Grammar-Nazi Wrote:Clinton hasn't killed anyone. More than 3,500 U.S. soldiers, and God knows how many innocent women and children in Iraq, have died because of Bush's lies and his corrupt administration. Bush himself promised anyone involved with the leaking of Plame's identity would be held accountable, and now he proves he lied when he said that, too.

Bush and Cheney should both be impeached for their crimes in office, and then, they should be held accountable in the Hague for their crimes against humanity.

Kool-Aid Drinker,

Libby had zero to do with Plame, he was charged with a process crime. If you are worried about the fate of the 'leaker' of non-covert agent Plame, I suggest calling the Prosecutor's office and ask him why he did not Charge Richard Armitage with any crimes..

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Changing the subject still doesn't absolve you of the fact that Bush commuted the sentence of someone who was convicted on 4 felony charges due to a coverup.

Changing what subject? Anyone on this site that leans at least a percentage point past moonbat knows this entire fiasco was political, and you prove it with everything you post. If you were "really" interested in justice, you'd be bitching about Sandy Berger stuffing and destroying documents pertaining to national security and getting a slap on the wrist. If you were "really" interested in executive privilege, and what you feel to be an injustice, you'd have been up in arms over Clinton. You aren't. It's all about sticking it to a political foe. I don't play that ****, never have, never will. You've proven yourself to be a political whore.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:And outing a covert CIA operative is a crime. They just got away with it.

Oh really? Then why was Richard Armitage never charged with a crime your honor? Especially since he actually admitted to being the one that "outed" Plame?

Everything about this entire episode was political down to the guts. Your "outrage" about it is just further proof.

Except for the fact that the presiding judge in the Libby case was a Bush appointee, you might have room to make that case.

Perhaps you're not familiar with how our justice system works, but judges don't bring charges, prosecutors do.

I'll ask again, if it was a crime to out Plame, why has Armitage not been charged?

And FYI, Libby wasn't charged with outing Plame, he was charged with obstruction of justice. He was charged for lying about something when there was no underlying crime.

What difference would it make? Bush would pardon him too.

Heck, pardons for everybody!

LOL! I guess we've reached the inevitable point with you Greg. You can't back up your point of view, so you just deflect.

Well done.

No, deflection is changing the subject of

"Bush pardoning Libby as a reward for falling on his sword and helping cover up the illegal outing of a covert CIA operative in retaliation to Joseph Wilson's debunking of Bush's '16 words'"

to

"Clinton pardoned criminals too."

GGniner Wrote:Kool-Aid Drinker,

Libby had zero to do with Plame, he was charged with a process crime. If you are worried about the fate of the 'leaker' of non-covert agent Plame, I suggest calling the Prosecutor's office and ask him why he did not Charge Richard Armitage with any crimes..

RebelKev Wrote:Changing what subject? Anyone on this site that leans at least a percentage point past moonbat knows this entire fiasco was political, and you prove it with everything you post. If you were "really" interested in justice, you'd be bitching about Sandy Berger stuffing and destroying documents pertaining to national security and getting a slap on the wrist. If you were "really" interested in executive privilege, and what you feel to be an injustice, you'd have been up in arms over Clinton. You aren't. It's all about sticking it to a political foe. I don't play that ****, never have, never will. You've proven yourself to be a political whore.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:And outing a covert CIA operative is a crime. They just got away with it.

Oh really? Then why was Richard Armitage never charged with a crime your honor? Especially since he actually admitted to being the one that "outed" Plame?

Everything about this entire episode was political down to the guts. Your "outrage" about it is just further proof.

Except for the fact that the presiding judge in the Libby case was a Bush appointee, you might have room to make that case.

Perhaps you're not familiar with how our justice system works, but judges don't bring charges, prosecutors do.

I'll ask again, if it was a crime to out Plame, why has Armitage not been charged?

And FYI, Libby wasn't charged with outing Plame, he was charged with obstruction of justice. He was charged for lying about something when there was no underlying crime.

