Watergate revisited

"Wayne Knight" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 3, 8:18 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:

Ta da! We have a winner in the balcony, Doctor. If only the ****
weasel whore monger would use his brain for something besides sowing
hate. You might have to explain it better to him, Wayne. Good luck.
But if you correct him, you can count on being called a nasty name or
two. It is how he operates. Ask anyone on roff.

Last I saw, I was part of "anyone" on Roff. I think Wolfgang and I
might have disagreed
before but we seem none the worse for the wear.

Well, you DID opt for the couch in the living room rather than stay in our
bedroom at the cabin in the Smokies.

Um.....and then the next night, that ******* Miller kicked ME out!


Actually, he makes a
pretty good friend
and fishing companion.

Ah, that's just because I HAVE good friends and fishing companions. It's
pretty easy to reciprocate in kind......even if doing so in sufficient
measure is sometimes daunting.

Which is the first opinion I've thrown into
this thread.

And one which is bound to buy you trouble.

Seems to me you came out swinging with the insults too, before
Wolfgang chimed in.

I fail to understand why a conversation cannot be had discussing the
cons, and well you might call them pros, of the current
administration
without the former being dragged into it. History goes far beyond
Clinton and he's been out of office almost seven years. Whatever
faults he had as a person
or as a leader is irrelevant to the issue at hand. And frankly it
smacks as childish to use Clinton's practices as justification for
subsequent misbehavior when part of the Bush platform was to avoid
those ethical and moral lapses.

davie is much easier to understand if one remembers that, whatever his
expressed feelings, Klinton is his friend......the ex-president is of some
use to him. Bush, on the other hand, betrayed him and continues to make him
look at what is reflected back at him.

It must be sort of like having your nuts in a vise, I suppose.....you can
yank....or you can just stand there. Either way, comments from the audience
will not effect the outcome. At most, they will have some small impact on
the volume of the impotent shrieking.

Wolfgang

On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:21:11 -0500, wrote:



Hillary may regret opening her cakehole about this one...


I hope she regrets it soon. I don't think she can be elected POTUS,
and think it would be a shame if the Dems couldn't put up someone
electable.
--

r.bc: vixen
Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
Almost entirely harmless. Really.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...


predictable blather on this subject snipped

my take, fwiw, on this whole Libby thing: This is possibly the best example
extant on the level of divisive partisan BS that will ultimately ruin the
US. On one side, the same folks who foamed at the mouth over Clintons
"crimes" now say that Libby(very similar situation) did "nothing" and was
persecuted for politics. Hypocrites?? You betcha.
On the other side, those folks who couldn't see the seriousness of Clinton's
perjury feel that Scooter Libby ought to be cluttering up space in a Federal
Prison. It is obvious ideologically-driven hypocrisy on both sides, and
further illustration of how little, collectively, we have learned since that
Lincoln fella rambled on about a "House
Divided"
Tom

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
Yeah, all that money coming from your taxessnipped....free drugs.

this explains a lotg
Tom

wrote in message
...
Interestingly, Libby was one of the attorneys that reviewed and
(unofficially) "signed off" on Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich and Pincus
Green

that was, IMO, one of the funniest spinoffs from this whole event. Ain't it
a small world!! And, yes, Hillary would have been well served to remain
silent on this entire
subject.
Tom

Tom Littleton wrote:
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...


predictable blather on this subject snipped

my take, fwiw, on this whole Libby thing: This is possibly the best example
extant on the level of divisive partisan BS that will ultimately ruin the
US. On one side, the same folks who foamed at the mouth over Clintons
"crimes" now say that Libby(very similar situation) did "nothing" and was
persecuted for politics. Hypocrites?? You betcha.
On the other side, those folks who couldn't see the seriousness of Clinton's
perjury feel that Scooter Libby ought to be cluttering up space in a Federal
Prison. It is obvious ideologically-driven hypocrisy on both sides, and
further illustration of how little, collectively, we have learned since that
Lincoln fella rambled on about a "House
Divided"

There is no moral equivalence between Clinton's supposed "crimes" and
Libby's.

First of all, Clinton was never convicted of anything, while Libby was
prosecuted by a Republican prosecutor, convicted of perjury and
obstruction of justice by a jury, and sentenced by a conservative
Republican judge according to established sentencing guidelines.

Secondly (and more importantly), Clinton's misbehavior was about a
personal sexual indiscretion. Libby's crimes sprang from an attempt by
the administration to cover up one of the lies they used to get us into
this horrible never-ending war (the false Nigerian/Iraq yellowcake
connection, based on forged documents, and mentioned by Bush in a State
of the Union speech), and his perjury was obviously intended to protect
his boss, Mr. Evil, and the commutation of his sentence is obviously
payback for him falling on his sword.

