STEPHANOPOULOS: There was a lot of talk about that at the Alito hearings, and listening closely to you I certainly seem to take away that you believe the president does not have the right, does not have the inherent power under the Constitution to circumvent a constitutional law,and as far as you are concerned, the FISA law is constitutional, isn’t it?
SPECTER: Well, I started off by saying that he didn’t have the authority under the
resolution authorizing the use of force. The president has to follow the Constitution. Where you have a law which is constitutional, like Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, there still may be collateral different powers in the president under wartime circumstances.
That’s a very knotty question that I’m not prepared to answer on a Sunday
soundbite. But I do believe that it ought to be thoroughly examined. And when we were on the Patriot Act and found the disclosure of the surveillance, I immediately said the Judiciary Committee would hold hearings, and I talked to the attorney general, and we’re going to explore it in depth, George.You can count on that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, if the president did break the law or circumvent
the law, what’s the remedy?
SPECTER: Well, the remedy could be a variety of things. A president —and I’m
not suggesting remotely that there’s any basis, but you’re asking, really, theory, what’s the remedy? Impeachment is a remedy. After impeachment, you could have a criminal prosecution, but the principal remedy, George, under our society is to pay a political price.
Crooks and Liars has the video here.
And, speaking of impeachment:
New Zogby Poll Shows Majority of Americans Support Impeaching Bush for Wiretapping
By a margin of 52% to 43%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he wiretapped American citizens without a judge's approval, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.
The poll was conducted by Zogby International, the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company. The poll interviewed 1,216 U.S. adults from January 9-12.
The poll found that 52% agreed with the statement:
"If President Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment."
43% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know or declined to answer. The poll has a +/- 2.9% margin of error.
IMPEACH
GO STEELERS!
7 comments:
.
Thanks to my perusing your blog, specifically, "2 Political Junkies", I have arrived at what I believe is a defensible inference. Both you and your readers would welcome news of in-your-face overt opposition to your "smirking chimp", my "dum'ya botch".
In plainer terms, I want to run for Representative for Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District on a platform calling for the impeachment of President George Walker Bush.
Incidentally, I deliberately referred to your blog, to indicate that I visited your blog as an individual, and not as a spammer. Yes, that last is an illustion to a "pre-deconstruction" chick flick with a rating of two and a half hankies.
Ah, before you click on any of the enclosed hyperlinks, please read the entirely of my comment. For example, the three planks I nailed together in my platform out to get me elected. "impeach bush" is the first plank. The second is "impeach bush". The third is like the second, "impeach bush".
To continue, the first hyperlink below leads to the opening salvo of my campaign.
http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2006/01/danger-senator-specter-danger.html
As for the second hyperlink, it leads to evidence that my candidacy is about more than opposition solely for the sake of opposition.
http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2006/01/dispelling-stench-in-oval.html
toodles
......\
.he who is known as sefton
oh, yeah, I should add that, in Epimethean Comment, I make the case that nominating Judge Alito to the Supreme Court is tantamount to treason.
Uhmmm, yeah...ok. Like we're supposed to believe that the poll results, coming from an organization like afterdowningstreet.org is factual. Judging from the site, it's just another liberal kook site reporting facts as they see "fit." You two are so amazing. You're actually worse than Huffington. *laugh* Thanks for the entertainment, nonetheless.
Uh, Braden?
You need to re-read that again (this time more carefully). The poll was commissioned by afterdowningstreet, but was done by a real live polling company called Zogby.
Are you saying that afterdowningstreet somehow convinced the real live polling company to skew the findings somehow? If that were true, there'd certainly be other polling companies that have conflicting data - Can you show us the conflicting data?
Do you have any evidence for what looks like a typical evidence-free conservative smear?
If you have no evidence to back up a charge, then I suggest you don't make that charge - you'll look less foolish that way (if that's even possible).
Specter's never been cuddly but he occasionaly speaks truth to power. That or he knows just how to showboat to please his "middle of the road" base. Or both. Either way, the proof of his intentions will be the zeal with which he pursues this issue in the coming weeks and months.
You need to re-read that again (this time more carefully). The poll was commissioned by afterdowningstreet, but was done by a real live polling company called Zogby.
Are you saying that afterdowningstreet somehow convinced the real live polling company to skew the findings somehow? If that were true, there'd certainly be other polling companies that have conflicting data - Can you show us the conflicting data?
-- Oh believe me, I read it carefully. And no, I am saying that afterdowningstreet twisted their findings (as all liberal outlets do - look at The Huffington Post). And then you lead me to this: http://www.democrats.com/bush-impeachment-poll-2. I am *so sure* that that poll was totally unbiased and reports truthful factual information. Come on now, it's on www.democrats.com for heaven's sake. Like they're going to post anything that's Pro-Bush. Get real, what do you take me for here? As far as conflicting data is concerned, there's no need to provide anymore proof other than it was originally posted on the site which you originally referenced, a leftist-liberal site no less, not to mention poll results posted on democrats.com. End of story.
Do you have any evidence for what looks like a typical evidence-free conservative smear?
-- What kind of question is that? That has nothing to do with anything here. But since I here, I am quite sure Alito could answer your questions when it comes to smearing, not to mention I am sure The Smudge Report which is a total rip-off of the Drudge Report, right down to the courier font; and let us not forget The Huffington Post. Yeah, they are totally unbiased.
If you have no evidence to back up a charge, then I suggest you don't make that charge - you'll look less foolish that way (if that's even possible).
-- So in other words, my conflicting points of view which do not match your political views deem me as foolish, correct? So be it. If that's the case, the you sir as just as close minded as I thought, which only confirms that if one doesn't agree with the political view/agenda of liberals, then they're marked as fools. So much for your liberal philosophy of diversity, right?
"Come on now, it's on www.democrats.com for heaven's sake. Like they're going to post anything that's Pro-Bush. Get real, what do you take me for here? As far as conflicting data is concerned, there's no need to provide anymore proof other than it was originally posted on the site which you originally referenced, a leftist-liberal site no less, not to mention poll results posted on democrats.com. End of story."
Cool! According to your "logic" if a Left site reports that Bush is President -- he isn't. So I guess he's not. Woo-hoo!
Hey everybody, Branden says Bush isn't the president! Let's break out the champaigne!
Maria, I wouldn't expect a response from you any less intelligent. You had nothing intelligent to say in response, so you'll purposely misconstrue what someone says in order to satisfy your own beliefs, no matter how false they may be.
You're just another who reinforces my quote of:
Liberalism = where the truth makes you turn your head the other way and cough
Post a Comment