Karl Rove! COME ON DOWN!!!!!

[Mr. Shaman]

O.K., Porky......here're your options.

You either flip (on your "boss"), or START PACKIN'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

​

"Asked if he had communicated with the Obama administration on the matter, Nadler said that is "premature," then backtracked to correct Olbermann's understanding of what follows a contempt vote.

"Normal contempt is, you simply arrest him," he said. "The grand jury indicts him, you arrest him for contempt and you put him in jail until he is prepared to testify, to obey the subpoena."

We could call it The Penn Option!

​

 

[BigRob]

O.K., Porky......here're your options.

You either flip (on your "boss"), or START PACKIN'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





We could call it The Penn Option!

​

Rove is already being held in contempt of Congress. It hardly means that anyone is going to jail. In order to actually take it to the grand jury level, which does not mean prison or an indictment or a trial, the full House of Senate has to vote on the matter.

Given that the majority of members have no interest in following this, it will go nowhere.

If it does, it then goes to the Attorney General (as I stated before) convenes a grand jury, indictment, and then decides to continue with the process.

Thinking that not showing up before Congress means you go to jail is simply wrong.

 

[Sihouette]

Given that the majority of members have no interest in following this, it will go nowhere.

You keep chanting that like a mantra..


Is it your hope that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth?

Not buying it. We have to regain the respect of the creditors we're going to have to go grovelling to, thanks to Bushco. Perfect solution, appease the world, restore our standing and give Bushco what they deserve all at the same time...

TOTALLY worth it.

Keep your fingers crossed BigRob. It's all you have left now..

 

[BigRob]

You keep chanting that like a mantra..


Is it your hope that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth?

No, it is me simply stating the present position of the current administration.

Not buying it. We have to regain the respect of the creditors we're going to have to go grovelling to, thanks to Bushco. Perfect solution, appease the world, restore our standing and give Bushco what they deserve all at the same time...

Trying Bush has nothing to do with if the United States can get credit or not.

TOTALLY worth it.

Keep your fingers crossed BigRob. It's all you have left now..

You are the one pursuing wishful thinking. President Obama already stated he has no interest in this. Given that he has considerable influence over it, this is the way it will be.

 

[Sihouette]

No, it is me simply stating the present position of the current administration.

How do you know. For sure?

You speak with such finality, as if you were one of the Obama Adminstration's closest advisors.

Either I believe that you somehow have priviledged knowledge about the inner workings of the Obama Administration, or I have to believe you are a simpleton in denial, given the snowballing of more and more damning evidence coming forward, making it compulsary upon Obama to order a trial on the matters. You do realize that a President isn't an emperor right? That he is a citizen occupying a role for a brief time..the epitome of the US Citizen, right?

You do realize that is how the Constitution was set up, to protect from tyranny, right?

You passed US Gov 101, right?

Which is it? Insider or simpleton?

 

[BigRob]

How do you know. For sure?

Because he said so....

His comments on the matter are: "My orientation's going to be to move forward." (move forward meaning putting it behind us)

"My general belief is that when it comes to national security, what we have to focus on is getting things right in the future, as opposed looking at what we got wrong in the past."

You speak with such finality, as if you were one of the Obama Adminstration's closest advisors.

Or someone with half a brain who listens to what Obama says on the issue and looks at historical precedent.

Either I believe that you somehow have priviledged knowledge about the inner workings of the Obama Administration, or I have to believe you are a simpleton in denial, given the snowballing of more and more damning evidence coming forward, making it compulsary upon Obama to order a trial on the matters. You do realize that a President isn't an emperor right? That he is a citizen occupying a role for a brief time..the epitome of the US Citizen, right?

I realize that you can think whatever you like and hold on to your beliefs. I also realize that Bush is not going to stand trial for anything.

You do realize that is how the Constitution was set up, to protect from tyranny, right?

If you want to debate the Constitutional merits of any of the Bush policies I am more than willing. However, I have made these points before and you ignore them.

You passed US Gov 101, right?

I passed a lot more than US Government 101.

Which is it? Insider or simpleton?

I seem to recall you saying resorting to such attacks showed clear weakness in the argument. So, which is it? Is your argument bad, or are you just vindictive?

 

[Sihouette]

lol...I think I'm going to be sick now. Suddenly you're all patriotic on Obama huh?



Anyway, you quoted him thusly:

"My orientation's going to be to move forward." (move forward meaning putting it behind us)

"My general belief is that when it comes to national security, what we have to focus on is getting things right in the future, as opposed looking at what we got wrong in the past."

Sure. That's what he said. Politicians say all sorts of things that look one way on the surface, but allow a great leniency in what they actually meant...which may or may not jibe with what they said..

I know you know that.

His "orientation" is going to be to move forward? That's pretty vague. Maybe he meant going forward with the hearings? How do you know? His "general" belief (wow, talk about room to wiggle) is that he wants to focus on the future? Just because you're focusing on something in front of you, doesn't suddenly mean your peripheral vision is defunct. Or that you cannot keep an eye on the rear view mirror for issues behind you.

Sure, he's a positive guy. Those statements reflect that. But he's also a realist. And a man who has also spoken out strongly in defense of abiding by the Laws of Nations.

That should be your red flag right there bud.

Still no? Still holding out hopes of hopes that the world won't pressure our leaders to hold those responsible who murdered and tortured in the name of a Texan/shady arab monopoly?

It's possible the world will suddenly forget, as our nation's economic demise in no small part from this Oil-war robbing (literally) our Treasury...as their populations starve and mayhem breaks out...

Sure. You can hold out hope. Nothing wrong with that *she said to the fat chicken at Tyson's farm*

 

[BigRob]

lol...I think I'm going to be sick now. Suddenly you're all patriotic on Obama huh?

Quoting him translate into "patriotic on Obama." I am not sure what that even means.

Anyway, you quoted him thusly:

Sure. That's what he said. Politicians say all sorts of things that look one way on the surface, but allow a great leniency in what they actually meant...which may or may not jibe with what they said..

I know you know that.

I will agree that politicians say things they do not mean. That is how they get elected.

His "orientation" is going to be to move forward? That's pretty vague. Maybe he meant going forward with the hearings? How do you know? His "general" belief (wow, talk about room to wiggle) is that he wants to focus on the future? Just because you're focusing on something in front of you, doesn't suddenly mean your peripheral vision is defunct. Or that you cannot keep an eye on the rear view mirror for issues behind you.

The context of the question was not about moving forward with hearings but about moving forward past the Bush administration.

Anyway, sure, everyone will leave wiggle room. Just look at the Executive Order that closed GITMO. There is plenty of wiggle room left open there for the continued use of tough interrogation techniques that are supposedly being ended.

Sure, he's a positive guy. Those statements reflect that. But he's also a realist. And a man who has also spoken out strongly in defense of abiding by the Laws of Nations.

That should be your red flag right there bud.

It is not a red flag. On top of that, United States domestic law takes precedence over any international law. Everything Bush did had clear precedents, OLC decisions, and Congressional acts backing it.

Still no? Still holding out hopes of hopes that the world won't pressure our leaders to hold those responsible who murdered and tortured in the name of a Texan/shady arab monopoly?

The world can pressure all they want. (I do not think many of them will) The United States is not dictated to by the world. Democrats and Republicans can agree on that. Further, Obama does not want to weaken the office of the Presidency by following through on this.

It's possible the world will suddenly forget, as our nation's economic demise in no small part from this Oil-war robbing (literally) our Treasury...as their populations starve and mayhem breaks out...

The viewpoint that the economic problems are caused by war and oil is a small minority. World leaders holding this view is an even smaller minority.

Sure. You can hold out hope. Nothing wrong with that *she said to the fat chicken at Tyson's farm*

If all I did was hold out "hope" I would have voted for Obama. Outside of that, I do not really care if Bush gets prosecuted or not. He will be found innocent, and it will only destroy the office of the Presidency. Nothing that Obama wants to do.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You keep chanting that like a mantra..

​

Is it your hope that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth?

Well....ya' gotta figure....it's worked (well-enough) for NeoCons, to-date!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

No, it is me simply stating the present position of the current administration.

Correction: The present stated-position of the current administration.

I think it's going to be amusing-as-Hell, once Obama takes-off-the-gloves, after he's proven that the "conservatives" are incapable of diplomacy.

You think their stock is bad, NOW??


​

 

[BigRob]

Correction: The present stated-position of the current administration.

I think it's going to be amusing-as-Hell, once Obama takes-off-the-gloves, after he's proven that the "conservatives" are incapable of diplomacy.

You think their stock is bad, NOW??


​

Did you want to address the comments made by Obama, or perhaps address the legal issues?

Or just continue posted useless rants?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

How do you know. For sure?

You speak with such finality, as if you were one of the Obama Adminstration's closest advisors.

Either I believe that you somehow have priviledged knowledge about the inner workings of the Obama Administration, or I have to believe you are a simpleton in denial, given the snowballing of more and more damning evidence coming forward, making it compulsary upon Obama to order a trial on the matters.

I'm still thinkin' they're (still) relying on psychic-connections.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Because he said so....

His comments on the matter are: "My orientation's going to be to move forward." (move forward meaning putting it behind us)

Yeah....keep your fingers crossed (on that one).

Everyone's got their limits.

EVERYTHING'S temporary.

(Especially John Boner's present-status!)​

 

[BigRob]

Yeah....keep your fingers crossed (on that one).

Everyone's got their limits.

EVERYTHING'S temporary.​

Guess banning torture is temporary too... same as closing GITMO?

In fact if you read the Executive Order issued to close GITMO there is quite a bit of wiggle room left in there to continue practices that are now supposedly banned.

You know legally speaking. If you bring GITMO detainees to US soil, and they claim evidence was gathered through procedures that are now being called torture their cases will be thrown out under Federal law. This is why it is so worrisome the manner that the Obama Administration has been referring to every action as "torture."

That means that the mastermind of 9/11 (if he did not confess) would have his case thrown out in federal court and he would be released. Do you want that?

How about this one... let us assume we capture Bin Laden alive. Where can we take him? You want to put him in federal court? What evidence do you have to convict him? Are you prepared to throw his case out too?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

That means that the mastermind of 9/11 (if he did not confess) would have his case thrown out in federal court and he would be released. Do you want that?

I question EVERY accusation The Bush Admin has ever made.....for obvious-reasons!!!​