Ridge tells CNN that it is great that we can discuss Bush's lawbreaking

[Atman]

on television. Isn't Democracy great? Tom Ridge tells Smiles O'Brian. The president can blatantly break the law and we can discuss it on national television! Don't you just LOVE democracy? Nothing will happen to Bush as a result of his lawbreaking, but we should all feel just swell and peachy-keen because democracy allows us to talk about it on television! I'm getting a red, white and blue boner just thinking about our great democracy, where any president is free to break the law and talk about it openly without fear of repercussions.

[Jacobin]

1. Is he saying: "Enjoy it while you can?"

[Waya]

5. Nope...he is saying that as long as we can TALK about Bush's ........

.......law breaking openly on TV witout fear - our democracy is sound. No cause to worry - the Nation is intact and doing great.:puke:

[SammyWinstonJack]

19. !

:crazy: :banghead: :argh:

[bananarepublican]

30. When they openly talk about Margie Schoedinger on CNN then we should all..

... have confidence in the (supposed) freedom of the press and good ol' 'murican democracy.

[babylonsister]

2. Yeah, I'm feeling all warm and fuzzy, without the boner. nt

[Atman]

6. Where the hell are all the "rule of law" freepers?

How many judges have now found that Bush has BROKEN THE LAW? At least two now, maybe more. They didn't suggest maybe Bush change his ways. They ruled that Bush BROKE THE LAW.

So freepers, you impeached Clinton because of the rule of law. But if the rule of law goes against your Chosen One, it's just the result of activist judges, right?


Riiiiight.

[ewoden]

11. It's like the Golden Rule

Them that's got the gold rule!!

Them that control the law rule!!

it's simple to understand and accept, once you taste the cool aide

[treestar]

16. In other words, the rule of men, not of laws

The freepers prefer the rule of men.

[rman]

3. "great"? no - it's normal. What is not normal,

is that "discussing" it seems to be just about all we can do. What is not normal is that there seems to be no acocuntability for the Bush admininstration.

[C_U_L8R]

4. Ridge sure didn't help the rightwing cause

Perhaps inadvertantly....
he came across saying that Bush broke the law
cause he ASSUMED congress and the courts
would be too slow.. but he didn't even try - did he??
Not once.
Bush just went ahead and broke the law...

[Atman]

8. That was the gist of it. Too bad Smiley O'Brian was the inquisitor.

He sure pitches a lovely softball, though, doesn't he? Maybe next time Ridge is on, Smiles' twin sister, Sosobad, can ask him for his famous scone recipe.

[underpants]

22. Eh I thought O'Brien did fairly well

He stayed on the BIG question about why can't you get a warrant and even started the interview stressing that it concerned WARRANTLESS wiretaps. He also mentioned that we now know that members of this administration wanted these changes BEFORE 9/11 and that they saw 9/11 as a means to strengthen the executive branch like never before.

I was pleasantly surprised at how well he did.

[QuettaKid]

7. you ARE kidding right?

please tell us you're kidding.

[Atman]

9. I wish I was

:(

[Ilsa]

I heard it and the OP isn't far off the mark. Not alot of hyperbole

there. After the discussion, Ridge took the conversation in that direction.

[Ilsa]

10. dupe

nt

[underpants]

21. No this was Ridge's comfy wrap up to the interview

O'Brien actually did much better than I expected. He never backed down throwing common sense and the actual political environment in DC (stated that Congress would and has given W everything he ever asked for*) and made Ridge look pretty foolish to be quite honest. Ridge isn't even in the administration anymore why is he whoring for them?

Ridge basically wanted everyone to leave with the warm fuzzy feeling of the Bill of Rights that the founders meant us to have.

Johnathan Turley of GWU Law followed and ripped the whole lie apart.

* I say "Everything" but there is one notable thing that wasn't awarded to W&Co. and that was the "Total Information Awareness" program. The TIA was going to monitor every call, every email, every bank transaction, everything all under the watchful eye of convicted felon John Poindexter and a logo so creepy that I went out and bought a hat from cafepress. Well does what TIA was supposed to do sound familiar? It should they went ahead with it anyway and O'Brien pointed out much of what is an issue now MAY have been started before 9/11. Oh by they way they also tried to slide Social Securtity back into the budget hoping no one would notice. They play in the margin that you jump over to get to reasonable consideration.

[leesa]

26. Ridge is facing a noose if the truth ever really comes out about 9-11.

and its cover-up. Also, he is making a great deal of money off the terrorist scare he helped to manufacture. He is heavily invested in the anti-terror industry.

[TheCowsCameHome]

12. I feel so relieved. I don't want Bush to feel disiked for what he's doing

What a sorry state of affairs................

[Ilsa]

13. The lawyer that came on afterwards reminded the viewers and

Miles O'Brien that the Bush* Administration DIDN'T WANT US to have this discussion AT ALL! They did everything they could to keep the program hidden so it would never see the light of day and be debated. He also commented that members of the Administration have sought, from day one, to empower the presidency with more than its Constitutional powers, and they used 9-11 to manipulate and consolidate more power and authority. He also made comments that we don't really know what they were listening to, and there was no way to determine if our rights were being violated.

It only took about two minutes, but this sharp dude smacked down Ridge, Bush, Cheney, and the whole pack of lawyers working for the NSA.

[Atman]

14. Yes, he did.

THAT GUY should have been the prime focus of the story. He really did lay the smack-down on the entire crew.

[elehhhhna]

20. He was interviewed earlier by Jessica Yellin who, when he said

"Yes it's THAT seriosu--the Prez could be IMPEACHED for this", said, LOUDLY AND ABRUPTYLY : "OH COME ON! He can't be IMPEACHED!"

Yellin is the perfect name for that conniesuckup.

[underpants]

18. Johnathan Turley from GWU law he testified at the Dem's hearings on this

http://www.law.gwu.edu/Faculty/profile.aspx?id=1738

[ck4829]

15. Try having a protest of Bush... when Bush is in town

Then see what will happen.

[Pawel K]

17. I was watching it, it was pitiful

the guy they had on after that put the smack down on him. I was actually suprised CNN had a counter voice on afterwards.

[klook]

25. That's why they're called the "Communist News Network"

by the freepazoids. They occasionally let people criticize the Chimperor's policies. I mean, you might as well be watching al-Jazeera! Now go back to Fox News.

[Cha]

23. nixon broke the law and

resigned..these particular brand of crooks will have to be dragged away kicking and screaming like banshees.

[MrCoffee]

24. If LIDDY (WTF?!?!) can go on Tweety's show and LAUGH about it

then why the hell can't Tom Ridge?

[Synnical]

27. Transcript is up

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/18/ltm.07.html

Here's the portion after Ridge:

O'BRIEN: Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, thanks for spending a little time with us.

Let's get the other side in now. Jonathan Turley has spoke early and often in opposition of wiretapping without warrants.

You heard what he said. This -- we've talked about this before, Jonathan, this whole notion of technology versus the law. The law is just by its nature is slow to react to new things. Does that in any way -- it's sort of an -- you know there's a bit of an end justifies the means kind of argument here. Does that justify it?

JONATHAN TURLEY, GWU LAW SCHOOL: No, it doesn't. And I'm perplexed by what Secretary Ridge said. Under FISA, the example he gave of an intercept that's ongoing of having to get a warrant, that problem doesn't exist. It is continually referred to by the White House. They can go ahead and do expedited interceptions without a warrant. The federal law does not require that.

O'BRIEN: And then they get the warrant retroactive.

TURLEY: That's right. And when Secretary Ridge says you know it's great that we're having this debate and it's great that the judge is looking at this, and that's what we all want, that's not what the White House wants. The White House has been trying to prevent judges from looking at their so-called legal authority.

They go to the Hill and people like Alberto Gonzales say our authority is clear and we look forward to presenting this type of authority in court. But in every one of these cases, they've tried to use the military and state's secrets privilege to prevent the judge from determining whether this is lawful.

So what Secretary Ridge is talking about of how wonderful it is that we can all debate the law, the president is trying to stop that. He's trying to keep judges, including this judge, from actually rendering a legal decision. She didn't stand for that. And she said, look, I'm not going to dismiss this case because you say there's secret things in your safe. Unless you've got a federal statute in your safe then you don't have legal authority and you can't have this program.

O'BRIEN: All right. But let's get this final point here. "The Wall Street Journal" with an editorial this morning said in part this, "Monitoring the communications of our enemies is neither a luxury nor some sinister plot to chill domestic dissent. It's a matter of life and death." If it's a matter of life and death, if people will die, in fact, because the Bush administration does not have the power to do this, what do you say to that?

TURLEY: The only thing the Bush administration does not have the power to do is to violate the Constitution. And when people like President Bush or Secretary Ridge come forward and say, you know, look, we have got to do this to protect your lives, every abuse in history has been based on that type of rationale.

We're trying to protect a legacy. We're trying to protect the thing that defines us that rule of law. And if we start to allow our leaders to say just look the other way because we've got good motivations, then well we've already lost the war.

But the important thing for the viewers to understand is they can do an enormous amount of surveillance, and they've never asked Congress for this power. Secretary Ridge says, well, we didn't ask it because we think they take too long. How do you know that? Congress has given the administration virtually every demand, in my view too many of the demands that they have made.

And the reason they did this is because long before 9/11, there were people in this administration that wanted to expand presidential authority. That was before 9/11. And they saw 9/11 as an opportunity to reinvent the presidency. And so they wanted to go it alone because they wanted to increase the power of that office.

O'BRIEN: Jonathan Turley, thank you for your words as well.

TURLEY: Thanks.

[Straight Shooter]

28. Bizzaro World, indeed.

[Harry Monroe]

29. Yeah, it's great that we can discuss Bush's lawbreaking

...but no one is talking about prosecuting him for breaking the law. All hail King George!!!!:sarcasm: