Democrat commits obstruction of justice- gets impeached

 

Republican commits obstruction of justice- convicted by the courts, but let off the hook by the President.

 

Clinton commits perjury and obstruction of justice and gets off the hook.

 

Libby (pending appeal) commits obstruction of justice and gets to be a convicted felon.

 

Try to keep it straight.

 

Nice reach. It's funny seeing you try and compare one person lying about his sex life (which really isn't anyone's business to begin with) to Libby's ordeal. Real similar.

 

The Clinton case and the Libby case are very similar. Both are important to political partisans, both are offshoots of other investigations, and neither represents charges for the alleged crime originally investigated. Also, both are obstruction of justice cases.

Democrat commits obstruction of justice- gets impeached

 

Republican commits obstruction of justice- convicted by the courts, but let off the hook by the President.

 

Clinton commits perjury and obstruction of justice and gets off the hook.

 

Libby (pending appeal) commits obstruction of justice and gets to be a convicted felon.

 

Try to keep it straight.

 

Nice reach. It's funny seeing you try and compare one person lying about his sex life (which really isn't anyone's business to begin with) to Libby's ordeal. Real similar.

Yeah, two cases involving perjury and obstruction of justice.

 

Apples and oranges. :lol :lol

Jonathan Pollard's sentence deserves to be commuted moreso than this scumbag's.

 

If I'm ever President of the United States, the only time Pollard would hear 'pardon' from me would be if I just farted.

 

Libby was not pardoned. The President of the United States used the barest fraction of his power to modify the man's sentence.

 

Democrat commits obstruction of justice- gets impeached

 

Republican commits obstruction of justice- convicted by the courts, but let off the hook by the President.

 

Clinton commits perjury and obstruction of justice and gets off the hook.

 

Libby (pending appeal) commits obstruction of justice and gets to be a convicted felon.

 

Try to keep it straight.

clinton got head...libby put someone else's head on the chopping block...get it straight

Yeah, two cases involving perjury and obstruction of justice.

 

Apples and oranges. :lol :lol

 

Obviously I was referring to the content portion, but thanks for being your typical douche bag self! :thumbup

 

Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice for covering up something that as it turns out wasn't a crime.

 

The "No Underlying Crime" defense has been used over and over again and it is completely bogus.

 

To start, there is an overlying crime, which blows that out of proportion. He lied to the FBI, and was put on trial. He was found GUILTY by a jury. GUILTY by a republican judge. GUILTY in the eyes of 2 republican appeals officers, and was days from jail.

 

And just for fun, if thats the only card you can play, name clintons underlying crime?

 

Getting some from a fat woman?

Democrat commits obstruction of justice- gets impeached

 

Republican commits obstruction of justice- convicted by the courts, but let off the hook by the President.

 

Clinton commits perjury and obstruction of justice and gets off the hook.

 

Libby (pending appeal) commits obstruction of justice and gets to be a convicted felon.

 

Try to keep it straight.

 

Nice reach. It's funny seeing you try and compare one person lying about his sex life (which really isn't anyone's business to begin with) to Libby's ordeal. Real similar.

Yeah, two cases involving perjury and obstruction of justice.

 

Apples and oranges. :lol :lol

let me ask you this...can you lie about different subject matters? can you obstruct justice in several different ways? oh yeah...which is more important...a blowjob or a human life?

Perjury is perjury.

 

But I guess not when it fits your political views.

...and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States

/thread

 

 

 

Wrong. Not "end of thread". Who our President chooses to pardon (and who he has failed to pardon) needs to be discusseed (especially on a discusson board).

 

Its what makes this country so great.

 

Sincerely,

 

A fellow Republican.

And just for fun, if thats the only card you can play, name clintons underlying crime?

 

Getting some from a fat woman?

 

I didn't play the underlying crime card. After such a defense was made for Clinton ("It was just a little head from a moped!"), I merely pointed out that in both cases the lack of an underlying crime is present. Also in both cases it was clear to me that the investigation was a waste of effort and money and ranged far afield of its original purpose.

 

let me ask you this...can you lie about different subject matters? can you obstruct justice in several different ways? oh yeah...which is more important...a blowjob or a human life?

