"Judges Question Bid to Stop Cheney Suit"

[ub4me]

Judges Question Bid to Stop Cheney Suit




Judge Scolds Cheney Lawyers in Energy Case Appeal.

 

[sMiLeYz]

Im just wondering whats Cheney's so desperate to keep from the public?

Cheney is probably the most secretive vice president ever, who rarely speaks in public, he alone controls the flow of information that when it comes to many classified documents, he REFUSED to give any transcript of a conversation with energy executives even when the court ordered it.

The guy is hiding something obviously.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
Im just wondering whats Cheney's so desperate to keep from the public?

Cheney is probably the most secretive vice president ever, who rarely speaks in public, he alone controls the flow of information that when it comes to many classified documents, he REFUSED to give any transcript of a conversation with energy executives even when the court ordered it.

The guy is hiding something obviously.

cmon, you think there is any need for us to hear what he and the boys from Enron talked about.

Remember when the Gov. of Cali asked the DOJ to look into "Texas" based energy companies regarding the power shortages and artificially inflated prices? That was dismissed by the administration.

If you are shocked by corruption and a lack of ethics in politics and business where have you been, the GOP recently asked a federal court to overrule a state and aksed congress to give money to help not a single business, but an entire industry, damn liberals......

 

[mastertech01]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
Im just wondering whats Cheney's so desperate to keep from the public?

Cheney is probably the most secretive vice president ever, who rarely speaks in public, he alone controls the flow of information that when it comes to many classified documents, he REFUSED to give any transcript of a conversation with energy executives even when the court ordered it.

The guy is hiding something obviously.

You think he is more secretive than Agnew was?

 

[Tiger]

he REFUSED to give any transcript of a conversation with energy executives even when the court ordered it.

So what?
If your going to require the executive to post transcripts of all conversations then you should require the same of congress and the judiciary. You think Congress wants all of it's private conversations with lobbyists open to the public? It'll never happen.
Elected officials are allowed to have private conversations with whomever they want. Get over it.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Tiger
Elected officials are allowed to have private conversations with whomever they want. Get over it.

Sorry, no dice. When elected officials have conversations related to their elective responsibilities, affecting the citizens they were elected to represent, then it is solidly, 100% within the public's right to know every detail of those conversations. While I understand why so many politicians want to hide their shady dealings from public scrutiny, I've never understood the apologists that are willing to let them do so.

A lack of accountability inevitably leads to abuse.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Elected officials are allowed to have private conversations with whomever they want. Get over it.

No I won't get over it. This is exactly what is wrong with our goverment. There are too many people having too many secret conversations. Anytime the govements business is being done it should be part of a public record unless it is a matter of national security. Why shouldn't it be? Why shouldn't everyone know what Cheney and Lay were talking about? Why shouldn't everyone know every conversation that Tom Daschle's wife has with every Congressman? Do they have something to hide? Of course they do. Those conversations could no more stand the light of day than the vampires that participated in them. Elected and appointed officials gave up their right to privacy the minute they decided to run for election or took an appointment. They are in a position to effect the lives of every American. They may be in a position to decide whether me, you or our children are going to be sent in harms way so I get to know about every aspect of their lives. Then I will decide if they are worthy of being put in a position to make those decisions. People unwilling or unable to stand up to this kind scrutiny need not apply.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Elected officials are allowed to have private conversations with whomever they want. Get over it.

No I won't get over it. This is exactly what is wrong with our goverment. There are too many people having too many secret conversations. Anytime the govements business is being done it should be part of a public record unless it is a matter of national security. Why shouldn't it be? Why shouldn't everyone know what Cheney and Lay were talking about? Why shouldn't everyone know every conversation that Tom Daschle's wife has with every Congressman? Do they have something to hide? Of course they do. Those conversations could no more stand the light of day than the vampires that participated in them. Elected and appointed officials gave up their right to privacy the minute they decided to run for election or took an appointment. They are in a position to effect the lives of every American. They may be in a position to decide whether me, you or our children are going to be sent in harms way so I get to know about every aspect of their lives. Then I will decide if they are worthy of being put in a position to make those decisions. People unwilling or unable to stand up to this kind scrutiny need not apply.

Exactly right. That is supposed to be part of the deal. If you want to be a public official, you have to give up some of your right to privacy. You have to agree to do your job in the public spotlight. If you can't accept that, then you're not suited for public-sector work; stay in the private sector where you can close the door.

 

[ub4me]

If Cheney doesn't have anytingh to hide, why doesn't he give the transcript of a conversation with energy executives to public?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

How can people defend Cheney in this? If you had someone working for you that kept it a secret what he was doing while on the clock, would you be allright with that? Because guess what, you do, and he is.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
How can people defend Cheney in this? If you had someone working for you that kept it a secret what he was doing while on the clock, would you be allright with that? Because guess what, you do, and he is.

Well, it seems the same people who are so quick to dismiss anyone who is against the current administrations policies as a "Bush hater" are equally as quick in defending anything and everything they do. No surprises here folks...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
How can people defend Cheney in this? If you had someone working for you that kept it a secret what he was doing while on the clock, would you be allright with that? Because guess what, you do, and he is.

Well, it seems the same people who are so quick to dismiss anyone who is against the current administrations policies as a "Bush hater" are equally as quick in defending anything and everything they do. No surprises here folks...

Yup, many likely threw hissy fits over Clinton hiding a BJ and wanted him to resign.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
How can people defend Cheney in this? If you had someone working for you that kept it a secret what he was doing while on the clock, would you be allright with that? Because guess what, you do, and he is.

Well, it seems the same people who are so quick to dismiss anyone who is against the current administrations policies as a "Bush hater" are equally as quick in defending anything and everything they do. No surprises here folks...

Yup, many likely threw hissy fits over Clinton hiding a BJ and wanted him to resign.

The two aren't even remotely related.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: sandorski
Yup, many likely threw hissy fits over Clinton hiding a BJ and wanted him to resign.

The two aren't even remotely related.

I agree that's true, but for exactly the opposite reason you meant (if I understand where you're coming from).

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job responsibilities. Cheney is hiding meetings with energy magnates that may affect this country's energy policies as well as the pockets of our taxpayers and the profits of major energy conglomerates. The meetings are directly related to Cheney's responsibilities.

There is no comparison.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: sandorski
Yup, many likely threw hissy fits over Clinton hiding a BJ and wanted him to resign.

The two aren't even remotely related.

I agree that's true, but for exactly the opposite reason you meant (if I understand where you're coming from).

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job responsibilities. Cheney is hiding meetings with energy magnates that may affect this country's energy policies as well as the pockets of our taxpayers and the profits of major energy conglomerates. The meetings are directly related to Cheney's responsibilities.

There is no comparison.

Absolutely. Why do people think this guy is above being a crook? Because GW picked him to run as his VP? Would you think he's capable and should be brought to trial if he wasn't VP? A criminal is a criminal. If he has nothing to hide, he has nothing to worry about. If he does, then I hope he becomes someone's wife in jail.

 

[Wheezer]

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job

LOL...riiight..

SO acording to you private conversations should be public knowledge, because we pay for thier services, therefore we have a right to know what they are saying.

BUT even though we are paying the president to do his job and not get a hummer on the "company clock" so to speak, that should remain private.

gee.....makes perfect sense to me

 

[Bleep]

Elected officials are allowed to have private conversations with whomever they want. Get over it

Stupidity at its finest. You have never heard of the Sunshine laws in your state I presume?

Bleep

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: Wheezer

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job

LOL...riiight..

SO acording to you private conversations should be public knowledge, because we pay for thier services, therefore we have a right to know what they are saying.

BUT even though we are paying the president to do his job and not get a hummer on the "company clock" so to speak, that should remain private.

gee.....makes perfect sense to me

No, that is not what he is saying...you are simply interpreting it to suit your view. He is saying that the VP's conversation directly affected US policy and as such, it should be a matter of public record. The issue with Clinton was nothing that directly affected US policy, and was a private matter. You are all hot and bothered about the President getting a hummer "on the clock", but the President of the USA is not a normal job. Technically, you are "on the clock" 24/7, but in reality, Presidents are people to, and are allowed some private time. Should we be upset every time George tags Laura at night since he, by your definition, is "on the clock"? Granted, this is not the same thing, but I am illustrating a point....which you will likely still not get. Life is more complicated than Clinton bad, GW good you know.

 

[KevinH]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: Wheezer

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job

LOL...riiight..

SO acording to you private conversations should be public knowledge, because we pay for thier services, therefore we have a right to know what they are saying.

BUT even though we are paying the president to do his job and not get a hummer on the "company clock" so to speak, that should remain private.

gee.....makes perfect sense to me

No, that is not what he is saying...you are simply interpreting it to suit your view. He is saying that the VP's conversation directly affected US policy and as such, it should be a matter of public record. The issue with Clinton was nothing that directly affected US policy, and was a private matter. You are all hot and bothered about the President getting a hummer "on the clock", but the President of the USA is not a normal job. Technically, you are "on the clock" 24/7, but in reality, Presidents are people to, and are allowed some private time. Should we be upset every time George tags Laura at night since he, by your definition, is "on the clock"? Granted, this is not the same thing, but I am illustrating a point....which you will likely still not get. Life is more complicated than Clinton bad, GW good you know.

Why this notion seems to escape those defending him is beyond me. Partisan politics at its finest...

 

[Bleep]

I have not looked up the sunshine laws relating to the federal goverment but I think they are similiar to these,

HERE scroll to bottom

Bleep

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Wheezer

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job

LOL...riiight..

SO acording to you private conversations should be public knowledge, because we pay for thier services, therefore we have a right to know what they are saying.

BUT even though we are paying the president to do his job and not get a hummer on the "company clock" so to speak, that should remain private.

gee.....makes perfect sense to me

In that persecution, I mean, prosecution, we were led to belive even the lawyer client privelage was not even sacred, yet we can't hear discussions that shaped our policy?

and yes an extarmarital affair is a private matter, until dumba*s Hart they were politely unreported on by US media. Newt and the boys going after anyone on ethical issues is like Hitler calling Stalin a murderer......

 

[sMiLeYz]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
Im just wondering whats Cheney's so desperate to keep from the public?

Cheney is probably the most secretive vice president ever, who rarely speaks in public, he alone controls the flow of information that when it comes to many classified documents, he REFUSED to give any transcript of a conversation with energy executives even when the court ordered it.

The guy is hiding something obviously.

cmon, you think there is any need for us to hear what he and the boys from Enron talked about.

Remember when the Gov. of Cali asked the DOJ to look into "Texas" based energy companies regarding the power shortages and artificially inflated prices? That was dismissed by the administration.

If you are shocked by corruption and a lack of ethics in politics and business where have you been, the GOP recently asked a federal court to overrule a state and aksed congress to give money to help not a single business, but an entire industry, damn liberals......

Damn liberals indeed... they need to learn that our government is infalliable!

Theres still no justification for the amount of secrecy that Cheney is keeping on the matter. If he has nothing to hide, why not demonstrate it?

In this day and age where our Administration secretly passes unconstitional laws while the public is distracted by war, we need the to know what really is going on.

after all, we can only look the other way for so long...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Wheezer

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job

LOL...riiight..

SO acording to you private conversations should be public knowledge, because we pay for thier services, therefore we have a right to know what they are saying.

BUT even though we are paying the president to do his job and not get a hummer on the "company clock" so to speak, that should remain private.

gee.....makes perfect sense to me

In that persecution, I mean, prosecution, we were led to belive even the lawyer client privelage was not even sacred, yet we can't hear discussions that shaped our policy?

and yes an extarmarital affair is a private matter, until dumba*s Hart they were politely unreported on by US media. Newt and the boys going after anyone on ethical issues is like Hitler calling Stalin a murderer......

Just to toss this in

DC has an adultery law
better link
So while I agree that it is a private matter, seems our government doesn't always see it that way.

CkG

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Wheezer

Clinton didn't want people to know how he got his jollies; this information did not affect U.S. policies, taxes, or anything else related to his job

LOL...riiight..

SO acording to you private conversations should be public knowledge, because we pay for thier services, therefore we have a right to know what they are saying.

BUT even though we are paying the president to do his job and not get a hummer on the "company clock" so to speak, that should remain private.

gee.....makes perfect sense to me

In that persecution, I mean, prosecution, we were led to belive even the lawyer client privelage was not even sacred, yet we can't hear discussions that shaped our policy?

and yes an extarmarital affair is a private matter, until dumba*s Hart they were politely unreported on by US media. Newt and the boys going after anyone on ethical issues is like Hitler calling Stalin a murderer......

Just to toss this in

DC has an adultery law
better link
So while I agree that it is a private matter, seems our government doesn't always see it that way.

CkG

I bet that is really enforced. If every person who commited adultery was sent to jail and fined, the prison system would be even more overloaded.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
If every person who commited adultery was sent to jail and fined, the prison system would be even more overloaded.

Yeah, and there wouldn't be enough politicians left to revoke the law.