Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Has this been proven yet? And if so, what is the point. To me it is like saying they used UPS rather than FEDEX if there was a regulation to use FEDEX. Who cares? What is it that they really want to know? They want to know if Bush, Rove or Chaney told Gonzales to fire people. If they did, they had a right to do so. In-fact almost everyone already knows Gonzales would not have made such a move without Bush's o.k. Now gonzales is covering for the White House. Do we need a federal investigation to know that? And now that we all know it, so what? It is not illegal to fire these folks.
|
Yes it was proven, the white house came out and said "oops sorry it was an accident". I don't buy their excuse. And if there is nothing wrong with what they did then why not cooperate and come out and say what they did? Why all the smoke and mirrors? Why lie to congress and the public about it?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Which investigations? How have they interfered? Congress has been on fishing expeditions, looking for something, anything, wasting time and resources and not focusing on real issues.
|
There was many of them where the GOP was calling up the AG trying to get them to do certain things. They refuse and say their isn't a case for it and they end up fired. This is why we have investigations. You seem to believe we should have all the evidence that is needed to convict prior to investigating? Wouldn't that make an investigation pointless and useless?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Did they falsify evidence or "cherry-pick" the evidence to support their case? One would be criminal in my view the other not.
The administration certainly had enough evidence to support a case for war using information that was common knowledge. Actually most who supported the war - supported it based on that information, including Sen. Clinton.
|
He presented the Niger evidence knowing they were forgeries and were blatantly false. That is lying.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Was this the Bush administration or the military? The way I understood the Tillman situation was that military officers at the location at the time and on the scene tried to cover-up the truth from the very begining, do you think the Bush administration was involved in that? Is there proof?
I don't know anything about the Lynch controversy.
|
Either way there should be investigations into it. You don't have a conclusion to an investigation and then try to prove it. You investigate it look at the evidence and draw conclusions. Whoever is responsible for the lies and propaganda should be charged. There is a reason that propaganda is illegal.....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
If you refer to Libby, that is debatable in my view. If you are talking about Gonzales, if they have proof, they should move forward with perjury charges.
Generally, all I have seen are "perjury traps", oh wait, no one in Congress would ever set someone up for that.
|
I'm referring to both. They both lied and are covering things up. They are not falling for "perjury traps" but instead they are purposefully withholding truth and stating falsehoods. I'm betting that as more things come out Gonzales will be tried for perjury.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
That has not been tested in court. The administration obtained legal opinions and selected members of Congress were aware of what the administration was doing. Has any victims of thes illegal wiretaps come forward and is willing to show how their rights were infringed upon?
|
Since when does something have to be tested in court to be illegal.... if that were the case nothing would be illegal. How can victims come forward if they don't know they are a victim? How can we know if our rights were infringed if it is all secret? The fact that the DOJ would not sign off on it and they did it anyway is telling.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I don't get that one.
|
See all of the above, and Bushes comment about the constitution being a damned piece of paper...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
The nature of war can be strange and often not understood, however, to suggest the administration is funding terrorist against our national interest and public saftey especially during war is to suggest they are guilty of treason. If this charge is true, people should be hung. Would you be willing to hang people now and in the future on the kind of evidence you have supporting your allegation?
|
Someone allowed the money to get into their hands and that is criminal negligence. There should be hearings on this. Same goes for the way Halliburton has been war profiteering.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Why didn't the special investigator bring that charge against anyone?
|
Maybe because he couldn't prove the intent. The problem with this law is it requires a proof of intent. Which is almost impossible to do without a confession or some sort of tape/memo/email incriminating the defendant. This is of course impossible to get when the white house claims executive privilege on all the communications.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Why are people on the left so obsessed with Rove?
|
Alas, it was a satirical joke on the fact that Rove is hated by so many.
Ace you seem to think that investigations are a bad thing. Those who fear investigations are the ones who have something to hide. If the administration can listen to my phone calls, read my emails, ect without a warrant. Then I too should be able to read ALL of their emails and listen to ALL of their conversations, especially when it has been subpoenaed. The investigations are being done because their is evidence that wrong doing may have occurred. This does not mean that it has occurred and if it has not then the investigation should clear them. When someone doesn't cooperate with an investigation it typically means they are guilty and are hiding it. The administration has not cooperated in these very serious investigations and this makes me think they are hiding something........
We need to remove the corruption from Washington and what a better place to start than the top?