 

I'd rather have the blow job. Seriously though, there was no human life at stake. At the time of the Libby interview it was public knowledge that no crime was committed, it appears that the prosecutor was just looking for another conviction for the ol' record.

Libby was convicted by a panel of his peers. Clinton was acquited by a Republican controlled Senate not impeaching him.

 

And I love the argument of how flimsy the case was. I think there are about a 10s of 1000s of people in prison that would like some of you to contact them immediately with your deepest concerns about the problems with the America justice system.

 

But hey, Bush is going to go down as the worst president in the history of the country. The guy is a walking talking joke.

...and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States

/thread

 

 

 

Wrong. Not "end of thread". Who our President chooses to pardon (and who he has failed to pardon) needs to be discusseed (especially on a discusson board).

 

Its what makes this country so great.

 

Sincerely,

 

A fellow Republican.

It does when people are appalled that he did this or when they use a title such as 'Bush Makes a Joke of Court System'.

But hey, Bush is going to go down as the worst president in the history of the country. The guy is a walking talking joke.

Not that I disagree that it could happen (even though its never a difinitive answer and who cares, really) but how many times has that been said when a president is currently in office? A lot. Pretty useless.

...and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States

/thread

 

 

 

Wrong. Not "end of thread". Who our President chooses to pardon (and who he has failed to pardon) needs to be discusseed (especially on a discusson board).

 

Its what makes this country so great.

 

Sincerely,

 

A fellow Republican.

It does when people are appalled that he did this or when they use a title such as 'Bush Makes a Joke of Court System'.

 

Actually, from what i have heard so far, the commute is different than the pardon. It usually takes special deliberation fomr the judicial system, which was skipped. It isn;t as smooth as the pardon, i'll research the specifics soon, but its almost time for the MARLINS!

...still within his powers as President (more like Emperor Bush lolz!), which is what I was getting at from the get go.

scooter f***ing libby doesn't have to go to jail for two and a half years.

 

BFD.

Clinton's questioning was on stuff not even remotely germane to the case on hand and led to the death of no one.

Libby's, on the other hand, was, and the original crime probably led to the deaths of some of our best CIA NOCs who probably would be REALLY important in Iran right now (probably b/c they were there at the time Brewster Jennings was unmasked by our own government).

and good lord that's a lot of obfuscating.

But hey, Bush is going to go down as the worst president in the history of the country. The guy is a walking talking joke.

Not that I disagree that it could happen (even though its never a difinitive answer and who cares, really) but how many times has that been said when a president is currently in office? A lot. Pretty useless.

 

Maybe so, but it depends on how the war in Iraq is seen by history.

But hey, Bush is going to go down as the worst president in the history of the country. The guy is a walking talking joke.

Not that I disagree that it could happen (even though its never a difinitive answer and who cares, really) but how many times has that been said when a president is currently in office? A lot. Pretty useless.

 

Maybe so, but it depends on how the war in Iraq is seen by history.

No doubt and that is at minimum a decade away (ending of US forces there, what Iraq becomes, etc.) and that is being generous.

 

Plus I think the whole Presidential legacy thing is somewhat a joke. Most of us hardly remember or hold those out of office accountable for many of the policies or actions they carried out during their term(s).

 

See: Carter, Jimmy; etc.

But hey, Bush is going to go down as the worst president in the history of the country. The guy is a walking talking joke.

Not that I disagree that it could happen (even though its never a difinitive answer and who cares, really) but how many times has that been said when a president is currently in office? A lot. Pretty useless.

 

Maybe so, but it depends on how the war in Iraq is seen by history.

No doubt and that is at minimum a decade away.

 

Plus I think the whole Presidential legacy thing is somewhat a joke. Most of us hardly remember or hold those out of office accountable for many of the policies or actions they carried out during their term(s).

 

See: Carter, Jimmy; etc.

 

On the contrary, I think Carter's legacy still haunts democrats. The failure to be aggressive when American lives were on the line set dems back 12 years from the White House.

 

I do think Bush's legacy will recover in the eyes of history because Hussein was a terrible person, but I still think he is a bad president. He allowed himself to be stubborn to the point of foolishness. That's just me though.

