Comments on: Corrupt Alcee Hastings in Charge of Intelligence Secrets?

By: Cracker

Cracker — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 03:39:24 +0000

If the criminal Hastings takes the Chair, Bush and his Administration should formally refuse to provide info to Congress until he is removed.

They would be justified in doing so, and for the country's safety, I hope Bush has the stones to "draw a line in the sand".

By: Hastings Supporters

Hastings Supporters — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 03:26:32 +0000

We are strong supporters of Alcee Hastings who has fought tirelessly to support the cause for America's working citizens. Is anyone knowledgeable enough to have read ALL the transcripts of the hearings on Hastings' conduct?

By: Californio

Californio — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 08:30:10 +0000

Read "The Jacksonian Tradition" - it spells it all out. Inside politics BS is great! I hope it energizes the people

By: jeff

jeff — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:01:56 +0000

So how did this sleazebag get elected in the first place? I mean, the Democrats must have known this guy was a sleazebag before they voted for him, right?

You're being ironical, right? Surely you remember Marion Barry? How about Cynthia McKinney? Or the swimmer himself, Ted Kenedy - killer of young women, collaborator with enemy states?

By: Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » It Isn’t A Surprise If You Expect It

Wed, 25 Oct 2006 03:11:16 +0000

[...] Mickey Kaus has a few additions: Point #13: Bury the news about the Secure Fence Act (if Bush doesn’t bury it first!), Point #14: Do not mention the name “Alcee Hastings,” and #15: ‘Keep Foley Alive!’ (though that may no longer be possible, even on NPR). [...]

By: PoliBlog: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » More Bad Poll Numbers for the GOP (Independents Edition)

Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:48:37 +0000

[...] The remarkable thing is that even in the midst of the political chaos, the Democrats have seemed unable to generate a positive reason to elect them. I wonder, also given the lack of enthusiasm for the Democrats coupled with the likely spectacle that will occur in the House with Chairman such as Conyers and Hastings as to how long the Democrats will be able to hold onto the House once they obtain it. Filed under: US Politics, 2006 Elections | |Send TrackBack [...]

By: Tano

Tano — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:49:27 +0000

Nice try Bandit,

I actually think it will take them about 12 years to show that, if they are as bad as the GOP. But I dont think they are really that bad.

By: Bandit

Bandit — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 22:05:14 +0000

For reasons laid out at length in the article, Pelosi is under enormous pressure from the CBC to elevate Hasting. Yet the idea of putting this sleazebag in a position where he would be privy to the most sensitive national security secrets is untenable.

Untenable to whom? The only good thing about having the Dems take control of congress is that it will take them about a half an hour to expose themselves as the power hungry criminals, traitors and lunatics that they are.

By: Kent G. Budge

Kent G. Budge — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 14:35:43 +0000

Alcee L. Hastings (Fla.), a senior Democrat on the intelligence committee, who was impeached and removed from his federal judgeship in 1989 for conspiring to take a $150,000 bribe and give light sentences to two convicted swindlers. So how did this sleazebag get elected in the first place? I mean, the Democrats must have known this guy was a sleazebag before they voted for him, right? And why didn't the House refuse to seat him?

By: Anderson

Anderson — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 18:58:25 +0000

I suspect that, if the Dems do retake the House, Pelosi's opinion on Hastings will change within moments of her election as Speaker.

The CBC will be able to cry all it wants, but they'd end up forfeiting their power by making Hastings their line in the sand.

By: jpe

jpe — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 15:00:22 +0000

To claim that Bush would be more reticent, one has to believe that Bush's hyper-secrecy is based on a pragmatic concern over leaks, rather than an ideological committment to a super-strong executive.

By: McGehee

McGehee — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 14:19:48 +0000

Unfortunately for the Democrats, that argument cuts against them too.

Which I gather is James' point.

By: Cernig

Cernig — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 13:04:54 +0000

James,

I agree entirely that those who have shown a previous prediliction for corruption have no business in public office.

But as for the Republicans building any kind of argument on that basis? It's impossible to build upward when your foundation is a swamp!

Regards, C

By: Sma' Talk Wi' T

Sma' Talk Wi' T — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Mark Foley Head Of The Child Protection Caucus?

By: Moonbattery

Moonbattery — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Hamas-affiliated CAIR. As noted earlier, Ellison's supporters interrupted his acceptance speech with jihadist cries of "Allahu Akbar!" I wonder if confirmed crook Alcee Hastings will find a place for Ellison on the Intelligence Committee.