To: carranza2 who wrote (12704 ) 2/19/2006 11:50:42 AM From: KonKilo Respond to It seems that on the whole, there is no desire to push Bush to the wall and turn the matter {illegal wiretaps} into a burning constitutional question. As evidence, I see the recent political develpments--the negotiations, the agreement not to call for hearings, etc.--as being suggestive of a deal being worked out under which some of the things the Administration is doing are allowed under some sort of agreed-upon supervision. Moreover, the Committee did not vote against an investigation. Instead, Roberts merely invoked a procedural device as Chairman to prevent a vote, for now, from taking place. (Incidentally, what happened to the Republican mantra that procedural maneuvers ought not be used to block up-or-down votes? It seems that principle only applies to matters where they know they will prevail on the vote. Here, there were clearly Republican members of the Committee who did not want to go on record – and who may have been unwilling to go on record – voting to oppose an investigation. As a result, no vote was held). glenngreenwald.blogspot.com Perhaps the Dems have finally wised up, and are unwilling to pursue Bush when most Americans think that we are genuinely at war and Bush genuinely acted in good faith. Zogby: By a margin of 52 to 43 percent, citizens want Congress to impeach President Bush if he wiretapped American citizens without a judge's approval.
