lI1|1! Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 with a presidential pardon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyClimber Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 I am not trying to look at this from a partisan perspective, I would have been just as outraged if was the Dems doing this. The way I see it, this was a flagrant disregard of the legal process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Um, he just said that dems and repubs should both view this issue. Â And it is an equally big problem to dismiss it or to derail the discussion with "every pres does this" Â Disagree. Â http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_pardoned_by_a_United_States_president Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyClimber Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 I am not saying that the other presidents who pardonned people were right or wrong. I am talking about the current president and this pardon. Can anyone make a valid argument that it was the right thing to do? Like I said, I am a liberal but if it was a Democratic president who had done the same thing I would have been just as pissed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 I can buy the argument that Clinton was sleazy, perhaps, or that he pardoned a bunch of people who had "connections," but there really is no comparison of those pardons with this commutation of Libby's punishment. Â There was nobody in the Clinton Whitehouse thought to be in a position to reveal felony actions of high Clinton officials, because after nearly eight years of investigations the worst crime they could find was that of lying about a blow job. Bush pardoned Libby to protect his man Cheney or others in Cheney's office. Does anybody honestly believe otherwise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 right.. who could EVVVVEERRRRRR have a different opinion than yours. aside from the seriously under-educated. duh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 right.. who could EVVVVEERRRRRR have a different opinion than yours. aside from the seriously under-educated. duh  believing scooter wasnt guilty is in the same league as the toothfairy and Iraqi WMD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 I can buy the argument that Clinton was sleazy, perhaps, or that he pardoned a bunch of people who had "connections," but there really is no comparison of those pardons with this commutation of Libby's punishment. Â There was nobody in the Clinton Whitehouse thought to be in a position to reveal felony actions of high Clinton officials, because after nearly eight years of investigations the worst crime they could find was that of lying about a blow job. Bush pardoned Libby to protect his man Cheney or others in Cheney's office. Does anybody honestly believe otherwise? Â Come on does "any" president pardon unless there is a reason? Please call all pots black. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underworld Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 he was talking about bush's motives (speculation)... not what actually happened. Â also, i was talking about his (and other's) attitude in general... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 he was talking about bush's motives (speculation)... not what actually happened. Â also, i was talking about his (and other's) attitude in general... Â with all that herring whens the bbq? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Sure all presidents do this. Put in place a scheme to out a CIA officer as revenge for her husband actually telling the truth in public. Then have the vice president's right hand man lie under to protect the scheme, then pardon him. Now I know Reagan was the best at this, pardoning felons out of his own administration, but I don't remember Clinton doing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyClimber Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Again, we aren't saying that Clinton or any other president's pardons were ok. If you can make a coherent argument about this specific case please do so. Simply repeating the fact that other presidents have also passed down some shady pardons doesn't really add anything to the debate. Do you automatically support and Bush decision simply because he is a "conservative"? I generally vote Democrat, but I don't think the Democratic leaders are always right. I try and look at each issue and make my own decision about it, not simply follow the party line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 (edited) Sure all presidents do this. Put in place a scheme to out a CIA officer as revenge for her husband actually telling the truth in public. Then have the vice president's right hand man lie under to protect the scheme, then pardon him. Now I know Reagan was the best at this, pardoning felons out of his own administration, but I don't remember Clinton doing this. Â No he just found ways to get rid of problems for himself. i.e. Whitewater and purgery under oath. Edited July 3, 2007 by Seahawks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted July 3, 2007 Author Share Posted July 3, 2007 I can buy the argument that Clinton was sleazy, perhaps, or that he pardoned a bunch of people who had "connections," but there really is no comparison of those pardons with this commutation of Libby's punishment. Â There was nobody in the Clinton Whitehouse thought to be in a position to reveal felony actions of high Clinton officials, because after nearly eight years of investigations the worst crime they could find was that of lying about a blow job. Bush pardoned Libby to protect his man Cheney or others in Cheney's office. Does anybody honestly believe otherwise? Â Well said Matt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted July 3, 2007 Author Share Posted July 3, 2007 Seahawks……Scooter is a liar and a pawn.  Are you supporting this action by the president?   Yes or no  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Seahawks……Scooter is a liar and a pawn.  Are you supporting this action by the president?   Yes or no  "Yeah, it's improper to be leaking those names," Snow said. Pressed on whether someone in the administration owed the American public an apology, Snow said, "I'll apologize. Done." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted July 3, 2007 Author Share Posted July 3, 2007 You are as slippery as a republican….wait….you are a republican……side stepping the question at hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 I can buy the argument that Clinton was sleazy, perhaps, or that he pardoned a bunch of people who had "connections," but there really is no comparison of those pardons with this commutation of Libby's punishment. Â There was nobody in the Clinton Whitehouse thought to be in a position to reveal felony actions of high Clinton officials, because after nearly eight years of investigations the worst crime they could find was that of lying about a blow job. Bush pardoned Libby to protect his man Cheney or others in Cheney's office. Does anybody honestly believe otherwise? Â Matt - first, he commuted his sentence - or more specifically the jail portion....not a pardon - he's still guilty as far as the courts are concerned. Second, how does commuting his jail term protect "his man Cheney" If anything, he's more accessible for book deals now than he would have been in prison? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 You are quite right there, Mr. B. that he commuted the sentence rather than pardoned it. That was sloppy writing on my part as I am aware of the difference. Â Do you really think that Scooter Libby is going to write a book now that he wouldn't have written if he went to jail? Are you nuts? He's not going to pay a dime of his fine, and what do you want to bet he gets the full pardon eventually -- the White House even specifically held out that "possibility" today. Libby will be taken care of and now there is no pressure for him to negotiate a lesser term in exchange for squealing on his boss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 Scotter's fine is already paid for by his "defense committee" - weathy admirers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted July 3, 2007 Author Share Posted July 3, 2007 When do you think the impeachment hearings will start for Bush and Cheney? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 (edited) Not going to happen. The refusal to submit to subpoenas - the strategy is to run out the clock. The Bush lawyers will ensure that this decision is delayed with proceedings until he is gone. Now that you don't hear Bush talk much about victory in Iraq he apparantly is using the same strategy here - run out the clock and hand over the mess to the next administration. It will be nice to have some adult supervision in the White House. Edited July 3, 2007 by Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted July 3, 2007 Author Share Posted July 3, 2007 Refusing to submit subpeonas is illegal. Right? Is that not an impeachable offense? We have to start somewere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 .... after nearly eight years of investigations the worst crime they could find was that of lying about a blow job... Â Matt - I believe that integrity is the single most important quality in a leader. It never ceases to amaze me how people gloss over a little marital infidelity. If he doesn't take his marriage vows seriously, why in the world would we believe he took his oath of office seriously. Â All of the lies Bush is accused of seem to focus around his protecting wealth and power (his and others), his foisting of his ideological agenda on the Arab World. You can argue whether this is right or wrong....but it's at least behavior befitting a power hungry politician. Â And Clinton's???....blowing his wad on a stupid chubby little intern's dress....who saved it??? Â Who's the dumbass? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted July 3, 2007 Author Share Posted July 3, 2007 after nearly eight years of investigations the worst crime they could find was that of lying about a blow job... If he doesn't take his marriage vows seriously, why in the world would we believe he took his oath of office seriously.  When you don’t take your wedding vows seriously, you hurt your spouse and maybe some other family. When you don’t take your presidential vows seriously thousands of people die……big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.