Still Hating America.

[Adder]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
It was OK for Clinton to lie and OK for Libby to lie. I don't view political witchhunts as having anything to do with the law.

In those circumstances, you get a pass.

You know, I might be able to agree with that in a lot of circumstances, including for those two, but the precedent was already set with Bill's BJ.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Adder
You know, I might be able to agree with that in a lot of circumstances, including for those two, but the precedent was already set with Bill's BJ.

I'm torn. I am against a tit-for-tat, sinking to their level kind of thing, because I don't think it's constructive. On the other hand, this is (marginally) more substantive and relevant than the BJ was.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Adder
Were his parents American citizens? If so, he is native born whether actually born in the U.S. or not.

Really? Huh.

[Adder]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I'm torn. I am against a tit-for-tat, sinking to their level kind of thing, because I don't think it's constructive. On the other hand, this is (marginally) more substantive and relevant than the BJ was.

I agree. This one is at least to somewhat related to abuse of official powers, albeit a fairly minor one. But I certainly would not have been outraged if he wasn't prosecuted.

Although I think Fitzgerald felt he needed to prosecute someone to avoid being (unfairly) labelled as a mere partisan witchunt and a waste of time. I don't think he was either, given that the White House continued to lie about its involvement.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I'm torn. I am against a tit-for-tat, sinking to their level kind of thing, because I don't think it's constructive. On the other hand, this is (marginally) more substantive and relevant than the BJ was.

That is true, and I thgought about that when I wrote what I wrote. I figured, on the balance, everyone ought to lie in response to these witchhunts.

If whores are going to abuse the sacredness of prosecutorial and investigative discretion to political ends, the only wazy I can think to fight them and dissuade such abuse is to make a mockery of the oath. When those whores whine about perjury, you can spin the argument back on them by saying that they are destroying the rule of law by these political witchhunts where the targets have no choice but to lie, and the American people feel its ok to do so (See: Clinton).

It's a simple trick of pushing blame back one event in the process. Drives the focus from the liar to the scumbag who started the investigation.

We ought to prosecute or make liable for damages politicians who initiate these withchunts. That's when you'd really see these chickenshits cut this nonsense.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Adder
I agree. This one is at least to somewhat related to abuse of official powers, albeit a fairly minor one. But I certainly would not have been outraged if he wasn't prosecuted.

Although I think Fitzgerald felt he needed to prosecute someone to avoid being (unfairly) labelled as a mere partisan witchunt and a waste of time. I don't think he was either, given that the White House continued to lie about its involvement.

Total tab to us? $30 mil? Way to go, DC.

As to Fitz, fuck him. The higher road would have been to not prosecute, but excoriate Libby in the press. Now he's just shown himself as a man who'll whore it up to cover his own reputation.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
That is true, and I thgought about that when I wrote what I wrote. I figured, on the balance, everyone ought to lie in response to these witchhunts.

If whores are going to abuse the sacredness of prosecutorial and investigative discretion to political ends, the only wazy I can think to fight them and dissuade such abuse is to make a mockery of the oath. When those whores whine about perjury, you can spin the argument back on them by saying that they are destroying the rule of law by these political witchhunts where the targets have no choice but to lie, and the American people feel its ok to do so (See: Clinton).

It's a simple trick of pushing blame back one event in the process. Drives the focus from the liar to the scumbag who started the investigation.

We ought to prosecute or make liable for damages politicians who initiate these withchunts. That's when you'd really see these chickenshits cut this nonsense.

You are all good until the last paragraph. And I don't think that the American people feel that Scooter Libby had "no choice but to lie" or that it is OK to lie about the types of conversations that he had. I think lying about those is worse than lying about extracurricular sexual activity. I just don't think that a federal case should necessarily be made out of it.

And, I think it was perfectly possible that there could have been (or may have been, and it didn't get uncovered) more culpable behavior than Libby's, so I don't think it was as wasted an investigation. At least the issue was substantive.

ETA I think it's when you use words like "scumbags" that I start to want to disagree with you. Because I don't like your approach. Or when you get so extreme. I am assuming you are not e.g. being an arbitrator in your spare time, now that you have left the law.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Total tab to us? $30 mil? Way to go, DC.

That's a bargain compared to the Clinton investigations, and this one actually had to do (at least tangentially) with national security.

Plus, as a percentage of GDP . . .

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Apparently John McCain was born in Coco Solo, Panama, in the Panama Canal Zone. That's not in the United States. So how can he become President?

dude. that's the kind of checkmate SJ material you wanna bring up just before the election, not now while the Rs can still go another way.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
It says "natural born citizen"

Doesn't that mean citizen at the time of birth? And one can be a citizen of the U.S. even if one is born overseas, whether to U.S. parents, on a military base, etc., as pointed out.

This isn't like Madeline Albright (born in Prague and a Czech citizen at first) or Jennifer Granholm (born in Vancouver).

OF course, the 14-year residency requirment could come into play on such a person . . .

the "natural born" stands on its own, not modifying "citizen." It was to eliminate test tube babies and clones. I understand Hamilton was a big Sci Fi reader and about killed everyone with his "what ifs."

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Apparently John McCain was born in Coco Solo, Panama, in the Panama Canal Zone. That's not in the United States. So how can he become President?

The Panama Canal Zone at the time was considered part of the territory of the United States. Same is true of Puerto Rico, or any other US territory, or true if one were born at a US embassy.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I think the framers were hip to the notion that other places might become states. Like California or Wyoming or Panama. Except that -- whoops -- Panama isn't a state. It's not one of the United States.

Nothing against McCain per se, and I think it's a stupid constitutional provision.

I don't think an Army base is considered US territory. But I could be wrong. Be the Panama Canal Zone was definitely a US territory.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Adder
Were his parents American citizens? If so, he is native born whether actually born in the U.S. or not.

In other words, he is not naturalized.

Even if both parents are US citizens, I don't think if you are born outside of the US you are native born. You can get citizenship, but you are not native born.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Adder
Who is everyone? Dude lied to the FBI and the grand jury. Not the most henious of crimes when the subject matter is primarily political, but a crime nonetheless.

Clinton lied to a Federal judge.

Was he under oath when he lied to the FBI? Why is that a crime. And why didn't he take the 5th in front of the grand jury? Why did he talk to anyone without getting immunity?

[SlaveNoMore]

Adder
What crime would the administration have been committing had they, " deliberately misled the American people about WMD intelligence before the war?"

The crime of "Agreeing with the prior POTUS and his administration, an informed Congress, the UN and practically all other Western Nations"?