Bush May Invoke Executive Privilege to Keep 9/11 Docs Away From Congress

Ummm, Paul Byrd is a pitcher for the Atlanta Braves. Do you have inside information of his political leanings that you would like to share with the rest of us, or did you forget to eat your Wheaties today?

 

Can't someone bold the important part of the article? It's easier that way...

 

I would have been stunned by former Congressman Tim Roemer, a member of the joint House and Senate Intelligence Committee when it investigated 9/11 and present at the closed hearings, being denied access to their minutes "to refresh his memory"... until it threatened to turn into a public relations problem for the White House during Bush's stunt on the USS Lincoln... but it's hard to get stunned by this White House any longer. I'm sort of stunned out. Hell, I'm stunned by the lack of comment about a post I made in the "Dems Run Off to Ardmore" thread. WTF, I shouldn't be surprised. (sorry, I've had a bad day... it happens)

 

Couldn't agree more... I have an easier time reading a MacBeth opus.

(j/k!)

 

Paige these are all reasons to keep something secret for personal reasons, much different than the situation we are discussing. The longer the Bush administration withholds this important information from the non-partisan Congressional investigation, the more it will appear they are hiding something to protect themselves.

 

Deckard: Why should you be stunned by lack of response in that other thread? How could they respond? You stumped them. Enjoy it.

 

batman...how about 'cause it's a red herring..it's not on topic. who the hell cares who they ultimately elected? that has nothing to do with a judgment of the conduct of the dems running out of the state..letting the business of the state die on the vine.

i could give a substantive response to the argument...but why? i don't think anyone feels compelled to, because it's simply not on point. if he's trying to make the argument that dems NEVER drew districts in such a way to benefit themselves while in power, that's laughable. and you know it is. no one would deny that. the conclusion of what those districts produce in terms of election results years later is sidebar. who cares?

 

Max, both sides accuse the other of letting other, more urgent business die on the vine and they're both right. Perry, DeLay and the Republicans know very well that redistricting is a messy, contentious issue which distracts from all other business for a substantial amount of time. And there was less than no reason to do it now (except that DeLay wanted it done now) when there was more urgent business -- it was done only two or so years ago. And Perry hadn't even presented a budget. You make it sound like the Republicans were itching to deal with other issues and the Dems ran away. That is patently false.

All that, plus even if you want to dismiss Deckard's point (which was notable), it was a fresh take in a stale thread. No one responded, he asked why no one had responded and another day passed. Certainly seemed like no one had an answer.

In a new development, Willie Nelson apparently sent a bottle of whiskey and a red banana to each Dem in Ardmore. I thought that was awesome.

 

i'm not saying either side is beyond reproach...though the dems certainly can't cast stones in glass houses, given their record of gerrymandering for decades in this state. the republicans didn't run away when that happened...they didn't get on the bus together and hold up all other business in some sort of veiled protest. the elections happened...they lost. they knew this was coming. they ran. they've stalled business that would have otherwise been dealt with. business that won't be dealt with for another 2 years now, likely.

no one responded because no one cared...at least that's how i felt.

 

they've stalled business that would have otherwise been dealt with. business that won't be dealt with for another 2 years now, likely.

Unless I'm misunderstanding, all of this business will be dealt with next month in a special session.

 

is that right? i haven't read that...a special session has to be called, doesn't it? what does it take to call a special session?

 

is that right? i haven't read that...a special session has to be called, doesn't it? what does it take to call a special session?

The House Speaker (or maybe the Governor) just has to call it, I think. These things HAVE to be passed before everyone leaves or Texas has no budget for the next 2 years, so it will get done. May take longer, but it'll happen. I'm just curious what will happen if the Republicans bring up redistricting again in the Special Session.

 

that might happen. i don't know.

i understand they have to deal with the budget...but my understanding is there are other bills out there that would die because of this delay.

what's your opinion on this, major? think they did the right thing by leaving town?

 

i understand they have to deal with the budget...but my understanding is there are other bills out there that would die because of this delay.

That may be the case - I'm not sure what all is pending right now.

what's your opinion on this, major? think they did the right thing by leaving town?


On a selfish note, I'm kind of glad it happened. I get to spend this summer in the House Speaker's office, and I kind of wanted to see things "in session" so the special session will be cool. [edit: assuming it happens]

Outside of that, I just find it entertaining. I figure the important work will get done, so I'm not too concerned about that. I kind of wish the Texas Rangers had worked out a deal w/ the Okie police to arrest them at their press conference - that would have been fun to see them all being paraded back into the House chambers. If you're going to go into hiding, at least go hide!

As far as the redistricting, I'm not a fan *at all* of political redistricting. I would like it to be a bipartisan process with an equal number of Democrats and Republicans designing it separate from the legislature. While I don't agree with the means, I'll be happy if this redestricting dies as a result. It's one thing to do political redistricting, it's another to do it in this underhanded way (offyear, no public discussion, no compromise) which I believe is counter to how its been done in the past, but I could be wrong.

 

A large number of the House bills in danger will be attached to Senate bills. They're working on it now. That's not to belittle the disruption and bills WILL die, but it'll be bills that aren't high up on the member's radar screen. All is not lost.

The Governor has said that he won't call a special session. He may be able to avoid it if he drops redistricting. I hope we don't have one. Every other summer after a session my wife gets to take some of her zillions of hours of comp time that she loses after a period of ? number of years. Four, or something like that. So anyone who thinks I've taken delight in all this is mistaken. I just happen to agree with what the Democratic House members did.

Thanks, Batman.

 

No sweat, Deckard.

I'm actually not ready to drop your original point yet -- just didn't have time to address it earlier.

I think you're wrong that it's irrelevant, Max. The primary argument for redistricting right now is that Texas is primarily Republican and that through Dem redistricting the Dems have unfair representation. Deckard's stats put the lie to that. Of course the Dems have attempted to redistrict in a way favorable to them, but if those districts which Deckard listed had voted as they registered representation would be in line with the current makeup of the state. In other words, the fact that there are more Dems representing than Repubs is not strictly due to partisan lines. Deckard's point puts the lie to the main reason for redistricting.

 

Huh? How did this thread get to talking about redistricting?

Before I proclaim that the current lines are fair, I'd like to see statistics on the rest of the districts. Just because 4 or 5 majority Republican districts elected Democrats doesn't mean that the lines are fair.

 

------> Bush May Invoke Executive Privilege to Keep 9/11 Docs Away From Congress<-------- Typical Republicans trying to change the subject

 

uh...actually it was deckard who brought it up here.

 

J/K that would actually be an interesting thread.