i mean, if he was never involved, why should he have anything to say about any of it? if it was the case that he had nothing to do with any of these decisions, then we would not hear a peep from him, would we?

methinks he doth protest way too much. and it’s so obvious, but nobody points this out. or, heaven forbid, bothers to actually ask him this question.

i’ve always thought it exceedingly important and therefore shrewd of obama to keep himself above the fray on all this illegal admin stuff. think about it; how would that be in any way effective?

it also seems to me that it is crucial for him to keep his guns holstered and not go in like gangbusters trying to clean up the whole town in one swashbuckling shootout. that, folks, was W’s way. obama has made it clear he intends to govern according to his role as laid out in article I; execute the laws congress passes and SCOTUS approves. period.

consider what it would mean for him to have directed holder to change the govt stance on all those cases hanging in courts when he came in. what was he supposed to do? oh judge, nevermind (channeling emily latella), we’re the new sheriff in town and want the world to know we don’t agree with the guys who started this whole thing, so we withdraw our position and argument. ??

obama WANTS these cases to have their day in court! he WANTS the arguments to get out there so they can be shot down. in the courts! if he just swaggers in all W like and installs what we know to be the more constitutional way by decree, these arguments and positions will someday once again find their way back into the zeitgeist and we’ll be right back where we are now, fighting these same battles.

yeah, remember iran-contra? and even watergate. both those cases got truncated when it became clear to those close to the evidence that there was a lot more incriminating crap to be found, so we’d better just quit while we’re ahead. hence we get the same iran-contra thugs running the damn country!

nope; i think obama really does have amazing scope on the big picture with this one. he recognizes how important it is to be patient when you want changes to happen appropriately, which includes with stability. if we make corrections that aren’t deep enough, they won’t take. i’m all for giving this the time it’s due.

hell, i assumed it would be at least a couple of years before we got this far on these things. i’m actually impressed.

all fear. all the time.

The question we all ought to be asking is not will the lower level folks be held to account, but rather will the higher ups pushing illegal policies?

Actually, the question we all ought to be asking is how does this make our country safer?

If there were men willing to inconvenience a murderer by depriving him of sleep, waterboarding, or even scaring him s***less by firing a pistol – and it prevented the murder of my wife or children…. I’m OK with that. I want to thank them for having the courage and committment to do something I could probably not do.

You all are the townsfolk mob with pitchforks, torches and tar, and Dick Cheney is your Frankenstein. You HAVE to have an evil person to hate , and you are going to storm the castle doggone it, regardless of the consequences.

If they’d had a falling out, we’d never know. Seems unlikely we’ll ever know anything he doesn’t choose to reveal. Intriguing.

Interestingly, she (Sibel Edmonds) claims that (Marc) Grossman blew the cover of Valerie Plame’s company Brewster Jennings back in 2001, causing CIA to shut it down, so Robert Novak was not guilty of exposing the CIA cover mechanism.