|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
spiritual_gunfighter
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 08:58 AM Original message |
Eric Holder: Miranda Rights Should Be Modified For Terrorism Suspects |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
no_hypocrisy
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:04 AM Response to Original message |
1. How does Holder propose getting the testimony into the court record |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
napi21
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:00 AM Response to Reply #1 |
30. It depends on how congress writes the law. There weren't ALWAYS Miranda rights you know. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:05 AM Response to Reply #30 |
31. Miranda doesn't give you rights. You already have those rights. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 07:27 PM Response to Reply #30 |
81. Correction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:41 AM Response to Reply #30 |
122. Really? Which case did Miranda overrule then? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
IndianaGreen
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:17 AM Response to Reply #1 |
38. No Miranda = cops can torture and beat you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SnakeEyes
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:31 AM Response to Reply #38 |
53. Not true |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:02 PM Response to Reply #53 |
59. You're right but I can't help thinking that a secondary gain we get |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:42 PM Response to Reply #59 |
66. Thats the most important aspect of it no doubt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:38 AM Response to Reply #53 |
120. It's not a reminder for everyone. Some people don't know they have those rights. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Angry Dragon
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:04 AM Response to Original message |
2. So now they want different rights for different people |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
msongs
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:29 AM Response to Reply #2 |
12. Obama already supports different rights for different people, nothing new here. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Angry Dragon
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 08:22 PM Response to Reply #12 |
83. Could you explain more please |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
xxqqqzme
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:46 AM Response to Reply #2 |
45. And I had 'hope' we would return to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
harun
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 03:55 PM Response to Reply #2 |
71. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iowa
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 06:27 PM Response to Reply #2 |
79. Absolutely correct. This is dangerous stuff and yet another step toward a police state. eom |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
iamjoy
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:07 AM Response to Original message |
3. Not Exactly The Change We Hoped For |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
4dsc
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:12 AM Response to Original message |
4. When did Holder become a republican? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xenotime
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 02:37 PM Response to Reply #4 |
144. The right listed should be modified not Miranda itself. Is that what I'm reading? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rug
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:16 AM Response to Original message |
5. Ironically, Arizona adds this to the Miranda warnings. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:19 AM Response to Original message |
6. I would rather establish that Constitutional right ONLY apply to American citizens. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:25 AM Response to Reply #6 |
8. Well, if you'd like things to be that way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:55 AM Response to Reply #8 |
26. Deleted message |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:40 PM Response to Reply #8 |
98. The amendment is already there. It's the XIV amendment privileges or immunities clause. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 08:06 AM Response to Reply #98 |
108. No. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 10:24 AM Response to Reply #108 |
111. They are entitled to due process of law. But not the privileges and immunities of citizens. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 10:37 AM Response to Reply #111 |
114. The exclusionary rule does apply to aliens in the US |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:30 AM Response to Reply #114 |
117. Irrelevant. privileges or immunities establishes the first eight amendments applies to "Citizens." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:39 AM Response to Reply #117 |
121. Yes it's irrelevant if you ignore things that contradict your wishes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Tue May-11-10 07:18 AM Response to Reply #121 |
155. If I'm wrong then we can't have immigration laws, boarder checkpoints and Visa's. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Tue May-11-10 08:15 AM Response to Reply #155 |
160. Whole Cloth. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:54 AM Response to Reply #117 |
125. Try reading this.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Tue May-11-10 07:01 AM Response to Reply #125 |
154. Madison repeatedly used the word "privileges" interchangeably with the word "rights." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:45 AM Response to Reply #111 |
123. No, Miranda was not an "immunities" case. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:39 AM Response to Reply #6 |
17. Why would you want anyone to give up their human rights? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:28 PM Response to Reply #17 |
84. Not really. Constitutional rights and human rights are different. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:25 PM Response to Reply #84 |
90. John Yoo, is that you? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
IndianaGreen
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:52 AM Response to Reply #6 |
21. Tell that to José Padilla. a natural born American citizen tortured and imprisoned by Bush |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:42 PM Response to Reply #21 |
86. Bush should be jailed for what he did to that citizen. No arguments there. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Posteritatis
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:48 AM Response to Reply #6 |
56. What a ridiculous idea |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:50 PM Response to Reply #56 |
87. If they become a threat National Security or commit serious crimes they lose the Status. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Posteritatis
