Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Conyers on ABC now. Asking * to waive executive privilege.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
femmocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:06 AM
Original message
Conyers on ABC now. Asking * to waive executive privilege.
Tune in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. Asking? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. The same question I have.
Asking? Sure John, that is going to get you a lot. You don't ask the decider. This is the time when you tell the decider and then back it up with some action and I don't mean a scolding memo. ARGHHHHH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yes - asking. Its a ploy to sway public opinion, the 'decent person' approach
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femmocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Ask nicely and carry a big stick! LOL
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
17. Is "calling for" better?
I notice there's a lot of "calling for" things going on... :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
2. Good luck with that, John
I'll never understand why they think they can strike gentleman's agreements with this asshat. He has proven time and time and time again that he is not interested in compromising anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. the big 'I' is NOT yet on the table for Conyers (he brought up recent polls but
would not commit)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femmocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. If impeachment is ever going to happen,
it could start with Conyers. Any one want to send him some paper plates?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
6. ASKING him to relinquish an imaginary power, one not mentioned in the Constitution?
Edited on Sun Jul-08-07 09:16 AM by dicksteele
Those are the Little DictatorTot's FAVORITE powers!
Not to mention that this one is keeping his treasonous
ass out of prison.

So what's Conyers REALLY up to today?:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. apparently what hes up to is pissing us off
WTF over. more and more it looks as if we, us, you and I are going to have to take our asses to dc, this is bullshit, people are dying here, I mean when you die thats it no more more, finny its over
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
7. I don't mean to be curt Mr. Conyers,
but bish will wave not waive exec privilege, as in ...wave it in your face. He couldn't care less about appearances at this point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
9. Stephanopolis told Conyers that the White House is going to ignore his subpoenas
Edited on Sun Jul-08-07 09:25 AM by spanone
said it was in the Washington Post this morn. Conyers acted like he didn't know it.

Conyers also said the 'IMPEACHMENT' word.

mentioned what percentage of the people were calling for impeachment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
11. He's getting the word out there, on nat'l TV. No small feat for Dems.
And he's not even on here yet. I'm glad he's on the show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NotGivingUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
12. Putting on a little 'show' to make himself look good ...and make people think we have a democracy.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Conyers is talking in code to the White House.
Edited on Sun Jul-08-07 09:47 AM by Jackpine Radical
He's not a fool, he's not naive. Listening to the people on this board as they comment is sometimes kinda like listening to five-year-olds comment on a Spassky-Fisher chess game. "Why'd he push that pawn over there? The king's 'way over here!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aasleka Donating Member (465 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. !
Exactly right, read between the lines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #14
21. I agree. Conyers is no fool; I respect his intelligence and judgement.
Whatever he's doing, he's doing it for a reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #14
22. Did he talk about the schedule for his Judiciary Committee hearings on the clemency?
Edited on Sun Jul-08-07 09:50 AM by ProgressiveEconomist
I haven't seen it yet.See also http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1273395 for background on the evidence against the WH in Treasongate (Conyers's term for the scandal) and why outing Plame was so bad.

(Edit: "Pardon me", "clemency")
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Conyers understands what he called "Treasongate" at least as far back as 2005
Before the Democrats took over Congress, Conyers used the term "Treasongate" to refer to the unconscionable WH exposure of covert agent Plame.

Google Archive search http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=treasongate&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 got 13 hits, including this one, from http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/1028-12.htm

"OCTOBER 28, 2005

CONTACT: Congressman John Conyers, Jr.; Dena Graziano, 202-226-6888

Conyers asks: What Did the President and Vice President Know and When Did They Know It?

Directs Judiciary Committee Staff to Conduct Full and Comprehensive Investigation into Treasongate, Downing Street, Pre-War and Other Deceptions

WASHINGTON: Congressman John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, issued the following statement regarding Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's decisions to indict Scooter Libby:

"Today's indictments represent the beginning, but not the end of the process of finally holding the Bush Administration accountable for its conduct in foisting a preemptive war on this country. The prosecutor has performed his job in pursuing this case vigorously and fairly. However the charges really beg the larger question - what did the President and Vice President know about these and related matters, and when did they know it? I believe it is imperative that Congress pursue these questions and determine how these charges fit into the entire web of deception, manipulation and obfuscation laid bare by the Downing Street Minutes and Treasongate. As a result, I have directed my staff to conduct a comprehensive investigation and review of the facts concerning not only alleged efforts to misuse the White House to out a CIA operative, but misinformation concerning the run up the Iraq War, and all legal violations and breaches of trust by the Administration concerning the
War."

Congressman John Conyers, Jr."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_Leo_Criley Donating Member (553 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #14
24. the chess game
I believe that you're exactly right Jackpine Radical.

Conyers knows what he's doing. Every step in this game needs to be done right, before going on to the next step. As someone pointed out recently, it is set up this way, to move slowly, on purpose. This is not a country of overnight revolutions which suddenly change the constitution. And that is what sets us apart from so many countries in this world.

During Watergate it was excruciatingly slow. Unbelievably so. But when public and congressional opinion turned, it turned completely, and there was no stopping the end of the Nixon administration.

What we hope will be an orderly transition, at the fall of * and Ch***y is beginning to happen in earnest now. You can feel it building day by day.

sic semper tyrannis and all that ...


glc

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justgamma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
15. Comeon on Shrub! Clinton did it! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
18. i think he needs to say, "Pretty please." that ought to do it...
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. as long as he adds the 'cherry on top,' Or how about a double dog dare?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-08-07 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. ah, noth'in do'n, i seen that movie...*triple* dog dare...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC