View Single Post
Old 07-03-2007, 06:22 PM   #43 (permalink)
host
Banned
 
We participate on a forum, and in a country....where little discussion can take place. Some of us form our opinion under the influence of the context of what is actually happening..... from the quotes reported right from the horses' mouths.....I quote the white house web page quotes often....for that reason.

It's difficult to spin what is actually said and written by the key participants in events......if your intent is to convey the exact opposite of what is happening....

I know why they all do it.....in the tiny, tiny world where this unjust, disrespectful, abuse of authority that is quite possibly another in a series of executive branch obstruction of justice and the investigation of the Plame leak.....<b>is spun as "business as usual"</b>...they do it in lockstep because the ones who still cling to this failed political party and failed presidency, are afraid of confronting their own confidence.

You see it in irate, in ace, and in powerclown...... all posting with such confident pronouncements....backed by....WHAT?

They never tell you. I try to show where I got the confidence to post what I post, almost always. Most of the time, with a foundation at least as strong as this:
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/A...=1&oref=slogin
July 3, 2007
Legal Confusion Follows Libby Decision
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 5:23 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush forced the CIA leak case into uncharted legal territory when he commuted the prison sentence of former White House aide I. Lewis ''Scooter'' Libby, a federal judge said Tuesday.

Bush eliminated Libby's 2 1/2-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.
We cannot have a "competition of ideas" here....when one side so clearly goes about "making shit up", and the other works to methodically support every key point posted.

This is not routine. The president himself hired a criminal defense attorney, Jim Sharp, in response to Fitzgerald's investigation. Cheney did the same:
Quote:
If Rove is Indicted, Will Media Mention Bush's Criminal Defense ...
Tilted Forum Project > The Academy > Tilted Politics > If Rove is Indicted ... McClellan reluctantly admitted that Bush had retained Jim Sharp during a June ...
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/archive...p/t-91795.html - 91k - Supplemental Result -
The president is experiencing the most prolonged and severe disapproval polling results of any president since Nixon. In the midst of support by independents, for example, declining to 24 percent, he opts to block Libby's serving of even a day in jail, questioning the sentencing judge's determination, and not even consulting the relevant DOJ department or the prosecutor, before he acts.

An NPR contributor commented this afternoon that preemption of an entire prison sentence by a president had not occurred in 80 years.....

This stinks...and it will fuel the further decline of this president and of his party. We post again, and again, why this is so....and your confident, but empty dismissal of our examples of objections and of the serious implications for the reputation of the presidency and the principle of equal justice is all that you post in response.

When you resort to an "argument" that includes your confident assertion that special counsel Fitzgerald should have ignored Libby's perjury and obstruction....that it was he who erred, not Libby.....you would leave no prosecutor with the tool of legal deterrent to discourage future perjury and obstruction...and as Bush has pissed in all of our faces and on the US constitution, and not for the first time.....you shit up these pages, in lockstep....brimming with a confidence as misplaced and pathetic as Bush himself so often displays.....
host is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360