- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 96,144
- Reaction score
- 33,470
- Location
- SE Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Yeah, yeah sure. You're partisan, I have no obligation to take your facts as the facts.Or facts or the truth evidently.
Yeah, yeah sure. You're partisan, I have no obligation to take your facts as the facts.Or facts or the truth evidently.
Pretty irrelevant.
Yeah, yeah sure. You're partisan, I have no obligation to take your facts as the facts.
& also a violation of law. The law requires you to refuse to carry out illegal orders & has since Nuremberg when...... "I vas just following orders" was not accepted as a reasonable defense.
The liberals will never forgive the Republicans for impeaching their precious Clinton.
The liberals will never forgive the Republicans for impeaching their precious Clinton.
I think Obama is going about this wrong
....And Conservatives will never get Clinton's dick out of their mouths.
you illustrate, therefore, how clumsy is this move by obama, what a political loser it is
Those AUSA's were still working for Bush.
What you are saying is that if Al Capone had been in charge of finding bootlegging problems in 1920's Chicago... & of course found nothing....that we should accept that investigation as a real one??:lol:
Those AUSA's were under extreme pressure to not find anything wrong or they would have been fired, plain & simple (Just like the 7 U.S. Attys who WERE fired for political reasons)
Career or not, they still work for the Executive Brnch & Bush was the chief executive. (are you seriously going to argue that government employees do not work under a President in the chain of command?)No, the AUSA's were career prosecutors.
I have worked with AUSA's most of my life & know that ALL government employees are subject to pressure from above them. (I assume AUSA is what you meant when you typed USAO's above?....I have no idea what a USAO is if not??)The fact that you would even think to make this analogy indicates that you have no idea how the USAO's work and that it's pointless for me to bother explaining.
It's being investigated right now & prosecutions will undoubtedly be coming. I don't have time to find links for your right now but just Google U.S. Atty firings & you'll find plenty.Link? If that's true, why did they prosecute one guy?
Career or not, they still work for the Executive Brnch & Bush was the chief executive. (are you seriously going to argue that government employees do not work under a President in the chain of command?)
I have worked with AUSA's (I assume that is what you meant when you typed USAO's above?) most of my life & know that ALL government employees are subject to pressure from above them.
It's being investigated right now & prosecutions will undoubtedly be coming. I don't have time to find links for your right now but just Google U.S. Atty firings & you'll find plenty.
They did have "a large degree of autonomy" prior to the Bush Justice Dept...........Bush changed all that & I suggest you watch some of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing available here C-SPAN | Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics to see how badly politicized the Bush Justice Dept was made. (I would also suggest you contact Senator Whitehouse's office for info on this)Of course they're part of the executive branch, but career prosecutors in the DoJ have a large degree of autonomy. The EDVA in particular has been noted for its independence and integrity.
I did misunderstand you & would have to look into your claim that that charges were brought. Even if true, it's a stretch to believe the Bush Justice Dept would investigate itself...impartially!:lol:You're misunderstanding me. When the AUSAs investigated these issues years ago, they did bring charges against one individual who was eventually convicted. This directly contradicts your bull**** claim that "Those AUSA's were under extreme pressure to not find anything wrong or they would have been fired, plain & simple."
They did have "a large degree of autonomy" prior to the Bush Justice Dept...........Bush changed all that & I suggest you watch some of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing available here C-SPAN | Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics to see how badly politicized the Bush Justice Dept was made. (I would also suggest you contact Senator Whitehouse's office for info on this)
I did misunderstand you & would have to look into your claim that that charges were brought. Even if true, it's a stretch to believe the Bush Justice Dept would investigate itself...impartially!:lol:
I'll concede your point.:lol:...but still suggest you watch some of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings...specifically involving the firings of the 7 U.S. Atts. jujst to see how badly corrupted & demoralized Bush's Justice Dept was.Sure, let me just ask a liberal Democratic Senator whether he thinks Republicans politicized something. Can't see how that would be a problem.
Are you really trying to sell the idea that the Bush Justice Dept would perform a completely impartial investigation....of itself??No, you don't have to "look into my claim," as it's explicitly stated in the OP. This is kind of an important facet of the story.
I'll concede your point.:lol:...but still suggest you watch some of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings...specifically involving the firings of the 7 U.S. Atts. jujst to see how badly corrupted & demoralized Bush's Justice Dept was.
Weren't you just complaining about millions of dollars being spent on political witch hunts?
you illustrate, therefore, how clumsy is this move by obama, what a political loser it is
For Witch hunts absolutely a waste........To protect our system of government from abuses?.....Money well spent.
When it's a Libbo, it's a witch hunt. When it's a Republican, we're protecting the country. And, those are really the only two variables there are. Ain't that right?
When it's a Libbo, it's a witch hunt. When it's a Republican, we're protecting the country. And, those are really the only two variables there are. Ain't that right?
You do realize just how stupid this sounds, right?
Then, maybe you shouldn't bother responding to it?