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:35 PM Response to Reply #87 |
96. But that's not what you said. You said they shouldn't have any constitutional rights at all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:46 PM Response to Reply #96 |
99. Take it up with Congressman John Bingham (Ohio). He's the one that wrote the XIV amendment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 08:12 AM Response to Reply #99 |
109. The 14th applies to 'persons' not just citizens. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:22 AM Response to Reply #109 |
116. Irrelevant! I am not discussing ius commune. I'm discussing Constitutional Law. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:51 AM Response to Reply #116 |
124. Nice *attempted* dodge. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Tue May-11-10 07:33 AM Response to Reply #124 |
156. Slaughterhouse interpretation of the XIV was later abandoned by the courts. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Tue May-11-10 08:11 AM Response to Reply #156 |
159. Say wha??? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Heywood J
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:53 AM Response to Reply #6 |
57. You mean that naturalized-citizen Pakistani, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:27 PM Response to Reply #57 |
91. SCOTUS doesn't always get it right. Look at their recent repeal of campaign finance laws they - |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:59 AM Response to Reply #91 |
126. Constitutional law is the supreme law of the land, not "separate from the law of the land." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Tue May-11-10 07:37 AM Response to Reply #126 |
157. The Constitution is law governing Government. It also governs the making the laws. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:12 PM Response to Reply #6 |
61. Yeah, that'll work well. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:08 PM Response to Reply #61 |
129. That is not from the Constitution. It's from the Declaration of Independence, which |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 07:34 PM Response to Reply #6 |
82. Constitutional rights do NOT only apply to Americans |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:37 PM Response to Reply #82 |
85. You do NOT have a constitutional right to life. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:55 PM Response to Reply #85 |
88. I don't NEED a Constitutional right to life |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:34 PM Response to Reply #88 |
95. try explaining that to the executioner as he sticks the needles in your arm. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:51 PM Response to Reply #95 |
101. Right to life |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:02 PM Response to Reply #101 |
102. That's from the declaration of Independence. That was replaced by the US Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:03 PM Response to Reply #102 |
103. Please go back and read my edit NT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:19 PM Response to Reply #103 |
105. I did and I pretty much agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:13 PM Response to Reply #102 |
130. No, the Constitution did NOT replace the Declaration of Independence. They are two |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Tue May-11-10 07:43 AM Response to Reply #130 |
158. My main point is that the D of I bears no legal force. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:17 PM Response to Reply #101 |
104. EXACTLY! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:02 PM Response to Reply #85 |
127. You're conflating. There's never been a genocide under the COTUS. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 01:35 PM Response to Reply #127 |
143. Tell that to the American Indians NT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Morning Dew
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:33 PM Response to Reply #6 |
94. Good luck proving your citizenship while you're being detained incommunicado. n/m |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teknomanzer
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 10:48 AM Response to Reply #6 |
115. Faisal Shahzad was a citizen... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:03 PM Response to Reply #115 |
128. Apparently, you ask Congress to change the law. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RobinA
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 03:15 PM Response to Reply #6 |
149. I Never Get |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bullwinkle428
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:21 AM Response to Original message |
7. How long before we have our very own "caste system" established? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dixiegrrrrl
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:43 AM Response to Reply #7 |
43. "UNTIL we have our own caste system"? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bullwinkle428
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 03:56 PM Response to Reply #43 |
72. Oh, it's always been there in the de facto sense; I was thinking |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:29 PM Response to Reply #72 |
133. It's also been there de jure as well. Slavery, Native Americans not being quite human, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:24 PM Response to Reply #43 |
132. Not only racism and genderism, but also money, as your last sentence implies, and orientation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Demeter
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:26 AM Response to Original message |
9. The DC Bubble Culture Is Insane |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
w4rma
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:26 AM Response to Original message |
10. WTF does he want to remove from our rights and protections? (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pinboy3niner
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:28 AM Response to Original message |
11. It is not clear that he is talking specifically about Miranda |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:38 AM Response to Reply #11 |
16. "Public safety" is a very broad brush. Your driving was a threat to public safety. No Miranda! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
iamjoy
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:48 AM Response to Reply #16 |
20. No Miranda for Drunk Drivers! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gmpierce
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 02:58 PM Response to Reply #20 |
67. iamjoy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
iamjoy
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 03:55 PM Response to Reply #67 |
70. I Thought I Was Joking |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pinboy3niner
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:52 AM Response to Reply #16 |
