of Staff for Pres Bush may have violated the Identities Protection Act of 1982 by revealing the identity of a covert CIA spy.

When questioned about the proposed bill, Frist said "This Bill only applies to Karl Rove and is only retroactive during the Bush Administration." DeLay babbled in the background about some pests needing exterminated.

Congressional Republicans said they already have President Bush's promise to sign the bill.


:sarcasm: OFF

Laugh if you dare. But this gang is not above doing exactly this kind of thing. Loyalty above country is their mantra.

[denverbill]

1. Why bother? Bush will probably pardon him anyway.

Remember Ford and Nixon? Nixon hadn't even been indicted and Ford pardoned him. It wouldn't surprised me at all if Bush pardons Rove preemptively.

[montanacowboy]

4. Bush may not be able to pardon anyone

remember, he lawyered up - he knew about the leak; Cheney is Miller's source - Fitzgerald might be looking at conspiracy here and all the rats might go down together... we might have President Hastert when everything clears

[satireV]

6. Presidential pardon power is absolute

He can pardon Cheney and Rove together. Just like his daddykins did with Poindexter and Weinberger.

[HereSince1628]

2. Well, if we need confirmation of the Bush Admin's criminal involvement

this does it.

And it's done in typical Republican fashion...change the rules to meet the political need.

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. Can you say, "ex post facto"?

I don't think Congress can decriminalize something after the fact and then assert that no crime was committed, just as they can't criminalize something after the fact and then assert that someone who did it before that law can be prosecuted under that law.

Then again, I wouldn't be surprised at the Republicans trying.

[satireV]

5. Who is going to decide it violates ex post facto????

The Bush SCOTUS?

The fix is in.

:yoiks: