We have a lot of conservatives here... is it time for Bush/Cheney to resign?

[Joshu]

How many GOP members over the Bush administration have resigned due to personal finances / lying / illegal fund spending / pedophilia compared to dems? There is a senator from Alaska (very powerful and admired) that said he may resign because an upcoming probe regarding his personal finances could "cause me some trouble".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/...nvestigation_9

[Roger in Kensington]

So, you think Libby was innocent?
Did he get a fair trail?
Was his sentence harsher than the usual and prescribed?
What does Clinton have to do with Scooter's guilt or innocence, anyway?
Do we let a felon off because we didnt like how another defendant was litigated?
Do you really approved of the original basis for Scooter lying and obstructing, namely that the administration wanted to needlessly discredit and humiliate someone who disagreed with them, and used govt agencies illegally to do so, when they should have been running the war worth half a damn(OH, thats right, mission accomplished, silly me!)?
Okay, have at it. Thank God this line of thought is finally not politically advantageous. But pls stop the 'well, Clinton did worse..' lines. Sheesh...

Observant readers will note that I did not claim that "Clinton did worse." In fact, I suggested that both he and Libby should be pardoned. That would have effectively thwarted the predictable caterwauling.

Since you mention it, exactly what was the original basis for the charges against Libby? Not what you claim. Patrick Fitzgerald never brought any charges regarding the illegal use of government agencies. If you have evidence of such illegal use, would you please present it here?

In fact, Mr. Fitzgerald already knew before he indicted Libby that Libby had not "leaked" Valerie Plame's name (Richard Armitage did), but it didn't matter because Ms. Plame was no longer covered by the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. Plame wasn't covert!

Who said so? Her husband, Joe Wilson, said so, that's who.

So, yes, IMHO Libby is innocent, at least of the obstruction of justice charge. How can there be an obstruction of justice when there is no underlying crime? (This opinion is shared by David Boies, Al Gore's lawyer during the 2000 election vote recount.)

My point, though, is that a commutation keeps alive the possibility that Libby's convictions will be set aside after appeal. Whatcha gonna do if that happens, Mike?

According to an article in the July 10, 2004, issue of that right-wing rag The Washington Post, Joe Wilson was found to have lied about not finding evidence that Iraq had attempted to acquire yellowcake uranium from Niger. You can read more about this here.

By the way, Mike, our troops located and removed 500 tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq following the invasion.

One last thing:

On October 2, 2002, the Congress passed a Joint Resolution authorizing the president to use force against Iraq. The Congress established 23 reasons for this action.

For you, Mike, and all on this Board of similiar opinion . . .

With which of these 23 reasons do you disagree?

[Jeff_in_Atl]

What R.I.K. said. Yes he is innocent. This should have never happened.

[Dave M]

[Roger in Kensington]

Fascinating . . . but what's your point?

And why is the subject being changed?

[Joshu]

Obviously his point is that terrorism isn't that bad compared to other ways of death. I am NOT downplaying terrorism at all. The topic was not changed by him pointing out that terrorism is a low risk way of death, because GB makes it sound like I am going to die outside of my door tomorrow by Osama with an AK47.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

The highest risk of being killed in the US is by automoble. You could call it extreme on the chart.

You could also say that George Bush has done such an excelent job that there has not been another attack on the US. But there is no way to know without an alternate time line.

[MDMike]

perspective

Obviously his point is that terrorism isn't that bad compared to other ways of death. I am NOT downplaying terrorism at all. The topic was not changed by him pointing out that terrorism is a low risk way of death, because GB makes it sound like I am going to die outside of my door tomorrow by Osama with an AK47.

Bravo.

'Bush was within his constitutional rights commuting Libby's sentence for perjury, false statements and obstruction of justice. He claimed Libby's two-and-a-half-year prison sentence was "excessive."
...this is a man who famously pledged during the 2000 campaign, "In my administration, we will ask not only what is legal, but what is right; not what the lawyers allow, but what the public deserves."' -GATEHOUSE NEWS SERVICE 7/10/07

No crime re outting, but sho nuff re lying.

'In his official statement, President Bush says he believes it's Libby's reputation that has been "forever damaged," adding, "His wife and young children have also suffered immensely."
Nearly 3,600 American men and women and an estimated more than 70,000 civilians are dead in Iraq. Their families suffer immensely. Scooter Libby, a.k.a. Federal Inmate No. 28301-016, walks free.' Ibid

As for yellowcake, here is how we handled it on W's watch: ''The irony is that the Tuwaitha facility south of Baghdad already possessed yellow cake uranium. Between 1980 and 1982, Iraq procured more than 400 tons of yellowcake from Portugal and Niger which remained in a storage complex close to Tuwaitha. [13] [14] The facility and it's yellowcake were monitored and frequently inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency after the 1991 Gulf War. About 1.8 metric tons of "yellow cake" and 500 tons of unrefined uranium went missing as the Iraqis left Tuwaitha unattended during the war. When the facility was first encountered by U.S. Marines, they thought they had stumbled upon an illegal weapons cache; according to nuclear experts, however, they actually wound up breaking the IAEA seals that are "designed to ensure the materials aren't diverted for weapons use or end up in the wrong hands."[16] The Pentagon dispatched a team to survey the site "after a month of official indecision", finding it heavily looted.'' - Barton Gellman, "Iraqi Nuclear Site Is Found Looted", Washington Post (4 May 2003) A1

So for Libby, these and other past lies and crimes made him the first flunkie justice could get their hands on, not the Dems. Sen Rockefeller declined to start hearings when all this broke, so it is no DNC witch hunt.

What will I do when he is pardoned? Since it will likely happen just before or after Bush's departure, rejoice. The return of civility, perspective, and the rule of law will be welcomed. Thank God the conservative agenda is on the wain once again, but who will be the next Rush or Coulter, distracting the weaker of us from the true issues, instead of immorally judging the rest of us?

As the chart points out, the true issues that threaten us is letting Afganistan boil over, poverty and injustice right here in America, and our loss of standing in the world. What a tragedy that our conservative freinds cannot fathom this, and would rather hate folks who are successful without hurting others, but worship the very supply-siders who *** them...
Like Scooter.

[Joshu]

The BIGGEST thing that bothers me about his administration is the secrecy level. He is never straightforward and honest, not to mention gives the same canned response for every question. Why is he commanding some people not to testify? He should not have anything to hide.

At first, it was stated that 0 of the 18 benchmarks for Iraq were met. The Bush administration then debated it and got 8 of 18 because a very limited amount of progress had been made in each category, but enough to say that it was met. The thing is IT WAS NOT MET, only the potential for it being met is there. 8 out of 18 is still failing though in any school in the country, except any one that Bush went to.

[MDMike]

irregardless of how we got to Iraq, one thing is certain; we cannot bail quickly and let the chips fall. Like oil or not, the stability of the world depends on it, and us.
Unspoken reasons for the Iraqi escapade are getting oil, suppressing Iran for the Saudi's benefit, neutralizing Israel's closest missle threat, and drawing Al Qaida someplace where the fallout will least affect us.
These reasons may not have gotten the Iraq portion okayed by Congress, so lies were substituted for the above to various degrees.
As folks such as Wilson began to question the false premises, front burner for the administration was to beat those critics into submission and embarrass them, using Nixon-esque techniques and leaks from the secretive VP office iaw Rove.
Scooter was the point guy for this deception, and he not only perjured himself, but tried to set a standard that would allow the POTUS secretly use govt agencies for political gain, and to silence criticism, recalling the McCarthy era, with Cheney in Nixon's place though much more influential.
You are right. It was all so pointless. We had AQ on the ropes in Afganistan, didnt need Gitmo, spent billions needed at home on Haliburton, p****d off the world when we needed them, made Colin look the fool, and got distracted from the border and Katrina. Mitigating factors like freeing the Iraqi people from Hussien, and castrating Israel's biggest threat are good deeds, but the costs are so high to many families everywhere. Now we must plan the wisest withdrawal in history, with the world's economy on the line and the Iranian question still unaddressed. I myself think McCain would be best for this thankless task, but he seems to be losing steam, so I suppose Edwards is the best alternative.
Scooter should indeed be pardoned. No way one person could ever be held accountable for this mess. So I reckon the answer to the original thread is yes, they should resign.
I do not think Clinton should be pardoned. But i am afraid Cheney will get one...

[Roger in Kensington]

Obviously his point is that terrorism isn't that bad compared to other ways of death. I am NOT downplaying terrorism at all. The topic was not changed by him pointing out that terrorism is a low risk way of death, because GB makes it sound like I am going to die outside of my door tomorrow by Osama with an AK47.

Oh, okay.

The original topic was "should Bush/Cheney resign," with the debate to be based upon "the merits of the argument" of a dithyramb (regarding the Libby commutation) penned by a low-ratings liberal moonbat (Oops, opinions about moonbats are off-limits. The jury will kindly disregard.).

Yet "the topic was not changed by him [i.e., the initiator of this discussion] pointing out that terrorism is a low risk way of death."

So, as I understand the now-morphed question, we should just "get over" the deaths of more than 3000 of our fellow citizens (mostly civilians) during several unprovoked, surprise attacks occurring in major cities located on the mainland of the United States.

Hmmm. Let's see where this line of reasoning takes us:

On December 7, 1941, approximately 2400 people (mostly military) were killed during the unprovoked surprise attack upon the American Pacific Fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Apparently, we should have just "gotten over" this. After all, Hawaii wasn't even a state (nor were Guam, The Philippines, Wake Island, a couple islands off Alaska, and other American territories and possessions that were attacked). Besides, these were "just" military deaths.

And wasn't it our fault anyway because President Franklin Roosevelt had cut off Japan's oil supply?

On December 8, 1941, the war-monger Roosevelt asked Congress for a declaration of war against – but only against – Imperial Japan.

On December 11, after Germany and Italy had declared war against the United States (and were torpedoing American ships just off the East Coast), that over-reacting, bloody-handed, racist tyrant (who by then had ordered the unconstitutional internment in concentration camps of American citizens of Japanese ancestry) asked for and got yet another declaration of war, this time against Germany and Italy.

Why? Neither Germany nor Italy attacked us on December 7. It's obvious that Roosevelt caused 12/7 to deflect attention from his mishandling of the domestic economy.

Pearl Harbor was an inside job!!!!

During the next three-and-a-half years, 400,000 American military personnel were killed and many, many more were wounded fighting Mr. Roosevelt's war.

All this fuss over such a trivial matter as a few thousand soldiers and sailors being killed and some obsolescent ships being sunk in some far-distant place. So what? For everyone else back home there was a low risk of death. And didn't we deserve to be attacked since it was all our fault in the first place?

Was it worth it?
____________________________

In The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, author William L. Shirer wonders how the world could dismiss Hitler's intentions when he had made his plans very clear in Mein Kampf. Seeing today how the current threat is so easily dismissed by some, I can understand.

It has been my experience that when liberals are losing the argument, they either change the subject, lapse into irrelevant histrionics, or try to end the debate with personal invectives. Nothing I've seen so far on this discussion thread changes that perception.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

bla bla bla lol

If the media of 2007 had been around in 1941 it would have sounded exactly as you wrote it.

Has anyone ever noticed how they call Bill Clinton "president Clinton" (even though he isn't president anymore) and they call George Bush "Mr. Bush"? How disrespectful that is.

[Joshu]

Bush deserves no respect. He's lost it in the eyes of the public. GB is a liar and fool.

How long was the US in WW2 for? Compare that to Iraq! We at least made progress during WW2, this Iraq business has just thrown us backwards.

And it is time to get over 9/11. GB has beaten this dead horse to a pulp. I respect all humanity, it doesn't matter if you are American or Muslim. We got over our 3000 deaths by killing hundreds of thousands of people abroad. Afghanistan was justified, Iraq and this president are jokes.

I'm tired of "these colors don't run" redneckism.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

Bush deserves no respect. He's lost it in the eyes of the public. GB is a liar and fool.

Give me one example of a lie Bush told. Remember a lie is a statement that when you make it you know it to be untrue. If you say something you believe is true and it later turns out to be false it is not a lie it is a mistake. Don't ignore this, give me an example.

How long was the US in WW2 for? Compare that to Iraq! We at least made progress during WW2, this Iraq business has just thrown us backwards.

You totally missed Rogers point. In WW2 we didn't have an entire political party who was actively trying to get America defeated in order to gain more votes for the next election.

And it is time to get over 9/11. GB has beaten this dead horse to a pulp. I respect all humanity, it doesn't matter if you are American or Muslim. We got over our 3000 deaths by killing hundreds of thousands of people abroad. Afghanistan was justified, Iraq and this president are jokes.

What is a joke is people who have bought into the liberal spin on this war in order to get democrats elected. How many times does it have to be proven that there was a direct connection with the hijackers of 9/11 and Iraq? You can't ignore facts because you don't like them.

I'm tired of "these colors don't run" redneckism.

If someone won't defend this country they don't deserve to live here. Period. A lot of other countries require every male to do a minimum 2 years of service in their armed force. They do it to survive. We live in the greatest country on the earth. We are lucky we don't have to do that here. But unfortunately it has led to people not understanding what it means to be proud of their country because they have not had to defend it. You can call that spoiled. Those people should have to go live abroad where they have things like terrorist attacks every day. They happen because they do not have the man power to go on the offensive. They have to sit back and take it on the chin when some Islamic goon decides to blow himself up in some restaurant and take out 20 innocent men, women and children because he doesn't like their religion. Thank God we have the ability and a president who has the courage to go on the offensive and fight the Islamic fascist in another country rather than here in America.

[Joshu]

First off, this is going to be fun.

Give me one example of a lie Bush told. Remember a lie is a statement that when you make it you know it to be untrue. If you say something you believe is true and it later turns out to be false it is not a lie it is a mistake. Don't ignore this, give me an example.

Aight, I won't ignore you. Watch the State of the Union? Remember this and te WMD hunt?

“leaves no doubt that . . . Iraq . . . continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.”

Vice President Cheney also was part of the chorus and declared that

“there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."

Bush said on Polish television that "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories." [5/29/03]That qualifies as a lie right there. Wait we did? Must have missed that.

What is a joke is people who have bought into the liberal spin on this war in order to get democrats elected. How many times does it have to be proven that there was a direct connection with the hijackers of 9/11 and Iraq? You can't ignore facts because you don't like them.

Direct from the 9/11 report:

Both the Senate Intelligence Committee and the 9-11 Commission found “no credible evidence of a collaborative relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda.”

Close, but no cigar there. Similar reports have echoed the same idea.

But back to the Bush lie thing: The 2006 Senate Intelligence Committe negated everything he claimed:

Findings do not support the 2002 NIE judgment that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.
Findings do not support the 2002 NIE assessment that Iraq's acquisition of high-strength aluminum tubes was intended for an Iraqi nuclear program.
Findings do not support the 2002 NIE assessment that Iraq has biological weapons.
Findings do not support the 2002 NIE assessment that Iraq possessed, or ever developed, mobile facilities for producing biological warfare agents.
Findings do not support the 2002 NIE assessment that Iraq "has chemical weapons" or "is expanding its chemical industry to support chemical weapons."
Findings do not support the 2002 NIE assessment that Iraq likely retained covert SCUD SRBMs.
Findings do not support the 2002 NIE assessment that Iraq and developed a program for an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle to deliver biological agents.

But back to the thread point...You can't screw up this bad and expect people to like you and want to lead them. Hence, get your rear out of office.