Ashcroft, Don Evans Resign

So reported CNN just now. UPDATE: Story here. As commenter Jennifer points out, Aschroft wrote in his five-page, handwritten resignation letter that, "The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved."

Comments

[Ken Shultz]

WWWWWwwwooooooooohhhhhHHHhhhooooooooooo!

Now let's just hope that Ken Layne's nightmare scenario doesn't happen, the one where he shows up as our next Supreme Court justice.

[TWC]

Can't say I'm sorry to see Ashcroft go.

[Mo]

Let's wait until his replacement gets appointed before we bust out the bubbly.

Come on Bob Barr. [crosses fingers]

[NoStar]

Has Ashcroft resigned to jump start his career as a Vegas singer?

[Jennifer]

Let the eagle soar wherever he wants, so long as it's away from power.

[Lowdog]

Yeah, I'd wait to see a) If they accept it and b) who is the next AG before I start celebrating.

[Warren]

DING DONG The Witch is dead.

Which old witch?

The WICKED witch.

Ding dong the wicked witch is deeaaaaaaaddd.

[Jennifer]

Hee, hee, hee. Here's a little gem cut'n'pasted from the Yahoo story, as to why Ashcroft chose to resign:

Ashcroft, in a five-page, handwritten letter to Bush, said, "The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved."

Hooray! Safe at last!

[Eric II]

"Ashcroft, in a five-page, handwritten letter"

A five-page handwritten letter? Just how reactionary was this guy?

[Jennifer]

Eric II-
Well, he would have used the computer but someone had once used it to view the naked booby of Lady Justice. What, do you think such an important document should be typed on a tainted machine?

Oh, and here's something else which you guys never ever saw coming: according to the Yahoo story, the next commerce secretary might be some rich guy who (gasp!) donated over 200 million dollars to the Bush campaign.

[Jennifer]

Whoops, my bad. Our future Commerce Secretary didn't GIVE Bush $260 million; he just RAISED it for him.

[Mark D]

Hurrah!

[Call me snake]

I thought that the power-mad religious conservatives would stop at nothing until their vision of theocratic rule was achieved?

This sucks...I was waiting for the 2nd term Ashcroft inspired federal sieges on non-believers....

.....oops, I forgot, that's what happens when third rate Florida prosecutors become AG in a moderately liberal administration.

A thousand pardons in advance for the deviation from the groupthink on this thread that the Patriot Act is the worst document since the minutes from the "Final Solution" meeting in 1941.

[Ken Shultz]

Call me snake,

I'm not sure, but, under the terms of the Patriot Act, I don't think you're allowed to comment on the Patriot Act in public.

[Jennifer]

Maybe when the Supreme Court started putting limits on what could be done down in Gitmo, the job just stopped being fun.

[isildur]

The first rule of the Patriot Act is: you do NOT talk about the Patriot Act.

[Xavier]

Unfortunately, Mankiw also left. I really liked him.

[Call me snake]

Ken,

What I am sure of is that I can't enjoy a Camacho Diploma robusto (Honduras's finest) in certain public places because a regulator imposed this rule by fiat, a moral crusade masquerading as a public health issue.

This impacts me (and pisses me off) much more than the Patriot Act, which even many GOP lawmakers have promised will be revisited.

With the Patriot Act I see our republic (partially) functioning: It was a legislative overreach, but it appears ready to be trimmed back considerably, the proverbial pendulum swinging.

Other areas of infringement are untouched by any check or balance.

[Ken Shultz]

Call me snake,

I'd cite abuses of the Patriot Act to counter the woeful immediacy of Honduras' finest, but unless the FBI decided to tattle on itself, I wouldn't know if there were any.

...in the meantime, I can't get a loan funded for any of my development projects without filling our a Patriot Act form for the bank.

[Call me snake]

and BTW, what the fuck do you think Ashcroft is going to write in his letter? "Today, Mr President, I resign in abject failure?"

[Ken Shultz]

"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved."

Whew! I'm glad that's over.

..now, who's going to protect us from the Justice Department?

[Pedro]

I have some issues with Mankiw, but it was nice to hear someone defending out-sourcing and free trade.

[Ellie]

and BTW, what the fuck do you think Ashcroft is going to write in his letter? "Today, Mr President, I resign in abject failure?"

Hahahahaha!

[Jennifer]

Snake-
There are ways to avoid an unpleasant truth without resorting to bald-faced lies.

[Eryk Boston]

Is it me or is he suggesting that we are now safe and secure because he resigned?

[Dave]

Never thought I'd be the one to have to say this, but....

For crying out loud, give the guy a little credit. Yes, the covering up of statues was retarded. As an atheist, I didn't like the fact that Ashcroft tried to narrow the seperation of church and state. And sending Tommy Chong to jail is hardly what the justice dept needs to be doing in the age of terror, so therefore Ashcroft is SO much worse than all those other Attorneys General who didn't bother with Prohibition, such as....um....uhh....that guy who died 100 years ago.
But speaking of the age of terror, need I remind everyone that the USA hasn't suffered an attack since 9/11? Raise your hand if you thought that was going to be the case 3 years ago. Hands down, liar. You can thank John Ashcroft for a large part of that, because it's sure as hell not from lack of trying on the part of the terrorists. Remember the members of the Oregon cell? Remember the dirty bomber in Chicago? Well few people do, because Ashcroft's Justice Department caught them. Things could be a hell of a lot worse right now. We're always talking about what could/should have been done about 9/11 in hindsight, but how many of you would recognize the name Mohammed Atta if we had arrested the hijackers months before they acted? You would have put it out of your mind just as we've forgotten about the other possibly enormous attacks that haven't happened since, all because certain people were arrested in time. There probably have been other successes that we don't know about, and there certainly haven't been any important failures on the home front.
When looking back through history, we always say things like "if only the rest of Europe had stood up to Germany at the Munich conference", but if they had we wouldn't appreciate how important that was today. The same applies here. If Ashcroft had fucked up and a dirty bomb went off in a major US city, or if the Oregon cell had done who knows what, most of the people on this board would have been calling for Ashcroft's head (not that you weren't anyway), so by the same token he deserves credit for having stepped up to the plate big time and kept us safe. Do I have a lot of problems with things he's done? Yes. But give some credit where it's due and have a little respect.

[Ken Shultz]

"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved."

John Ashcroft 2004

"I made a balloon of such extensive dimensions, that an account of the silk it contained would exceed all credibility...with this balloon and my sling I played many tricks, such as taking one house from its station, and placing another in its stead, without disturbing the inhabitants, who were generally asleep, or too much employed to observe the peregrinations of their habitations."

Baron von Munchausen 1785

[Lowdog]

Call me a liar if you must, Dave, but I haven't been worried about a terrorist attack on US soil since, oh, forever. Was I surprised when one happened and would I be surprised if another one happened again? Yes. And it has nothing to do with Ashcroft, I'm just really not that worried about terrorists.

(No offence to all the people who died in NYC or their families, I just don't see what terrorists can really do to us, aside from make us afraid so that our government can pass laws to curtail our freedom. They've been trying with limited degrees of success for years, and terrorist attacks give them ammunition.)

[Ken Shultz]

"But speaking of the age of terror, need I remind everyone that the USA hasn't suffered an attack since 9/11? ...You can thank John Ashcroft for a large part of that, because it's sure as hell not from lack of trying on the part of the terrorists."

Jason Ligon once offered to sell me a magic rock that scares away tigers. I couldn't afford it, but if you've got the cash, I bet he'll sell it to you instead.

[Andrew Lynch]

I, too, don't fear terrorist attacks. But I do fear my government's reaction to terror.

But who cares about that. Oh, Joyous Day! Aschroft is outtie. See ya!

[Andrew Lynch]

And who the hell is Evans? Talk about a disproportionate double bill.

[Ken Shultz]

Andrew Lynch,

Now's as good a time as any to get rid of the Commerce Department.

[Mo]

Dave,
How many terrorist attacks did we suffer 3 years after the first WTC attack?

Gee, that Janet Reno did a bang up job protecting the country, didn't she.

[Brian]

I don't know why there there hasn't been another terrorist attack since 9/11.

Sometimes I think they're chumps who got really lucky that one time.

Other times I think they're on a different schedule than we are. The first WTC attack was what 1993? They waited until 2001 to try again.

I've no doubt we've killed and captured some AQ guys, mainly overseas. After Padilla, etc., I'm highly suspicious of any claims that we're rounding up a bunch here. If 1000s of AQ guys are here hiding out, then what are they waiting for anyway? Blow something up. Hasn't happened. So they must not be here. QED sorta.

[Alex Trebek]

"But speaking of the age of terror, need I remind everyone that the USA hasn't suffered an attack since 9/11? ...You can thank John Ashcroft for a large part of that, because it's sure as hell not from lack of trying on the part of the terrorists."

Jeopardy Answer in the Form of a Question: What were Dave's famous last words?

