the barges - they didn't want another explosion and loss of life by
cutting corners like bp did.
On Jun 21, 7:21 am, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> You are not answering the question. You are just trying to push the
> question somewhere else. Meanwhile back to Zero trying to stop the
> clean up so he can have a bigger crisis not to waste (thank you, Rahm,
> for telling us your philosophy of government - explains the terrible job
> this admin is doing). Guess you have problems answering that
> truthfully so you try to hijack the subject. Typical of Dem liars.
>
>
>
> 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...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment