<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: House OKs subpoenas for top Bush aides</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/</link>
	<description>Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:08:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anon</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/comment-page-1/#comment-62359</link>
		<dc:creator>Anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Mar 2007 01:04:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/#comment-62359</guid>
		<description>Did Bush Firing Of Attorney Have To Do With Turning A Blind Eye To A Pedophile?

People In Washington State Are Wondering.

http://soundpolitics.com/archives/008252.html

Perhaps there are reasons behind why Bush fired these people. Perhaps these people are not as innocent as the Democrats are trying to portray them as being.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did Bush Firing Of Attorney Have To Do With Turning A Blind Eye To A Pedophile?</p>
<p>People In Washington State Are Wondering.</p>
<p><a href="http://soundpolitics.com/archives/008252.html" rel="nofollow">http://soundpolitics.com/archives/008252.html</a></p>
<p>Perhaps there are reasons behind why Bush fired these people. Perhaps these people are not as innocent as the Democrats are trying to portray them as being.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gary l. day</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/comment-page-1/#comment-62358</link>
		<dc:creator>gary l. day</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 17:37:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/#comment-62358</guid>
		<description>Jeff,

Greg is correct. Also, that&#039;s exactly what Bush did--it&#039;s exactly
what each new Administration does, clean house and install their
own people. It&#039;s standard procedure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff,</p>
<p>Greg is correct. Also, that&#8217;s exactly what Bush did&#8211;it&#8217;s exactly<br />
what each new Administration does, clean house and install their<br />
own people. It&#8217;s standard procedure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Molby</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/comment-page-1/#comment-62357</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Molby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 03:16:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/#comment-62357</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;No. They are all Bush appointees. Every Clinton appointee was sacked at the beginning of Bushâ€™s first term.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
I don&#039;t believe you&#039;re correct on that point, but it doesn&#039;t affect the rest of your argument.

If Bush wanted to clean house and install his own guys, he could have done so when he took office. No one would have batted an eyelash. Instead, he kept these guys on for over four years before he discovered they weren&#039;t performing the job competently? And it just so happens a statistically high percentage of those men were involved in investigations involving politically allies?

Hmmm, it&#039;s fair to say that has the appearance of impropriety. Correlation certainly doesn&#039;t imply causation, but it is worth suspicious and worth investigating.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>No. They are all Bush appointees. Every Clinton appointee was sacked at the beginning of Bushâ€™s first term.</p></blockquote>
<p>I don&#8217;t believe you&#8217;re correct on that point, but it doesn&#8217;t affect the rest of your argument.</p>
<p>If Bush wanted to clean house and install his own guys, he could have done so when he took office. No one would have batted an eyelash. Instead, he kept these guys on for over four years before he discovered they weren&#8217;t performing the job competently? And it just so happens a statistically high percentage of those men were involved in investigations involving politically allies?</p>
<p>Hmmm, it&#8217;s fair to say that has the appearance of impropriety. Correlation certainly doesn&#8217;t imply causation, but it is worth suspicious and worth investigating.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gary l. day</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/comment-page-1/#comment-62356</link>
		<dc:creator>gary l. day</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:03:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/#comment-62356</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s been so long since there&#039;s been any, you may not be familiar
with the concept. It&#039;s called &quot;Congressional oversight,&quot; which is
part of Congress&#039; constitutional function. But then, the right-
wing definition of &quot;malfeasance&quot; tends to be completely situational.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s been so long since there&#8217;s been any, you may not be familiar<br />
with the concept. It&#8217;s called &#8220;Congressional oversight,&#8221; which is<br />
part of Congress&#8217; constitutional function. But then, the right-<br />
wing definition of &#8220;malfeasance&#8221; tends to be completely situational.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/comment-page-1/#comment-62355</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:40:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/#comment-62355</guid>
		<description>&quot;considering they are all Clinton appointees&quot;

No. They are all Bush appointees. Every Clinton appointee was sacked at the beginning of Bush&#039;s first term.

&quot;Um, White House is two words not one.&quot;

Um, his name is Sheldon Whitehouse. One word. He doesn&#039;t live at the White House, his name is Whitehouse.

&quot;Do you hear the arrogance from this cockroach?&quot;

Pointing out that the Bush administration is intimidating prosecutors who are doing their job by prosecuting cases by firing those whose investigations get too close to allies? No, I don&#039;t hear the arrogance.

As for behaving as promised, Democrats promised to hold the administration&#039;s feet to the fire, to actually exercise the oversight that the Constitution entrusts to Congress, something the Republicans never did. Democrats are behaving exactly as they promised, which is why 60% of Americans still think Democrats in power is a good thing. Compare this with the 27% who think Bush is good for America.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;considering they are all Clinton appointees&#8221;</p>
<p>No. They are all Bush appointees. Every Clinton appointee was sacked at the beginning of Bush&#8217;s first term.</p>
<p>&#8220;Um, White House is two words not one.&#8221;</p>
<p>Um, his name is Sheldon Whitehouse. One word. He doesn&#8217;t live at the White House, his name is Whitehouse.</p>
<p>&#8220;Do you hear the arrogance from this cockroach?&#8221;</p>
<p>Pointing out that the Bush administration is intimidating prosecutors who are doing their job by prosecuting cases by firing those whose investigations get too close to allies? No, I don&#8217;t hear the arrogance.</p>
<p>As for behaving as promised, Democrats promised to hold the administration&#8217;s feet to the fire, to actually exercise the oversight that the Constitution entrusts to Congress, something the Republicans never did. Democrats are behaving exactly as they promised, which is why 60% of Americans still think Democrats in power is a good thing. Compare this with the 27% who think Bush is good for America.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator</title>
		<link>http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/comment-page-1/#comment-62354</link>
		<dc:creator>Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 23:15:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/03/21/house-oks-subpoenas-for-top-bush-aides/#comment-62354</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Rove might talk about prosecutors&lt;/strong&gt;

The White House offered Tuesday to make political strategist Karl Rove and former counsel Harriet Mi</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Rove might talk about prosecutors</strong></p>
<p>The White House offered Tuesday to make political strategist Karl Rove and former counsel Harriet Mi</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

