posted on Apr, 30 2007 @ 03:45 PM
Originally posted by grover
We do not want it to become a tit for tat kind of thing and if the Democrats tried to at this late stage that is exactly what it would look like.
Not at all. If that were the case, they would have brought it up during his first term. Even though they didn't have any kind of majority, the
public would have given them brownie points.
If anything, we're all wondering what's taken them so long.
Maybe the Republicans tried to impeach Clinton knowing that Bush would follow him. Remember, the PNAC was already written, everything was in place,
except their 'Stooge-In-Chief'.
Maybe they knew we would be having this conversation, and that the ever-polite Dems would balk at any such implication, thereby stalling this very
conversation before it ever started.
What I am favor of at this late date is a through (and I do mean through) series of investigations into the behavior of this administration with the
intent of passing the resulting information on to a grand jury, once they leave office for criminal prosecution, and then subsequently trying them for
any crimes that might be uncovered.
From what I understand, and I'm sure there are people much more knowledgable than I am on this topic, but didn't Bush pass some legislation saying
that neither he, nor his people, could be prosecuted for anything they did during his tenure?
And, didn't Bush purchase a whole bunch of land in Paraguay (which doesn't extradite political prisoners to the US)?
I say, let's get 'em now... before they flee the country.
ps, Halliburton and Iran, on c-span tonight at 8pm, EST