Reply With Quote
Hopefully it isn't Chertoff. Amusing he was even considered from a political POV.
Drudge says that an announcement naming Ted Olsen as Attorney General is imminent. An interesting move, if true -- Olsen was SG on 9/11 (as we probably all remember) and is undoubtedly among the foremost conseravative legal minds in the country today. I had thought that SG Paul Clement would be a logical choice to succeed Gonzalez, but Olsen might be somewhat less controversial and even more logical, I suppose. It makes sense that the Administration might prefer that General Clement remain its primary advocate before the Supreme Court -- something that wouldn't happen if he was elevated to Attorney General. I suspect that the bigger issues for the Administration from a legal standpoint are its defenses of previously-enacted policies that are currently being litigated; the development of additional policies seems less likely to be important going forward.
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 09-11-2007 at 09:37 AM.
Hopefully it isn't Chertoff. Amusing he was even considered from a political POV.
You know, I heard that but, I don't recall ever seeing it forwarded by the White House. On whose list was Chertoff?
Chertoff is actually qualified to be AG. I would favor that move if only to get someone like Frances Townsend to head DHS. I imagine the Bush administration wasn't looking forward to confirmation hearings for Chertoff.
The morning that the world learned of Gonzalez's resignation, Chertoff was an immediate speculative choice to become AG -- I don't think there's ever been any sort of official suggestion that Chertoff has ever really been considered for the position, though.
I can't see that Chertoff would be an expedient political or practical choice, either. Both General Clement and Olsen are much better possibilities IMO.
No one is going to pick on Olsen during a confirmation hearing.
I can't believe I miss the dulcet tones of John Ashcroft.
I agree.
There would also be some symbolic sentiment for announcing the appointment today, since it is the 6th anniversary of his wife's death on board American flight 77.
So, there really were people on that cruise missile that hit the Pentagon? [/Nbadan-boutons-crazies, et. al.]
No, of course not!!! She was among those who were systematically executed on board the plane while at some random military base in Kansas.
There are random military bases in Kansas??!!??!!No, of course not!!! She was among those who were systematically executed on board the plane while at some random military base in Kansas.
^^Fort Random? Camp Random, or Random AFB. LOL
Where else do you think they keep and maintain all of those black helicopters, Yonivore?
Sheesh!
Area 51?
While we're on the topic, there was more bad news for Nbadan and the rest of the truthers concerning one of the more enduring myths of the 9/11; the rapid collapse of the Twin Towers after being hit by the commercial jets six years ago today.
The conspiracy theorists insist that a self-initiated collapse could not have occurred, and even if it did, it could not have progressed so rapidly. Their theory has government agents spending two weeks in the building, planting explosives without disturbing the offices in the building, without being observed, and waiting for that special day when a couple of planes hitting the towers would give them an excuse to demolish them.
Instead, their theories on the impossibility of collapse just got demolished at Cambridge:
Someone call Nbadan! Can he say "residual capacity" 110 times in nine seconds? I'll grab the egg timer.The study by a Cambridge University engineer demonstrates that once the collapse of the twin towers began, it was destined to be rapid and total. ...
Dr Seffen was able to calculate the "residual capacity" of the undamaged building: that is, simply speaking, the ability of the undamaged structure to resist or comply with collapse.
His calculations suggest the residual capacity of the north and south towers was limited, and that once the collapse was set in motion, it would take only nine seconds for the building to go down.
This is just a little longer than a free-falling coin, dropped from the top of either tower, would take to reach the ground.
As anyone who has read the Popular Mechanics site or their more detailed book already understands, the towers collapsed for obvious reasons: two very large commercial jets struck them. The evidence of our eyes was clear enough for the vast majority of the people who watched it. The collapse of the buildings came as a shock, as no one had ever seen a skyscraper fall like that -- but none had ever been hit with a Boeing commercial jets with full fuel tanks, either.
Engineers have told us for years that no conspiracy was needed to explain the collapse. Burning jet fuel created a firestorm that weakened the steel trusses of the floors above the impact site, and that led to the collapse of the upper structure onto the lower portion. That hit with enough force to start a progressive collapse, which as we saw took almost no time to complete. Dr. Seffen has now supplied us with the mathematics of the collapse, answering the silly free-fall argument offered in this and other forums, but NIST had already done much of this work before now.
Will this convince the Truthers? Of course not.
People who think that Galileo's great contribution to science was postulating the world was round have no real affinity for science or research, but instead for imaginary cabals, innuendo, and paranoia. The truth is out there -- at Popular Mechanics, the Journal of Engineering Mechanics, and NIST. It's not in Alex Jones' world.
Come on -- everyone knows that Area 51 is the place where the military holds all of the alien spacecraft that this nation has captured and it's in Nevada. Black ops like surveillance helicopters and systematic executions are carried out in other places, like Kansas. Do try to keep up!!
Just don't let it happen again. A disdain for "the truth" doesn't change it.
And, in the end, I believe that Ted Olsen would be a good choice for AG.
A highball clink to that!
But, just so I can repoliticize the discussion...David Petraeus was a good choice for leading the MNF in Iraq, 8 months ago.
My how quickly good people go bad.
David Petreaus was a good choice for planning the war in 2001.
Apparently Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, et. al. don't share our esteem for Mr. Olsen.
I'm shocked!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
