euwe wrote:
So Libby just refused to answer because he had a sudden anxiety attack? - that fits the facts, doesn't it. On Jun 20, 9:41 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:Suppose you then find out what the FBI did with the original interview of Tom Russet. They claimed they could not find it at all. Then you have a member of the jury who was a former assistant to Russet and was releasing notes he took so he could write a book about the trial and the jury deliberations. That is patently illegal. Then you have a judge that claims that the prosecution cannot bring up new things in the summation and Fitz brought up a slew of things that could not be answered because the defense had already spoken. The judge permitted it. And to this day the man who really released the fact that Plame was CIA ,Richard ARmitage of the State Dept, was left alone totally and he was the one who should have been on trial. That is the truth and you cannot deny it. There were so many mangled points in that trial that it should have been null processed and restarted to keep within legal constraints. euwe wrote:Have your fun, but the difference between commuting a sentence and pardoning doesn't change the fact that he was sympathetic to those who were involved in the Plame affair. Your complaints are nothing but legalistic obfuscation of the truth - as was Bush.On Jun 20, 5:37 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:FS. You lied. Out and out lied. And did it on purpose. If nobody called you on it then it might stuck like that claims that Sarah said she could see Russia from her back yard. Never happened. That was Tina Fey. You are trying to do the same thing again. Liar. Big plain old liar.euwe wrote:I didn't lie, I "misspoke" - you know, like Cheney when he said "I think he has indeed, reconstituted nuclear weapons."On Jun 20, 5:21 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:so he did not pardon him. You lied again as usual.euwe wrote:right you are - he was just spared prison time for obstruction of justice.My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged. His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting.The Constitution gives the President the power of clemency to be used when he deems it to be warranted. It is my judgment that a commutation of the prison term in Mr. Libby's case is an appropriate exercise of this power.On Jun 20, 5:09 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:There you go again. Bush did not pardon Libby. However your boy Bubba pardoned all sorts of people to get support for his wife and to gain big bucks (remember Mark Rich?).euwe wrote:Whatever happened to "Personal Responsibility" ? --------- You mean "I forgot?"or "I pardoned Libby?"On Jun 20, 5:39 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:Whatever happened to "Personal Responsibility" ?? These ships were not manned by tourists but by seasoned sailors who are just, if not more so, concerned with the preservation of their own life as the USCG.Just which professional is more correct... the seasoned sailor or the seasoned sailor commanded by an organization that has never had a successful "private or public" enterprise ??On Jun 18, 4:01 pm, euwe <machgie...@gmail.com> wrote:oh, I get it - you're a libertoonian. So have you got your own carpet cleaning business? Or maybe you refinish parking lot blacktops?On Jun 18, 4:36 pm, bruce majors <bruce.maj...@gmail.com> wrote:http://libertarian2010.wordpress.com/2010/06/18/libertarians-say-gove...
No comments:
Post a Comment