You are here

Log in or register to post comments
Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
A conundrum...

Hi,

This is bugging me:

Let's say you are the chief investigator in a drug operation. You have wire taps approved by the court, and you find a suspect who is setting up a drug deal with a buyer...they've talked about it on the phone and you have tapes...so you move in and arrest the dealer before the drugs are in place and the buyer has handed over the money and taken possession of the drugs.

You get no drugs and all you've got is two guys talking about a deal.

Premature edjudication?

Then, let's say you are an investigator looking into a governor of a large state potentially trying to sell a friggin' United States Senate seat. You get him on tape talking about doing it, but...you move in before he closes the deal.

Why?

Shouldn't the investigator have kept tape rolling and tracking the dinero as the governor and his co-conspirator close the deal?

Man, I wish they'd have waited a few weeks!

On the plus side, maybe Governor Blagojevich will give me my 80 dollars back. So much for Senator Buddha.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...

I understand that concern, Buddha, but I think that they had SO much dirt on Governor Blowjobgiveit that the Senate seat issue wasn't necessary to put him away for a long time in prison where he can live up to his name

I wonder if they are using RICO to nail him for intent.
I think I remember reading the prosecutor would have liked to wait but felt he had to stop the selling of a senate seat.
It will be interesting to see if the case is weakened because of that.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...

Something else few are noting...they had enough on the governor in July to arrest him but held off till after the election for fear it would hurt the home town boy.

Monty
Monty's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 16 2005 - 6:55pm
Re: A conundrum...

If you know where something is going and you don't want it to get there, you
derail it early. I wouldn't doubt that was a major concern with the Feds.

This could get really interesting if the Gov goes down hard. He seems to be the
type who will sing like a bird and start naming names. And, you know he knows
where the bodies are buried from way back.

How big this story ends up being will be determined by how hard the prosecution
wants to push it. If Fitz pushes as hard as he did the Plame debacle, we could be
talking about this for Obama's entire Presidency.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
If you know where something is going and you don't want it to get there, you
derail it early. I wouldn't doubt that was a major concern with the Feds.

This could get really interesting if the Gov goes down hard. He seems to be the
type who will sing like a bird and start naming names. And, you know he knows
where the bodies are buried from way back.

How big this story ends up being will be determined by how hard the prosecution
wants to push it. If Fitz pushes as hard as he did the Plame debacle, we could be
talking about this for Obama's entire Presidency.

Right, but this has nothing to do with Obama despite jimv's cheap shot.

Fittzgerald did not have a case months ago and didn't even want to bring the case now. He was forced to do that to avoid blowjobgiveit making a corrupt senate appointment.

Your accusation, Jimv smacks of a typical right wing response.
You lost, get over it.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
Something else few are noting...they had enough on the governor in July to arrest him but held off till after the election for fear it would hurt the home town boy.

That is total BS and you know it. If you actually believe that then you are just stupid.
But I suspect you are just another dishonest right wing nut sore about losing.

JSBach
JSBach's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 28 2008 - 1:25am
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
Your accusation, Jimv smacks of a typical right wing response.
You lost, get over it.

Yes it does, but do have some sympathy for the poor dears. They sincerely believe they were born to rule.

mrlowry
mrlowry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: May 30 2006 - 1:37pm
Re: A conundrum...

Legally in many circumstances intent to commit a crime is the same as committing that crime. The reason that most undercover operations allow the crime to be committed is to make a STRONGER case. There is probably so much evidence against him in other ongoing investigations that they aren't so worried about THIS case falling apart, they just wanted to stop it. But they know that they will get him on the other cases.

My question is how STUPID do you have to be to try to SELL a Senate seat OVER THE PHONE when you know that you have been under investigation for years. He had to know that there was a strong possibility that his phone was tapped.

I've been joking that there's no one more crooked than an Chicago Democrat for years. Mayor Daley being a poster child for the breed. However, in the last couple of days things have hit a new low when it was revealed that Governor Rod Blagojevich tried to sell a US Senate seat, threatened to withhold funding from a CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL in order to get a donation, tried to get an editor at the Chicago Tribune fired, and tried to hold up the sale of the Chicago Cubs in order to shake the Tribune down for a campaign donation. All of these charges stem from his activities in the last month and they sprung the trap because these issues were time sensitive.

The sad thing is that Mr. Blagojevich is STILL the Governor and still has the ability to appoint someone to the Senate seat vacated by Mr Obama. The only mechanism to stop him is that if he were to do so the US Senate probably wouldn't allow that individual to take their seat. Unfortunately, Blogo isn't the kind to go quietly. The business of Illinois government will be ground to a halt to serve his ego.

What kind of monster would shake down a children's hospital? As a Chicagoan my I'm truly saddened by the corruption that has been allowed to reign supreme in Chicago and the state government for far too long. ALL OF THIS IS DISGUSTING!!!

The only ray of light is that thus far the President elect hasn't been named as being involved in any of these dealings. Even though I was a McCain supporter I've never felt that Obama is a dishonest man, he just wasn't nearly as qualified as McCain. Mr. Obama has all my hopes for his succeed because if he fails our entire country will be in a very, very deep hole.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...

I hear tell on another forum here that the only person worse than Blagojevich is the notorious Ethan Winer!

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 2 min ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Re: A conundrum...

It's called racketeering and is illegal under such things as the RICO act. The RICO Act is another one of the many acts throughout our history designed to bring down organized bullshit in the best interest of the government, regardless. It has been used to bring down everything from your city block gang-bangers, the Hell's Angels, to the Five Families. Another example, the Sedition Act of 1918. The fact that it was conveniently repealed after WWI ended is moot. It served its purpose while enacted and enforced even though it was blatantly unconstitutional. RICO allows the government to obtain convictions regardless of your arguments to the contrary. There are many ways to get in trouble with the government but the last thing you need is getting busted for racketeering. We can beat this around the bush until we are blue in the face but these laws are on the books because we do have intelligence without representation or vice versa depending on the situation. Another good example is the masterpiece of the Sixteenth Amendment, which took a State of New Mexico, Taxation and Revenue Department Hearing Officer to explain in layman terms how the government trumps its best interest over the constitution with perfection. This is actually a good read once you get past the introduction and specifics of the case.

http://www.tax.state.nm.us/d&o/dno9733.htm

In essence, the Feds had enough of this idiot without having to go the whole nine yards. It's how we operate. Again, history didn't begin on September 11, 2001 and the Patriot Act.

bifcake
bifcake's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Nov 27 2005 - 2:27am
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
I hear tell on another forum here that the only person worse than Blagojevich is the notorious Ethan Winer!

I heard Ethan was overheard conspiring to dampen the senate seats with bass traps. His carefully devised plans have not yielded large mouth bass.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
Right, but this has nothing to do with Obama despite jimv's cheap shot.

Fittzgerald did not have a case months ago and didn't even want to bring the case now. He was forced to do that to avoid blowjobgiveit making a corrupt senate appointment.

Your accusation, Jimv smacks of a typical right wing response.
You lost, get over it.

I read the stor on a variety of forums a few days ago...this is the gist of the claim:


Quote:
A federal source of mine with ties to Chicago says that FBI agents had enough to prosecute corrupt, helmet-haired Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich back in June, when he was already engaged in some of the blackmail and extortion alleged by the FBI affidavit and other documents associated with his arrest and prosecution.

The source says that the FBI was suddenly ordered by the U.S. Attorney's Office--and I believe that order came from the top, ie., U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and Justice Department officials in Washington--to hold off on doing anything until after the election, so as not to hurt Obama's White House bid. Here's what my inside source says.

This is from a blog I do not follow

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/12/federal_sources.html#comments

The blogger has had opinion pieces printed in New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, and The Jerusalem Post.

