MadelynIris
Refugee
Right, we can't trust a site like newsbusters. They are hilarious.
MadelynIris said:on a side note, can anyone tell me why my images aren't working?
MadelynIris said:Right, we can't trust a site like newsbusters. They are hilarious.
Because you've got both the IMG and URL brackets in there. It needs to be one or the other. If you just want to post a link to a picture on some other site, use URL brackets only. If you want to post a picture in here, save the photo, upload it to ImageShack or your Interference gallery or whatever you use, then enclose the resulting url in IMG brackets only.MadelynIris said:on a side note, can anyone tell me why my images aren't working?
MadelynIris said:They didn't order the leak. One Sunday morning, an op-ed appears in the paper from a former diplomat.
financeguy said:
What exactly are the guidelines, i.e. minimum and maximum?
anitram said:This is a notoriously "tough on crime" judge which...George Bush appointed. So you appoint a judge to the bench due to his credentials of precisely this: issuing out sentences which are tough, while being fully within his discretion.
The justice system does not work to deal with everyone in the same way. You and I could commit the same offence, be tried for the same offence and have different judges impose different sentences, where there is a min/max guideline. This is what this judge did. And he was appointed for that reason, which is what makes this all the more hilarious.
So now people whine because the sentence was for 6 months longer than the medium.
anitram said:
Clearly the response to that is to erase the sentence entirely.
Bush eliminated Libby's 2½-year prison term and left in place his two years of supervised release. But supervised release – a form of probation – is only available to people who have served prison time. Without prison, it's unclear what happens next.
U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton posed the question to Libby's attorneys and to Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald: Does this mean Libby won't actually be required to serve supervised release? Should he just have to report to probation officials as if he spent time in prison?
The law, Walton said in court documents, “does not appear to contemplate a situation in which a defendant may be placed under supervised release without first completing a term of incarceration.”
For now, it appears Libby is in legal limbo. Walton gave both sides until Monday to respond.
The scandal is Cheney ordering a leak of a non-covert agent's name, you mean?
WASHINGTON - An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Wow, 8 whole post and you have FYM figured out...
Alter, anyone?
hawkman said:
FYM can be figured out by reading, posting isn't a prerequisite.
It's as clear as day.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
You've only been a member since April? And it shows up when you are reading, haven't ever seen you name in here...
Tell me what you've figured out, enlighten us...
hawkman said:
So you monitor 24 hours a day ? What is this, high school ? and you're the self-appointed hall monitor ?
The double standards at play in your imaginary debating society were pointed out, you appear to not have liked it, too bad.
anyone who supports the republican party is an absolute moron
BonoVoxSupastar said:
No, my point was if you were in here often even just reading, I probably would have noticed. Maybe you have read a few threads, so what. You can't sum up a whole forum, especially when not paticipating.
I saw not one double standard. I saw people trying to compare pardons of a past presidency with a commutation of a current president. I saw people who jumped all over perjury when it was Clinton and write it off when it was a Republican. Then I saw people who objected to the severity of the sentence, when it was from a Bush appointed judge...
Show me the double standards, I'm very curious.
MadelynIris said:They didn't order the leak. One Sunday morning, an op-ed appears in the paper from a former diplomat.
The white house assembled a rebuttal, and in the process disclosed that this former diplomat was sent by his wife (or his wife's boss). His wife happened to work at the CIA. Very strange. When everyone went to investigate, including Novak, they printed what they found out.
Scooter's account went against others. Therefore, he lied, therefore, 3 years prison.
I never claimed to be monitoring, get off it. Merely a, "I've never seen you hear before", as a regular would say to a new member. That's it, get over it.hawkman said:
The fact that your monitoring failed to make note of everyone who's in a given forum at any given time is hardly surprising. The fact that you'd use your monitoring as some kind of logical argument behind which you'd stand to draw some kind of conclusion is laughable.
So wait, in your keen observations you say that I in paticular turn threads into "Christian bashing" threads? Very interesting...hawkman said:
Almost every thread about Gays or Muslims for example turns into a Christian bashing thread, and no I'm not a christian, but an avowed atheist. So, when an anti-bush topic gets the "but Clinton is worse" responses it's supposedly getting off topic and we need to have the thread focus ONLY on Bush ? Well, that's hypocritical at best. But that's how it works here. And the times I've been reading posts here (apparently not under your keen and ever watchful eye) have been enough to tell me that. Just doing a quick scan of some earlier showed that you in particular are usually one of th efirst to change the topic in that manner. Now I see why you're upset about having the hypocrisy pointed out. Have a great 4th of July. In case you're wondering, I'll be logging out and won't be back until tomorrow. No need to keep monitoring !
Angela Harlem said:this makes me cry. it's not funny. it's tragic. anyone who supports the republican party is an absolute moron. anyone who cannot see the error in this commuting is either intellectually challenged, or brainwashed. diamond, the instances you brought up are erronous on their own. there is no legal relationship here. you don't have a solid grasp of law and your constitution, it seems. that's ok, though. just don't be foolish in your support of this.
i've not read past page 1. it's too infuriating.
hawkman said:Almost every thread about Gays or Muslims for example turns into a Christian bashing thread
Ormus said:
Usually, that's because every thread about gays turns into a gay-bashing thread (see diamond's latest nonsense thread, for instance).
struckpx said:
and that liberals should lay off his back for he is working against his party's conservative base currently to be partisan.