West Virgina/Puerto Rico Statehood?

[First of Two]

>"Our current President is living proof that, after 225 years, we are not ready yet......."

And our most recent ex-president is living proof that crime DOES pay.

Politics 'R Bad. Politicians 'R Worse.

First of Two for Dictator in 2008.

[Diamond]

>And our most recent ex-president is living proof that crime DOES pay.

?? Most thouroughly investegated, least number of convictions. In order to find something on him, criminalize something not normally considered illegal. I guess your definition of who is a criminal is counting the number of accusations.

New administration accuses, "The outgoing staff sabotaged computer systems and stole stuff from Air Force One!" making headlines of course.
Ex-president says, "Well, total up the damages and I'll pay for them out of my own money."
New president is quoted in the back of the newspapers, "Turns out the accusations were not correct."
Investegating team reports accusations were eggagerated, but it's months after the original accusation and old news is no news.

[Captain Blake]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Cdr Scot II:
Back in the dark days before Ireland's economic miracle, when we gratefully took all the handouts that the EU would give us, it was suggested that we declare war on the US (okay, in the pub perhaps rather than in the hallowed halls of government) - you guys would come in and blow the crap out of our "infrastructure" (hah!) then institute a Marshall Plan and spend five years and billions of dollars rebuilding us .
</font>

The Mouse that Roared, 1959 movie starring Peter Sellers, had exactly that same plot. "Let's get money from the Americans by losing a war."

Alex

[Captain Blake]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Diamond:
[BI guess your definition of who is a criminal is counting the number of accusations.
[/B]</font>

He lost his law licence over that whole "Lying Under Oath" thing. They dropped the legal charges of Perjury in exchange for that.

If someone plea bargains something away, does it count as an illegal activity?

Most of the stuff he was accused of, he may or may not have done. Plausable Deniability or Media Frenzy I'm not sure, it could go either way.

Alex

[calguard66]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Diamond:
>And our most recent ex-president is living proof that crime DOES pay.

?? Most thouroughly investegated, least number of convictions. In order to find something on him, criminalize something not normally considered illegal. I guess your definition of who is a criminal is counting the number of accusations.
</font>

Hmmm... White House staffer offered immunity to testify against President commits "suicide" in his office, first one on scene is the First Lady... files missiong from staffer's office are later "found" in the White House.

Bill O'Reilly audited 3 years in a row by the IRS, Jesse Jackson not audited once in last ten years.

Four potential witnesses against the President (all former business partners, all convicted or charged with crimes themselves) die of "natural" causes within two years of each other.

"Confidential" FBI files on various Republican members of Congress "found" lying about the White House.

And Clinton _did_ commit perjury by lying under oath... impeaching him was a political proccess, not a legal one... and failure of the Senate to do so has no bearing on wether he actually committed the crime in question. And he was disbarred.

I imagine you thing OJ Simpson is "innocent" as well? He's not innocent, he's just "not guilty" which isn't the same thing. He is, however, liable for the deaths finacially.

------------------
"I'd rather die standing than live on my knees..."
Shania Twain

[This message has been edited by calguard66 (edited 05-22-2001).]

[Captain Blake]

Actually, Diamond, with Dubya, you've got the "He's too stupid to remember what happened 10 minutes ago, let alone 20 years" effect going. He's such an amiable idiot that it's believable to most people that he couldn't remember.

And unfortunately, we don't put people under oath to quiz them for the presidency, we let the media do all the work. And as we all know, the media is biased in favor of what sells papers.

Can you see the story editor:

"Another Bush "forgot some detail of the past story". "Ho hum. People already believe he's an idiot."

"Bill's pardoned people just before leaving." "Let's see if we can dig up any dirt."

Alex
who tries to treat everyone the same no matter who they are. Usually, that's treating people badly.

[calguard66]

Let's not forget it's not an "us vs them" thing. Anyone who does something illegal/ higly immoral in life or in office should be called on the carpet... office holders should be held to a higher standard, the higher the office, the higher the standard.

I'm really not partisan, I'm regestered as a Libertarian... I don't much like either mainstream party, but as a soldier (and I couldn't say this before) President Clinton and her husband are the first people to make me ashamed I'm a United States citizen.

The man makes me vomit.

------------------
"I'd rather die standing than live on my knees..."
Shania Twain

[Diamond]

Ayuh, I can go with that, Blake. Nailed it.

[Diamond]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Hmmm... White House staffer offered immunity to testify against President commits "suicide" in his office, first one on scene is the First Lady... files missiong from staffer's office are later "found" in the White House.

Four potential witnesses against the President (all former business partners, all convicted or charged with crimes themselves) die of "natural" causes within two years of each other.
</font>

Ahyes, the infamous "Clinton Death List." This ridiculous canard is thouroughly debunked here: http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/outrage/clinton.htm Putting the word "natural" in quotes is a nice touch.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Bill O'Reilly audited 3 years in a row by the IRS, Jesse Jackson not audited once in last ten years. </font>

Um, what is that supposed to indicate? There are millions of taxpayers. I'm sure you could cook up a list of lots of democrats who have been audited and republicans who have not been audited. It's meaningless, even if true.


I did not use the OJ Simpson analogy for innocence. When it comes to lying under oath, you've got Clinton there: He lied about doing something that was not illegal. He was held to a standard far higher than any other polititian when they put him under oath to ask about his sex life, something that no other polititian was held to. Indeed, many of the congresspeople who voted against him were adulterers (subsequently proven or admitted to in the following years), but they had never been put under oath about that. Because it wasn't something you did, before Clinton's innocence to the OTHER crimes he was accused of forced them to dig tremendously deeper.

But yes, you shouldn't like under oath for anything. Clinton was imperfect. One thing's for sure: he wasn't telling terrorists to hold american hostages until after the elections so his rival would look bad (october suprise). He wasn't selling arms to ant-american nations in order to finance an illegal war in central america, then pardoning the guilty because their testimony was soming dangerously close to implicating himself! (Iran-Contra).

[redwood973]

O.K for the record (as a republican) this was my take on the whole shamefull actions of B Clinton act....
---------------
I was not in favor of impeachment, I did not support censur, I did not advocate forgetting it; I was rooting for an assassination.

[Captain Blake]

First, all this Pro/Anti Clinton stuff is way, way off topic. And so with that being said, I'm going to go off on a rant.

Bill Lied Under Oath. Sure, everyone in Washington has affairs. Not many of them were asked about it under oath, and none of them lied about it.

If he'd have said, "That's none of your darned business," I'd have agreed completely. It wasn't any of their business. If he'd have taken the 5th, that'd been OK too.

He said, "I haven't had sexual relations with that woman." Which was a lie. Under oath. That's perjury. In a federal court, that's a felony, I do believe.

If you or I were to do the same thing, we'd be thrown in jail so fast it'd make your head spin. For lying under oath. Not for sex with an intern. Although, most people can be fired for sleeping with a student, or an intern or something like that, it's not a crime.

The Republicans really lost their chance by playing to the sexual nature, when the fact that he Lied Under Oath was a much greater crime.

If he lies under oath, how can we trust anything he says. And if the president lies under oath, and gets away with it, who's next. The 5th amendment protects against self incrimination. There isn't any need for lying under oath. Sure it happens, I'm not foolish enough to believe it doesn't. But it shouldn't. And I sure as heck don't want it to become a precedent. "Heck, Bill lied under oath, so I can too."

Alex

[Diamond]

Captain Blake, I agree completely. The powerful shouldn't get away with crimes just because they are powerful. If you apply that standard consistently, no matter if they have a "D" or an "R" after their name, we'll get along fine.

I admire Shrub's ability to say, "My cocaine habits prior to 40 years old are none of your business." He's certainly ethical and scrupulous in avoiding lying. FYI, drunk driving is a crime. He was asked about convictions earlier, but it was only to the press and not under oath so his answer wasn't illegal. His earlier mispeaking about no further convictions was to protect his children. Good thing no unscrupulous democrats put him under oath and forced him to decide wether to lie under oath or say something that would hurt his daughter.

[This message has been edited by Diamond (edited 05-22-2001).]

[Howlin' Mad Mark]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by calguard66:
It's a standing joke in Political Science circles that the best thing that can happen to a country is to lose a war to the US.

</font>

But, isn't that like loosing a war to the Federation? Look at what we are doing for the Cardassians after the DW!!!

In reality, when I win the next several hundred million in Powerball or whatever, I will buy an Island, Invite everyone on the Boards to join my in my new nation, then declare war on the US. Before the bombers get there, Build a lot of structures out of palm trees, call that my infrastructure, and wait for the USAF or USN to blow the hell out of it. Then Surrender and wait for all that good old US money to come in.....

[Fortunae]

What I had wished had happened with the Clinton adultry issue is that he had been charged with violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He was the Commander and Chief of the United States military forces. Under UCMJ, Adultry is a criminal offense, as is purjury. As the supreme commander of the military, he *should* have been held to the same standards of conduct expected of by his subordinates in the Military. He *volunteered* to be the Commander and Chief just as much as any farm boy who goes to a recruiting office and signs up. He swore an oath when he took office.

So he didn't break a Civilian Law by commiting Adultry, so Senators and Representatives commited adultry, it doesn't make it quid pro quo. They aren't in the Military Chain of command. Besides betraying his wife, he betrayed all the troops who have to follow him. Maybe that doesn't mean anything to the majority of people out there, but it bothered me alot.

We as citizens *should* respect the office, the person in the office *must* respect it. He could have kept his libido in check if for nothing else than the fact that he was supposed to be a role model while in office AND the man that our military should be able to believe in.

You could say, "Hey, our President is a Play-ah!" But what I would have said is "How in the Hell can I follow orders from a guy who is to stupid to hide his adultry from the world...you want me to believe he can coordinate and hide strategic operations?"

Not the same thing? True. But the Devil is in the details.

Peace.

[JALU3]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Fortunae:
What I had wished had happened with the Clinton adultry issue is that he had been charged with violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He was the Commander and Chief of the United States military forces. Under UCMJ, Adultry is a criminal offense, as is purjury. As the supreme commander of the military, he *should* have been held to the same standards of conduct expected of by his subordinates in the Military. He *volunteered* to be the Commander and Chief just as much as any farm boy who goes to a recruiting office and signs up. He swore an oath when he took office.

So he didn't break a Civilian Law by commiting Adultry, so Senators and Representatives commited adultry, it doesn't make it quid pro quo. They aren't in the Military Chain of command. Besides betraying his wife, he betrayed all the troops who have to follow him. Maybe that doesn't mean anything to the majority of people out there, but it bothered me alot.</font>

I argued that possibility several times, but each time, being here in LIBERAL NorCal I was shot down with the fact that he is a citizen first and for most, due to the fact that their is a well thought out reason why their should be a civilian at the head of the military.

However, I still supported the idea. It just wouldn't have flied.