The sources may or may not be accurate but does sort of back my 'cheap shot'.

I think you will find that I can usually back my 'cheap shots' with links to a source. You may or may not like my source but I, unlike many on the left, do not simply make it up.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...

Sorry, you lost me at "helmet haired."

Check it out, was that a journalistic comment?

When a source tosses in those little asides, they are giving us a peak at their purple-ness.

Not that you are certainly wrong, JIMV, just that I also wouldn't trust an article that said something like, "Karl Rove, Bush's dough faced closeted necrophile svengali, said...."

Like I said, I do think premature edjudication occurred, but your source writes like Hannity.

Yeah, "helmet haired" fits right into a serious piece of hard hitting facts.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...

The blogger was only reporting what someone else said. It is not definitive proof of anything but is certainly plausable as US attorneys are notorious for avoiding anything that looks like politics. An investigation that is deep into Ilinois politics involving a lot of folk who are in bed with a presidential candidate will be handled very carefully.

Obama's connections with a lot of, shall we be charitable, unsavory folk was known before the election but simply not mentioned by the press. Today we have a very rotten system being exposed and in that exposure, links, real and tenuous with The Anointed One are being revealed.

I have no idea if TAO will turn out to be as crooked as Clinton. Far to early to say. I hope not as the country cannot stand one party that nominates the inept and another that nominates crooks for long.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
The blogger was only reporting what someone else said. It is not definitive proof of anything but is certainly plausable as US attorneys are notorious for avoiding anything that looks like politics. An investigation that is deep into Ilinois politics involving a lot of folk who are in bed with a presidential candidate will be handled very carefully.

Obama's connections with a lot of, shall we be charitable, unsavory folk was known before the election but simply not mentioned by the press. Today we have a very rotten system being exposed and in that exposure, links, real and tenuous with The Anointed One are being revealed.

I have no idea if TAO will turn out to be as crooked as Clinton. Far to early to say. I hope not as the country cannot stand one party that nominates the inept and another that nominates crooks for long.

JIMV! I didn't realize you'd been out of the country for eight years!

If you wish to remain Republican, do yourself a favor and do not read any news from January 2001 to present.

For all you know, the market has just been kinda flat for 8 years.

(Totally joking around. I obviously have a more liberal bias. Seriously, though, you think Clinton was worse than Bush II? As Wallace Shawn kept saying in "The Princess Bride," inconceivable!)

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:

Quote:
Right, but this has nothing to do with Obama despite jimv's cheap shot.

Fittzgerald did not have a case months ago and didn't even want to bring the case now. He was forced to do that to avoid blowjobgiveit making a corrupt senate appointment.

Your accusation, Jimv smacks of a typical right wing response.
You lost, get over it.

I read the stor on a variety of forums a few days ago...this is the gist of the claim:


Quote:
A federal source of mine with ties to Chicago says that FBI agents had enough to prosecute corrupt, helmet-haired Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich back in June, when he was already engaged in some of the blackmail and extortion alleged by the FBI affidavit and other documents associated with his arrest and prosecution.

The source says that the FBI was suddenly ordered by the U.S. Attorney's Office--and I believe that order came from the top, ie., U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and Justice Department officials in Washington--to hold off on doing anything until after the election, so as not to hurt Obama's White House bid. Here's what my inside source says.

This is from a blog I do not follow

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/12/federal_sources.html#comments

The blogger has had opinion pieces printed in New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, and The Jerusalem Post.

The sources may or may not be accurate but does sort of back my 'cheap shot'.

I think you will find that I can usually back my 'cheap shots' with links to a source. You may or may not like my source but I, unlike many on the left, do not simply make it up.

You didn't make it up, your "source" did.
Quoting bloggers to defend yourself, really,,,,,,,,,,,,really ?

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...

Clinton was crooked, personally, and moraly bankrupt. Bush was simply inept. I'll leave you as to which you prefer. McCain was following the inept model (look at how he ran his campaign and Obama has the same sort of personal conections as did Clinton. He has not demonstrated any crookedness unless the Rezko charges prove out so the jury is still out on TAO.

We might luck out and get an honest politician from Illinois, maybe.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
You didn't make it up, your "source" did.
Quoting bloggers to defend yourself, really,,,,,,,,,,,,really ?

The MoveOn left did exactly that for 8 years without blinking a skeptical eye. Why do you believe the right will not do the same thing?

I have been vastly amused by the left on political blogs since the election. They won one and now seem to believe the political game is over and the losers will not follow the lefts lead and behave as they did when they lost in 2000 and 2004 but will quietly go home and celebrate T.A.O.

Not going to happen. Look forward to years of 24/7 criticism of your guy when he merits it.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
Clinton was crooked, personally, and moraly bankrupt. Bush was simply inept. I'll leave you as to which you prefer. McCain was following the inept model (look at how he ran his campaign and Obama has the same sort of personal conections as did Clinton. He has not demonstrated any crookedness unless the Rezko charges prove out so the jury is still out on TAO.

We might luck out and get an honest politician from Illinois, maybe.

Clinton was not crooked. And talk about lefties making things up.

As I joke with my conservative friends, you get to be a loser now, I had to be a loser the last 8 years

Some polysci thinkers speculate that we are at a sea change and will see liberalism for the next 30 years as we come out of the last 30 years of conservatism .

Not a moment too soon , IMO.
You may just need to get used to it, JIMV.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:

Quote:
You didn't make it up, your "source" did.
Quoting bloggers to defend yourself, really,,,,,,,,,,,,really ?

The MoveOn left did exactly that for 8 years without blinking a skeptical eye. Why do you believe the right will not do the same thing?

I have been vastly amused by the left on political blogs since the election. They won one and now seem to believe the political game is over and the losers will not follow the lefts lead and behave as they did when they lost in 2000 and 2004 but will quietly go home and celebrate T.A.O.

Not going to happen. Look forward to years of 24/7 criticism of your guy when he merits it.

I don't give credence to liberal or conservative blogs. I'm with you on that , JIMV.
Most of those site from either slant are a waste of time , IMO.

Of course Obama's policies should be fought by those who disagree, that is the democratic process. Imperfect as that process is it's still the best system around.

At least we now will have a pres. who is intelligent, rational and analytical.
I also think both the right and left will be surprised by his ability to find compromise.
In doing so I suspect he will upset the right and the left, not a bad thing,IMO.
Moderates will likely be the most happy.

It would be interesting to revisit this in a year and see what we all think.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...

Hi, JIMV.

I read ya.

I'll go with 'puts his penis in interns' mouths' (likely plural, eh?) over 'ran the country into the dirt via ineptitude.'

I was hopeful in late 2000 that Bush's line about bipartisanship and compassionate conservative was true, but we found out that moral corruption can be hidden behind a Bible, too.

Actually, I gave Bush the better part of a year's worth of credit, so I will do the same for Barry.

One sure sign that things might be OK is that the Hannity/Limbaugh zombies are so fired up already. There's no "11" for them to turn it up to!

The real question, for me, is how Al Franken will capture that Senate seat and then become President in 2016!

2016 will begin the me administration. That's "me, Al Franken."

Cheers, JIMV.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
Clinton was not crooked. And talk about lefties making things up.

Boy, its been a long time since anyone made that claim. I guess we can forget the loss of his law license and his hundreds of thousands in fines, and those are just the things he copped too. The list of accusations leading to impeachment was long indeed.

I a not going to refight the Clinton Follies as the history is settled law by now.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:

Quote:
Clinton was not crooked. And talk about lefties making things up.

Boy, its been a long time since anyone made that claim. I guess we can forget the loss of his law license and his hundreds of thousands in fines, and those are just the things he copped too. The list of accusations leading to impeachment was long indeed.

I a not going to refight the Clinton Follies as the history is settled law by now.

