So, what's interesting?
- The EU is giving Iran ONE LAST STERN WARNING - then, I don't know, they may issue A STRONG ULTIMATUM - to be followed by AN ANGRY, EXASPERATED, VERY LAST TIME THEY'LL SAY IT - THEY MEAN IT THIS TIME!!!
European Union foreign ministers agreed on Saturday to give Iran two more weeks to clarify its stance on halting sensitive nuclear work after Tehran ignored a U.N. deadline to suspend uranium enrichment.
You know, the funny thing is, they're not even considering giving Iran a DEFINITE TIME-OUT - they just want to know what they're thinking about doing.
The United States said on Friday it was consulting European governments about possible sanctions against Iran for intransigence over its nuclear program, but the EU ah already signaled it wanted to see more dialogue with Tehran.
So, how come it takes 2 weeks to get a reply? And what makes them think they'll get an honest answer "we're working around the clock to make a bomb to kill J-O-O-O-O-O-O-S!!!!"? - British police have arrested 16 suspected of terrorist activities. What makes this so alarming is the following numbers:
Peter Clarke, head of Metropolitan Police anti-terror efforts, said police and intelligence agents were now attempting to track thousands of people believed to be directly or indirectly involved in terrorism, according to comments made public Friday, The Associated Press reports.
- Didn't the Andrew Johnson impeachment trial settle this issue?
Congressional Democrats are sharpening their attacks on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, with one senator proposing a resolution that would call on President Bush to sack the outspoken Pentagon chief.
Uh, Babs, it's the President's prerogative to have the advisors that he wants, whether or not the Congress approves. Check out the Constitution.
Sen. Barbara Boxer of California said Thursday that she wants to attach the measure to the defense appropriation bill coming to the Senate floor after lawmakers' August recess.
I may go back to bed. With luck, I'll find out that it's all been a dream.
1 comment:
No, the impeachment of Andrew Johnson didnt settle this issue [puts on aluminum foil pedant hat]
Johnson was impeached for violating the Tenure of Office Act, which said that Cabinet officers who needed the advice and consent of the Senate to get their jobs could only get the presidential boot with the advice and consent of the Senate. The act was an attempt by the Radical Republicans to get around a president they didnt have much use for and to keep Johnson from purging the Radicals' favorite Cabinet Secretary, Edwin Stanton. But Johnson fired Stanton anyway and then the country got the whole impeachment thing and Johnson hung onto his presidency by the vote of a single junior senator from Kansas. The Tenure of Office Act itself was repealed in 1887 at the insistence of President Cleveland. The whole concept of the Senate getting a say in how the President fires his own staff was shot down once and for all in Myers v. United States (1926), which said that since the executive branch was in essence an extension of Presidential powers, the President could hire or fire as he saw fit (civil service employees excepted, obviously)and that the Congress trying to get a say in such decisions amounted to the legislative branch trying to seize executive powers. I'm sure I'm mangling the details no end here, but the basic facts are correct. You can look it up; the Court's decision and information about the Tenure of Office Act is available online.
Post a Comment