Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Hugo Chavez on March 22, 2007, 04:21:56 PM
-
"I think it would be disastrous. It is basically saying he is above the law, he doesn't have to comply with the law," said Senate Majority Whip Don Nickles of Oklahoma on NBC's "Meet The Press." "Everybody else in America has to comply with subpoenas (while) he's saying he wouldn't. ... I don't think that would be sustainable."
"I think the fact that he would ignore and violate a subpoena would certainly be grounds to file articles of impeachment," Hatch said
And the subpoena's today aren't even for the president ::)
-
You mean Republicans are hypocrites?
I wish someone had mentioned this earlier. >:(
-
One of two things is going to come from this either.
CRICKETS
Or party line BS.
The next question is will the subpeonas actually get issued. I love this quote from Snow.
"Snow was careful, however, not to react to the House subcommittee's vote to authorize the subpoenas. "There is an important distinction between authorizing subpoenas and issuing them," Snow said. "And we hope members of Congress, as they have an opportunity to think this through, are going to realize that they've got a deal before them that enables them to find out what the truth is."
How the hell are they supposed to find what the truth is if no one is under oath and compelled to tell the truth?
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-usattys22mar22,1,4626997.story?coll=la-news-a_section (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-usattys22mar22,1,4626997.story?coll=la-news-a_section)
-
One of two things is going to come from this either.
CRICKETS
Or party line BS.
The next question is will the subpeonas actually get issued. I love this quote from Snow.
"Snow was careful, however, not to react to the House subcommittee's vote to authorize the subpoenas. "There is an important distinction between authorizing subpoenas and issuing them," Snow said. "And we hope members of Congress, as they have an opportunity to think this through, are going to realize that they've got a deal before them that enables them to find out what the truth is."
How the hell are they supposed to find what the truth is if no one is under oath and compelled to tell the truth?
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-usattys22mar22,1,4626997.story?coll=la-news-a_section (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-usattys22mar22,1,4626997.story?coll=la-news-a_section)
LOLOLOL, a way to the truth always comes best from people who want to tell their side freely,.... just not under oath ::) LOL...
-
How about Tony's Snow's Op-Ed in 1989 regarding executive privilige
"Evidently, Mr. Clinton wants to shield virtually any communications that take place within the White House compound on the theory that all such talk contributes in some way, shape or form to the continuing success and harmony of an administration. Taken to its logical extreme, that position would make it impossible for citizens to hold a chief executive accountable for anything. He would have a constitutional right to cover up.
"Chances are that the courts will hurl such a claim out, but it will take time.
"One gets the impression that Team Clinton values its survival more than most people want justice and thus will delay without qualm. But as the clock ticks, the public's faith in Mr. Clinton will ebb away for a simple reason: Most of us want no part of a president who is cynical enough to use the majesty of his office to evade the one thing he is sworn to uphold -- the rule of law."
btw - If I recall the details correctly 30 of Clinton's people testified under oath ~ 54 times (working from memory so I could be off on the #'s) including Stephanopoulos who was Clinton's Senior Advisor on Policy and Strategy
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003560724
-
You mean Republicans are hypocrites?
I wish someone had mentioned this earlier. >:(
:o
-
Just as I thought.
CRICKETS
-
Just as I thought.
CRICKETS
yup
-
Just as I thought.
CRICKETS
majority agree.
-
You mean Republicans are hypocrites?
I wish someone had mentioned this earlier. >:(
lol and dems aren't hypocrites? lol
-
Just as I thought.
CRICKETS
see if you could stop assuming what conservatives think all the time you would realize most of us don't agree with Bush on this!!! wait did MM69 just say that???? I better take cover, the CIA will probably be here to lock me up!!!! I don't think time needs to be wasted on this but if the Dems insist then why not testify...Of course the dems are trying to take attention away from their big pork filled Iraq war bill....
-
see if you could stop assuming what conservatives think all the time you would realize most of us don't agree with Bush on this!!! wait did MM69 just say that???? I better take cover, the CIA will probably be here to lock me up!!!! I don't think time needs to be wasted on this but if the Dems insist then why not testify...Of course the dems are trying to take attention away from their big pork filled Iraq war bill....
This isn't about the Democrats who in most instances are no better than the Republicans. This is about Bush's stance. If you don't agree with Bush on this why didn't you post in the thread initially, why wait a few days until the thread was all but dead?
I'm willing to bet everything I have that if Kerry were in the White House and he did the same thing Bush did you'd be up in arms over it.
Did you read that quote from Snow about finding the truth while not testifying under oath? Come on.
-
This isn't about the Democrats who in most instances are no better than the Republicans. This is about Bush's stance. If you don't agree with Bush on this why didn't you post in the thread initially, why wait a few days until the thread was all but dead?
I'm willing to bet everything I have that if Kerry were in the White House and he did the same thing Bush did you'd be up in arms over it.
Did you read that quote from Snow about finding the truth while not testifying under oath? Come on.
I haven't made any replies to the issue, and surely never stated that I support Bush on this issue. So why assume I do? I have stated many times that the only issue I support Bush on is the war...
-
I haven't made any replies to the issue, and surely never stated that I support Bush on this issue. So why assume I do? I have stated many times that the only issue I support Bush on is the war...
What happened to you not being a conservative?
see if you could stop assuming what conservatives think all the time you would realize most of us don't agree with Bush on this!!!
Did I just catch you in a lie?
-
What happened to you not being a conservative?
Did I just catch you in a lie?
what lie are you pueporting now? If I am conservative I have to support Bush on everything?
-
What happened to you not being a conservative?
Did I just catch you in a lie?
Oh I get it,,,since I am conservative I am a republican????? I am conservative on a lot of things, but not everything. I don't vote party lines....
-
What happened to you not being a conservative?
Did I just catch you in a lie?
What would I be classified as? I'm not far left Lib, I'm not far right conservative.....what do they label that?
-
No need to meltdown with a three post barrage. Your battle with 240 might be getting to you.
Didn't you say the other day that you weren't a conservative? I remember asking you if you were one and you said you weren't.
-
No need to meltdown with a three post barrage. Your battle with 240 might be getting to you.
Didn't you say the other day that you weren't a conservative? I remember asking you if you were one and you said you weren't.
No I posted 3 times because I think of things after I post....I don't consider myslef a lib, or conservative, but when talking on here it easier to just use one of the 2 major labels because I don't know what categorie I fall into.
-
No I posted 3 times because I think of things after I post....I don't consider myslef a lib, or conservative, but when talking on here it easier to just use one of the 2 major labels because I don't know what categorie I fall into.
OK, so you're not a conservative but in the post above you said you were a conservative.
So from now on when you actually do call yourself a conservative I shouldn't pay attention to it because you're only doing it because it's "easier to just use one of the 2 major labels"?
-
OK, so you're not a conservative but in the post above you said you were a conservative.
So from now on when you actually do call yourself a conservative I shouldn't pay attention to it because you're only doing it because it's "easier to just use one of the 2 major labels"?
oh wow......how do you classify people? Lib and conservative right? I mean what would you call yourself?
-
oh wow......how do you classify people? Lib and conservative right? I mean what would you call yourself?
I classify myself as an independent. I tend to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
Oh I get it,,,since I am conservative I am a republican????? I am conservative on a lot of things, but not everything. I don't vote party lines....
Last time I checked it would be rather difficult to be a conservative and a Democrat so wouldn't you have to be a Republican?
-
I classify myself as an independent. I tend to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
Last time I checked it would be rather difficult to be a conservative and a Democrat so wouldn't you have to be a Republican?
no, that would mean I vote party lines, I don't do that...
-
no, that would mean I vote party lines, I don't do that...
Oh sure, like you've been of voting age long enough to have a pattern ::)
-
Oh sure, like you've been of voting age long enough to have a pattern ::)
well I agree there, but I still am not a republican.....