Clinton wasn't treated like any other citizen...no other citizen in our history has ever been subjected to a $40 million dollar, multi-year fishing expedition of an investigation.
If he hadn't been president there would have been no need to spend much money on it. But the fact is he commited several felonies.
But it wasn't about justice. It was about payback for taking Bush's second term from him. It was about Clinton commiting crimes.
It actually cost well OVER $60 million. And he was aquitted.
He wasn't charged criminally but should have been. That happens to those in power. But of course had Clinton been a Republican you and other left wingers would have been screaming for an indictment.
jethro, if the prosecution couldn't convince a supermajority of the (republican controlled no less) house of representatives that he was guilty, how in the world do you think they'd get a unanimous vote on a jury that he was? face it. the man was acquitted.
but just to make you feel good about it, it is important to remember that the verdict is "not guilty", not "innocent".
jethro, if the prosecution couldn't convince a supermajority of the (republican controlled no less) house of representatives that he was guilty, how in the world do you think they'd get a unanimous vote on a jury that he was? face it. the man was acquitted.
O.J. was acquitted but most people know he was guilty. But it wasn't a question if the Senate thought he was guilty. Clinton escaped removal from office not because they didn't think he was guilty but because of the politics. One more thing a jury wouldn't have been made up of politicians. The evidence of Clinton's guilt was overwhelming and he should have had a criminal trial.
But of course had Clinton been a Republican you and other left wingers would have been screaming for an indictment.
The first Bush is widely rumored to have a mistress. I didn't call for an indictment...I wouldn't even want it investigated. I'm glad it remained private. I also don't want an investigation to see if GW has one.
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Corporal Charles Graner will be the fourth U.S. soldier to be court-martialled over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners when he faces seven charges including maltreatment, adultery and cruelty, the U.S. military said.
Graner, facing more charges than any of his co-accused so far, will be arraigned on May 20, the same day as two sergeants who each face five charges.
No date is fixed for his general court martial, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt told a news conference on Friday.
In all, seven military police reservists have been charged in an affair that has outraged Iraqi opinion against the U.S occupation. Three of them, all women, are still awaiting a decision on whether their cases will go to trial.
As well as cruelty, maltreatment and adultery, Graner is charged with dereliction of duty, assault, indecent acts and obstruction of justice.
Specialist Jeremy Sivits will be the first to be judged when he faces a special court martial in Baghdad on Wednesday, May 19. He is charged on three counts -- conspiracy to maltreat detainees, maltreatment and dereliction of duty.
Military sources and Sivits' family have said that he only took the now notorious pictures of the alleged abuses, and never participated. His charges are less and his potential punishment less severe than the others so far charged.
Staff Sergeant Ivan "Chip" Frederick and Sergeant Javal Davis will be arraigned on Thursday, May 20, and will also face a potentially more severe general court martial. At an arraignment, defendants hear the charges and can lodge a plea.
The Los Angeles Times cited court documents on Friday to say that Sivits told investigators that Graner abused detainees during nightly rounds, "joking, laughing...acting like he was enjoying it."
GUILTY PLEA
The paper said Sivits, expected to plead guilty at his court martial next week in Baghdad, said all the abuse was done without the knowledge of their superiors in the Army chain of command.
Hmmm,
"Our command would have slammed us," he said, according to documents quoted by the paper. "If they saw what was going on, there would be hell to pay." He said Graner warned him not to say anything, telling him: "You did not see (this)."
The first Bush is widely rumored to have a mistress. I didn't call for an indictment...I wouldn't even want it investigated. But that isn't a crime. Perjury, suborning of perjury and obstruction of justice are crimes.
His "sex life" had nothing to do with it.
then why was it investigated?
Becuase he committed perjury, suborning of perjury and obstruction of justice.
you want to say Hillery, who was never charged with anything, should have been for her sweetheart deal...but I don't hear you saying anything about GW's sweetheart deal.
BTW: He should be investigated/charged on a number of his business deals.
ah...there it is.
Nice justification.
justification? some of those guys were actually convicted.
So those involved in Iran Contra should never be given a job again?
let's see...do you give a convicted bank robber a job in a bank?
do you give a convicted child abuser a job in a day care center?
but it's more than that.
