kallend 2,184 #1 July 1, 2008 Court compares administration claims to nonsense. www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/30/court.poem/... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #2 July 1, 2008 Once could use that about many politicians and what they spew. Al Gore and his iced tea defense, for instance. Hadn't thought about that for years. Looky what I found!!!! Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #3 July 1, 2008 The full opinion of the court socks it to the administration: pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200806/06-1397-1124487.pdf p28 for the Snark reference.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #4 July 1, 2008 I guess all the liberals would just have us surrender to the Snark. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #5 July 1, 2008 > I guess all the liberals would just have us surrender to the Snark. Yep. The defeatocrats want to cut and run from the clear and present danger posed by the evil Snarks. They don't just dislike our policies, they want to destroy our very way of life! They hate freedom, children, democracy, diversity and baseball. The only way to combat this grave, imminent threat is a new trillion dollar War on the Snarks. We'll know that we've succeeded when inspectors can find no sign of them, preferably after a protracted, money-intensive Shock and Awe campaign that requires a GOP majority to prosecute successfully. Only then will we be safe from the evil of the Snarks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #6 July 6, 2008 A Libertarian viewpoint: www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0706chapmanjul06,0,3566869.column... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #7 July 7, 2008 nice article, that one. Well written. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #8 July 7, 2008 Does Bush even care what the courts order? The current administration has already made the statement that they are above the law. The courts convicted Scooter Libby on four counts. Bush commuted his sentence. Ergo, they are above the law. So why should that same administration care about what a civilian court orders a military prison to do?Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #9 July 7, 2008 Your opinion on pardoning Marc Rich? Was President Clinton above the law as well? Gerald Ford for his pardon of Nixon? I think commutation of Mr. Libby's sentence (notice it was not a pardon) stemmed more from the fact that the case was preposterous than a disrespect for the law itself. But that's just me. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Leapinglizardto 0 #10 July 7, 2008 its a little different, when you pardon THE guy that took the rap, for YOU. & you do so, so quickly that his cellmate barely had a chance to tell him how sexy he thinks he is. [email] republicans It's pretty pathetic when you have to TELL people you're fucking cool Skymama «narrative»This thread will lock in 3..2.. What a load of narrow-minded Xenophobic Bullshit!-squeak Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #11 July 7, 2008 No pardon was given. Not sure what 'rap' to which you're referring. Mr. Libby was convicted of perjury. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #12 July 7, 2008 Quote Your opinion on pardoning Marc Rich? Was President Clinton above the law as well? An indictment is different than a conviction and sentencing. Pardoning a person that was indicted 20 years prior, and has no personal connection to you is different from commuting the sentence of your friend and employee that was convicted and sentenced to jail while you are still in office, and to whom you are associated directly. Not that I would defend Clinton from this - probably all Presidential pardons constitute an abuse of power. QuoteGerald Ford for his pardon of Nixon? Let's not forget Bush Sr's pardon of many figures involved in the Iran-Contra scandal, while he was the Vice President. Quotethe case was preposterous Are you stating that the jury that convicted Libby was guilty of party politics? Were the jury all democrats or something??Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #13 July 7, 2008 The jury? Not at all. The decision to prosecute? Absolutely. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Leapinglizardto 0 #14 July 7, 2008 contempt. I'm just trying to start some shit, before I go away for a few days, where I won't be able to access the internet. republicans, jeéz.It's pretty pathetic when you have to TELL people you're fucking cool Skymama «narrative»This thread will lock in 3..2.. What a load of narrow-minded Xenophobic Bullshit!-squeak Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #15 July 7, 2008 Presidential pardons are Constitutional. Kangaroo courts aren't. Imprisonment without any hearing isn't.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #16 July 7, 2008 QuotePresidential pardons are Constitutional. Bush didn't pardon Libby - he commuted the sentence while upholding the conviction and fine. I don't think that's in the constitution. It's a cowboy president making up his own laws as he sees fit. The "checks and balances" are neither being checked, nor are they balanced. Quote The jury? Not at all. The decision to prosecute? Absolutely. That's no different than anyplace else in the justice system. Someone with bias brings a case (maybe a district attorney), and that's why we have a jury system. If you believe the jury was non-partisan, then you must believe their decision was non-biased, and according to our laws, the judgment AND sentence (both performed by a jury) should be upheld.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Leapinglizardto 0 #17 July 8, 2008 Quote It's a cowboy president making up his own laws as he sees fit. The "checks and balances" are neither being checked, nor are they balanced. end of story.It's pretty pathetic when you have to TELL people you're fucking cool Skymama «narrative»This thread will lock in 3..2.. What a load of narrow-minded Xenophobic Bullshit!-squeak Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