Sorry, but Bush has made the country far weaker than it was when he left office, and it wasn't out of his control. The only thing in his Presidency that was out of his control was 9/11. No other President, not Carter, not Buchanan, and not Nixon, can beat him in sheer incompetence and idiocy.

No doubt and that is at minimum a decade away.

 

Plus I think the whole Presidential legacy thing is somewhat a joke. Most of us hardly remember or hold those out of office accountable for many of the policies or actions they carried out during their term(s).

 

See: Carter, Jimmy; etc.

 

On the contrary, I think Carter's legacy still haunts democrats. The failure to be aggressive when American lives were on the line set dems back 12 years from the White House.

 

I do think Bush's legacy will recover in the eyes of history because Hussein was a terrible person, but I still think he is a bad president. He allowed himself to be stubborn to the point of foolishness. That's just me though.

 

'Most of us' was used to not mean people like yourself who are intelligent and politically motivated and aware. :thumbup

 

I just think we've had a lot of bad presidents and as a public we've rather quickly 'forgotten' and moved on. I mean, that is just American society and I happen to think it's a good trait to have. Learn from mistakes, but look ahead as well.

 

I definitely agree with you that Presidents try to create and leave a 'legacy' however foolish and misguided it is to try and force that.

 

As for Bush, I'm not pleased by his 2nd term. I agree with some of his premises and ideas but the execution on many of those has been awful. Plus, the biggest 'folly' to me as someone who voted for him is the fact that social security got totally brushed to the side. A little talked about issue that absolutely burns me.

Sorry, but Bush has made the country far weaker than it was when he left office, and it wasn't out of his control. The only thing in his Presidency that was out of his control was 9/11. No other President, not Carter, not Buchanan, and not Nixon, can beat him in sheer incompetence and idiocy.

You should make that in to a rubber stamp for yourself.

 

That post has little to do with what was being discussed - legacies.

 

Carter isn't being burned at the stake for his role in the rise of Robert Mugabe's reign in Zimbabwe.

 

I think 'legacies' or the 'dirty after taste' of the previous president goes away slowly with the succeeding president's term.

No doubt and that is at minimum a decade away.

 

Plus I think the whole Presidential legacy thing is somewhat a joke. Most of us hardly remember or hold those out of office accountable for many of the policies or actions they carried out during their term(s).

 

See: Carter, Jimmy; etc.

 

On the contrary, I think Carter's legacy still haunts democrats. The failure to be aggressive when American lives were on the line set dems back 12 years from the White House.

 

I do think Bush's legacy will recover in the eyes of history because Hussein was a terrible person, but I still think he is a bad president. He allowed himself to be stubborn to the point of foolishness. That's just me though.

 

'Most of us' was used to not mean people like yourself who are intelligent and politically motivated and aware. :thumbup

 

I just think we've had a lot of bad presidents and as a public we've rather quickly 'forgotten' and moved on. I mean, that is just American society and I happen to think it's a good trait to have. Learn from mistakes, but look ahead as well.

 

I definitely agree with you that Presidents try to create and leave a 'legacy' however foolish and misguided it is to try and force that.

 

As for Bush, I'm not pleased by his 2nd term. I agree with some of his premises and ideas but the execution on many of those has been awful. Plus, the biggest 'folly' to me as someone who voted for him is the fact that social security got totally brushed to the side. A little talked about issue that absolutely burns me.

 

General history wise, it's true that it will be forgetten. But yea, I was thinking legacy wise.

At the very least, this President has done more to damage free speech and Constitutional rights than the last 42 before him combined.

 

The Patriot Act alone is bad enough, but he couldn't stop there...

John Adams suspended the First Amendment, guy. Woodrow Wilson threw people in jail for criticizing the government. Let's also not forget FDR's Japanese Internment camps.

 

Think before you speak.

John Adams suspended the First Amendment, guy. Woodrow Wilson threw people in jail for criticizing the government. Let's also not forget FDR's Japanese Internment camps.

 

Think before you speak.

Adams wasn't able to get away with that for long.

 

I have a feeling that Wilson was doing that during a war, although it's still ridiculous.

 

Yes, FDR's actions in that case were bad, but it wasn't his idea. There was national hysteria and political pressure to get him to do something about the perceived Japanese threat. Once again, this was during a major war.