Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/3/2007 8:09:08 PM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/03/keith-olbermanns-special-comment-you-ceased-to-be-the-president-of-the-united-states/

from transcript ( last seconds of clip are truncated. This completes text )

quote:


And for you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task.

You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed.

Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.

And give us someone — anyone – about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, “I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my president, and I hope he does a good job.”

Good night, and good luck.



< Message edited by farglebargle -- 7/3/2007 8:12:55 PM >

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/3/2007 10:07:13 PM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline 		Again, I just don't see the big deal with this.

President Clinton pardoned drug dealers and even a man that did business with America's enemies. The congress couldn't do anything about it.

Our founding fathers put the pardon in there and it is solid constitutional law. You can scream all you want but nothing can be done about it. You can't impeach a president because he makes an unpopular pardon. That is not an impeachable offense nor an abuse of power. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution states that a President has the authority to pardon whoever he wants.

And if all Fitzgerald has for his case is one witness lying...that makes it a very weak case against trying to go after anyone else in the administration. Why doesn't congress haul Armitage into a committee hearing and ask him who told him to leak Plame? If Armitage says that no one told him to do it and that he acted alone, and if there is no other evidence...guess what...the case is dead. This case has been dead for a few years.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 6:35:25 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Again, I just don't see the big deal with this.


A guy who's *supposedly* for Mandatory Minimum Sentences lying about his beliefs, dude.

That is the MOST galling issue. It proves Bush has *always* been full of shit, and all his supporters were just suckers falling for his bullshit.

If it doesn't bother you to be played for a fool, by all means, go ahead an continue your support.

quote:


And if all Fitzgerald has for his case is one witness lying...


Well, that's NOT all his case is, is it? Why do you neglect the OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE charge, which prevented the investigation from continuing?

He did his job, he lied and stopped the investigation before it hit Cheney and Bush. And he's been rewarded FOR his Obstruction.

Now, is a CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE involving The President something warranting continued investigation?

Sure, but it's impossible after the quid-pro-quo.

Remember when Bush promised to "Restore Honor and Integrity to the White House"?

Were you dumb enough to fall for that lie, too?

At least Nixon had the balls to resign.


_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 7:04:25 AM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline 		I am talking about how the legal system works...

Fitzgerald investigated this case for over 5 years. The only indictment he could muster is against Cheney's chief of staff who made an inconsistant testimony. Now you can throw this guy in prison for a decade. If that is Fitzgerald's only evidence, and Libby never says anything, his case is dead. Remember Ken Starr did the same thing with Susan McDougal. She refused to testify against Clinton, so he threw her in prison for a few years. She still never broke her silence and the Whitewater case died.
And why arn't you bashing the Democrats for not doing anything? If they wanted to, Nancy Pelosi can start hearings. But Pelosi has completely refused to do it. She doesn't need more votes to do it. The Democrats have the majority and they have subpoena power. Perhaps she knows there really isnt anything there? She has the votes to do it...that's not the problem.

If there was more to this case, why didn't the grand jury indict Rove or even Dick Cheney? Why didn't Fitzgerald go to Congress and report wrongdoing the same way Ken Starr did with the Lewinsky case? Because it is obvious he has no evidence other than Scooter Libby. The grand jury couldn't find enough evidence to indict anyone else.
If Libby goes to jail and continues to keep his mouth shut for the next 2 1/2 years....not only is the case dead, but the Bush presidency is long over so no one is going to care anymore.

But like I said, if the purpose of this case was to find out who leaked Plame's name...it was Richard Armitage, not Scooter Libby. So why are we ignoring Armitage?

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 7:34:33 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:


If there was more to this case, why didn't the grand jury indict Rove or even Dick Cheney?


Because Libby's OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE prevented the Grand Jury from learning what would have been necessary to indict anyone else.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 9:38:52 AM   
FatDomDaddy


Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Because Libby's OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE prevented the Grand Jury from learning what would have been necessary to indict anyone else.


Ummmm.... He could have charged Richard Armitage.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 9:53:58 AM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Because Libby's OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE prevented the Grand Jury from learning what would have been necessary to indict anyone else.


Ummmm.... He could have charged Richard Armitage.


Exactly.

Now I'm not a Bush supporter. I couldn't care less if the guy is thrown out on his ass. But I can smell when a political witchhunt is under way. And that is all this was. For 5 years the Democrats, the media, and Fitzgerald lead this country onto the belief that he was on some campaign for truth to discover who outted a CIA agent. It turns out Fitzgerald knew who it was the entire time but spent 5 years trying to nail Cheney or Karl Rove. Which he couldn't do. And to end it all....he didn't even indict the man that actually made the leak!

Again...you cannot lead a prosecution based on one sole witness. Just ask Mike Nifong. You need cold, hard evidence.

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:00:37 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		If you DO NOT LIE AND OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, you have nothing to fear from any political witch-hunts.

Look at all the other people investigated who did not get convicted of felonies...



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:12:45 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Because Libby's OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE prevented the Grand Jury from learning what would have been necessary to indict anyone else.


Ummmm.... He could have charged Richard Armitage.


Could Richard Armitage have testified to Dick Cheney's involvement?



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:12:58 AM   
Masternslave07


Posts: 203
Joined: 12/29/2006
Status: offline 		You just aren't going to convince the Bush haters with facts. Their hatred for Bush trumps reality.

