RunRyder RC
 10  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 6 pages [ <<    <     1      2     ( 3 )     4      5     NEXT    >> ] 3821 views POST REPLY
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterOff Topics › Rove should be held in comtempt for this.
07-12-2008 06:55 PM  9 years agoPost 41
Sealerman

rrVeteran

Long Island, New York.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

After all, Bobby Kennedy illegally surveilled MLK. Not to mention what Hoover did. We are very far from anything remotely resembling that.
LMAO Stet how do you know that?
I do not consider listening to phone calls to be an unreasonable search and seizure especially when we are at war. Lincoln completely suspended Habius Corpus for citizens, we survived that.
Stet you are one ignorant fool, what does violating the FISA laws have to do with "unreasonable search and seizure" and "suspended Habius Corpus for citizens" If Rove has nothing to hide why doesn't he just talk?
You don't even have a single victim who you can cite, just a paranoid reaction founded on your spite for Bush.
So why the immunity for anyone? There are many cases to site, look them up.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 07:01 PM  9 years agoPost 42
JohnLund

rrNovice

Corpus Christi, TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Stet you are one ignorant fool, what does violating the FISA laws have to do with "unreasonable search and seizure" and "suspended Habius Corpus for citizens" If Rove has nothing to hide why doesn't he just talk?
It is interesting that people that think that if you have nothing to hide, things like unwarranted searches, and secret wiretapping are ok, but when one of the politicians they support has to answer for his actions, it's a waste of time, and he shouldn't have to be subjected to it, and can just ignore it.

Ron's Heliproz South

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 07:05 PM  9 years agoPost 43
Sealerman

rrVeteran

Long Island, New York.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Well said John, that is what I was trying to say.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 07:45 PM  9 years agoPost 44
Stet

rrElite Veteran

Key Largo FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

How do you know otherwise Sealer? You don't.

The Government has a system in place to track terror related phone calls. But the loons extrapolate that to something it isn't. At the peril of our intelligence gathering capability.

Wear it proudly:

keepin' it real

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 07:50 PM  9 years agoPost 45
Stet

rrElite Veteran

Key Largo FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The original article makes it pretty clear what is at issue in the Rove case and seems clearly to side with the plain facts. You guys get lost in trying to tear down Rove and Bush over nothing. I guess the feds are supposed to prosecute only dirty Republicans and ignore the Dems for fear that the prosecutions might be "politically motivated". The article pretty much debunks that and pretty clearly shows the process to be a circus with protesters in place holding signs saying he should be arrested.

keepin' it real

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 07:56 PM  9 years agoPost 46
LouInSD

rrVeteran

San Diego CA USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The issue is ignoring a subpoena. That is flagrant disrespect for the law. Which is okay if you're a Republican...according to nutcases like Stet...

Stet-logic: Wiretapping American citizens is okay as long as we don't know about it and can't prove it's happening...

LOL

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 08:00 PM  9 years agoPost 47
Sealerman

rrVeteran

Long Island, New York.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The Government has a system in place to track terror related phone calls. But the loons extrapolate that to something it isn't. At the peril of our intelligence gathering capability.
LOL, yea Stet so why does anyone need immunity?
You guys get lost in trying to tear down Rove and Bush over nothing.
So why don't they just talk?
I guess the feds are supposed to prosecute only dirty Republicans and ignore the Dems for fear that the prosecutions
Yea thats it Stet.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 08:36 PM  9 years agoPost 48
JohnLund

rrNovice

Corpus Christi, TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The original article makes it pretty clear what is at issue in the Rove case and seems clearly to side with the plain facts. You guys get lost in trying to tear down Rove and Bush over nothing. I guess the feds are supposed to prosecute only dirty Republicans and ignore the Dems for fear that the prosecutions might be "politically motivated". The article pretty much debunks that and pretty clearly shows the process to be a circus with protesters in place holding signs saying he should be arrested.
I don't see anyone here saying that only Bush and Rove should be held accountable, just the opposite. Maybe there's something you know about some posters, but you are the only one mentioning that people are just looking to see those two taken down, and ignoring the democrats.

Ron's Heliproz South

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 09:54 PM  9 years agoPost 49
Stet

rrElite Veteran

Key Largo FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

How many Dems have received subpoenas from Linda Sanchez?

It is now for the courts to decide the validity of the subpoena.

keepin' it real

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 10:03 PM  9 years agoPost 50
LouInSD

rrVeteran

San Diego CA USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Yet another irrelevant smokescreen question from Stet.

It is totally obvious that the Bush admin was on a withchunt and was targeting Dem officeholders and judges while trying to install Repubs in their places. Repubs cant win on the issues so they resort to corruption.