What difference would it make? Bush would pardon him too.

Heck, pardons for everybody!

LOL! I guess we've reached the inevitable point with you Greg. You can't back up your point of view, so you just deflect.

Well done.

No, deflection is changing the subject of

"Bush pardoning Libby as a reward for falling on his sword and helping cover up the illegal outing of a covert CIA operative in retaliation to Joseph Wilson's debunking of Bush's '16 words'"

to

"Clinton pardoned criminals too."

And yet once again you still haven't answered the question. Obviously you realize that you can't, because you know the answer debunks your entire view on this matter.

And of course you'd rather be wrong and not admit it than be intellectually honest about this discussion. And here I thought you were the master debator.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:And outing a covert CIA operative is a crime. They just got away with it.

Oh really? Then why was Richard Armitage never charged with a crime your honor? Especially since he actually admitted to being the one that "outed" Plame?

Everything about this entire episode was political down to the guts. Your "outrage" about it is just further proof.

Except for the fact that the presiding judge in the Libby case was a Bush appointee, you might have room to make that case.

Perhaps you're not familiar with how our justice system works, but judges don't bring charges, prosecutors do.

I'll ask again, if it was a crime to out Plame, why has Armitage not been charged?

And FYI, Libby wasn't charged with outing Plame, he was charged with obstruction of justice. He was charged for lying about something when there was no underlying crime.

What difference would it make? Bush would pardon him too.

Heck, pardons for everybody!

LOL! I guess we've reached the inevitable point with you Greg. You can't back up your point of view, so you just deflect.

Well done.

No, deflection is changing the subject of

"Bush pardoning Libby as a reward for falling on his sword and helping cover up the illegal outing of a covert CIA operative in retaliation to Joseph Wilson's debunking of Bush's '16 words'"

to

"Clinton pardoned criminals too."

And yet once again you still haven't answered the question. Obviously you realize that you can't, because you know the answer debunks your entire view on this matter.

And of course you'd rather be wrong and not admit it than be intellectually honest about this discussion. And here I thought you were the master debator.

I answered the question. You are playing dodge ball.

aTxTIGER Wrote:yea, it definitely looks bad. not surprising however. at least he didnt pardon him completely, just commuted his sentence. scooter still cant own a gun or vote....just saying.

Actually, I think that it's more wrong that he can neither own a gun or vote, but hey, that's just me.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:I answered the question. You are playing dodge ball.

You are so insanely bad at this it's hilarious.

Perhaps you need a recap.

You said

Quote:And outing a covert CIA operative is a crime. They just got away with it.

To which I asked

Quote:Then why was Richard Armitage never charged with a crime your honor? Especially since he actually admitted to being the one that "outed" Plame?

Since then you've tried to tell us judges can bring charges against someone for a crime and you then offered up that it doesn't matter, Bush would have pardoned Armitage anyway. Neither of which answer the question of, if outing Plame was a crime, why wasn't Armitage charged?

That is the question you are asked to answer. And the more you deflect, the more you avoid it just simply cements the fact you're wrong, you simply don't care that you're wrong, and you lack the intellectual honesty to acknowledge it.

Pitiful.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:I answered the question. You are playing dodge ball.

You are so insanely bad at this it's hilarious.

Perhaps you need a recap.

You said

Quote:And outing a covert CIA operative is a crime. They just got away with it.

To which I asked

Quote:Then why was Richard Armitage never charged with a crime your honor? Especially since he actually admitted to being the one that "outed" Plame?

Since then you've tried to tell us judges can bring charges against someone for a crime and you then offered up that it doesn't matter, Bush would have pardoned Armitage anyway. Neither of which answer the question of, if outing Plame was a crime, why wasn't Armitage charged?

That is the question you are asked to answer. And the more you deflect, the more you avoid it just simply cements the fact you're wrong, you simply don't care that you're wrong, and you lack the intellectual honesty to acknowledge it.

Pitiful.

The only thing that's pitiful here is your game of dodge ball.

