| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2007/7/2-4 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:47144 Activity:nil |
7/2 Re: Aspen and "PECUNIARY EXTERNALITIES" ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/02/us/02aspen.html |
| 2007/7/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47145 Activity:moderate |
7/2 Prez commutes croney's sentence:
http://csua.org/u/j2k (sfgate.com)
\_ I gotta hand it to "Bush will not pardon Libby" guy, he turned
out to technically be correct. He should have bet me, he would
have made $20. -ausman
\- ausman advisory: this commutation is an exercise of the
pardon power. i.e. the president (or many governors)
can use the POWER OF THE PARDON to change a death sentence
to a life sentence. this is a weird version of that.
See e.g. Shcick v Reed: http://tinyurl.com/3cuec3
\_ Too bad no one took me up on my $1m bet. :-) To the advisor
above: Libby is still a convicted felon with a $250k fine, and
2 years of probation to go along with his destroyed career,
reputation, lost time, stress, and millions of dollars in legal
fees. That is hardly a 'pardon' in any normal sense of the word.
\_ Bush can (and probably will) still pardon Libby, after
he has exhausted the appeals process.
\_ Time will tell. I admit to being surprised Bush did even
this much for him but it does fit the pattern of pissing
everyone off without actually doing the right thing.
\_ Besides the above, don't be too sure Libby's career is
destroyed. It will not be the same as it was but I don't
think he's out on his ass. Millions in legal fees? Reference
please.
\_ GOP fundraisers are already covering his legal costs and
a juicy appointment with the AEI awaits him.
\_ Oh goody, that makes it all ok. Sign me up!
\_ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1859840/posts
\_ Praise jesus!
\_ You know, Bush has been hammered by people about Ramos and Compean
(two border guards currently serving a sentence for something I
don't think they're guilty of), and his response when asked for a
pardon/commutation has been that "there's a process to go through"
and he'd look at it after it went through that progress. He seems
to have skipped that process for his pal. I have to wonder why his
approval rating is above 0% at this point for anything other than
the war. -emarkp
\_ not that i have any sympathy for illegal immigrant drug dealers,
but didnt those border guards falsify their reports?
\_ apparently. what about it? should that result in their
lives being destroyed? should that be enough to grant
immunity to a known illegal alien felon to testify against
them? i dont think so. dock their pay? sure. put them
on suspension? sure. send them to some hellish HR inspired
training for a few weeks? sure. demotion? maybe. prison?
for a false report? nuh-uh.
\_ Part of the reason for the relatively stiff (though not,
as Bush claims, beyond the sentencing guidelines) penalty
against Libby was because of the abuse of office. I would
submit that law enforcement personel deserve similarly
stiff sentences for abuses of their offices as well.
\_ They got hammered to 'send a message' to the rest of
the border patrol agents. Abuse of office? Bullshit.
Happens all the time without *any* punishment at all
levels of government much less going to friggin prison.
\_ I don't know the particulars of this case. I was
speaking generally.
\_ Generally, an abuse of power, especially something
as trivial as misfiling a report not only would go
unpunished but unnoticed.
\_ No, they didn't. They were required to submit oral reports to
their supervisors. The supervisors /were present/ at the
scene after the shooting when 9 officers helped collect shell
casings. That's part of the lie that Johnny Sutton (a Bush
buddy) keeps telling. Another of the lies was the claim by
Homeland Security that they said they were "going to shoot
some mexicans", which was only exposed when an HS rep was in
front of Congress under oath for another reason. -emarkp
\_ Just in time for Indepedence Day!
\_ Why does the president have this power, again? Seems pointless.
\_ So he can pardon his predecessor of any crimes committed while
in office. And the circle-jerk goes round and round.
\_ The Founders gave the President this power so he could take
action to right wrongs even though it may be unpopular.
Ultimately this is about having a final say in thwarting mob
rule quality 'justice'. Seems pointed.
\_ There was much debate about the merits of the power even
when the Constitution was written. While it has "a point"
I don't believe the greater good is served by the president
having this power. We have a justice system and a supreme
court. That's not mob rule. Think if the power didn't exist,
what great wrong would not have been righted? Some death
sentences have been commuted but there you have to get into
the whole "should we have the death penalty" issue. Having
the executive leader arbitrarily decide who dies is stupid
and reminiscent of monarchy.
\_ The justice system is all about mob rule. That's what a
jury is. Very few cases are taken up by the USSC. I don't
see it as the executive arbitrarily determining death. We
already have the justice system for that as you said. This
is about having a final way to correct some great wrong.
I looked up Clinton's pardon list. There was a mix of
drug offenses, white collar crime and military crimes he
over turned. Most of them were so old the people had
already served their sentences so what he was really doing
was restoring their right to vote, cleaning their records,
etc so they can live normal lives. Anyway, I don't see
400 or so pardon/commutations out of the zillions convicted
to be that big a deal.
\_ Have you ever gone through the jury selection process
and actually served on a jury? Just curious. I have
a lot more faith in an average jury, than an
average gvt procecutor, say. -- ilyas
\_ I think most juries do their best to get it right
but we know that isn't always true. Thus the
President has the power to pardon as the ultimate
final check on the system. The founders didn't give
him the power to convict, only free. Reagan did just
over 400. Clinton did a few more. Bush1 did under
100. I don't know how many Bush2 has done. These
are very small numbers and I'm a-ok with them even
if some were questionable.
\_ Wait, this is the treason guy, right? -John |
| 2007/7/2-5 [Health/Disease/AIDS] UID:47146 Activity:nil |
7/2 in nytimes today:
http://iraqwarit.blogspot.com/2007/07/kristof-attack-of-worms.html |
| 2007/7/2-5 [Uncategorized] UID:47147 Activity:nil |
7/2 Kwik-e-mart in town
http://laaker.com/micah/?p=112
\_ I drove by the one in LA tonight and it had a line 50 people deep
just to get in. |
| 2007/7/2-5 [Uncategorized] UID:47148 Activity:nil |
7/2 fess up. who got an iphone? |
| 2007/7/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47149 Activity:low |
7/2 Three more judges (two of them Republican) join the
MSM/Karl Rove/Dick Cheney conspiracy to put Libby behind bars:
http://www.csua.org/u/j2h
\_ 'The three-judge panel of the appeals court rejected Libby's
request in a one-paragraph order, ruling he has not shown that
his appeal "raises a substantial question."'
\_ Hell, even John Dean called this one:
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070615.html
\_ "...as are the steady stream of personal threats the judge
has received from the right-wing nuts who have called and
written him." Remember, they aren't terrorists, just good
patriotic Americans who are trying to correct an error.
\_ No one here said it was a conspiracy. They said he got screwed
which has happened to many innocent people in our justice system.
Why is it so hard to believe it happened to Libby?
\_ 'Cos he's an evasive scumbag who worked for a man who redefined
moral ambiguity to mean "anything I want to do"?
\_ Covered this a dozen times already. He didn't evade and he
didn't even have to talk to the grand jury. He volunteered
to do so. But don't let facts get in the way of your bias
and agenda. Carry on.
\_ Why would a panel of 3 judges, 2 of them Republicans,
then say there was "overwhelming" evidence to his guilt
if he's innocent? The fact is he lied about the events
surrounding the outing of an undercover CIA agent.
If you think committing perjury
when it comes to treasonous activity is not a big deal
then say so. For instance, I admit 100% Clinton lied
about his relationship to Lewinsky under oath. I just
don't think lying about your sex life under oath is a
big crime.
if he's innocent?
\_ Why do you keep bringing up the political affiliation
of the various parties? If this is about real justice
then it shouldn't matter. If this is political then
justice and truth has nothing to do with it. As far as
treasonous activity and outing agents goes, *HE DIDN'T
DO THAT*. The guy who did do that was *known to the
prosecutor* _before_ Libby testified. This never had
anything to do with finding who talked about Plame.
If it did why was Armitage never prosecuted? Because
she wasn't undercover and no crime was committed re:
Plame's identity. Even if Libby lied his ass off, it
is no more a crime to lie about something that wasn't
a crime than it was to get nooky in the Oval Office
and lie about that. Sheesh, you really don't know
anything about the details of his case, huh? I guess
that never stopped anyone from posting to the motd.
\_ There were (at least) three leakers. Armitage,
Libby, Rove. Armitage didn't know plame's name
until it was brought to him. They (bush? cheney,
more likely. he likes [mis]using intel) wanted
the name out there. They got it. Libby took
the fall to protect "them". And now he's getting
his kickback, with the side bonus that he can still
plead the 5th if called before congress.
\_ Uh huh, and where is the prosecution of Armitage,
again? Riiight. The rest is just conspiracy.
\_ I guess you know more about the law than those
judges?
\_ Yummy, arguing from authority. I know the case
better than anyone here seems to.
\_ Lying to a Grand Jury is always a crime.
\_ Have you been with us today? That is exactly
what I've been telling you he didn't do.
Whatever.
\_ Perhaps your psychic powers could help us to find
Jon-Benet Ramsey's killers as well?
\_ I strongly encourage you to post your theories about
the "true Libby case" to The Economist's View blog
where they can be examined more thoroughly.
\_ I don't have theories. I followed the case which
no one else here apparently did. I've only
repeated documented facts about what happened in
front of the Grand Jury.
\_ They asked him about conversations and know-
ledge. He told them he couldn't remember. They
didn't believe him, and his own notes, memos,
and such indicated otherwise. Hence, they
charged him with perjury, and a jury of his
peers found him guilty. The Judge reviewed the
basis of the case and didn't find it wanting
enough to grant dismissal. He now has a chance
at appeal, but he still has to go to jail just
like anyone else who has been convicted. |
| 2007/7/2-4 [Uncategorized] UID:47150 Activity:nil |
7/2 ROFLMAO!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEWgs6YQR9A |
| 2007/7/2-4 [Uncategorized] UID:47151 Activity:kinda low |
7/2 i do this when bored
http://youtube.com/watch?v=MAhSSy4_7mc
\_ What, post random YouTube links without descriptions?
\_ its something about shao lin dudes hanging giant
weights from their testicles. |
| 2007/7/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47152 Activity:nil 69%like:47177 |
7/2 Why Bush commuted Libby's sentence instead of pardoning him:
http://www.csua.org/u/j2p (Economist's View)
\_ More obstruction of justice. |