Rumsfeld and Ashcroft in legal Jeopardy

So it's a big crisis warranting impeachment when a President lies about screwing around and it's of no consequence when a President and his men lie and break the law in matters directly related to their public responsibilities? Personally, I think both are important but that what happens in a person's admittedly messed up personal life is of minor consequence in comparison with what is done in connection with official duties. Nixon tried to assert a form of presidential privilege, saying that any action ordered by the President could not be a crime. It was a neat theory but it doesn't hold water under our laws. Bush/Cheney have tried to assert similar privilege. I believe that it's important that we reject the notion of such an imperial presidency unless you are eager to see Obama wield that same sort of autonomous authority. I am not and I voted for him.

I also hope that Bush issues a blanket pardon. It will avoid tearing the country up trying to assign blame for things that never should have been permitted to happen and will stand as a monument to the abject moral failure of this administration. During his first campaign, Bush said he would restore honor to the White House. He has left it much more stained than he found it. Hopefully the next crowd will do better. If not, we should throw them out as well.

Interestingly, a Presidential pardon would offer no protection against civil suits. It also offers no protection against prosecution by any number of countries which allow universal jurisdiction for war crimes. FWIW, Clinton was held accountable for his mis-deeds both in civil court where he paid a lot in damages and in state court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cotts135

I know all you manly men who call yourselves conservatives and have guns, think that anyone who doesn't think like you do are weak or limp spined. I can tell you from working 22 yrs as a Corrections officer in NY that some of these guys who yelled the loudest how tough they were and owned guns were some of the biggest pus#%$ I knew. The guys that didn't say much and who I am sure you would consider weak, were the guys who were there when you needed them most.



As I have posted in here before, I have no problem with that at all. If you were involved then you need to be held accountable if the courts find that a crime was commited.




It didn't work for Germans at Nuremburg did it? The punishments were different though.



This is really nonsense. It seems you could rationalize anything that doesn't fit neatly into your hypocritical thinking.

If they broke the law then be man enough to be held accountable for it..

---

You say manly men like that is a bad thing.. What else are men supposed to act like ....womanly men?

As for the other generalizations, simply because you project a position does not make it so. Who in the world said anything like guys that yell the loudest are the toughest? That is simply a ridiculous rant. Isn't it the liberal leftist terrorist credo, those who whine the loudest eventually get their whacked out version of reality to become public policy? I see in the news that again Israel is the bad guy because they won't sit down and take their rocket attacks like good boys and girls. And not surprisingly the media demands to know why don't they just leave the poor terrorists alone. ...the world is turned upside down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marvin S

Just like William Jefferson Clinton was?

---

Marvin that is just plain silly, you know very well Clinton is a Democrat and above reproach. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Johndrow

Sounds like someone needs to get a life to me.

---

again.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cotts135

I know all you manly men who call yourselves conservatives and have guns, think that anyone who doesn't think like you do are weak or limp spined. I can tell you from working 22 yrs as a Corrections officer in NY that some of these guys who yelled the loudest how tough they were and owned guns were some of the biggest pus#%$ I knew. The guys that didn't say much and who I am sure you would consider weak, were the guys who were there when you needed them most.

---

Oh, now this is rich...a former CO advocating that his military counterparts should be subject to criminal and civil lawsuits for following policies and procedures established by people way over their head. If you need help with that, here it is in terms you can grasp...

For 22 years you did full body cavity searches of inmates. You didn't see the harm in them...they served to protect the COs/staff and prisoners. They'd been done for years and were authorized by your boss. But a new govenor takes over and changes the policy as he thinks full body cavity searches are inhumane and violate prisoners' dignity and rights. A month later a subpoena server knocks on your door to let you know that you're being sued by Amnesty International for all those body cavity searches you did. Now go tap into your 401k because you're gonna need some money for an attorney. Perhaps instead of cavity searches, feel free to substitute solitary confinement, isolation cells, one shower per week, or any of the other "inhumane" acts you committed on prisoners if that helps you wrap your head around the concept of criminalizing policy after-the-fact.

I'm sure your military CO brethren appreciate you for "being there for them when they need you most."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hew

Oh, now this is rich...a former CO advocating that his military counterparts should be subject to criminal and civil lawsuits for following policies and procedures established by people way over their head. If you need help with that, here it is in terms you can grasp...

For 22 years you did full body cavity searches of inmates. You didn't see the harm in them...they served to protect the COs/staff and prisoners. They'd been done for years and were authorized by your boss. But a new govenor takes over and changes the policy as he thinks full body cavity searches are inhumane and violate prisoners' dignity and rights. A month later a subpoena server knocks on your door to let you know that you're being sued by Amnesty International for all those body cavity searches you did. Now go tap into your 401k because you're gonna need some money for an attorney. Perhaps instead of cavity searches, feel free to substitute solitary confinement, isolation cells, one shower per week, or any of the other "inhumane" acts you committed on prisoners if that helps you wrap your head around the concept of criminalizing policy after-the-fact.

I'm sure your military CO brethren appreciate you for "being there for them when they need you most."

---

Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
I will be perfectly happy to let the courts decide that question and to live with that decision.
What I don't want to see is a bunch of Sgt's and private's swinging in the wind for policies that were made by unethical politicians. This is what happened at Abu Ghraib and instead of standing behind policies that they endorsed they ran away from them and blamed the incident on some "bad apples". What I would like to see is that the pardons Bush is going to give out, that they go to the guys in the trenches, the guys that were ordered to do the dirty work for them. Anyone above them should be held accountable.

[quote=cotts135;378618]Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
[quote]


Perhaps the best example of someone having their head so far up their ass that they can’t tell if it is day or night. It is OK when applied to me, but not for others.......:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cotts135

Your missing one point Hew. What I did and when I did it was legal at the time. My contention is that what Rumsfeld and Ashcroft have done is illegal.
I will be perfectly happy to let the courts decide that question and to live with that decision.
What I don't want to see is a bunch of Sgt's and private's swinging in the wind for policies that were made by unethical politicians. This is what happened at Abu Ghraib and instead of standing behind policies that they endorsed they ran away from them and blamed the incident on some "bad apples". What I would like to see is that the pardons Bush is going to give out, that they go to the guys in the trenches, the guys that were ordered to do the dirty work for them. Anyone above them should be held accountable.

---

It doesn't just stop at sgt's and privates. Reagan and Poindexter turned Oliver North into the most screwed over Marine in history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cotts135

It amazes me every time I see it. Die hard, chest thumping, conservatives who preach that this is a country of laws and not men who see it as a badge of honor that no man is above the law, will make exceptions to the people who govern us.
Can someone explain to me how this is.?

---

Cott: Try not to get involved with these RTF "Conservatives." Seems they don't want a discussion. They have their opinions and they are going to stick them despite the facts/information.

You will have to pry their opinions out of their cold dead heads to to get them to think rationally.

Try not to confuse them with the facts. Their minds are made up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rosemary Westling

Cott: Try not to get involved with these RTF "Conservatives." Seems they don't want a discussion. They have their opinions and they are going to stick them despite the facts/information.

You will have to pry their opinions out of their cold dead heads to to get them to think rationally.

Try not to confuse them with the facts. Their minds are made up.

---

Rigggghhhtttttt and your mind is as open as a 24 hour convience store:rolleyes:
Two way street honey