“A top Senate Democrat said Sunday that President Bush should be held responsible if he violated the law in authorizing the domestic spy program.
But Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said it is too early to tell if either censure or impeachment of Bush would be appropriate.
“I can’t rule anything out until the investigation is complete. I don’t want to prejudge it,” said Durbin, the Senate’s No. 2 Democrat. “But if this president or any president violates the law, he has to be held accountable. “It’s valuable that Senator Feingold is moving us forward to finally be a catalyst to have the kind of hearings and the kind of deliberations as to what lies behind this warrantless wiretap situation,” said Durbin, calling the overall inquiries so far by the Republican-controlled Senate inadequate.
“We have a responsibility to ask the hard questions, to find out what the nature of the program is and whether the president violated the law.” Durbin said. Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Durbin said he so far has not heard a valid legal justification for the spy program that was put in place after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.”-from the AP story.
Crooks and Liars has some video, too.
Update [2006-3-19 22:15:59 by howieinseattle]: FAUX News now has a partial transcript up.
never have I found FOX news to be quite so entertaining as these videos today. I sense a shift in the paradigm. Let’s hope it gains steam!!!
I thought the same thing when all the DSM stuff came out. So, I am taking a wait and see attitude.
we’ll get an honest, fair and thorough investigation…he’s far more optimistic than I am…
Basically what Levin’s office said.
Legal justification my ass. That is not the point Question is whether Bush violated the existing laws, which we know he did, since he admited it.
Durbin is pretty much saying the same thing you are, only he is employing the indirect language of the Beltway. This language aims to avoid offending people with whom you may have to do business in the future.
Thanks for the clarification. I knoew I was missing something ( I haven’t been able to see the clip since it stops every few seconds)
Guess he has been getting a lot of phone calls last week pressuring him (and Dems) to do something.
Your post last week about 20 Dems supporting Clinton’s censure was great and very timely!
thanks
The Bush admin is going to find a way to spin this into being a legal program with as much time as they have to work it.
What would be illegal about private security companies performing a massive investigation to develop threat assessment profiles on all citizens?
Why either or?
The Senate can Censure him.
The House can Impeach him.
Then he can be removed from office in disgrace.
Now that’s the sort of trifecta I think we should all aspire to.
If you read his words, Durbin is leaving all options on the table.
I read his words and actually watched the interview. And they don’t contradict my remark. Please note that I was responding to the bolded quote and your headline.
My remark was tongue and cheek anyway – since I can safely bet that none of the above will actually occur.
I agree with you that it doesn’t have to be “either or.” It could be one or the other or both. I still don’t think he ruled that option out. I hope you are wrong that neither will ever occur.