Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (66936)	5/24/2006 1:40:55 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

I am not aware of any felony charges brought in this case. A felony charge is not required for a warrant, only probable cause. The video tape looks like a pretty good foundation for probable cause. I appreciate your concern and initially was alarmed when it occurred. Though once the "alarm" subsided it seemed reasonable. I would believe that the attorney general's office and the judge that issued the warrant looked at the appropriate Constitutional clauses pretty hard before the warrant was issued. That doesn't guarantee "correctness". I think it more likely that Rove is trying to push the impeachment issue again, because that and bird-flu are the only distractions he has left. I think this little search of Jefferson's office is going to die a quick death as an issue. I certainly don't see Frist and Hastert calling for an impeachment based on that issue and the Democrats would just as soon let the spotlight fade away. jttmab