Look at Negroponte's history and then consider what he's been appointed to. If his history is anything to go by, he's been appointed to create a military state in order to use it to wage war against yet another country. It begs the question...did we invade Iraq so we could use them to attack, say...Iran? It's not like we haven't done that before as well....and it's exactly what Negroponte did in his old job.
During the court-martial, Mejia's defense team had argued he did not return to his company because he believed that he was exempt because he is a Costa Rican, and not an American citizen, and an old treaty exempts him from mandatory service.
Would that not be refering to a draft and not to his volunteering for service and all that entails?
I think that we are basically saying the same thing. As you say, you take an oath and are bound by that when you volunteer. What I believe the guy is quoting that they are exempt from mandatory service concerns whether he can be drafted when there is a draft. The two do not have anything to do with each other and is no defense for what he did.
There is about 1,400,000 active duty military, and about an average of 3 dependents per servicemember. Completely disregarding eligible reserve personnel and their dependents, as well as eligible retirees, that makes an eligible population of over 4,200,000. Using these figures, there is about .015% of those eligible using this service each year. The real figure would actually be much smaller. Hardly a surgery stampede.
Now, considering that the doctors need the experience to keep up their credentials and add to that those patients that were disfigured in combat or other service to their nation, I find this to be very petty on your part, if even a story at all.
See Dan, you have no opinion here. You have to be a pissed off, washed up, bitter, half psycho, whiney, vet to have any say on this thread. Too bad he self proclaims to be a representitive of them all.
I have to say that Dan has a long way to go before looking like Torpedo. Fold, you posted a story about cosmetic surgery and the military. You made comments on it. Dan posted that he didn't think that it was that big of a deal, because the number of people that are actually benefitting from it is very small. Apparently though Dan can't respond to it all, because he either hasn't served in the military or it doesn't affect him at all. The war in Iraq is going on, so does that mean anyone who hasn't served has no right to give their opinion on it? There's plenty of people who aren't affected by the war directly, so they must not have a right to an opinion on it.Â
Yea and there was other intell used from multiple sources. The intell found on the Al Quieda "computer geeks" computer was updated as recently as January 2004.The 9-11 attacks took 4 years to plan. 3 years for the attack on the Cole. As many as 5 or 6 for the African embassy bombings. So with that, other sources corroborating it and new activity I guess the evil Bushco shouldn't have said anything. Then you'd complain if a week later we were hit and they hadn't said anything. From the NYT today.
WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 - Senior government officials said Tuesday that new intelligence pointing to a current threat of a terrorist attack on financial targets in New York and possibly in Washington - not just information about surveillance on specific buildings over the years - was a major factor in the decision over the weekend to raise the terrorism alert level.
The officials said the separate stream of intelligence, which they had not previously disclosed, reached the White House only late last week and was part of a flow that the officials said had prompted them to act urgently in the last few days.
And for the record I think the way you treated Dan was lame. Apparently people can't disagree with you without you going off or acting like a complete turd.
Well Dan I don't really give a good God Damn what you think, as I didn't MAKE that story, I just copied it and posted it here for the benefit of other Veterans, as this thread implies it is for, and which you ain't. Fold #571
Gee Dan, I don't remember accusing you of anything, let alone NOT being something you Ain't... Fold #574
How pathetic. You can't even lie very good.
So don't read it, or read it and don't Bitchat me about it, as I don't make policy for the GDubbya Administration...K?
See, you are trying to blame the president for a fabricated problem. I appologize for joining in on the debate here. I thought it was an open forum for us to discuss things and bring facts to the table. I guess it is only open to those that agree with you and wish to propagate the lies that you believe in.
I feel that it is rather "Petty" of you to blame me for re-printing the story, since I clearly posted where the story came from.
I feel that it is petty of you to castigate me for pointing out the glaring problems with the story that you brought up for discussion. All you are trying to do is make the president look as bad as possible and it is not working. I sometimes wonder if you are really a Republican that is deep undercover trying to make the Dems look like fools.
Yeah, I know what you're getting at. You come here every few months, slam me, then run off to your land of sunshine and happy thoughts. Stick around for a while, fuckhead.
Hey Torpedo, I do read the boards pretty consistently. There are posters who I just feel give me no reason to respond. You dislike someone, you post about them every chance you get. I don't feel the need for it.Â
Maybe you should come visit me in my land of sunshine and happy thoughts. Help get your mind off Crabs and Damon for a while. Relieve some stress.  Perhaps get a tan.
Oh, btw. How come you can slam people left and right, and then get all upset when someone else does it to you?
Because you go running off when someone gives you a bloody nose. Do i have to repeat it again? You're good at hit and run. Much as in your real life, i suspect.
But you sure "feel the need" for insults, don't you?...Mr. Hypocrisy.
Are you saying you've given me a bloody nose? I find it hard to even think about debating with you. In my opinion, you just make most of your posts to take shots at people. How do I debate that? And I don't feel the need for insults a lot of the time. If anything, I feel the need to stand up for people, support them. If I really wanted to insult you, I would have added more to my statement. All I said was that Dan had a long way to go before he was like you. I'm comparing your postings. Didn't say who was better or worse. You focus on one line of my post, which the majority of was directed towards Bill and his attack on Dan.
Backpedal-backpedal-backpedal...another liberal trait. "Didn't say who was better or worse". Yeah, ok. Stick to your medallion board. That's where most of the kids hang out.
you strike me as a Jim Jones type.
Clinton wasn't treated like any other citizen...no other citizen in our history has ever been subjected to a $40 million dollar, multi-year fishing expedition of an investigation.
If he hadn't been president there would have been no need to spend much money on it. But the fact is he commited several felonies.
But it wasn't about justice. It was about payback for taking Bush's second term from him. It was about Clinton commiting crimes.
and not even saluting the officers when they walk by?
I never understood saluting anyone.
Where in the world does that happen, besides in the military?
I don't get it.
It actually cost well OVER $60 million. And he was aquitted.
He wasn't charged criminally but should have been. That happens to those in power. But of course had Clinton been a Republican you and other left wingers would have been screaming for an indictment.
jethro, if the prosecution couldn't convince a supermajority of the (republican controlled no less) house of representatives that he was guilty, how in the world do you think they'd get a unanimous vote on a jury that he was? face it. the man was acquitted.
but just to make you feel good about it, it is important to remember that the verdict is "not guilty", not "innocent".
jethro, if the prosecution couldn't convince a supermajority of the (republican controlled no less) house of representatives that he was guilty, how in the world do you think they'd get a unanimous vote on a jury that he was? face it. the man was acquitted.
O.J. was acquitted but most people know he was guilty. But it wasn't a question if the Senate thought he was guilty. Clinton escaped removal from office not because they didn't think he was guilty but because of the politics. One more thing a jury wouldn't have been made up of politicians. The evidence of Clinton's guilt was overwhelming and he should have had a criminal trial.
know
believe. the only people who know for sure whether he was guilty are dead.
the only people who know for sure whether he was guilty are dead.
Now I like that one!
but its true, isn't it? at least as far as we know anyway.
well, i suppose oj does.
I think almost everyone knows O.J. did it. All of the evidence says it was him including evidence not presented at trial.
The first Bush is widely rumored to have a mistress. I didn't call for an indictment...I wouldn't even want it investigated. I'm glad it remained private. I also don't want an investigation to see if GW has one.
The investigation of Clinton began not because of his being a man-whore, but because of Whitewater.
His "sex life" had nothing to do with it.
John Poindexter
Elliot Abrams
Otto Reich
John Negroponte
Rogelio Pardo-Maurer
they are all CRIMINALS, almost everyone KNOWS THEY DID IT.
They all have been given postitions in the GW administration. One was just appointed ambassador to Iraq.
then why was it investigated?
and Whitewater....was he ever even charged with anything on that one?
then why was it investigated?
Because he committed perjury.
If I recall it went to Reno, who sent it on to Starr.
and Whitewater....was he ever even charged with anything on that one?
No, but he should have been.
Just like Hillary should have been charged with her sweetheart deal with Tyson.
Hmmm,
http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/403419|top|05-14-2004::12:48|reuters.html
The first Bush is widely rumored to have a mistress. I didn't call for an indictment...I wouldn't even want it investigated. But that isn't a crime. Perjury, suborning of perjury and obstruction of justice are crimes.
His "sex life" had nothing to do with it.
then why was it investigated?
Becuase he committed perjury, suborning of perjury and obstruction of justice.
Take it to a different boad guys, general politics or anywhere please.
you got that backwards...he commited perjury because they investigated a blowjob.
shoulda woulda coulda.
and Bush with his sweetheart deal of Harken Oil stock?
so did all those Iran-Contra guys who have now been appointed by Bush.
Iran-Contra #90.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
you got that backwards...he commited perjury because they investigated a blowjob.
Wrong. Besides, it doesn't matter. There's no excuse for committing perjury.
and Bush with his sweetheart deal of Harken Oil stock?
What does that have to do with the discussion? Nice attempt at deflection though.
BTW: He should be investigated/charged on a number of his business deals.
so did all those Iran-Contra guys who have now been appointed by Bush.
Nice justification.
you want to say Hillery, who was never charged with anything, should have been for her sweetheart deal...but I don't hear you saying anything about GW's sweetheart deal.
ah...there it is.
justification? some of those guys were actually convicted.
but I don't hear you saying anything about GW's sweetheart deal.
You'll have to take my word for it, but I said a lot about that last election. I wasn't happy that Dubya was the Republican candidate.
I've also said a lot about the Iran Contra affair.
it's current news...Negroponte alone.
how many of those guys has Bush appointed at this point anyway?
So those involved in Iran Contra should never be given a job again?
let's see...do you give a convicted bank robber a job in a bank?
do you give a convicted child abuser a job in a day care center?
but it's more than that.
Look at Negroponte's history and then consider what he's been appointed to. If his history is anything to go by, he's been appointed to create a military state in order to use it to wage war against yet another country. It begs the question...did we invade Iraq so we could use them to attack, say...Iran? It's not like we haven't done that before as well....and it's exactly what Negroponte did in his old job.
and I'm sorry, but if you lie to Congress, you don't get another appointment in the government, no.
and I don't care if someone you lied for pardons it either.
And this comes from someone who violates Best Buy's drug policy on a routine basis.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
During the court-martial, Mejia's defense team had argued he did not return to his company because he believed that he was exempt because he is a Costa Rican, and not an American citizen, and an old treaty exempts him from mandatory service.
Would that not be refering to a draft and not to his volunteering for service and all that entails?
I do not know that I understand your question
I think that we are basically saying the same thing. As you say, you take an oath and are bound by that when you volunteer. What I believe the guy is quoting that they are exempt from mandatory service concerns whether he can be drafted when there is a draft. The two do not have anything to do with each other and is no defense for what he did.
I can only shake my head and laugh. That could have been 1 soldier and 1499 family members. In four years no less. WOW!!! What a raw recruit shortage!
You're toooooooooo easy Fold. Quit supplying the ammunition.
Clearly, this is a BIG mistake...
There is about 1,400,000 active duty military, and about an average of 3 dependents per servicemember. Completely disregarding eligible reserve personnel and their dependents, as well as eligible retirees, that makes an eligible population of over 4,200,000. Using these figures, there is about .015% of those eligible using this service each year. The real figure would actually be much smaller. Hardly a surgery stampede.
Now, considering that the doctors need the experience to keep up their credentials and add to that those patients that were disfigured in combat or other service to their nation, I find this to be very petty on your part, if even a story at all.
Hey!, no story is too small when Fold wants to bitch. Which of course, is all he does.
See Dan, you have no opinion here. You have to be a pissed off, washed up, bitter, half psycho, whiney, vet to have any say on this thread. Too bad he self proclaims to be a representitive of them all.
LOL
Fold, you have no idea if I served or not. You do not know if I have family members in service now or not. Why does it make a difference?
That story was rubish and yet you post it as if it was some major failure by the president himself.
Of course, that is your goal. Anything for the party, the country be damned.
I have to say that Dan has a long way to go before looking like Torpedo. Fold, you posted a story about cosmetic surgery and the military. You made comments on it. Dan posted that he didn't think that it was that big of a deal, because the number of people that are actually benefitting from it is very small. Apparently though Dan can't respond to it all, because he either hasn't served in the military or it doesn't affect him at all. The war in Iraq is going on, so does that mean anyone who hasn't served has no right to give their opinion on it? There's plenty of people who aren't affected by the war directly, so they must not have a right to an opinion on it.Â
'Bill - Fold' 8/4/04 5:40am
Yea and there was other intell used from multiple sources. The intell found on the Al Quieda "computer geeks" computer was updated as recently as January 2004.The 9-11 attacks took 4 years to plan. 3 years for the attack on the Cole. As many as 5 or 6 for the African embassy bombings. So with that, other sources corroborating it and new activity I guess the evil Bushco shouldn't have said anything. Then you'd complain if a week later we were hit and they hadn't said anything. From the NYT today.
WASHINGTON, Aug. 3 - Senior government officials said Tuesday that new intelligence pointing to a current threat of a terrorist attack on financial targets in New York and possibly in Washington - not just information about surveillance on specific buildings over the years - was a major factor in the decision over the weekend to raise the terrorism alert level.
The officials said the separate stream of intelligence, which they had not previously disclosed, reached the White House only late last week and was part of a flow that the officials said had prompted them to act urgently in the last few days.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/04/politics/04terror.html?ei=5006&en=30f6652340651dab&ex=1092196800&adxnnl=1&partner=ALTAVISTA1&adxnnlx=1091602592-8T34J/TdZJLdYNgpNfUfwA&pagewanted=print&position=
And for the record I think the way you treated Dan was lame. Apparently people can't disagree with you without you going off or acting like a complete turd.
Â
Well Dan I don't really give a good God Damn what you think, as I didn't MAKE that story, I just copied it and posted it here for the benefit of other Veterans, as this thread implies it is for, and which you ain't. Fold #571
Gee Dan, I don't remember accusing you of anything, let alone NOT being something you Ain't... Fold #574
How pathetic. You can't even lie very good.
So don't read it, or read it and don't Bitchat me about it, as I don't make policy for the GDubbya Administration...K?
See, you are trying to blame the president for a fabricated problem. I appologize for joining in on the debate here. I thought it was an open forum for us to discuss things and bring facts to the table. I guess it is only open to those that agree with you and wish to propagate the lies that you believe in.
I feel that it is rather "Petty" of you to blame me for re-printing the story, since I clearly posted where the story came from.
I feel that it is petty of you to castigate me for pointing out the glaring problems with the story that you brought up for discussion. All you are trying to do is make the president look as bad as possible and it is not working. I sometimes wonder if you are really a Republican that is deep undercover trying to make the Dems look like fools.
The great and almighty TMK.
Yeah, I know what you're getting at. You come here every few months, slam me, then run off to your land of sunshine and happy thoughts. Stick around for a while, fuckhead.
Hey Torpedo, I do read the boards pretty consistently. There are posters who I just feel give me no reason to respond. You dislike someone, you post about them every chance you get. I don't feel the need for it.Â
Maybe you should come visit me in my land of sunshine and happy thoughts. Help get your mind off Crabs and Damon for a while. Relieve some stress.  Perhaps get a tan.
Oh, btw. How come you can slam people left and right, and then get all upset when someone else does it to you?
http://www.swiftvets.com/
Because you go running off when someone gives you a bloody nose. Do i have to repeat it again? You're good at hit and run. Much as in your real life, i suspect.
But you sure "feel the need" for insults, don't you?...Mr. Hypocrisy.
Are you saying you've given me a bloody nose? I find it hard to even think about debating with you. In my opinion, you just make most of your posts to take shots at people. How do I debate that? And I don't feel the need for insults a lot of the time. If anything, I feel the need to stand up for people, support them. If I really wanted to insult you, I would have added more to my statement. All I said was that Dan had a long way to go before he was like you. I'm comparing your postings. Didn't say who was better or worse. You focus on one line of my post, which the majority of was directed towards Bill and his attack on Dan.
Backpedal-backpedal-backpedal...another liberal trait. "Didn't say who was better or worse". Yeah, ok. Stick to your medallion board. That's where most of the kids hang out.
Where's Rodney King when you need him ?