I'd like to know who forged those documents.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:11:11 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:

my take, fwiw, on this whole Libby thing: This is possibly the best example
extant on the level of divisive partisan BS that will ultimately ruin the
US. On one side, the same folks who foamed at the mouth over Clintons
"crimes" now say that Libby(very similar situation) did "nothing" and was
persecuted for politics. Hypocrites?? You betcha.
On the other side, those folks who couldn't see the seriousness of Clinton's
perjury feel that Scooter Libby ought to be cluttering up space in a Federal
Prison. It is obvious ideologically-driven hypocrisy on both sides, and
further illustration of how little, collectively, we have learned since that
Lincoln fella rambled on about a "House
Divided"

I agree that Libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of
justice and he was guilty. But the sentence was a bit harsh compared
to what has been dealt out to other politicians and cronies. All I am
asking for is fair to be fair, Tom.

The ones who think that this *commutation* (not pardon) is wrong and
want Libby in prison seem to forget that a far more egregious crime
was committed by Sandy Berger in his theft and destruction of top
secret papers from the National Archives that show Clinton's
incompetence in dealing with Muslim terrorists. He got a slap on the
wrist, and a $10K fine. Big deal. If Libby goes to jail for
something that is nowhere near as serious as Berger's crimes, then
there is no fairness. Bush was correct in commuting his jail time,
and not pardoning him. If Bush does pardon him in 2009, it will be no
worse than Clinton pardoning Cicneros or his Arkansas lawyer friends
in 2001, to say nothing of his pardoning of Marc Rich. That one was
truly unbelievable.

I agree that there is schism in this country. We have become either
blue or red and certain people on this ng are always referring to
people as being either blue or red. I have come to learn to live
with liberals, with many friends being such, but as a conservative on
this ng, I have more than taken my fair share of abuse. Not crying
about it, mind you, because I feel I give back what I receive.

Dave

rw wrote:
Tom Littleton wrote:
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...


predictable blather on this subject snipped

my take, fwiw, on this whole Libby thing: This is possibly the best
example extant on the level of divisive partisan BS that will
ultimately ruin the US. On one side, the same folks who foamed at the
mouth over Clintons "crimes" now say that Libby(very similar
situation) did "nothing" and was persecuted for politics. Hypocrites??
You betcha.
On the other side, those folks who couldn't see the seriousness of
Clinton's perjury feel that Scooter Libby ought to be cluttering up
space in a Federal Prison. It is obvious ideologically-driven
hypocrisy on both sides, and
further illustration of how little, collectively, we have learned
since that Lincoln fella rambled on about a "House
Divided"

There is no moral equivalence between Clinton's supposed "crimes" and
Libby's.

There was no "supposed" part about it except in the minds of the
historical revisionists. It is fact that Clinton lied to a Grand Jury
and was involved in obstructing justice. He was a sitting president of
the U.S. The only other time that a president was found obstructing
justice, he was forced to resign.

Add all the money Clinton had when he started his presidency with all
the income he got as president. Then compare that to the amount of
money he had when he left office. Where did all that additional money
come from? Cash for pardon's? Corrupt contributions for special
favors? Nights in the Lincoln bedroom?

Face the fact that Clinton was disgraced and corrupt. Almost as bad as
Carter.


First of all, Clinton was never convicted of anything, while Libby was
prosecuted by a Republican prosecutor, convicted of perjury and
obstruction of justice by a jury, and sentenced by a conservative
Republican judge according to established sentencing guidelines.

Preparation was pretty much complete and the case pretty solid against
Clinton. The prosecutors were lined up waiting for him to leave office.
Bush stopped the prosecution with presidential action. But that
couldn't stop the Arkansas Bar from taking reasonable and justified
action. They knew the case against Clinton was airtight.

Libby was just an adviser. Clinton was a president. There's a big
difference between the two.

Interesting that it was a Republican prosecutor. So maybe all the huff
about Gonzales is just politically motivated by the Democrats looking
for something to complain about.



Secondly (and more importantly), Clinton's misbehavior was about a
personal sexual indiscretion.


No, it was about lying to a Grand Jury and obstruction of justice. A
POTUS undermining the criminal and civil justice system. Lying to a
Grand Jury. Obstructing justice.

Clinton lied for personal gain. To protect and hide his personal
corruption.

Only the Clinton apologists minimize Clinton's crimes against the people
of the US.