_____________________________

You can lead a horse to water, but not a cow.

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:14:48 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		What's to like from about an alleged felon responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths...

That's very much like liking Hitler... ( Which Bush's grand-dad, Prescott CERTAINLY did... )

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Masternslave07)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:16:42 AM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		I'll never understand why right-wing apologists always seem to think that if something has already happened and can't be changed, there's no point in talking about whether it was good or bad.

It was bad.

The man was indicted and convicted.  What was the purpose of pardoning him?  The only possible reason is exactly what Olbermann said: to set up Libby as the party's hatchet-man: to obstruct justice, prevent the case from ever going higher, and, in return, to make sure that he never serves jail time.

The presidential pardon was instituted to prevent miscarriages of justice, not to help presidents shelter their own criminal staff-members.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Our founding fathers put the pardon in there and it is solid constitutional law. You can scream all you want but nothing can be done about it. You can't impeach a president because he makes an unpopular pardon. That is not an impeachable offense nor an abuse of power. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution states that a President has the authority to pardon whoever he wants.

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:16:47 AM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

If you DO NOT LIE AND OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, you have nothing to fear from any political witch-hunts.

Look at all the other people investigated who did not get convicted of felonies...




The old, "If you did nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" routine... Right?

And why are people comparing this to Paris Hilton? I thought that sentence she got was excessive and I think Libby's sentence was excessive as well. Have you ever heard of someone going to prison for 30 months for lying under oath? Clinton did that, coerced others to lie, and obstructed justice and never served a day in prison.

Everyone talks about fairness under the law and I just dont see it. Lately it seems judges are more concerned with making examples out of people when in the public's eye.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:17:00 AM   
Masternslave07


Posts: 203
Joined: 12/29/2006
Status: offline 		You can always tell when someone has no argument. They play the "Hitler" card. Lol.

_____________________________

You can lead a horse to water, but not a cow.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:33:01 AM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline
quote:

That's very much like liking Hitler... ( Which Bush's grand-dad, Prescott CERTAINLY did... )

So did a whole fuck of a lot of other people, so what does that proove?

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:34:30 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

If you DO NOT LIE AND OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, you have nothing to fear from any political witch-hunts.

Look at all the other people investigated who did not get convicted of felonies...




The old, "If you did nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" routine... Right?

And why are people comparing this to Paris Hilton? I thought that sentence she got was excessive and I think Libby's sentence was excessive as well. Have you ever heard of someone going to prison for 30 months for lying under oath?


OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, dude.. Why do you neglect to mention that .

IF you use the Federal Sentencing Manual, you add it up, apply factors, and end up with....

30 months. Just like the Judge did. He didn't pull that out of his ass, he used the reference book.

quote:


Clinton did that, coerced others to lie, and obstructed justice and never served a day in prison.


Bring it to the Grand Jury if you feel there's a case.


_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:38:02 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		Remember after Karla Faye Tucker converted to Christianity, and Newt Gingrich and Pat Robertson came out for Commuting her sentence to Life?

What did Bush do then?



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:53:15 AM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Bring it to the Grand Jury if you feel there's a case.



Ken Starr was going to do that. But there was a constitutional problem when it comes to indictment of a sitting president. So instead he gave the case to the House of Representatives. The Judiciary Committee then took the matter up. The House voted on 3 counts to impeach Clinton. The measure failed in the Senate.

Unfortunately the Democrat party didn't seem to care if Clinton lied because it was "about sex." So I guess if you are a democratic president, you can abuse your power to keep the skeletons in the closet, as long as it is about sex, rape, or harrassment.
It was not the sex that Clinton got in trouble for....He used the office to conceal sexual harrassment. And Democrats think that was OK to do.

So now I am supposed to take the Democrats seriously when they get upset when Libby obstructs justice and lies in court?

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 10:56:30 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Bring it to the Grand Jury if you feel there's a case.



Ken Starr was going to do that. But there was a constitutional problem when it comes to indictment of a sitting president.


I don't see the words "Exempt from Criminal Indictment or Penalties" in Article 2.



< Message edited by farglebargle -- 7/4/2007 10:57:04 AM >

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 - 7/4/2007 11:19:51 AM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline 		Keep in mind that Leon Jaworski also did not indict Nixon because he didnt think he has the authority. So instead he named Nixon as a "unindicted co-conspirator."

Constitutional scholors seem to disagree on this issue. However there seems to historically be a tilt towards the belief that a sitting president would have to be impeached by the House and removed from office by the Senate before he can be indicted. And the reason why is because it interferes with the seperation of powers if you allow a sitting president to be indicted.

The judiciary branch is not supposed to "check and balance" the executive branch in this manner. That duty is supposed to be left up to the legislative branch and the Congress has the power to do it.
The problem lies in the fact that if the judiciary indicts the president, that sets up a constitutional crisis. The judiciary has the ability to then incarcerate the president. The President is the head of all executive departments and is the commander-in-chief of the military. If he is in prison, the government will effectively shut down.

The debate goes back to the founding of the United States on which branch should have the power to go after another because they knew it was going to be a war. In the end, the designed a system that they thought created a playing field so that each branch is equal in the amount of power they hold. When one branch takes the initiative to go beyond their power...it creates a crisis.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Keith Olbermann's Special Comment 7/3/2007 Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.236