Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Not really. He embraces crime on a regular basis.One would think from the reaction that this is the first time a president ever intervened in a criminal case
One would think from the reaction that this is the first time a president ever intervened in a criminal case
The silver lining, if you can call it that at this point, is that Bush has handed the White House over to the Democratic Party. There will be no contest now.
Republicans cannot, with any credibility, claim to be anything close to a "law and order party."
The only label they can legitimately claim now is "Soft On Crime."
All I know is that your prez proved he is soft on crime yesterday.What would you call the Democrats who posterboy Clinton issued far more pardons than Bush and for far more egregious acts?
I guess the Democrats are softer on crime than the Republicans.
What ongoing investigation are you talking about?For the sake of discussion, could you list some instances where a president has commuted the sentence, or given pardon, to a figure that plays a central role in an ongoing investigation into the administration?
The closest example I can think of is Nixon firing his Attorney General.
What would you call the Democrats who posterboy Clinton issued far more pardons than Bush and for far more egregious acts?
I guess the Democrats are softer on crime than the Republicans.
These Republicans don't care about justice, or freedom, or the prosperity of the American people. Only about their own power and the prosperity of their rich friends. Remember everyone, this is not just about Bush. This is about his entire party, they refuse to denounce him and continue to stand by him. The party as a whole, at a national level, stands shoulder to shoulder with Bush, to blame for this tragedy of a presidency.
What ongoing investigation are you talking about?
Most.
Corrupt.
Administration.
Ever.
And If I provide a case where the President issued a pardon to a fugure that played a central role in an investigation into the administration, would you then confess that this case with Bush and Libby is an acceptable use of Presidential power? I don't want to do the research just to have you poo-poo it as not relevant.My bad, that was probably just wishful thinking. I thought that the office of special prosecutor was still investigating.
But my core question remains. could you list some instances where a president has commuted the sentence, or given pardon, to a figure that plays a central role in an investigation into the administration?
Silly Rabbit.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6263561.stm
Witch hunt.
Fitzgerald didn't want his investigation ruined with the truth, and he had the chance to get a conviction even though a crime was not commited.
Libby's crime? Openly testifying. He should have recited the Clinton's testimony. "I do not recall" "I have no recollection", "I am unsure"
And when you give an answer, say I believe that was....
So you give no definate answer.
Not surprised.
Libby has the chance to clear his name, this way.
With a pardon, he wouldn't be able to prove he didn't
do it.
Lets see, Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction. But the judge talked about nothing but
outing a secret agent.
So Libby was punished for a crime they could not prove happened.
Libby was convicted of lying because he didn't get the
dates right. Or couldn't remember events(obstruction).
So why should he go to prison? He was just a pawn in the political witch hunt.
I fully expect a pardon, if Libby doesn't win his appeal.
But if their is a justice system, he should be at least resentenced, since the punishment was for a crime he wasn't convicted of.
Libby convicted for lying and obstruction of an investigation of a crime that never happened.
And If I provide a case where the President issued a pardon to a fugure that played a central role in an investigation into the administration, would you then confess that this case with Bush and Libby is an acceptable use of Presidential power? I don't want to do the research just to have you poo-poo it as not relevant.
That pardon law needs to be repealed. Anyone else see the sick irony? The very person whose sole job is to defend the constitution gets to ignore it at will. It also gives de facto immunity to anyone in an administration. If this doesnt prove bush is a liberal nothing will.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?