GOP leader presses indicted congressman to resign

With any luck he can share a cell with congressman Jefferson, that way they can cover each others backs, or whatever else that may need to be protected.

I am shocked, shocked I tell you!

Gotta love those family values Republicans. This, prostitutes, molesting underage male pages, adultry. Thank goodness that immoral Bill Clinton is out of the White House!

Another crooked John McCain/Bush Republican political pal bites the dust.

Pass the popcorn, Donny B!

Correction: It is not true that Doolittle "resigned his seat." Like Renzi, he announced he would not run for reelection, but he continues to remain in office.

molesting underage male pages,
Posted by: Paul | February 22, 2008 5:53 PM

Paul : When Barney Franks was censored by congress he promised he wouldn't do that any more. He must be up to his old tricks again, what do you think Paul.

"THE BOEHNER SPEAKS"

A YEAR LATER, AND FOUR SCORES AGO!

A YEAR LATER, AFTER GRANDSTANDING IN FRONT OF GEORGE BUSH. RICK RICK HE'S OUR MAN! VOTE FOR RICK BECAUSE HE'S FROM FLORIDA, I MEAN, VIRGINIA, I MEAN, THE GRAND CANYON.

A YEAR LATER, AND ANOTHER ONE GOES HOME TO MAMA! A YEAR LATER, STILL NO RELIEF FOR "QWEST" COMMUNICATIONS "COMMERCE CHAIRPERSON"

A YEAR LATER, AND ANOTHER GOP CHEERLEARDER CAUGHT WITH HIS HAND IN THE "I BROKE THE LAW" GOP COOKIE JAR. TAP TAP, MOVE OVER!

BUT THE SURGE IS WORKING!
AND THE "FREEDOM IS ON THE MARCH"

FOUR YEARS LATER, TOM DELAY STILL THE "HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER" FRONT RUNNER! OH I FORGOT HE GO STRAIGHT TO "CRAWFORD RANCH" PASS! I DON'T KNOW JACK EITHER PASS!

NOW WHAT DOES THE BLUNT OF CAPITOL HILL HAVE TO SAY!
WE WERE SUPPOSE TO VOTE AT 11:30 NOT 10:45!

I DON'T RECALL!

Don, isn't it something that Paul and his putrid ilk make a bigger deal out of Foley, who NEVER had sex with a page, then they do with Gerry Studds DID have sex with a male page or that Barney Franks had a male prostitute ring working out of his condo?

Also, isn't indicted Dem Congressman William Jefferson still in Congress? And isn't he still chairing a committee?

I love the rabid right. They hold up franks and jefferson against how many republicans to date? I thought the republicans would take a stand against corruption...not a wide stance.

John D.,

"Putrid ilk."

Dude, YOU ARE NUTS.

John D,

Back to your glass box. Practice your French miming.

Ohhh Doug, just look at all the crap being dished day in and day out by your buddies. Sorry, but it's pretty damn putrid. As a military man, I'd think you would be pretty steamed with all the nonsense regarding McCain???

John D.,

You don't get it.

Many of your very personal mis-labeling of entire classes of people is/are way over the top.

You will do yourself and your idealogy a favor when you come the understand the concept of disagreeing without being disagreeable.

Si se get a grip, git 'er done.

John D., the consummate Grand Old Pedophiles apologist. He'd defend the owners of this establishments too, if they were Repugnicans:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvLDFtaL5HI

Do you know how foolish you all look by taking sides? The GOP is rife with crooks and queers but the Dems have their share. They all went for this slam-dunk invasion almost 5 years ago and none of them have the courage to stand up for us and our Constitution and impeach the big crooks at the top (Bush & Cheney). I say throw them all out and start over!

The guy should obviously step down. But from what I read it doesn't sound like what he did is much worse than what Harry Reid did with his land deals and he's still Senate Majority Leader.

There certainly are partisan scandals out there. Tom DeLay had all the charges against him thrown out of court but his leadership position and his seat are now in democratic hands, so the campaign of Mr. Earle was "successful" from a partisan standpoint. Hard to tell what's the truth when politics is involved.

I love how the right defends law and order. Headlines: Republican caught in corruption....Don B and John Ds' answer? Franks and Jefferson
Headlines: Bush tells 958 lies about Iraq....Don B and John Ds' answer? Franks and Jefferson

I love how the right defends law and order. Headlines: Republican caught in corruption....Don B and John Ds' answer? Franks and Jefferson
Headlines: Bush tells 958 lies about Iraq....Don B and John Ds' answer? Franks and Jefferson

Posted by: bill r. | February 22, 2008 10:24 PM

bill: you may need a new pair of glasses,
my first post mentions both Mr. Renzi and Mr. Jefferson, I only mentioned Barney Franks because another one of you kool-aid drinkers infered that a Repub. was with a page, For the record Mr Studds and Mr. Franks took a pinch for that. Don't lower yourself to John Everdumbs level with your inaccurate postings.

billr. Were these famous Republicans lying too ?

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!

Doug, you still don't get it. Your idol, John E., understands the concept of agreeing to disagree. I also remember many over the top comments by yourself too.
Hey, all I do is throw it right back at your buds. I also can point to occasions in which I've taken Paulo to task for some of his comments. Can you say the same about John E, for instance?

And Bill R., again, the Tribune is making a big deal out of a little known Congressman from Arizona. Just because he is a Republican. Sorry, but the Trib does do the same for the corrupt Dems. When Harry Reid gets whacked for shady land deals we get Frank James using Harry Reid press releases to clear Harry Reid's name. William Jefferson hardly merits a sniff from the Tribune. Rick Renzi? Huge attention.

Some how some way you know this is all Bill Clinton's fault

Ho Hum. Another Republic party crook. This is surprising?

Show me an honest Republic. Now that would be news.

Don B...Which one of those listed ordered the invasion of Iraq?

There's been a decidely leftwing tilt at The Swamp in the last few weeks. All the headlines seem to present Republicans in a bad light.

Things were much more balanced here during the GOP primaries. Now that McCain has won, all of a sudden The Swamp seems to have become bogged down in typical liberal MSM Republican bashing.

And I say this as a independent-minded libertarian. I'm not even a McCain supporter, and I can see a hard turn to anti-McCain/anti-GOP here on this Blog.

Swamp editors, Please get back to the Center.

Don B...Which one of those listed ordered the invasion of Iraq?

Posted by: bill r. | February 23, 2008 8:19 AM

That would of been the bi-partisan U.S. Congress bill r.

That would of been the bi-partisan U.S. Congress bill r.

Posted by: Don B. | February 23, 2008 8:54 AM

No sir, they ordered nothing. Theyn inadvisedly gave the President of the United States the authority to make that decision.

Oh and John D, William Jefferson is NOT still chairing a committee. Do you ever get the facts right?

You guys who try to defend this crook by bringing to attention other lying crooks belittle your party and your own selves. If you dare make excuses for such criminal behavior, you appear to condone it. Criminals of any party belong in jail. No excuses. This crook won't find himself in the minority when he goes. Most republicans are crooks, or vice versa.