It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NOW Bush claims his authority to pardon Libby comes from the Constitution.

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 06:53 PM
link   
No its "Ted Bundy killed people so I can to!" Guess what? That defense wouldn't work in court.




posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Semper,

Leave the precedents for a court of law where they belong. The truth is Bush, Cheney, Libby, Rove are all part of the criminal element- they're all involved, and THIS is what separates this case from the others.

You certainly understand that. Remember, caca rolls downhill. And they're all in that hill.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Precedent is precedent...

As far as the "court of law" is concerned, what do you think is happening here?

There is so much supposition and conjecture, all the while you are placing him on trial and convicting him when it is readily evident that emotion is your driving force. You have no legal basis other than "just what you think or feel."

The facts are clear..

He has every legal right

A precedent has been set in EVERY administration before

His claim to constitutional authority is correct and has stood the test in the Supreme Court..

Facts

Pure and simple

Semper



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 09:26 PM
link   
A criminal pardoning other criminals.

HE is part of the crime family.

No, sorry, you are wrong. Just doesnt make any sense. Bush can pardon someone out of the boundaries of his administration, but not WITHIN- where all the lies begin with the president himself.

I dont think there is a precedent for this. This is a one of a kind deal- NOW, if Bush succeeds at pardoning everyone in his office, THEN there is a precedent for the next criminal president and his goons.
See?

Where in our history has there been a similar case that we could use for case law?

Clinton pardoned murderers., thieves, druggies, etc, but they were not close and affiliated with him.

So, give me a case i can read where this has happened before? If it happened before, then we have a precedent.

We dont.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Roger Clinton was not close to President Clinton?

The individuals which were pardoned by Clinton who were affilated with Roger Clinton are not considered close?

Marc Rich is not close to the Clintons, with Rich's wife being a MAJOR donor to the Clinton campaign?

[edit on 9-7-2007 by ferretman2]



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Duh.

Clintons pardons were not to his IMMEDIATE staff/cabinet/cohorts-whom are ALL involved in the same crimes TOGETHER.

There is a difference.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Duh.

Clintons pardons were not to his IMMEDIATE staff/cabinet/cohorts-whom are ALL involved in the same crimes TOGETHER.

There is a difference.


First it was the pardon that doesn't exist... And now it's pardons that do exist but which you claim don't...

Could someone please do a modicum of research before making a claim?

Please review the following selections and the list in it's entirety:



CISNEROS, Henry G.
CLINTON, Roger
COX, Ernest Harley, Jr.
CROSS, John F., Jr.
DEUTCH, John
McDOUGAL, Susan H
PALMER, Robert W.

www.usdoj.gov...


Looks like staff and cohorts to me... But why do any research? Why bother denying ignorance when making baseless claim that suit an agenda is so much more fun?




posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Sorry. none of the above are VICE PRESIDENT, VICE PRESIDENT SECRETARY or advisors AT THE WHITE HOUSE TO THE PRESIDENT.
All which are under an umbrella or (I'll put it mildly) SUSPICION.


You know, you can sugar coat it but its not going to work.

Now if Clinton/Gore and other members of the previous white house did Monica Lewinsky, who is Clinton to pardon say, Gore??
( who by the way knew all the dirt on Clinton and wanted to share Monica- got caught and lied for Clinton?) Poor analogy maybe, but it makes the point.
What would the Republicans have to say about THAT???

Clinton keeps popping up on every thread :shk:
And lord knows, that was very very very serious stuff.
Truly impeachable. Oh yes.

[edit on 9-7-2007 by dgtempe]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Do you really ever bother...

To take the time to exercise a little due diligence before you're tempted to hit the "post reply" button...

You previously asked for:


Originally posted by dgtempe
A criminal pardoning other criminals.

HE is part of the crime family.

No, sorry, you are wrong. Just doesnt make any sense. Bush can pardon someone out of the boundaries of his administration, but not WITHIN- where all the lies begin with the president himself.

I dont think there is a precedent for this. This is a one of a kind deal- NOW, if Bush succeeds at pardoning everyone in his office, THEN there is a precedent for the next criminal president and his goons.
See?

Where in our history has there been a similar case that we could use for case law?

Clinton pardoned murderers., thieves, druggies, etc, but they were not close and affiliated with him.

So, give me a case i can read where this has happened before? If it happened before, then we have a precedent.

We dont.


Then you changed the threshold:


Originally posted by dgtempe
Duh.

Clintons pardons were not to his IMMEDIATE staff/cabinet/cohorts-whom are ALL involved in the same crimes TOGETHER.

There is a difference.


My post addressed both threshold's and made the criteria for both. Please review the names I listed, their positions within the Clinton administration...

John Deutch

He was "just" the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Henry Cisneros

He was "only" the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

The remaining (aside from ole "Roger the Dodger") are some of the people (but not all) involved in the Whitewater & Madison Guaranty Scandal.

Please note: George W. Bush has not pardoned Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Once again.... Just to be clear... George W. Bush has not pardoned Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

This might be a newsflash to some... George W. Bush has not pardoned Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Your title, and with it your presumptions are incorrect, flawed, wrong... Pick your description you have embraced ignorance on this subject, and despite ample proof to the contrary insist on this misguided diatribe.

There may be some here that fail to fathom the chasm between a commuted sentence, and a pardon... I suggest one put it in the perspective of a death row inmate... If your sentence is commuted, you spend the rest of your life in prison, but you are spared (insert witty capital punishment analogy here) but if you are pardoned.... You are walking down the street whistling a snappy tune and wondering what's on TV tonight.

If any of you are unable (or unwilling) to recognize this as a "legal chasm" then your agenda has outstripped your ability to "deny ignorance" and I can be of no further assistance to you.

As Forrest Gump would say...



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 08:19 AM
link   
When it comes to Libby the pardon by the president will only shows the state of corruption that our government is in right now.

The main fish is Cheney and libby is covering for him, taking into consideration the arrogance of the present administration and the none stop of events that are coming to the light right now.

I believe what you said about this government on another thread Dg, we are facing a new type of government we have right now autocracy.

If Bush is not impeached first we may see the first president that will pardon his entire cabinet and perhaps himself using his executive powers.

I think he will be arrogant enough to do it.
he has no choice if he wants to keep all the dirt under the rug.

Like he said before he holds nobody in his administration for any mistakes done by his administration.


Just look at the problem now with the Subpoenas.

He got a long list of pardons ahead of him.


[edit on 10-7-2007 by marg6043]



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Please...


Originally posted by marg6043
When it comes to Libby the pardon by the president will only shows the state of corruption that our government is in right now.


Someone... Anyone... Show me where George Bush has pardoned Lewis "Scooter" Libby or any other member of his administration.

This has to be one of the most blatant cases of embracing ignorance I've seen on any of the ATS boards...

:shk:



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Someone... Anyone... Show me where George Bush has pardoned Lewis "Scooter" Libby or any other member of his administration.

:shk:


My dearest Mirthful Me, the issue is as good as done. He will pardon libby Mirthful Me he will, is just now a matter of time.

But is a done deal.


Sorry you are getting frustrated because we are talking as if was already done.

But mark our words he will pardon libby.

He has no choice.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Oh, I see...

This should have been posted in BTS Dreams & Personal Predictions Forum...

My mistake.




posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Oh, I see...



You are so sweet, I will keep this thread on my favorites because when Bush pardon Libby along with many others including the controversial subpoena group, this thread will be worth of remembering.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lightstorm
Gee, FDR nuked two cities and didn't get in trouble, I guess I can nuke Houston and Dallas and not get in trouble. What? FDR did it before me and didn't get in trouble.

I guess I can kill anyone I want since Ted Bundy(Republican, worked for them) and Ike and George H.W. Bush killed People. Sure Ike was a general and GHWB was in the air force but hey, they still killed people and got away with it. So I guess I can to.

It sounds like you have a case of severe animosity towards Republicans. That's an unbalanced and unhealthy outlook on life.

Oh, and btw....FDR didn't nuke any cities. He was DEAD at the time. A DEMOCRAT by the name of Harry Truman was POTUS on August 6, 1945.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
I dont think there is a precedent for this. This is a one of a kind deal- NOW, if Bush succeeds at pardoning everyone in his office, THEN there is a precedent for the next criminal president and his goons.
See?

Where in our history has there been a similar case that we could use for case law?

Clinton pardoned murderers., thieves, druggies, etc, but they were not close and affiliated with him.

So, give me a case i can read where this has happened before? If it happened before, then we have a precedent.

We dont.


Yes we do.

September 8, 1974.


Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.


www.watergate.info...

Can't be much more of a "part of the administration" than POTUS and VP, can you?



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Ok Jsobecky, i get it- however, Nixon stepped down and left the presidency. It is a little different. The next president can pardon the previous one, i know. Maybe Bush should step down, and Cheney, then they could be pardoned.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Mirthfulme,

No, Bush has NOT pardoned Libby. He's just keeping him out of jail, that's all. He had to pay his fine. I know.

I call it pardoning if someone doesnt have to serve time. But you got me on a "technicality"

Are we driving you crazy yet???


I cant wait for a Democrat to take office of the president of the United States so we can bash the heck out of him/her and all agree that both parties are the same poop.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 06:24 AM
link   
I've said something very similar to the title in your thread right over there, but my source came from Yahoo News. I'd like to quote a bit of my comment here, since it fits so well into both threads:

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
Yeah, Bush has the Constitutional authority to lessen or eliminate Libby's sentencing & even can keep quiet about his reasons for doing so (unless, of course, Bush gets a subpoena!), but Bush does not have the Constitutional or legal authority to obstruct an investigation that stems from Libby's original testimony that implicated Cheney. However, it is the Constitutional Duty of Bush (to "execute faithfully the laws") to demand further investigation on other alleged criminal activities. It doesn't matter that Cheney happens to be in Bush's group or not, the Law demands investigation!



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
I must have missed the news flash...

Could someone please show me where President George Bush pardoned Lewis "Scooter" Libby?

Anyone?

I didn't think so.

When Bush's term is nearing its end, Bush will give a full pardon, maybe even give a refund check
for the "fine" and Scooter will gas up and take off into the sunset- free of any wrong doing.
You call it commutation? I call it pardon.
He's exercising his rights afforded to him by the US constitution, you know, that piece of paper.....



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join