<< When this initially broke, someone else posted that it raises questions for ANY President who would be able to buy silence from accomplices with pardons. "Just do some time and I'll get ya out before I leave. Thanks!" >>
That was yours truly and I still believe it. Bush et al. may not pursue this partly because they selfishly don't want to limit their future "options".
Abuse of power is a real concern especially considering the media won't cover ratings-poor stories for very long. Seems to me the highest level of government is basically a private, bought-and-paid-for Elite Clubhouse now.
That was yours truly and I still believe it. Bush et al. may not pursue this partly because they selfishly don't want to limit their future "options".
Abuse of power is a real concern especially considering the media won't cover ratings-poor stories for very long. Seems to me the highest level of government is basically a private, bought-and-paid-for Elite Clubhouse now.
Denis: Don't be so silly. The Nixon pardon was done because he was still elected President, and the country did not need to have the whole affair dragged through the courts. Nixon died dishonored and reviled by many people. That pardon was to save the country from an unnecessary soap opera. This Rich pardon (have to love the irony of the name!!), on the other hand, was solely motivated by money and donations either to the Presidential library, to the DNC, or to Clinton himself (any speculation that Rich gave money to Clinton's legal defense fund?). There is no reason whatsoever to pardon this prick other than as a quid pro quo, since everyone who is familiar with the scoundrel agrees that he's despicable in every way.
JellyBaby: I think it's understandable for Bush to not "rock the boat" on the pardon issue as far as Presidential power is concerned. While there is talk of limiting the President's unfettered power in the future (Specter talks of an Amendment), I doubt that anything will be done on that front. The issue is that Clinton broke the traditional rules in granting the pardon by not consulting with law enforcement or intelligence agencies about this case prior to granting it. Of course Bush doesn't want to lose this Presidential privilege, nor does he want part of his legacy to reflect that he ceded power to Congress.
JellyBaby: I think it's understandable for Bush to not "rock the boat" on the pardon issue as far as Presidential power is concerned. While there is talk of limiting the President's unfettered power in the future (Specter talks of an Amendment), I doubt that anything will be done on that front. The issue is that Clinton broke the traditional rules in granting the pardon by not consulting with law enforcement or intelligence agencies about this case prior to granting it. Of course Bush doesn't want to lose this Presidential privilege, nor does he want part of his legacy to reflect that he ceded power to Congress.
AndrewR,
Agreed. The only republican president who might have agreed with those legislators calling for limits to presidential priviledge would've been McCain. A Libby certainly would. No democrat ever would.
Anybody catch McCain on Defeat the Press last weekend? Impressive. Most impressive. Damn I wish the R establishment wouldn't have castrated his run. :|
Agreed. The only republican president who might have agreed with those legislators calling for limits to presidential priviledge would've been McCain. A Libby certainly would. No democrat ever would.
Anybody catch McCain on Defeat the Press last weekend? Impressive. Most impressive. Damn I wish the R establishment wouldn't have castrated his run. :|
<< Specter said Clinton "avoided a conviction on impeachment the last time around because he had not lost the confidence of the American people >>
Gee, this wouldn't happen to be the same limpdick who voted against impeachment the first time around. Gutless puss.
What's really a riot is watching papers like the NY Times call for Slick Willy's head after eight years of covering his ass. Since the boy is out of office and lost possession the goodie bag, I guess it's okay for his former apologists to publicly feign indignation and shock at his myriad of nefarious activities.
Russ, NCNE
He lied under oath.
"That's ok, it was about his personal life."
He bombed an aspirin factory in the Sudan, killed a janitor.
"So what?"
He took the silverware when he left.
"That's outrageous!"
Seems that Denise Rich made a number of "visits" to the White house last year.
http://www.vny.com/cf/news/upidetail.cfm?QID=159535
"That's ok, it was about his personal life."
He bombed an aspirin factory in the Sudan, killed a janitor.
"So what?"
He took the silverware when he left.
"That's outrageous!"
Seems that Denise Rich made a number of "visits" to the White house last year.
http://www.vny.com/cf/news/upidetail.cfm?QID=159535
Good old Arlen Sphincter, he never ceases to amaze me. Well said, Russ.
I am indeed suprised how many Democrats are pissed about the whole Clinton pardon/gifts scandal that we are in the midst of. Things just might be getting interesting.
I am indeed suprised how many Democrats are pissed about the whole Clinton pardon/gifts scandal that we are in the midst of. Things just might be getting interesting.
That speech by Clinton at Morgan Stanley may well cost them some high dollar, high profile clients. It seems they were none to pleased that MS was paying the Poor White Trash $100K and had no desire to hear a word come out of his mouth. It seems the chairman had to do some fast and furious crow eating via e-mail to keep the indians on the reservation. He said the invite was not well thought out and should not have benn made without consulting more people.
Trouble follows that guy like the Plague.
Trouble follows that guy like the Plague.
Why are these Dem's and Liberal newspapers mad about the Rich pardon yet none of them gave a rat's ass about the 12 convicted murdering terrorists(FALN members) that Clinton pardoned for no reason other than for Hillary to get the Puerto Rican votes for her Senate campaign?
Russ, you hit the nail right on the head. Now that the newspapers can't endanger their "access" to the White House or to inside government sources, they can lambaste Clinton as much as they want. Perhaps they wanted to all along, as did the Democratic Congressmen coming out on this issue, and just reserved their rancor for political reasons. I wonder. I find it interesting that I could respect them EVEN LESS if that were the case because it demonstrates their lack of dedication to the truth -- a truth that they (the media) endeavor to proclaim, allegedly.
Xerox Man: LMAO!!!
Xerox Man: LMAO!!!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter