in a 16-page order, entered today (PDF),
federal district court judge christine m.
arguello has ruled that dick cheney must
allow the plaintiff's lawyers to serve him
with a subpoena -- and eventually sit for a
sworn deposition -- about the events in beaver
creek, colorado, on the afternoon of june 16, 2006.
this is all about whether we, ordinary citizens of
these united states, do still possess the fundamental
right to dissent from our government's policies,
and petition it -- for the "redress of [our] grievances. . ."
. . .The cases do not involve, as the present case does, situations where the high-ranking official to be deposed was an eyewitness or physical participant in an event which precipitated the lawsuit.
Furthermore, and perhaps more obviously, Mr. Cheney is no longer a high-ranking government official, so the Court questions whether these cases are still applicable. In any event, the Court believes that Mr. Cheney should be deposed because he has relevant testimony that is unavailable from any other source in this case. . .
no doubt, cheney's lawyers will appeal
this order allowing the service, and
therefore, the sworn deposition of the dick.
so -- it will be a while, but he will
eventually have to answer -- under oath -- why
he ordered his guards to arrest steven howard
for simply expressing his first amendment pro-
tected views about the administration's policies
in iraq. one small one for the good guys.