Libby's crimes sprang from an attempt by
the administration to cover up one of the lies they used to get us into
this horrible never-ending war (the false Nigerian/Iraq yellowcake
connection, based on forged documents, and mentioned by Bush in a State
of the Union speech), and his perjury was obviously intended to protect
his boss, Mr. Evil, and the commutation of his sentence is obviously
payback for him falling on his sword.

I'd like to know who forged those documents.


What happened to the secret documents from the Clinton administration?
Did Sandy Berger destroy the evidence that Clinton ignored the terrorist
threat and was a major factor in subsequent terrorist attacks?

Clinton lied again to hide his failings as POTUS to address a known
terrorist threat. Better to push it off onto the next administration.
So saying that Clinton's corruption was just personal is not to
recognize the depth of the Clinton administration corruption.

The real crime was Clinton / Berger, not Libby.

Dave LaCourse wrote:

I agree that Libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of
justice and he was guilty. But the sentence was a bit harsh compared
to what has been dealt out to other politicians and cronies. All I am
asking for is fair to be fair, Tom.

http://sentencing.typepad.com/senten...ing_lewis.html

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"Cal Vanize" wrote in message
...
rw wrote:
Tom Littleton wrote:
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...


predictable blather on this subject snipped

my take, fwiw, on this whole Libby thing: This is possibly the best
example extant on the level of divisive partisan BS that will ultimately
ruin the US. On one side, the same folks who foamed at the mouth over
Clintons "crimes" now say that Libby(very similar situation) did
"nothing" and was persecuted for politics. Hypocrites?? You betcha.
On the other side, those folks who couldn't see the seriousness of
Clinton's perjury feel that Scooter Libby ought to be cluttering up
space in a Federal Prison. It is obvious ideologically-driven hypocrisy
on both sides, and
further illustration of how little, collectively, we have learned since
that Lincoln fella rambled on about a "House
Divided"

There is no moral equivalence between Clinton's supposed "crimes" and
Libby's.

There was no "supposed" part about it except in the minds of the
historical revisionists. It is fact that Clinton lied to a Grand Jury and
was involved in obstructing justice. He was a sitting president of the
U.S. The only other time that a president was found obstructing justice,
he was forced to resign.

Add all the money Clinton had when he started his presidency with all the
income he got as president. Then compare that to the amount of money he
had when he left office. Where did all that additional money come from?
Cash for pardon's? Corrupt contributions for special favors? Nights in
the Lincoln bedroom?

Face the fact that Clinton was disgraced and corrupt. Almost as bad as
Carter.


First of all, Clinton was never convicted of anything, while Libby was
prosecuted by a Republican prosecutor, convicted of perjury and
obstruction of justice by a jury, and sentenced by a conservative
Republican judge according to established sentencing guidelines.

Preparation was pretty much complete and the case pretty solid against
Clinton. The prosecutors were lined up waiting for him to leave office.
Bush stopped the prosecution with presidential action. But that couldn't
stop the Arkansas Bar from taking reasonable and justified action. They
knew the case against Clinton was airtight.

Libby was just an adviser. Clinton was a president. There's a big
difference between the two.

Interesting that it was a Republican prosecutor. So maybe all the huff
about Gonzales is just politically motivated by the Democrats looking for
something to complain about.



Secondly (and more importantly), Clinton's misbehavior was about a
personal sexual indiscretion.


No, it was about lying to a Grand Jury and obstruction of justice. A
POTUS undermining the criminal and civil justice system. Lying to a Grand
Jury. Obstructing justice.

Clinton lied for personal gain. To protect and hide his personal
corruption.

Only the Clinton apologists minimize Clinton's crimes against the people
of the US.



Libby's crimes sprang from an attempt by
the administration to cover up one of the lies they used to get us into
this horrible never-ending war (the false Nigerian/Iraq yellowcake
connection, based on forged documents, and mentioned by Bush in a State
of the Union speech), and his perjury was obviously intended to protect
his boss, Mr. Evil, and the commutation of his sentence is obviously
payback for him falling on his sword.

I'd like to know who forged those documents.


What happened to the secret documents from the Clinton administration? Did
Sandy Berger destroy the evidence that Clinton ignored the terrorist
threat and was a major factor in subsequent terrorist attacks?

Clinton lied again to hide his failings as POTUS to address a known
terrorist threat. Better to push it off onto the next administration. So
saying that Clinton's corruption was just personal is not to recognize the
depth of the Clinton administration corruption.

The real crime was Clinton / Berger, not Libby.

Um......you really DON'T know that Clinton is not currently in office, do
you?

Moron.

Wolfgang
who thinks this whole mess should be tabled until we get that andrew johnson
thingy straightened out.