Waiting for Fitzgerald

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Nope. Never did.

Doesn't change the fact that the lawsuit was legally meritless, and was championed and funded for political purposes.

As for Broaderick, I've read an interview and tend to believe her. (Wiley too.) Didn't really affect my view of Clinton by that point.

S_A_M

How is that possible? Rape is okay with the passage of time? You are okay with the President of the US being of a character where as a 30 plus yo he could rape and violently beat a woman and baldfacedly lie about it?

I ask you as I asked Gatti (who has yet to answer), if it was your mother or wife or daughter would you be so nonchalant?

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski

what's worse- Missing some flight duty or raping and attempting rape? Gatti is on record.

Did people advocate jailing Bush for his missing flight duty?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Is that what the girls you flirted with in college called it?

PoPDPotD!!! Congrats Burger.

And ftr, I was chaste in college. I focused on my grades and various internships and booze.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
1. Yes. verily.

2. Your fate is yours to choose. It's the beauty of America.

Congratulations. What's the name/URL of your blog?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Actually, your indignation comes across as more powerful when you do make distinctions about it. Gives the ALL CAPS that special je ne sais quoi.

Translation: I still defend rapists and perjurers as long as they of the same political stripe as I and as long as the offences are just about sex. The rule of law only applies to the other guys.

[Replaced_Texan]

Apparently purjery is just a technicality, as is an investigation that wastes taxpayers dollars.

And secondly, I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars. So they go to something that trips someone up because they said something in the first grand jury and then maybe they found new information or they forgot something and they tried to correct that in a second grand jury.

It's nice to see Republicans admit that they were wrong.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Gattigap
I really doubt that, though I take your point.

I would be satisfied if the institutional left could admit that we are a nation of laws and that the rule of law should be respected regardless of the political demographic of the person violating it.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Penske_Account


I ask you as I asked Gatti (who has yet to answer), if it was your mother or wife or daughter would you be so nonchalant?

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize this was a serious question. I thought you were just being an asshole.

No, I wouldn't be so nonchalant about it, Penske. Do we get to play this game every time we debate politics or public policy, where we personalize horrible impacts to members of your immediate family? I find it tends to stultify the debate, but if you wish to pursue it, we can talk about foreign policy next.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I would be satisfied if the institutional left could admit that we are a nation of laws and that the rule of law should be respected regardless of the political demographic of the person violating it.

Tell it to the Senior Senator from Texas.

[Not Bob]

From Yahoo, in the "as ye sow, so shall ye reap" department:

• Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (news, bio, voting record) of Texas derided any potential perjury charge as a "technicality," and suggested Fitzgerald may be trying to show that "two years' of investigation was not a waste of time and dollars."

I happen to agree with her, btw.

eta: Beaten by RT. Mmmmmmm.

feta: Uh, sorry, balt.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Congratulations. What's the name/URL of your blog?

I take visa/mc for the coffee mugs if you are interested.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize this was a serious question. I thought you were just being an asshole.

No, I wouldn't be so nonchalant about it, Penske. Do we get to play this game every time we debate politics or public policy, where we personalize horrible impacts to members of your immediate family? I find it tends to stultify the debate, but if you wish to pursue it, we can talk about foreign policy next.

I don't know that it is useful in every instance, but in this case I do think the hypocrisy is telling. You wave away the violent anti-social, criminal acts of a man who you would otherwise condemn, and by doing so, in the context, you validate the campaign of that man and his cronies to mock and delegimitize the attempts of the victims to his crimes from accessing justice. And yet if they were your family members it would be different. That's a sad commentary on what you must think justice means. America's moral compass has really been wacked by the dimwits to effect such thoughts from someone otherwise so thoughtful and intelligent.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Tell it to the Senior Senator from Texas.

Please. Delay;s lies times 10 don;t equal the criminality of violent rape. Or are you equating them?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Apparently purjery is just a technicality, as is an investigation that wastes taxpayers dollars.

It's nice to see Republicans admit that they were wrong.

She should be embarassed. What a rEdiculous response. She should fire the staffer who prepped her.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Please. Delay;s lies times 10 don;t equal the criminality of violent rape. Or are you equating them?

I think the equation she's looking at is:

Rove's and Libby's perjury [>, =, or <] Clinton's perjury.