<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>NewsTrust - Most Recent Stories</title>
    <copyright>Copyright (c) 2008 NewsTrust</copyright>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:05:38 -0800</lastBuildDate>
    
    <link>http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw/top_stories</link>
    <description>NewsTrust helps people find good journalism online. We rate the news based on quality, not just popularity. Our social news network features top-rated stories from hundreds of mainstream and independent sources. Find out more at http://www.newstrust.net/</description>
    <item>
      <title>Does It Matter that the Constitution Doesn't Say &quot;The Separation of Church and State&quot;?</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2010 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3824398/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3824398/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By Vikram David Amar, Alan Brownstein - Oct. 22 (Opinion) - The phrase &quot;the separation of church and state&quot; is a shorthand description of a much more complicated interpretation of the constitutional text. As such, whether it appears literally in the Constitution's text is not terribly important. What is important is whether this metaphor accurately captures the meaning of the constitutional guarantee of the First Amendment.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3824398?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.3 average&lt;/a&gt; (not enough reviews) - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3824398?ref=rss&quot;&gt;See&amp;nbsp;Review&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3824398/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Freedom of Speech</category>
      <category>U.S. Constitution</category>
      <category>Religion and Politics</category>
      <category>Church and State</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Politics of Excusing Torture In The Name of National Security</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/42604/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/42604/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By John Dean - May. 15 (Editorial) - Politicians come and go, but the folks who actually run the government have an agenda of their own, including covering their mistakes.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/42604?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.9 average&lt;/a&gt; (not enough reviews) - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/42604?ref=rss&quot;&gt;See&amp;nbsp;Reviews&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/42604/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Torture</category>
      <category>National Security</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Evidence Establishes, without Question, that Republican Rule Is Dangerous</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/30153/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/30153/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By John W. Dean - Oct. 31 (Opinion) - Republicans rule, rather than govern, when they are in power by imposing their authoritarian conservative philosophy on everyone, as their answer for everything. This works for them because their interest is in power, and in what it can do for those who think as they do.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/30153?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.8 average&lt;/a&gt; (not enough reviews) - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/30153?ref=rss&quot;&gt;See&amp;nbsp;Review&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/30153/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Presidential Election 2008</category>
      <category>Republicans</category>
      <category>John McCain</category>
      <category>Obama Administration</category>
      <category>Sarah Palin</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Judge Bates Slams the Bush White House's Claims of Congressional Immunity</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/24484/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/24484/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By John W. Dean - Aug. 08 (News Analysis) - Without reaching the question of whether the president might claim executive privilege in this instance, Judge Bates issued a closely reasoned and detailed opinion legally slamming the White House's claims. The ruling is instructive. Not surprisingly, Georgetown law professor Marty Lederman, a popular legal blogger, openly praised the ruling, calling the opinion a landmark. Rather than rehash Lederman's on the mark analysis of the Bates ruling, I will instead focus here on its implications.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/24484?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.0 average&lt;/a&gt; (not enough reviews) - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/24484?ref=rss&quot;&gt;See&amp;nbsp;Review&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/24484/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Bush Administration</category>
      <category>Law Enforcement</category>
      <category>Law</category>
      <category>U.S. Congress</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Congressman Kucinich's Impeachment Resolution, the Parallel to Nixon, and Why Even Nixon's Defenders Finally Abandoned Him</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/23835/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/23835/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By John Dean - Jul. 25 (Opinion) - After the smoking gun tape surfaced, none of these various defenses and strategies were relevant, because no member was prepared to defend Nixon's obvious lies about Watergate. As today's hearings continue, it will be interesting to see if any members of Congress are prepared to defend Bush and Cheney's lies about taking the nation to war in Iraq. Disturbingly, it has been clear for some time that Bush and Cheney did indeed lie - and that their lies fit within a clear, extensive pattern of abuse of power. Yet condemnation from Congressional Republicans has yet to be heard. Sadly, it seems possible that today's Republicans -- unlike Wiggins and the other Nixon apologists who changed their minds when confronted with proven presidential lies -- have no moral lines that they will draw.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/23835?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.1 average&lt;/a&gt; (not enough reviews) - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/23835?ref=rss&quot;&gt;See&amp;nbsp;Review&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/23835/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Bush Administration</category>
      <category>Law Enforcement</category>
      <category>U.S. Constitution</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Barack Obama and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments</title>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/22680/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/22680/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By John Dean - Jul. 01 (Opinion) - Not everyone is aware of the statement that Obama made to Will Bunch, or the reality that there is no immunity from criminal prosecution under the FISA amendments. In fact, it is not clear if Senator Obama himself is aware of the limits of the immunity in the FISA amendments. However, if Obama is a man of his word, he should explain to his Senate colleagues that when elected President, he will &quot;immediately&quot; request that his attorney general investigate the criminal activity of the Bush Administration in violating the FISA statute, along with the telecommunications firms who aided and abetted these violations.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/22680?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.2 average&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/22680?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4&amp;nbsp;Reviews&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/22680/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Domestic Spying</category>
      <category>Presidential Election 2008</category>
      <category>Obama Administration</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Alberto Gonzales Displays Contempt for Congress, And Perhaps the Department of Justice As Well</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2007 10:03:17 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/8080/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/8080/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By John W. Dean - May. 18 (Opinion) - Congress could hold Gonzales in contempt by a simple majority vote (and that would not be difficult to obtain, given the feelings in both chambers about this Attorney General). It could hold him in contempt for his failure to respond to the subpoena he virtually ignored, or for his lies to the Senate Judiciary Committee....Congress could --taking a page from Gonzales's playbook -- send fifteen plainclothes Capitol Hill police officers to arrest the Attorney General and take him into custody. Either the House or Senate, alone, would have the power to hold him until the end of the 110th Congress. In truth, a majority of either chamber of Congress has more power than a president, the Department of Justice, and federal courts to take summary actions against those who refuse to honor its processes.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/8080?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.2 average&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/8080?ref=rss&quot;&gt;6&amp;nbsp;Reviews&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/8080/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Bush Administration</category>
      <category>U.S. Attorney Firings</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Refocusing the Impeachment Movement on Administration Officials Below the President and Vice-President:</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:47:25 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3016/toolbar?ref=rss</guid>
      <link>http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3016/toolbar?ref=rss</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/sources/findlaw?ref=rss&quot;&gt;FindLaw&lt;/a&gt; - By John W. Dean - Dec. 15 (Opinion) - Lowering the aim of an impeachment effort to focus on those who have aided and abetted, or directly engaged in, the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, would have all the positives, and none of the negatives, of going after Bush and Cheney. It would not be an effort to overturn the 2004 election, but rather to rid the government of those who have participated, along with Bush and Cheney, in abuses and misuses of power; indeed, many among them have actually encouraged Bush and Cheney to undertake the offensive activities.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3016?ref=rss&quot;&gt;4.7 average&lt;/a&gt; (not enough reviews) - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3016?ref=rss&quot;&gt;See&amp;nbsp;Review&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/stories/3016/toolbar?ref=rss&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Bush Administration</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