22. Broad brush, certainly, but you're going for slippery slope |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:00 AM Response to Reply #22 |
29. Lets just say that in a legal landscape. A slippery slope is best painted with a broad brush. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
IndianaGreen
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:53 AM Response to Reply #11 |
24. Are you aware that Scalia has been saying for years that Miranda should be repealed? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pinboy3niner
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:08 AM Response to Reply #24 |
34. I'm aware of Scalia's view |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dixiegrrrrl
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:48 AM Response to Reply #11 |
46. From the article: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pinboy3niner
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:53 AM Response to Reply #46 |
47. I voted No |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:36 PM Response to Reply #11 |
134. He was on Meet the Press yesterday and it's perfectly clear he mean Mirandas. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pinboy3niner
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 08:41 PM Response to Reply #134 |
152. You're right. There was a succession of interviews that made it clear |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bowens43
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:30 AM Response to Original message |
13. unfucking believable |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RainMickey
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:38 AM Response to Reply #13 |
119. Agreed. Just when I thought we'd reached a point where another shoe couldn't drop...... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:32 AM Response to Original message |
14. Deleted message |
atreides1
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:21 AM Response to Reply #14 |
39. We must remain adamant to the point we compel the world around us to change.......as always. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mr. Sparkle
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:35 AM Response to Original message |
15. If this is true, then it is a new low in the Obama administration, imo. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
IndianaGreen
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:40 AM Response to Original message |
18. Bush Lite |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
O is 44
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:44 AM Response to Original message |
19. Dumb and very disappointing if true n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:52 AM Response to Original message |
23. Deleted message |
IndianaGreen
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:54 AM Response to Reply #23 |
25. Those that won't uphold the Constitution, will destroy America from within |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 01:06 PM Response to Reply #25 |
140. How about those who stand by and do nothing about it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
scentopine
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:55 AM Response to Original message |
27. America is slowly surrendering to the Taliban. We are becoming more and more |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:50 PM Response to Reply #27 |
100. Amen! We're currently too busy worrying about respecting their rights to defeat them. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 10:25 AM Response to Reply #100 |
112. First we need to decide |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wizard777
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 11:38 AM Response to Reply #112 |
118. Exactly! But can you actually expect an executive to make a decision? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
newspeak
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 02:54 PM Response to Reply #118 |
148. Anybody remember the first WTC bombing-the parking garage |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
amandabeech
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 08:45 PM Response to Reply #112 |
153. How do you suppose the powers that be will determine the end of the war on terror? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:39 PM Response to Reply #27 |
135. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
glowing
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:59 AM Response to Original message |
28. Is this admin turning out to be a more eloquent speaking Bush 3rd term or what? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BootinUp
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:05 AM Response to Original message |
32. Holder has said things before that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
IndianaGreen
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:11 AM Response to Reply #32 |
35. Holder also refused to prosecute John Yoo |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saigon68
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 04:22 PM Response to Reply #35 |
73. Holder is a coward ( A Spineless coward) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:19 PM Response to Reply #32 |
63. *nod* Holder spoke of renewing the assault weapons ban in Feb last year. *smack* n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Travis Coates
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 10:26 AM Response to Reply #63 |
113. Have you noticed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
2Design
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:08 AM Response to Original message |
33. omg - no more law of the land - no more usa - this is a terrible idea n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:15 AM Response to Original message |
36. Deleted message |
ixion
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:17 AM Response to Original message |
37. Way to keep up the march towards the Corporate Police State, Mr. Holder |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RufusTFirefly
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:22 AM Response to Original message |
40. Yeah. Constitutional rights are absolute. Except, of course... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jefferson23
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:24 AM Response to Original message |
41. These are the dangerous ideas, and I am so ashamed they are coming |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 01:10 PM Response to Reply #41 |
141. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jefferson23
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 04:57 PM Response to Reply #141 |
150. Thanks, one thing I will say in Holders defense is that he will go |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hardtoport
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:31 AM Response to Original message |
42. Can we conclude Obama is not on our side now? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Inuca
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 03:34 PM Response to Reply #42 |
