When you are a Republican hack and even a Bush controlled Department of Justice determines that you broke the law, you’re probably screwed. See Justice Dept. report concludes aides broke law.
When you are a Republican hack and even a Bush controlled Department of Justice determines that you broke the law, you’re probably screwed. See Justice Dept. report concludes aides broke law.
This entry was posted on July 29, 2008 at 8:15 am and is filed under ass hat, politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
By RSS Feed
Sexual Intelligence
Underdog Blog
Meeting the Sin Laws
TTABlog
Seattle Trademark Lawyer
Trademark Blog
Media Law
Mass. Law Blog
Patry's Copyright Law Blog
The Liberal Blogger
Contiguglia's Entertainment Law Blog
Above the Law
Adams Drafting
Althouse
Las Vegas Trademark Attorney
WindyPundit
Nobody's Business
Simple Justice
Build a Solo Practice
New York Personal Injury Law Blog
Pope Hat
Tatiana Von Tauber
QuizLaw
First Amendment Seminar
Entertainment Law
Copyright Law
Trademark Law
Sports Law
Theme: Contempt by Vault9.
Blog at WordPress.com.
July 31, 2008 at 10:46 am
Here’s a question for you, Marc. If the DOJ is “Bush controlled,” doesn’t the fact that the DOJ found as it did indicate that Bush doesn’t protect “Republican hacks”? Doesn’t this indicate that the Bush-controlled DOJ applies the law even to said hacks? Of course, I understand that you’re loathe to admit that Bush isn’t pure evil.
July 31, 2008 at 11:21 am
I don’t think that the fact that the DOJ failed to protect this particular hack means that it does not protect them in general.
I do find it telling that if EVEN THIS DOJ doesn’t cover your ass, when you are a hack, you’re screwed.
Why is it that such a short post needs such clarification?
July 31, 2008 at 12:35 pm
You wrote “I don’t think that the fact that the DOJ failed to protect this particular hack means that it does not protect them in general.”
Doesn’t the fact that the DOJ determined here that the hack broke the law provide at least some evidence that the “Bush controlled” DOJ is, at least sometimes, acting on principle?
No, you’re right, your post doesn’t need clarification; I just thought I’d point out the obvious, namely that your Bush hatred clouds your judgment.
July 31, 2008 at 12:38 pm
P.S.: I give you props for your “New York Times Snubs McCain” post.
July 31, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Yes, you are correct — this DOJ does, sometimes, act on principle.
And it is not that the Bush hatred came first. The Bush hatred comes from his administration’s actions — not simply from waking up one day and deciding that I hate him.
Thanks for the props. I do try to be fair and balanced. :)
July 31, 2008 at 1:01 pm
I find your Bush hatred amusing, and I equate it to the Clinton hatred that was common among Republicans in the 1990s (I once knew a guy who actually believed that the Clintons murdered Vince Foster!). As it was with Clinton (for whom I voted in 1992), you will find fault with Bush no matter what he does. No, Bush is far from perfect, of course, but in any instance in which there are two (or more) plausible interpretations of his motives, you’ll attribute to him the malevolent one. It’s not very becoming.