This comment stuck out for me like a sore thumb.
Or rather, like a gangrenous thumb that had been removed by a rusty nail file, cleansed by New York harbor water...

The FBI has reported that the VAST MAJORITY of wiretapping efforts have been fruitless and pointless.
"But virtually all of them (wire-tapping efforts), current and former officials say, led to dead ends or innocent Americans."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/17/politics/17spy.html

And now Gonzalez is claiming that we "did not eavesdrop on innocent Americans"???
So every single wire-tap has involved a guilty American???
@%#@#$

And of course, Gonzalez was not sworn in for his testimony...
We swore in baseball players for testimony to Congress, but for a president wire-tapping U.S. citizens, THAT doesn't need swearing in...

You know, after the 2000 and 2004 election I would get frustrated with the people who claimed Bush "is not my president".
Now I can't help but think (on some levels) they may have been the sanest people in the country...

Judges on Secretive Panel Speak Out on Spy Program
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: March 29, 2006
WASHINGTON, March 28 — Five former judges on the nation's most secretive court, including one who resigned in apparent protest over President Bush's domestic eavesdropping, urged Congress on Tuesday to give the court a formal role in overseeing the surveillance program.
Judge James Robertson quit the intelligence court just days after the spy program was disclosed.
In a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the secretive court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, several former judges who served on the panel also voiced skepticism at a Senate hearing about the president's constitutional authority to order wiretapping on Americans without a court order. They also suggested that the program could imperil criminal prosecutions that grew out of the wiretaps.
Judge Harold A. Baker, a sitting federal judge in Illinois who served on the intelligence court until last year, said the president was bound by the law "like everyone else." If a law like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is duly enacted by Congress and considered constitutional, Judge Baker said, "the president ignores it at the president's peril."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/29/po...th&oref=slogin

Today is March 30, 2006
329 days since congressional request for investigation.
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

WTF

SNAFU

PUMP THIS ACROSS THE WEB!