The impeachment failed. Clinton lied about a BJ, big deal.

Bush lied about WMD and became a mass murderer.

I'll take Clinton, thank you very much.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...

OK, just a little fanning, here:

Clinton lied, and Monica lived.

Bush lied about WMD's and over 4,000 soldiers have died.

Which lie is "worse?"

The Bush administration called the Geneva Convention antiquated.

Clinton called the definition of "is" antiquated.

(I'm bloviating, and I'm the first to admit it.)

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...

Another of my all time favorite examples of silly mindedness

"Clinton lied about a blow job" or the more classic bumper sticker prtetending to be an argument "It was all about sex".

It was to the simple minded but to folk who followed the law, it was all about obstruction of justice, perjury and witness tampering. As the trial was a political effort, the result was preordained.

I let the simple minded spout the bumper sticker as argument to influence other simple minded folk but try to keep my comments to things the big lug actually was convicted of, pled out, or was fined for.

You know, perjury and sexual harrassment.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
OK, just a little fanning, here:

Clinton lied, and Monica lived.

Bush lied about WMD's and over 4,000 soldiers have died.

Oh these are gifts....another bumper sticker faking an argument, one that only works if one makes several assumptions, like the war was not merited, or that Bush lied at all. It also requires one to equate Clintons impeachment with fighting terror, a false apples and oranges argument.

I better bumper sticker argment was the "when Clinton lied no one died". The problem with that was it again did what you do, equate real lies in his impeachment with imaginary lies committed by Bush. If one was to compare apples to apples...Bush's reasons for getting into the war with Clintons reasons for getting us into Kosovo, we have a real comparison. In a speach to the VFW before Clinton attacked Serbia over Kosovo he spoke eloquently of a missing 100,000 Kosovars and mass graves in Kosovo. When the war was over the UN did a massive search for those missing folk and found they didn't exist. They did a multi year search for mass graves and found under a thousand dead broken down about equally between those killed by Serbs and those killed by Kosovars over a period of a decade with no increase in the incidents of murder leading up to the war. The final report can be found on the UN sight with a lot of searching.

In short, when Clinton was told by his intel folk there was genocide going on, he was misinformed. As a result over 500 civilians died in the war. When Bush was told by his intel folk that there were WMD, he was also misinformed...if one 'lied' then both did and the bumper sticker fails as an argument...except to the simple minded.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...

You know, if Bubba had gone on TV after getting caught in his lie, and said, "America, I lied. I lied...well, you know my wife. Wouldn't you have lied, too? I didn't want to get in trouble with Hillary, and I apologize. Guys, you know what I'm talking about. My job, believe it or not, can get lonely, and when a twenty year old woman with that beautiful big hair offered me comfort, in a moment, or twenty, of weakness, I took it. Newt, you know, you have you're own intern, right now. Congressman Hyde, you know. Heck, Newt and Henry ended up divorced over it. America, please accept my apology. I will henceforth keep it in my pants, you know I will," he'd now be ending his fourth term as President.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
You know, if Bubba had gone on TV after getting caught in his lie, and said, "America, I lied. I lied...well, you know my wife. Wouldn't you have lied, too? I didn't want to get in trouble with Hillary, and I apologize. Guys, you know what I'm talking about. My job, believe it or not, can get lonely, and when a twenty year old woman with that beautiful big hair offered me comfort, in a moment, or twenty, of weakness, I took it. Newt, you know, you have you're own intern, right now. Congressman Hyde, you know. Heck, Newt and Henry ended up divorced over it. America, please accept my apology. I will henceforth keep it in my pants, you know I will," he'd now be ending his fourth term as President.

That would have avoided the entire mess and we could have gone back to investigating Travelgate or Pardongate...

For pure entertainment value, it was hard to fault the Clinton Follies.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...

JIMV!

You thinkwe are going to see any 'preemptive pardons' in the next 5 weeks?

How about Scooter?

Cheney?

CIA 'interrogators?'

It could get really interesting.

I do hope Bush pardons that 'drug dealer' who's been in the news. He's paid sufficiently, IMO.

mrlowry
mrlowry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: May 30 2006 - 1:37pm
Re: A conundrum...

It really pisses me off when people said that Bush lied about chemical and biological weapons. Lying is saying something that you KNOW isn't true. From all of the available evidence the intelligence agencies of the world for the most part believed that those weapons were there. It all boils down to the fact that Liberals have the same kind of irrational, over cooked hatred for George W. Bush that Conservatives had for Clinton.

Bush didn't "lie" about WMD he made a mistaken assessment based on faulty intelligence. US wasn't the only intelligence service that got it wrong England, France, Russia and MANY others also believed that the capabilities were there. Saddam WANTED us to believe they were there even his General's believe they had the capabilities. Saddam verbally said "no weapons, no weapons, no weapons" but used his actions (baring inspectors from sites then having trucks in the night come in to said facilities to "move" things, then allowing inspectors) to bluff that he DID have them. Unfortunately for him he bluffed himself right out of power and into a hang man's noose and the Middle East will eventually be a better place for it.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...

The only pardons I expect are for the border patrol cops who are in jail for political reasons.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
The only pardons I expect are for the border patrol cops who are in jail for political reasons.

I'm with you on that. I may have been hearing the story wrong, but how it reached me it sounds like a travesty.

See? We agree!

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 1 week ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
It really pisses me off when people said that Bush lied about chemical and biological weapons. Lying is saying something that you KNOW isn't true. From all of the available evidence the intelligence agencies of the world for the most part believed that those weapons were there. It all boils down to the fact that Liberals have the same kind of irrational, over cooked hatred for George W. Bush that Conservatives had for Clinton.

Bush didn't "lie" about WMD he made a mistaken assessment based on faulty intelligence. US wasn't the only intelligence service that got it wrong England, France, Russia and MANY others also believed that the capabilities were there. Saddam WANTED us to believe they were there even his General's believe they had the capabilities. Saddam verbally said "no weapons, no weapons, no weapons" but used his actions (baring inspectors from sites then having trucks in the night come in to said facilities to "move" things, then allowing inspectors) to bluff that he DID have them. Unfortunately for him he bluffed himself right out of power and into a hang man's noose and the Middle East will eventually be a better place for it.

Willfully suppressing accurate information and taking political revenge upon those who did not support the 'mistaken' data is tantamount to lying.

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...

What's not to agree...neither is a politician, just a poor dumb cop trying to do his job.

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:

Quote:
It really pisses me off when people said that Bush lied about chemical and biological weapons. Lying is saying something that you KNOW isn't true. From all of the available evidence the intelligence agencies of the world for the most part believed that those weapons were there. It all boils down to the fact that Liberals have the same kind of irrational, over cooked hatred for George W. Bush that Conservatives had for Clinton.

Bush didn't "lie" about WMD he made a mistaken assessment based on faulty intelligence. US wasn't the only intelligence service that got it wrong England, France, Russia and MANY others also believed that the capabilities were there. Saddam WANTED us to believe they were there even his General's believe they had the capabilities. Saddam verbally said "no weapons, no weapons, no weapons" but used his actions (baring inspectors from sites then having trucks in the night come in to said facilities to "move" things, then allowing inspectors) to bluff that he DID have them. Unfortunately for him he bluffed himself right out of power and into a hang man's noose and the Middle East will eventually be a better place for it.

Willfully suppressing accurate information and taking political revenge upon those who did not support the 'mistaken' data is tantamount to lying.

x2, Buddha

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 weeks ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Re: A conundrum...


Quote:
Willfully suppressing accurate information and taking political revenge upon those who did not support the 'mistaken' data is tantamount to lying.

Wow! two false statements posted as fact and a novel new legal concept 'tantamount to lying' all in one sentence.

I am impressed...

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading