Day: December 28, 2005

Can’t Put the Abramoff Toothpaste Back in the Tube

Trish

Great commentary at Indianz.com on the members of Congress who are now falling all over themselves to return the Abramoff money they worked so hard to get.

The money that Abramoff and associates funneled…already bought the access, consideration, help, favors and votes it was meant to buy. Giving away money won’t undo whatever these politicians did to earn support from Abramoff and his clients.

Members of Montana’s congressional delegation have joined politicians elsewhere in attempting to distance themselves from Abramoff.

This is silly and entirely for show.

The money that Abramoff and associates funneled to Burns, Baucus and Rehberg, et al, already bought the access, consideration, help, favors and votes it was meant to buy. Giving away money won’t undo whatever these politicians did to earn support from Abramoff and his clients.

For that matter, the money itself has been spent. “Returning” money to Abramoff’s clients or “donating” it to third parties qualifies now as a new campaign expense – more or less like buying an ad that proclaims, “We’re not in this guy’s pocket – honest.” Where’s this money going to come from? That’s right – from other lobbyists or big-money donors who will have their own demands, expectations and strings to pull.”

The editors also left a message for readers explaining there will be light posting until after New Year’s.

…we wish you a happy holiday season to you, your family and all of your lobbyists

Bush vs. the Bill of Rights

Trish

Funny what you see when you’re getting your oil changed: The waiting room had FOX News going, so I got a rare glimpse. The anchor, a scary-looking woman with way too much eye makeup, was trying to get the requisite two opposing sides to say that because “all” the people Bush spied on were “really bad guys” that what he did was O.K. And because Bush did the noble thing and admitted he was doing this, these “really bad guys” are going to get off on a technicality.

Illegal evidence – evidence obtained in an illegal search – is not made more legal in light of what it reveals

Our team explained that the 4th Amendment is not generally regarded as a technicality but a pretty important foundation of our society.

What he didn’t say was what I learned in Constitutional Law 101: illegal evidence – evidence obtained in an illegal search – is not made more legal in light of what it reveals. Murder cases have been thrown out over this fact. It’s not new, and it’s not directed at the Bush White House. It’s just bedrock law in America. Or it was until Bush came to town.

President Bush’s Illegal Spying Is, First and Foremost, an Affront to the Rule of Law – Not Just Civil Liberties

Jon Ponder

Felon-in-Chief: The Bush team is hoping that Democrats will go after the president’s illegal wiretapping as an abuse of civil liberties, rather than as a flagrant violation of a United States law – in this case, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Attacking the president’s violation of FISA purely as an affront to civil liberties helps the Bush regime because they can easily contort this position – with the media’s help – into “Democrats prefer civil rights for terrorists over national security.”

Certainly, the wiretapping of U.S. citizens without a warrant paves the way for unchecked abuse of power. Who knows whether Bush operatives have eavesdropped on their political enemies, including Democratic and Republican members of Congress.

Leaving all that aside, however, the damage the president has done to our democracy is very simple:

President Bush broke the law.

[…]