The subpoena is the first step in punishing people for corruption. Sorry but thats the American way Stet. If you like corruption so much move to another country...we dont like it so much here...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-12-2008 11:20 PM  9 years agoPost 51
Stet

rrElite Veteran

Key Largo FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Normally a new administration purges all of these appointed individuals.

This was a mistake not to do so by the Bush admin, had they done so, they would have had less problems.

So it is not corruption at all. So once again it is a circus, and no need to play dat.

Let's just say Rove was involved in the discussions of terminating the lawyers. Is the act of terminating them illegal? Answer, no.

keepin' it real

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-16-2008 08:58 AM  9 years agoPost 52
LouInSD

rrVeteran

San Diego CA USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Stet,

I'm not surprised that you would attempt a bald-faced lie like that, but what is amazing is that you think you're going to get away with it...

Both Rove and Alberto Gonzales resigned BECAUSE they were under fire over the politically motivated firings of Democrat U.S. attorneys or Repub U.S. attorneys who refused to be used as attack dogs for the Bush administration.

The common thread in all these firings is that they were seen as unwilling to cross the line and break the law for the sleazy, corrupt Bush mafiosos...

In the case of Carol Lam from San Diego, she convicted Republican Duke "crybaby" Cunningham for corruption and was about to go after 3 CIA employees for corruption.

The politicization and corruption involved in these firings is unprecedented. That's what MAKES it a scandal, Mr Denial..

This guy refused to be unethical and go along with what the Administration was asking so he was fired...

Only a real traitor would defend this type of corruption...

************************************************
Why I Was Fired

By DAVID C. IGLESIAS
Published: March 21, 2007
Albuquerque

WITH this week’s release of more than 3,000 Justice Department e-mail messages about the dismissal of eight federal prosecutors, it seems clear that politics played a role in the ousters.

Of course, as one of the eight, I’ve felt this way for some time. But now that the record is out there in black and white for the rest of the country to see, the argument that we were fired for “performance related” reasons (in the words of Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty) is starting to look more than a little wobbly.

United States attorneys have a long history of being insulated from politics. Although we receive our appointments through the political process (I am a Republican who was recommended by Senator Pete Domenici), we are expected to be apolitical once we are in office. I will never forget John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, telling me during the summer of 2001 that politics should play no role during my tenure. I took that message to heart. Little did I know that I could be fired for not being political.

Politics entered my life with two phone calls that I received last fall, just before the November election. One came from Representative Heather Wilson and the other from Senator Domenici, both Republicans from my state, New Mexico.

Ms. Wilson asked me about sealed indictments pertaining to a politically charged corruption case widely reported in the news media involving local Democrats. Her question instantly put me on guard. Prosecutors may not legally talk about indictments, so I was evasive. Shortly after speaking to Ms. Wilson, I received a call from Senator Domenici at my home. The senator wanted to know whether I was going to file corruption charges — the cases Ms. Wilson had been asking about — before November. When I told him that I didn’t think so, he said, “I am very sorry to hear that,” and the line went dead.

A few weeks after those phone calls, my name was added to a list of United States attorneys who would be asked to resign — even though I had excellent office evaluations, the biggest political corruption prosecutions in New Mexico history, a record number of overall prosecutions and a 95 percent conviction rate. (In one of the documents released this week, I was deemed a “diverse up and comer” in 2004. Two years later I was asked to resign with no reasons given.)

When some of my fired colleagues — Daniel Bogden of Las Vegas; Paul Charlton of Phoenix; H. E. Cummins III of Little Rock, Ark.; Carol Lam of San Diego; and John McKay of Seattle — and I testified before Congress on March 6, a disturbing pattern began to emerge. Not only had we not been insulated from politics, we had apparently been singled out for political reasons. (Among the Justice Department’s released documents is one describing the office of Senator Domenici as being “happy as a clam” that I was fired.)

As this story has unfolded these last few weeks, much has been made of my decision to not prosecute alleged voter fraud in New Mexico. Without the benefit of reviewing evidence gleaned from F.B.I. investigative reports, party officials in my state have said that I should have begun a prosecution. What the critics, who don’t have any experience as prosecutors, have asserted is reprehensible — namely that I should have proceeded without having proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The public has a right to believe that prosecution decisions are made on legal, not political, grounds.

What’s more, their narrative has largely ignored that I was one of just two United States attorneys in the country to create a voter-fraud task force in 2004. Mine was bipartisan, and it included state and local law enforcement and election officials.

After reviewing more than 100 complaints of voter fraud, I felt there was one possible case that should be prosecuted federally. I worked with the F.B.I. and the Justice Department’s public integrity section. As much as I wanted to prosecute the case, I could not overcome evidentiary problems. The Justice Department and the F.B.I. did not disagree with my decision in the end not to prosecute.

Good has already come from this scandal. Yesterday, the Senate voted to overturn a 2006 provision in the Patriot Act that allows the attorney general to appoint indefinite interim United States attorneys. The attorney general’s chief of staff has resigned and been replaced by a respected career federal prosecutor, Chuck Rosenberg. The president and attorney general have admitted that “mistakes were made,” and Mr. Domenici and Ms. Wilson have publicly acknowledged calling me.

President Bush addressed this scandal yesterday. I appreciate his gratitude for my service — this marks the first time I have been thanked. But only a written retraction by the Justice Department setting the record straight regarding my performance would settle the issue for me.

David C. Iglesias was United States attorney for the District of New Mexico from October 2001 through last month.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-16-2008 03:36 PM  9 years agoPost 53
Stet

rrElite Veteran

Key Largo FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Your zeal for self righteousness, slander and overstatement never diminshes. Bottom line, it does not matter what the motivation is, firing them is not a crime. Just like outing Joe Wilson's wife. Not a crime. Wilson's lying to the senate committee about his "findings" should have been a crime in my estimation, but that was not pursued by the administration.

And given your extraordinary ESP, of course you know the reasons for their removal and the reasons for the firings. Regardless, the reasons don't matter. Nor does your rage and overinflated ego.

keepin' it real

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-16-2008 03:48 PM  9 years agoPost 54
Pistol Pete

rrProfessor

Seffner, FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

whos winning? dems or cons? condems?

this is just another wag the dog BS while we slowly decay away into "what great nation?"

~~Enjoying the hobby one flight at a time~~

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  BLOGAttn:RR
07-16-2008 11:14 PM  9 years agoPost 55
LouInSD

rrVeteran

San Diego CA USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Stet,

As I said,

Only a real traitor would defend this type of corruption...

and to punctuate it with a statement saying that outing a covert CIA agent is anything less than treason is further evidence that you are a traitor to this country...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-17-2008 02:12 AM  9 years agoPost 56
Stet

rrElite Veteran

Key Largo FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

She was not a covert agent

She misused her office and sent her husband on a trip for political purposes, to discredit her ultimate boss

He lied and said Cheney sent him

He lied about his findings, documented in the senate report about the whole stink

Now we move the 500 tons of yello cake out of Iraq to be processed in canada, you know, the stuff he said never went to Iraq

She was outed by a state department employee named Richard Armitage to Novak

So you want to call me a traitor?

You are just a jerk who looks for fights.

Note the following:

1) She was not covert
2) Richard Armitage leaked her name to Novak
3) If a crime were committed, Armitage would have been charged. No crime, no charge
4) In the witch hunt, Libby lied just like Martha Stewart, both stupid. Both paid the price.

You have a problem with keeping current with the facts.

keepin' it real

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-17-2008 02:33 AM  9 years agoPost 57
JohnLund

rrNovice

Corpus Christi, TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Stet, none of that matters. Playing the "well, they did this, so we can do this" game is BS. If Rove, or any other government employee is subpoenaed, than they have to show up, just like everyone else in America, or pay the cost. It is because we live in a land of laws that we are free, when those that create and enforce laws start ignoring them they lose there meaning, and soon there is anarchy.

Ron's Heliproz South

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR
07-17-2008 03:07 AM  9 years agoPost 58
Stet

rrElite Veteran

Key Largo FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

That is right, therefore it is up to the courts to decide if it is enforceable.

And no they do not have to show up. You don't see the marshal arresting him, do you? Nor will you.

So it is not up to someone's opinion as to whether he has a legal obligation to appear in a dog and pony show, regardless of what you think. The process and rules are a little more complicated than that.

keepin' it real

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-17-2008 09:24 AM  9 years agoPost 59
TrexRookie

rrKey Veteran

San Francisco, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

On one hand, we have the Republicans, who are quite obviously the wrong choice... and on the other hand, we have the Democrats... who are...
also...................... the wrong....... cho... damnit, what now?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
07-17-2008 12:53 PM  9 years agoPost 60
SSN Pru

rrElite Veteran

Taxachusetts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I see on the news this AM that Bush yanked out the "Executive Privilege" card again about some FBI report that Congress wants to read...

It's really looking to me like Bush and company are trying to cover something up by hiding behind executive privilege.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
WATCH
 6 pages [ <<    <     1      2     ( 3 )     4      5     NEXT    >> ] 3821 views POST REPLY
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterOff Topics › Rove should be held in comtempt for this.
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 10  Topic Subscribe

Tuesday, September 26 - 5:21 pm - Copyright © 2000-2017 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online