The disclosure by Panetta to both the Senate and House intelligence committees about Cheney’s involvement was first reported in The New York Times.

Don’t Miss
Senator: Cheney and alleged secret CIA program ‘a problem’
Republicans, Democrats trade barbs on alleged CIA wrongdoing
House Dems: Panetta testified CIA has misled Congress repeatedly
Efforts to contact Cheney for reaction were unsuccessful.”
Even his daughter Liz isn’t commenting other than to say she doesn’t believe he did anything wrong.

Max won’t. It would too much change for him. But thanks for asking…

Nope: not an attorney. But thanks for playing.

As for “inferior being,” well, the rule of thumb, JimJohnson, is something like this: demonstrating an inability or an unwillingness to engage a substantive argument, as you have here, exhibits the very intellectual impotence characteristic of an “inferior being.” You’re out of your depth on every conceivable level. How’s that feel, JimJohnson?

Smugness and vapidity, JimJohnson, have been welcomed into your life. It would behoove you to do something about that.

JimJones,

Neither. You’re as inept at judging who you’re dealing as you are intellectually dishonest in your depiction of current events.

—————-

Thank God. We have enough incompetent attorneys out there already.

Thank God. We have enough incompetent attorneys out there already.

And if “who you’re dealing” is some reference to your credibility, then anyone who reads your writing already knows the answer to that question. You are simply an inferior being, who pretends to stand on some throne, and you wrap yourself with your own compliments.

Suddenly, you of all people are concerned with those who challenge our Constitutional government.

Thanks for the laugh CF.

One more thing. Regarding investigation, you wrote the following:

“It would be disasterous, not only for this administration’s ability to simultaneously push its own agenda…but for the precedents set that future administrations use the criminal courts to punish previous administrations for policy differences.”

Please don’t conflate “policy differences” with what is at issue in the present case, namely, a back-channel program, in defiance of existing statute, that answered to Dick Cheney ALONE. Investigating the latter in no way establishes precedent for open season on the former.

Your reasoning, GMC70, hands a blank check/get out of jail free card to potential wrongdoing by future Executives–much as is currently the case. Hard to see how any other possible consequence is worse than that.

JimJones,

Neither. You’re as inept at judging who you’re dealing as you are intellectually dishonest in your depiction of current events.

Not much to add to the rejoinders left by others, except to note that the question of whether or not to investigate the emerging reports of wrongdoing by Dick Cheney is “political” in a sense not yet mentioned: namely, “political” in that the issues involved in the allegations are such as have the ability to collapse our system of government entirely.

If a renegade Vice-President Dick Cheney really had sole authority over programs that involved domestic surveillance, and if getting to the bottom of this isn’t of the highest importance for EVERY American, then there really isn’t anything left to salvage of our “political” order.

And if the investigation is hindered from going forward out of fear of what might be revealed, one has to ask what Cheney signed off on. Was it just domestic surveillance? Was it also CIA-style dirty tricks against political opponents? Was it a campaign of intimidation and blackmail vis a vis J. Edgar Hoover?

Or was it assassination of political opponents?

It is worth noting, GMC70, that in the afternoon’s press conference, Robert Gibbs refused to say whether or not President Obama had received a briefing on this program. I think it’s possible that the Administration doesn’t actually know what sort of “program” Cheney left in place. And that, itself, is cause enough to investigate.

I don’t think you, GMC70, can answer those questions one way or another. But among Americans loyal to the Constitution, GMC70, the discovery of a shadow government within the Federal government ought to provoke a different set of responses than your open threats of partisan warfare without end.

It goes back to the points in my earlier post which you ignored: that no challenge to our Constitutional government, from whatever quarter it comes, can be allowed to stand. Excusing Nixon and Reagan only created Dick Cheney. And if we immunize THIS miscreant from prosecution, who do we get next time? Stalin?

If it was any “D” or “R” president I would demand the same thing. The integrity of this nations future depends on finding out just how far out of bounds the criminal behavior of Bush/Cheney went.

It`s far beyond who ordered what, but who twister the facts and LIED to all American`s.

Investigate NOW!

Cheney kinda has that Wu Shocker Sneer.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I’ve always suspected that the poor man in perpetually constipated.

House Republicans on Thursday demanded that a bipartisan panel investigate her allegations.

Does the Capn know what he is talking about or what?

Whadaya think Capn?

Just because he too wants to move on doesn’t mean he’s a CON.

Cons wear shoes. Obama wears shoes. So what?

BTW, it’s no surprise why the CONs are so insistent that “we all move on”
-Capn

I was not aware that Obama was a CON. It’s unfortunate that he wants to move on while the rest of us are excited about any possibility of a government stopping, media dominating investigation.

WorstPresidentEver.

WorstVicePresidentEver.

WorstCandidateEver.

By golly, the CONs hit the trifecta.

Poor wittle victims.
Work that majority. Please.