![]() |
#321 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 07:12 AM
|
Quote:
So this is their big retort? Remember they took office on the claim of "Restoring honor and dignity to the Whitehouse". And their reply is in effect "We doing the same thing they did". |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#322 |
Acrobat
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 485
Local Time: 03:12 PM
|
who is clinton to comment on this? honestly.....
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
#323 |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,228
Local Time: 09:12 AM
|
Well, none of us are as clean as a whistle so who cares, right?
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#324 | |
ONE
love, blood, life Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 08:12 AM
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#325 | |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,228
Local Time: 09:12 AM
|
Quote:
But it's interesting you post that passage. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#326 | |
Blue Crack Distributor
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,894
Local Time: 08:12 AM
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#327 | |
Blue Crack Distributor
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,894
Local Time: 08:12 AM
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#328 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,749
Local Time: 10:12 AM
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#329 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,142
Local Time: 03:12 PM
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#330 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,749
Local Time: 10:12 AM
|
Okay Bluer White, I read the CNN article that you showed. Note that that article is a year old now. There have been developments since. If you click on the link on the left, CNN has a much more detailed timeline of the events that took place throughout this investigation.
For example, this one: The New York Times, citing lawyers close to the case, reports that notes in the hands of a federal prosecutor indicate that Libby first heard Valerie Plame's name from Cheney in a conversation on June 12, 2003, a month before the Bob Novak column made it public knowledge. This would seem to conflict with Libby's grand jury testimony that he had not heard of Plame until he was asked about her by reporters. And of course, in 2007 when Fitzgerald himself said that this investigation has left a cloud over the white house. Libby is refusing to answer direct questions to protect Cheney's involvement. No Cheney didn't himself out Plame. Cheney ORDERED it. www.findlaw.com has some great articles too of people well versed in legal studies examining this case. Last time you posted her you said Plame was not covert, which is untrue. I'd suggest checking some of the findlaw articles instead of year-old CNN reports. Only because I think those would be more accurate. Yes the article you shared is important, however the context of this investigation is even more important. |
![]() |
![]() |
#331 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,868
Local Time: 11:12 AM
|
What does the fact that Armitage was the leak have to do with the fact that Libby perjured himself? Absolutely nothing. I wasn't aware that it was a legal defense to state that "the other guy committed crime 1, and then I committed crime 2, so therefore I should not have been prosecuted."
|
![]() |
![]() |
#332 | |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB Join Date: May 2007
Location: Out Californy-way
Posts: 8,403
Local Time: 08:12 AM
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#333 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,749
Local Time: 10:12 AM
|
ewww you quoted it!!!
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#334 |
Blue Crack Distributor
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,894
Local Time: 08:12 AM
|
forgive him, as he's still a newbie
![]() ![]() Though give him points for Godzilla ![]() \back on topic, if possible |
![]() |
![]() |
#335 |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:12 AM
|
There's so many things wrong with the posts about Clinton, the biggest thing being that Clinton's pardoning has nothing to do with this case. This case isn't about the pardons of Bush, for one because this wasn't even a pardon! This is about THE COVER UP.
And some of the posts in this thread leave a sickening feeling in my stomach. It's amazing what political parties can do to people. - phillyfan26, Independent |
![]() |
![]() |
#336 | |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,228
Local Time: 09:12 AM
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#337 | |
Acrobat
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 485
Local Time: 03:12 PM
|
Quote:
Precedent is what makes up every facet of this country. We rely on it, live on it, and breathe it. For Clinton to condemn this and smile about it is another one of his great lies that we have become so used to. Look into the Marc Rich case or the FALN terrorist commutals and you will find that Libby's case pale's in comparison to those. Both Clinton and Libby are very similar. That is also why this argument keeps being brought up. They both are/were high ranking officials, lied under oath and both were tried for alleged or actual crimes. Differences: Clinton was elected President, Libby a staffer unelected by anyone but Dick Cheney. both are supposed to hold high morals, but one was officially publicly elected. Prior to this case, none of us would have been able to even know what Libby looked like. Here's the catcher: Scooter Libby is a convicted Felon, Bill Clinton, although many senators voted to impeach him, was not convicted of anything. For further evidence, I refer all of you to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution. It reads: "The President...shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." So, he was convicted in a US court of law, which means his crime was an offense against the United States and the president commuted his sentence, also known as a reprieve, which the Constitution allows to. Now, what do you not understand about this? Should I go further into Clinton's commutals? I would love to indulge in those, for they are much worse than Libby's. I look forward to feedback. Is that not enough evidence? What else should I put? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#338 |
Blue Crack Distributor
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,894
Local Time: 08:12 AM
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#339 | |
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,644
Local Time: 10:12 AM
|
Quote:
Bush came into the White House on the charge of restoring honor, dignity and morality to the office. Now suddenly when he's caught doing just the opposite, " the other guy did it to" is supposed to be justification? Please. Face it, the ONLY reason Bush did this is so that no one further up the line will face any legal action for the traitorous act of outing a CIA agent. No amount of comparison to Clinton or past presidents reduces the cowardly and corrupt nature of that act. What Bush did was wrong. Comparing it to Clinton's wrongs doesn't change the fact that it's wrong. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#340 | |
Acrobat
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 485
Local Time: 03:12 PM
|
Quote:
And yes, he has run a very tight line on his morals. Bailing out one of his good friends would be expected. Any President, no matter what party would have done this if they were in the same shoes, so for the Democrats to go all hoopla on Bush is quite immature. |
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|