[Dan]

Dave, How many terrorist attacks did we suffer 3 years after the first WTC attack?

The Oklahoma City bombing happened just over two years after the first World Trade Center attack. It's amusing to remember that both the Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) blamed Oklahoma City on right-wing talk radio.

Anyway, I have no idea to what extent Ashcroft actually protected us from terrorism. None of us has enough information to say.

[Mo]

Dan,
Fair enough.

Though rounding up Islamist cells wouldn't have prevented that or the Atlanta Olympics bombing.

[s.a.m.]

The Oklahoma City bombing happened just over two years after the first World Trade Center attack.

Very true, also a few abortion clinics for that matter.

[Brian]

Just thought of something. Is Judge Roy Moore doing anything right now? He could replace teh boobie statues with that graven image he's fond of.

(Seriously I swear I read somewhere that his 10 Commandments statue was going on tour throughout the heartland and people would gather around it on their knees chanting and all sorts of stuff).

[Reg]

Ashcroft was the most competent member of the Bush Cabinet. Though some of the prosecutions seemed borderline abusive, how many al qaeda cells have carried off an attack? the guy has been doing something right. Compare to Janet Reno. He didn't burn any kids to death so there's another plus.

As for justice titties, it would be annoying to see every picture of yourself in the newspaper showing a giant marble boob next to your head.

[plunge]

It's not the justice department's job to prevent terrorism: that's the military and the CIA and the FBI and homeland security you are thinking about. It's the justice department's job to _prosecute_ terrorists. And insofar as that was Ashcroft's job, he's been an utter, abject failure in almost every single way. Almost every trial has collapsed for lack of evidence or turned into a farce, or even just been plain embarrasing for the United States as it not only rushes to poop all over it's vaunted ideals of justice, but then fails to have anything to show for it either (i.e., just tons of pointlessly detained combatants and trials that go nowhere or derail themselves). THAT is a success? Give me a break.

[bigbigslacker]

Don't forget the evil militias McVeigh tried to join. Somehow the media found them to be guilty as well, but not the army. That the Michigan militia rejected McVeigh didn't seem to rule in their favor in the 11th circuit court of media opinion.

Militias are cool and stuff, huh, huh, huh.

[Dave]

"How many terrorist attacks did we suffer 3 years after the first WTC attack?
Gee, that Janet Reno did a bang up job protecting the country, didn't she."

You're going to compare the environment then to the all-out war they have declared on us today? Come on, you guys are starting to sound like the isane leftists at democratic underground, willing to bend reality as far as it needs to go in order to not give a memeber of the Bush administration any credit for anything. So if being 100% against Ashcroft requires the insane proposition that there is no terorist threat to worry about, then that's what you'll say. And to compare this to a "magic rock that scares tigers away" is beyond silly. Maybe if that magic rock commanded a force of thousands who were tracking and locking up tigers every day, but otherwise you are saying that tracking terrorist communications and arresting terrorists or potential terrorists has nothing to do with those terrorists not being able to do what they want, and that is simply not a serious argument. Tommy Chong never went to jail for selling bongs until I bought that magic rock, so it's the rock's fault, right? Oh wait, now it's Ashcroft's again.

Lowdog doesn't see what terrorists can do to us? Well I'm at a loss for words. No idea how to answer this one. Do you have access to television and newspapers? I can post some web links if you don't. The photos are pretty disturbing though, mainly explosions, people falling out of towers to their deaths, beheadings, little kids being killed at school. I know the ride back from Alpha Centauri was long and tiring, but we need to sit down and talk, some bad stuff happened while you were away. But ok, you win. Terrorists pose no threat to the US, it's all just a plot to take away all your civil rights. When the first suicide bomber takes out a restaraunt in NYC, I want you to stand up and say the government bears no blame because they shouldn't have been worrying about this before hand. When radioactive materials or Anthrax are dispersed (well half of that already happened), I want you to stand up and say how proud you are that our country didn't waste it's time trying to prevent such things. When a school is attacked as in Russia, I fully expect you to be on this board saying Bush was right not to try and prevent something like that, because as you said, you just don't see what the terrorists can do. Even when it's right in front of your eyes.
I thought this site was called Reason. I guess it's more important to hate EVERYTHING about Ashcroft than to face the fact that there are people who live for nothing but our deaths, and will get them if we aren't vigilant. That is reason. You were right to be surprised on 9/11, we never experienced something that huge on our own soil. You don't have that excuse anymore. But that's not the real issue, the real issue is that John Ashcroft is a blah blah blah, and nothing else could be more important.