68. "Obama is screwing up this country in ways Bush only dreamed of." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iowa
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 07:18 PM Response to Reply #68 |
80. This is not accurate.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Inuca
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 06:43 AM Response to Reply #80 |
106. Of course they are at opposite end of the spectrum |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 01:19 PM Response to Reply #106 |
142. There are altogether too many similarities, especially in the legal positions |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iowa
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 02:46 PM Response to Reply #106 |
147. DUers tend not to "scream made-up innanities"... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
newspeak
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 09:53 AM Response to Reply #42 |
110. Nah, * still holds the record |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
krabigirl
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 02:40 PM Response to Reply #42 |
145. Answer: he never was. and neither will the next one, or the next one, unless we really make changes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jefferson23
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 05:04 PM Response to Reply #42 |
151. I don't believe Holder is looking to get rid of Miranda rights, he |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Turbineguy
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:44 AM Response to Original message |
44. Why change it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AzDar
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:57 AM Response to Original message |
48. Fuck that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:21 PM Response to Reply #48 |
65. +1 n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
scheming daemons
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:09 AM Response to Original message |
49. Not what he said.... OP is very misleading |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jefferson23
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:14 AM Response to Reply #49 |
50. It is true that Holder doesn't state what exactly should be modified. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RainMickey
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:50 PM Response to Reply #49 |
138. How about issuing a hit on an American citizen who has never had a day in court? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nyy1998
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:17 AM Response to Original message |
51. So whatever happen to the bill of rights of the Constitution? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
IndianaGreen
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:36 PM Response to Reply #51 |
97. It is now toilet paper! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
City Lights
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:21 AM Response to Original message |
52. Um, NO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:45 AM Response to Original message |
54. "Constitutional law already permits..." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ClarkUSA
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:48 AM Response to Original message |
55. The OP is not only misleading but its premise is based on the HuffPo writer's cluelessness... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Inuca
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 11:56 AM Response to Reply #55 |
58. Oh, but it feels so good |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ClarkUSA
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:09 PM Response to Reply #58 |
60. lol! Yes, it's a Rorschach test in many ways. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Odin2005
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:14 PM Response to Original message |
62. Obama FAIL! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CLANG
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 12:20 PM Response to Original message |
64. That is so un-progressive and un-liberal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mari333
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 03:46 PM Response to Original message |
69. hmmm sounds like BUSH |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zhade
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 05:05 PM Response to Reply #69 |
74. I don't recall even that murderous piece of shit suggesting this. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
krabigirl
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 02:40 PM Response to Reply #74 |
146. this is a neocons wet dream |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rasputin1952
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 05:32 PM Response to Original message |
75. WTF...NO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
New Dawn
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 06:15 PM Response to Original message |
76. Not surprised in the slightest. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:42 PM Response to Reply #76 |
136. No difference between New Democrats and the DLC. The DLC subscribed to the PNAC memo. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
awoke_in_2003
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 06:21 PM Response to Original message |
77. NO... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Coco2
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 06:22 PM Response to Original message |
78. Holder is a protoge of Janet Reno, that he would destroy Miranda is no surprise. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KamaAina
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 09:59 PM Response to Original message |
89. Great to see him parroting Krauthammer's columns |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
merkins
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:29 PM Response to Original message |
92. "He who would trade freedom for safety deserves neither. " |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Sun May-09-10 10:33 PM Response to Original message |
93. Deleted message |
ShortnFiery
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 06:48 AM Response to Original message |
107. This is UN-SAT. eom |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DemoTex
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:18 PM Response to Original message |
131. Part-time Constitution on the fast-track to being obsolete. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bamacrat
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 12:47 PM Response to Original message |
137. What? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Mon May-10-10 01:02 PM Response to Original message |
139. And you wonder why Pres. Obama has not nominated liberals to the bench? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sun Jun 16th 2024, 02:54 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC