Have Bush/Cheney ever done anything that is actually illegal? Nope!

reply to post by Trunkeight


I guess I should expect to be called a troll by the same people that accuse Bush/Cheney of everything under the sun because they disagree with them.

How is this trolling. I am giving you a chance to make your case, heck I am begging you to make your case. Is it trolling because I have a different view than yours?

I guess if I simply believed everything I read on a website or bought every conspiracy theory without any proof then somehow that would make me a more valuable member of this site. Is that what you are trying to imply?

Instead of calling me a troll, why dont you try to do something worthwhile and prove how what I stated is wrong.

[edit on 18-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

reply to post by grapesofraft

Here is the proof of a crime.

Cheney's crime

Bush's crime

End of thread.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by solarstorm

 

It is hard to tell since they were lost. Since we do not have them then I would say they may or may not have something incriminating. If I had 5 million of your emails would I find you guilty of a crime?

Yet another pathetic deflection and distraction tactic. Just answer the question. But no, you have to try and create a thread where you will simply deflect and try to turn the tables and NEVER actually taking any of the EVIDENCE provided as evidence.

First off, they were DESTROYED not lost. The excuse of failure or anything else is unacceptable at that level. Every document is to be retained so that it can be gone over at a later time. Well, it wasn't. It's the law that it's supposed to be that way. Hmmm, so does that mean it is illegal that those emails are gone? You bet your rear it does.

Then we have good ole Scooter. Why was the CIA agents name leaked again? Who was Scooter? Who was his BOSS? Hmmm, illegal? Well, the courts thought so. But you will come up with another twist of course.

The forged intel about WMDs in Iraq? The very ones that the CIA was investigating? Hmmmm, just a bit coinkadinky for me.

But alas, you'll come up with some stupid deflection and try to turn it around on me by saying something completely irrelevant like "if you lost 5 million emails would that mean you did something illegal...."

Originally posted by total newbie
reply to post by grapesofraft

 

You have got it brother. Bush and Cheney should have their faces carved on Mount Rushmore even if it means removing some other less known political types.

Also any new printed money might have their faces on the bill.

This is sarcasm I hope right?

I haven't had time to read all of this website yet, but it should hopefully shut you up for a while.

bushcrimes.net...

I especially liked this section:

under US criminal law, any knowing lie or creation of a false impression that causes harm to even one single person is by legal definition felony criminal fraud, and that causing the knowing preplanned unprovoked death of even one single innocent person is, by legal definition, premeditated murder.

If the president of the US 1) willfully and deliberately pre-plans and executes a massive international CRIMINAL FRAUD lying campaign (as a pre-planned false cover story for a pre-planned unprovoked war) that knowingly and falsely states that another country has WMD and is about to use them against us, 2) knows that if he were to attack that country that his attack would kill thousands of innocent women and children and at least hundreds of US military, 3) and then knowingly attacks that innocent country and kills those thousands of innocent people based solely upon his lies, 4) then his pre-planned unprovoked attack becomes his premeditated MURDER of ALL people killed as the result of his criminal fraud war (per the Felony Murder Doctrine).

Your honor i rest my case.

reply to post by hangdiver


LOL, I give you credit for trying. A star for you. Someone else brought up Bush's crimes of his youth as well. Really what I am looking for is proof of something major like war crimes, being behind 911, etc...

Many of us have our minor violations of the law in our past, but i am looking for the kind of stuff that make these guys the devils they are accused of being.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Reading

 

This is not a conspiracy site, it is a discussion board. I did not know that you had to believe in every conspiracy to join up to a discussion board or even a conspiracy site for that matter. But, I guess if all you want on this site is people that agree with you then maybe you should have me kicked out.

I have heard of claims that Bush dodged the draft, but to be honest I havent researched it, but I will. Also, I have never once heard that Cheney dodged the draft, but I will look into it. Seems odd that a man who was once ahead of the Defense Dept was a draft dodger, but I guess anything is possible.

Morals are subjective, that is why we live by a rule of law. If it was not bad enough to have a law against it then how bad could it really be if no one decided to make it illegal in the last 200+ years?

What is more delusional, believing anything negative you hear about someone when there is no proof of their guilt or following the law of the land and say that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Heck, I might even say they were guilty before they were convicted if one of you could make a case for anything they are actually guilty of.


[edit on 18-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

It is a discussion board about CONSPIRACY theories search it on google and tell me what the second hit down says.

You dont have to agree to every viewpoint on this website, nobody asked that its just people do the research on this site so that they can make up their own assumptions.

Answer me this if dick and bush are such wonderfull people where did these perceptions of them being asshats come from?

it had to come from somewhere right? and dont tell me its because they disagree with the political policies because im not even from america so it doesnt afftect me what they do politicly.

The world is alot older than 200+ years and i dont need law's and bits of paper to tell me what is right and wrong i know clearly all about that.

Maybe you should look into the draft dodging because its a well known fact from the both of them, i find it sickening that they sent people into a false war without actaully seeing the horror's of one firsthand.

If that doesnt show agenda then i dont know what does.

Seeing as you are looking for PROOF so much

how about you give me one shred of proof that iraq had WMD'S and that it was completly needed to invade them?

How about some proof that they had ties with Al qaeda?

How about some proof that iraq was truly a threat to the united state's?

We can both play the give me proof game its not hard, your never gonna be convinced so whats the point asking?

reply to post by Kram09


I would agree with you that the things you listed are crimes, the problem I have is there is not a shred of proof that Bush or Cheney is guilty of any of this.

I guess you could say any president involved in war are guilty of these things, but you have to prove it. Sometimes war is justified.

I hear lots of people accusing Bush and Cheney of commiting all kind of crimes but nobody ever has a shred of proof. Nothing! Nada!

They have been accused of:
1. Being behind 911
2. Stealing all of our rights
3. Killing people
4. Stealing money
5. Trying to lead a coup
6. Trying to murder their friends
7. Torturing people
ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why did you leave out their convictions?

George Bush;

* The first arrest of George W. Bush was for theft at a hotel.
* The second arrest was for disorderly conduct at a football game.
* The third arrest, we've now learned, is for a very serious crime -- drunk driving.

Laura Bush;

*"Accidentally" ran a stop sign and killed another student who she was romantically interested in but turned her down.

Dick Cheney;

*Convicted twice of DWI.

reply to post by Reading


It is a discussion board a part of which is dedicated to conspiracy. If it werent you would not have places that you can create threads outside of conspiracy.

I researched as well and found them to be not guilty of the accusations against them, since there is no evidence.

The accusations came from people who try to blame anyone but the terrorists for the crimes of 911. That and people that are anti-war, liberals, etc...

Having not been to war and starting one is not proof of guilt of anything. I guess Clinton was just as guilty when he started the action in Somalia or Yugoslavia, or Obama is just as guilty for not stopping the current wars. Neither of them served either.

how about you give me one shred of proof that iraq had WMD'S and that it was completly needed to invade them?

How about some proof that they had ties with Al qaeda?

How about some proof that iraq was truly a threat to the united state's?

There is no proof of WMD or ties to AlQueda, but it doesnt make them guilty since they were given incorrect info from the CIA. Is it their fault that they trusted their trusted advisors? Does it make them guilty that they took Sadaam at face value when he said he had WMD's and he would use them in the months leading up to the war?

Iraq was a threat to the oil supply that the USA depends on.

The war is justified simply by the fact that Iraq violated the peace agreement numerous times and was running around saying they had WMD's almost up until the moment we invaded.

reply to post by Tiloke


Because with the exception of Laura these are petty crimes that many people are convicted of. It is not proof of evilness, just prove of some bad judgements.

Though, maybe we should go after Laura, that seems a little fishy. I always thought I saw horns underneath that hairdo of hers

[edit on 18-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

So all we have after 7 pages is that Bush and Cheney are guilty of DUI, and Bush was guilty of petty theft in his youth. Well if that makes them the worst people in history then I think many of us are in big trouble.

reply to post by Reading


It can easily be said that anyone posting on this site are sheep because if you don't agree with the majority, then you are an outcast then are called sheep, sheeple, zombie, stupid, ignorant etc etc. Hypicritical if you ask me. Anyone who has done their research in any topics discussed on this site are free to form their own opinons on it. The OP has asked a fair question, and he is right. There isn't solid proof saying Bush/Cheney did anything illegal? All was found was Bush's youth, but most people have had some run in with the law be it for drinking, smoking (tobacco or the happy grass), so that doesn't count. All that exists are accusations and if I'm not much mistaken, until someone is convicted of a crime, they are innocent.

Do I think they had done any of the things they are accused of, probably, they are politicians after all. Politicians and lawyers are the same sub-human species but who doesn't know that. But most leaders in this world, history and present have done things that would be considered illegal. Look at what Saddam had done during his reign. It makes everything Bush/Cheney are accused of look like child's play. The OP has started a thread that could be a good one for discussion but most of the ATS "sheep" would rather accuse the OP or anyone in agreement as "sheep". I thought the slogan of this site was "deny ignorance", the OP is doing just that, and so have some of the posters, but dismissing something because it is not "conspiracy worthy" or against the common beliefs on this site is again hpyicritical.

Originally posted by grapesofraft

Originally posted by unityemissions
How about deceiving the people?

Going to war with Iraq under false pretense.

The patriot act 1 & 2?

When did they decieve people?

What false pretenses did they go into Iraq on?

How can Patriot Act 1 & 2 be illegal if it was approved by Congress and still in force today under a new admin?

wow, im not reading anything more

you know why i do not discuss politics with my 4 year old child? same reason I wont be discussing it in this thread

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by dgtempe

 

Well actually the case would have never made it to court, because you guys havent given enough evidence to even get past a grand jury.

BUT,
Lets start out with 911.

My clients have been accused of being behind the heinous acts of 911, but neither of them were anywhere near the WTC on 9/11/2001. Furthermore, every action they took from the moment they became aware of the attacks was to do their very best to protect the country from future attacks.


[edit on 18-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

ok so you say your clients were no where near the WTC. Would they have to be??? :lolMy cousin Vinnie could have come up with something better)

Nothing further.

[edit on 18-6-2009 by dgtempe]

This thread is just "he said", "she said."

People have made posts saying Saddam was going round saying he had WMDs. I don't remember him doing this. Can someone please provide some evidence of him ever saying this?

Originally posted by dgtempe

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by dgtempe

 

Well actually the case would have never made it to court, because you guys havent given enough evidence to even get past a grand jury.

BUT,
Lets start out with 911.

My clients have been accused of being behind the heinous acts of 911, but neither of them were anywhere near the WTC on 9/11/2001. Furthermore, every action they took from the moment they became aware of the attacks was to do their very best to protect the country from future attacks.


[edit on 18-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

ok so you say your clients were no where near the WTC.

Would they have to be??? :lol

My cousin Vinnie could have come up with something better)

Nothing further.

[edit on 18-6-2009 by dgtempe]

Exactly, you could say every action they took after 911 was to make themselves look less guilty AND to kill two birds with one stone and use it as a excuse to invade iraq afghanistan.

And where did saddam say he had WMD'S ?

reply to post by Kram09


I personally think it was based off of bad intell, which isn't unheard of, but until there is proof that it was a Bush/Cheney lie to get us into Iraq then it just adds to the accusations. However, what about Rumsfield? Why isn't he ever added to some of these accusations? He was very much for invading Iraq, in fact I heard he was the one who pushed for it. I wouldn't be surprised if his people had presented the wrong intell to the President and Powell. This is were I've always leaned towards. Does that rule out that Bush/Cheney and Rumsfield had orchestrated everything? Of course not, but since we don't actually no for sure what went on behind the scenes, and only have theories/opinions coming from different directions on it, we might never know for sure.

As for Saddam, he was definitely no angel himself, so it's hard for me to spare any pity for the man. I find it kind of amusing that people have suddenly forgotten what that man did to his own people during his time in power. The people of Iraq and Iraqis that live in the U.S were sure glad to see the U.S invade the country. In fact, they were upset when Bush part one didn't kill him off and had been wanting the U.S to finish the job for years. They sure were happy when he was captured/hung too. Was all of this for oil and "expansion of the American empire through democracy", yes most likely on the oil part, and it could be good or bad depending on how you view the second. If we are helping a country get rid of their dictator, then why would we sacrifice our own people and resources for nothing? Just my take on all of this.

Personally, I have always been against war unless it is absolutely necessary. I also think we should stay out of foreign problems, but I'm not against aiding another country temporarily to help them be free from a tyrant. Our country's foundation had help from Spain and France to fight the British, so you can't say that we did it by ourselves and nothing wrong with a country wanting something like we have or whatever they want to do to change and helping them out. But once Saddam's people, army, were defeated and Saddam himself captured and killed, that is when we should have left in my opinion.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by solarstorm

 

It is hard to tell since they were lost. Since we do not have them then I would say they may or may not have something incriminating. If I had 5 million of your emails would I find you guilty of a crime?

That's what's so amazing about Bush/Cheney, anytime anyone accuses them of anything, the evidence either mysteriously disappears or they can't release it due to National Security reasons.

So you're request that people provide evidence if they are going to accuse them of something automatically makes the attempt futile because the evidence amazingly suddenly won't exist or it's kept hidden for one reason or another.

How about YOU properly defend them using evidence?

reply to post by nunya13


OK what charge would you like me to defend them from?