[Pseudo]

Is it possible Ashcroft will be replaced by a recently deceased, symbolic place-holder?

I can dream.

*************

(If someone used that joke earlier, sorry. I didn't read the whole thread)

[Gene Trosper]

Gee, without our interventionism in the Middle East, 9/11 wouldn't have happened. Not to excuse the horror of that day, but actions have consequences. Invade a holy land and enagage in bombing, maiming and killing innocent civilians...hmm..wonder if anyone is going feel the need to retaliate?

[Rick Barton]

Long live the Bill of Rights!

[Rick Barton]

Hey, click on Gene Trosper above for link. Good stuff!

[Dave]

Ah yes, the old "well if we had been nicer to them" argument. Because they aren't calling for the whole world to be converted to Wahabbism or be killed. Because they don't banish women from public life and beat them if they venture outside the home without a male. Because they don't crush homosexuals (or should I say, the ones who admit it in a society where sex segregation has made it extremely common) for existing. Because they themselves never engage in bombing, maiming, and killing innocent civilians. They especially would never make civilians their intentional target. They certainly aren't the kind of people who would kidnap and behead aid workers who have done nothing but try to get their people clean water and education. Ah, the middle east....millenia of peace and human rights until America came along and starting blowing everything up for fun.

[Jimbo]

McCain said on the Tonight Show that he would want Lieberman to be AG. Discuss...

[plunge]

"You're going to compare the environment then to the all-out war they have declared on us today?"

Newsflash: they had ALREADY declared all-out war "then." But it takes them years to plot major attacks, and the 2000 ones got foiled. I see nothing about Ashcroft that points him out as exceptionally more competant at what he does than any other AG would have been. Can you present ANY evidence to the contrary? The man has FAILED at most of his basic tasks of locking up terrorists and then successfuly bringing justice to bare on them. Instead, we've had countless fumbled cases that either fell apart, turned into jokes, or became huge black-eyes for the country.

"I guess it's more important to hate EVERYTHING about Ashcroft than to face the fact that there are people who live for nothing but our deaths, and will get them if we aren't vigilant."

blah blah blah. I don't have an argument, but Osama wants to kill us all so how dare you disagree! Again, if you had any case at all that Ashcroft has done a good job, make it. Citing the lack of terrorist attacks in this country isn't evidence of anything, and the fact that you analyze using such broad generalities just shows how little you know about the ACTUAL progress or lack thereof: what's really gone on at the DOJ over the years.

You want to talk Reason? How about this: our leaders aren't magically made more competant than they actually are just because the threat is bigger or you feel the need to cling closer to the flag. "But the terrorists want to kill us" is not an argument for why Ashcroft has been a good AG, anymore than it makes Bush a good President. Both these men have arguably made it HARDER for us to actually pre-emptively attack and prosecute real terrorists. That's a failure, not a success, no matter how bold they might have been.

[Stevo Threadkiller]

What I am sure of is that I can't enjoy a Camacho Diploma robusto ...

For a minute there, I thought this was the latest burrito offering from Taco Bell.

Anyway, the important thing is that now we can all look at naked-boobed statues without fear.

[Dynamist]

Thanks, Dave, for getting sufficiently close to one of my sentiments. On his watch there were no more attacks, so he can properly claim the "mission has been accomplished". May Rudy G. or whoever warms his chair next be equally effective by this simple measure.

As for the handwritten letter-- maybe he felt it was more personal that way. Similar to a breakup by email that seems less appropriate than a note from one's own hand. We may not like what he espouses, but I believe he really felt he was doing important work trying to keep people from being slaughtered.

Now, woohoo! and snark on!

[Robert G]

How many times did the Supreme Court have to tell DoJ that they were on the wrong side of the law? Ashcroft was writing laws, not defending them.

Americans feel less secure today and that is exactly the way Karl Rove wants it. Living in fear is the Republican form of slavery. Creating massive deficits is the Republican form of slavery. Living under one God is the Republican form of slavery.

[Deron]

It's the end of the world as we know it... and I feel fine.

I'm worried about a terrorist attack, but I'm also worried that I'll end up biting it when some idiot runs a red light.

Ashcroft has prevented nothing, because nothing has been attempted. If you can prove other wise then prove it, but don't demand that other prove a negative.

I could be wrong. Maybe Ashcroft has been fighting the Wahabi's (sp?). I kinda doubt it since they also view due process as a weakness, believe in the traditional family structure (er..values), are pro-life, anti gay, and in favor of a litmus test for judges. The great danger isn't that the terrorist will kill us, but that the religious right will discover that they could form a coalition with the wahabis.

[Dave]

My argument was not that "Osama wants to kill us so how dare you disagree". My point was that some of the above posters went as far as to suggest that there isn't any threat from Osama and his kind because to acknowledge that danger is to acknowledge that the danger has so far been held at bay, in some manner. If you want to talk about Ashcroft botching cases in court, I am in total agreement that that's a legitimate course of argument against his effectiveness. I don't know that I'll necessarily agree with your points, but they are the sort of points that could make a valid case, as opposed to the lunatic argument of suggesting that terrorists haven't hurt us because there isn't any threat from them.

[Les]

I think Dan nailed it when he said we don't have enough information to know whether or not Ashcroft helped to prevent any terrorist attacks.

What we DO know about what Ashcroft accomplished isn't very impressive. He fought against states' rights in Oregon (assisted suicide) and California (medical marijuana). He publically claimed his critics aided terrorists with their critiques.

He issued terrorist threat warnings without consulting Homeland Security or the White House.

Contradicting Ashcroft's sworn testimony, acting FBI Director Tom Pickard and Ruben Garcia, head of the FBI Criminal Division, claimed the Ashcroft said he didn't want to hear any more about terrorism in the U.S. in July of 2001.

In the years after the terror attacks, he devoted more money and manpower to prosecuting obscenity law violations, going after small business owners who rented and sold relatively tame pornography.

I don't think anyone is damning Ashcroft for "trying" to stop terrorism. No one damns the public school system for "trying" to educate kids. But there's just no evidence that Ashcroft did his job any better than the public school system does its job.

Personally, I'll be the first to damn him for being a religious fundamentalist puritan who has accomplished (and wasted) as much as the average government bureaucrat.

I wonder if he'll be anointing himself in oil when he resigns as he did before beginning his terms as Governor and Senator. If he does, I hope he holds a press conference.

[Dan]

going after small business owners who rented and sold relatively tame pornography.

What do you mean by "going after"? I know they've investigated a number of content services, but the only actual major prosecution I'm aware of is the one against Rob Black (whose stuff is certainly not "tame" unless graded on a curve against Japanese and German fetish videos).

[Rick Barton]

I should have said, "Let us repair our Bill of Rights from injuries, some of which have been inflicted even pre-Ashcroft."...Now it's clear why I said, "Long Live the Bill of Rights!"

[Mo]

Dave,
My point was more that the all out war you state started before 9/11 and the Bush administration. As much as the Clinton administration is derided, they recognized the threat of non-state actors, though they didn't quite understand the magnitude, none of us did (plus the whole appearance of wagging the dog, like the asprin factory). The only difference between the 93 and 01 WTC attacks was success. The original plan was to have one fall on the other. Just because the first one didn't kill 3000 people doesn't mean the intent was any different. In AQ's mind the war had begun in 1993, not 2001. The (foiled )millenium plots, the USS Cole and the African embassies were part of the pattern. The only place the environment changed was in the American psyche.

[Les]

Dan,

There's an article here:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-te.obscenity06apr06,0,3004361.story?coll=bal-home-headlines

I think Black's stuff is pretty disgusting, but I feel like there are more pressing concerns in our society than consensual sex that I find disgusting. Problem with Ashcroft and those like him is that they actually believe pornography made by and for adults IS a pressing concern.

I don't think he's worse than Reno or Meese or most other A.G.'s (or is it A.'s G.?), but I find admiration and/or respect for him to be a sure sign of loyalism.

[Les]

"Just because the first one didn't kill 3000 people doesn't mean the intent was any different. In AQ's mind the war had begun in 1993, not 2001. The (foiled )millenium plots, the USS Cole and the African embassies were part of the pattern. The only place the environment changed was in the American psyche."

I hadn't even thought of that and it's an essential (and obvious) fact to consider. Thank ye, Mo!

[Rick Barton]

Dave:

"Ah yes, the old "well if we had been nicer to them" argument."

Dave, you miss the whole point:

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel, said the final report of the Sept. 11 commission.

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/heraldleader/news/nation/9222612.htm

The evidence is that the tragedy of 9/11 probably wouldn't have occurred but for our government's intervention in the mid-East, specifically its support of the Israeli government's brutal occupation, which is a terribly unethical thing for our government to be doing with our money anyway.

The best way to keep us safe from terror is to adopt the wise recommendation that Bush made in his foreign policy debate with Gore in the 2000 election: "A more modest foreign policy". (Remember, Gore would have none of it.) Of course, that one wouldn't involve an expansion of the government.

Now Dave, go to Gene Trosper's fine libertarian site that he links to at 10:45 PM

http://www.noninterventionist.com/

Then go to

http://www.antiwar.com/

and please make a contribution because it's their pledge week. Then go to http://www.isil.org/
which is Free Market.net and ISIL merged. Then go to:

http://www.independent.org/

then go to:

http://www.cato.org/

Ok, after those please go to some lefty and neocon sites and try to enlighten them into joining the cause of liberty.

[Jason Bourne]

Dan only stated the obvious.

Les,

I love the fact that the jackboots have to seek "counseling"; they need to get over their prudery.

[Bill Bennet's dominatrix]

"But speaking of the age of terror, need I remind everyone that the USA hasn't suffered an attack since 9/11?"

And I haven't been attacked by tigers, either. Golly, I guess that magic rock I bought really works!

[Jason Bourne]

Note that whether Ashcroft is head of the Justice Department or not, they will continue go after things like Oregon's "right to die" law:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6445465/

[Jason Bourne]

Presumably they will also go after medical marijuana laws in Oregon (which just expanded its law), California, Vermont, etc. (we are up to ten states that have legalized marijuana for medical purposes in some manner).

http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3391

This really must piss the nanny-staters off.

[Quippl]

One problem I've had with Ashcroft's Justice Department is not likely to go away with another AG: that of "mission creep" in law enforcement. The Patriot Act, ostensibly passed to fight terrorism, has found its way into prosecuting child pornography cases (http://www.wkyt.com/global/story.asp?s=2041760&ClientType=Printable).

I've got no problem with the Justice Department going after child pornography cases, but it worried me at the time the Patriot Act was passed, and worries me still, how laws passed by Congress for one purpose may be used (perverted?) for application in areas that the lawmakers may not have intended.

[mike]

"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved."

You 'd think he wasn't aware that liars burn in hell.

[McClain]

If Bush is re-elected, the sun will go out, the rivers will run with blood, Roe versus Wade will fall, John Ashcroft will resign...
(hiccup)...[pause]...[rewind]...
wait, I'm sorry...what was that?
John Ashcroft will resign?
Well.
That's it then, I'm sorry: I'm voting for Bush.
Oh wait, I already did.
You're Welcome!
🙂

[Jason Bourne]

McClain,

Hmm, if Kerry had won Ashcroft would have resigned, or rather, have been booted from office, so its a wash.

[Phil]

But speaking of the age of terror, need I remind everyone that the USA hasn't suffered an attack since 9/11? Raise your hand if you thought that was going to be the case 3 years ago. Hands down, liar.

I'll happily raise my hand in truth. In fact, I assumed that 9/11 had blown the terrorists' money and planning wads for quite some time.

Remember the members of the Oregon cell? Remember the dirty bomber in Chicago? Well few people do, because Ashcroft's Justice Department caught them.

Caught them? Not only was the "dirty bomber" never charged with or convicted of anything, he was (or is going to be) let go! And deported to that well-known non-terrorist-harboring state, Saudi Arabia! You fuckin' moron.

[Mr. Sun]

Ashcroft to star in new sitcom:

The General and the Queen

[drf]

X:

you like mankiw????????? a salt water economist?

we need a supply sider in there. none of this east coast/northwestern stuff......

[Skeptikos]

I think I just learned how to love ashcroft...

http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6774636
Bush Plans to Name Gonzales New Attorney General
"If he is selected, Gonzales' Senate confirmation hearing would likely delve into what role he played in a legal opinion that defined the treatment of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq, which critics said contributed to the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, a charge denied by the administration.

In classified memos that were released in June, administration lawyers argued that Bush, as commander in chief, was not restricted by prohibitions on torture enshrined in U.S. law and international treaties due to the president's "complete authority over the conduct of war," including interrogations."

[Skeptikso]

I suspected that Bush would nominate one of the few folks at the DOJ who scare me even more than Ashcroft did.

Didn't G actually author the memo that "unbound" Bush from such pedestrian limits such as the concept of "laws"?

[Skeptikos]

Well, better laugh, before I cry...

"Lawyers Decided Laws of Physics Didn't Bind Bush"

http://watleyreview.com/2004/060804-1.html

[Isaac Bartram]

Skeptikos

I believe you need a sense of humor to live in America.

If I didn't have a sense of humor I'd probably go insane or become a Republican or Democrat. But I repeat myself.