Answer these questions. A yes or no will do.

1) Was Scooter Libby convicted of a crime in a court of law?
2) Did Bush commute his sentence?

Grammar-Nazi Wrote:Clinton hasn't killed anyone. More than 3,500 U.S. soldiers, and God knows how many innocent women and children in Iraq, have died because of Bush's lies and his corrupt administration. Bush himself promised anyone involved with the leaking of Plame's identity would be held accountable, and now he proves he lied when he said that, too.

Bush and Cheney should both be impeached for their crimes in office, and then, they should be held accountable in the Hague for their crimes against humanity.

Libby wasn't charged with having anything to do with outing Plame. In fact, the investigation revealed that it was Richard Armitage who was responsible for that...again, how is the prosecution of Armitage progressing?

the other Greg Childers Wrote:The only thing that's pitiful here is your game of dodge ball.

Pot, meet kettle.

Quote:Answer these questions. A yes or no will do.

1) Was Scooter Libby convicted of a crime in a court of law?
2) Did Bush commute his sentence?

Yes and yes. Neither of which I have ever disputed.

Now how about you do something you are incapable, or unwilling to do. Defend your position. I'll restate it.

Quote:And outing a covert CIA operative is a crime. They just got away with it.

And I'll restate my question for you yet again. If it was a crime to out Plame, and they got away with it as you state, why was Armitage never charged?

Simple question master debator, how bout you actually nut up and answer it?

Our entire justice system relies on people being honest when they are subpoeaned. This wasn't an interrogation about a bj. It was trying to find out if our country was misled into a war that has killed 3500 people and counting. I find it quite amusing the same people who were up in arms about 8 years ago ar so blas e' today. Karma's a ***** boys. This was a Bush quid pro quo. You take the fall for Cheney and me and you never spend a day in jail. Why would anyone in W's administration cooperate in any investigation? That 20 billion that's unaccounted for in Iraq reconstruction? We will never find out what happened to that money. My donor's need a war. My donor's need EPA laws to be taken back to the 60's. My donor's need......................


It's quid pro quo boy's.................

but don't think this won't cost them in 2008, unless they can pull another Fl. in 2000 or Ohio in 2004 again.

2008 is already lost to them, unless the Dems REALLY eff it up.

I wouldn't put it past them to do that, BTW...

Machiavelli Wrote:blah blah blah blah

Sophandros Wrote:2008 is already lost to them, unless the Dems REALLY eff it up.

Keep thinking that. Seems I've heard it before.

RebelKev Wrote:

Sophandros Wrote:2008 is already lost to them, unless the Dems REALLY eff it up.

Keep thinking that. Seems I've heard it before.

No, I think that the Republicans have pretty much conceded 2008, and are going to try to start things up again with the next mid-term elections, ala the Contract on--err--With America days with Newt.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:And I'll restate my question for you yet again. If it was a crime to out Plame, and they got away with it as you state, why was Armitage never charged?

Since my name is not Patrick Fitzgerald, I can only speculate that he was not charged because he would probably walk, exactly like Libby did.

The fact that he got away with it still does not have anything to do with the fact that he broke the law.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:The fact that he got away with it still does not have anything to do with the fact that he broke the law.

Since when do you give a rat's ass about the law?

Machiavelli Wrote:It was trying to find out if our country was misled into a war that has killed 3500 people and counting.

Not to let the facts get in the way or anything but Fitzgerald's investigation had nothing to do with the war.

Quote:but don't think this won't cost them in 2008, unless they can pull another Fl. in 2000 or Ohio in 2004 again.

Nothing happened in Florida in 2000, and nothing happened in Ohio in 2004. Loosen the tin foil hat dogger, it's cutting off the circulation again.

RebelKev Wrote:

the other Greg Childers Wrote:The fact that he got away with it still does not have anything to do with the fact that he broke the law.

Since when do you give a rat's ass about the law?

When it involves treason and coverups.

I guess you only care about it when Democrats get arrested.