Bush commutes Libby's sentence

[Axxman]

You discredit yourself by even mentioning a lie about Bush's alleged quote. The very fact that you would cite such nonsense as credible evidence that Bush may or may not have morals is absurd at best. If you know ANYONE who was 'hurt' by that nonsense then I feel sorry for you...and them.

A lie?

Bush on the Constitution: 'Just a ******** piece of paper'

By DOUG THOMPSON

Dec 9, 2005, 06:39

C'mon ... Doug Thompson has a horrible reputation for making up stories...and sources. He just recently apologized and recanted an article about Ron Paul because it was discovered that his sources were bogus. He's done that before too. Some news websites have banned him because of his bogus stories. You can't seriously think that Doug Thompson is a good source of 'inside' info.

Can you just see a White House aide bumping into Doug 'unnamed sources' Thompson. "Hey Doug, guess what GW just said." Then this guy is lucky enough to find three other 'no-name' sources who are willing to talk to one of the most unreputable journalists in Washington DC.

He was the guy that broke the story about how Bush knew that Iraq never sought to buy yellowcake from Niger. And he cited his source as Terrance J. Wilkinson...who was a COMPLETE FRAUD. Surely you remember that.

Sometimes you guys really don't seem to realize that your news sources are willing to say and do anything to discredit Bush.

[Zceiv]

You discredit yourself by even mentioning a lie about Bush's alleged quote. The very fact that you would cite such nonsense as credible evidence that Bush may or may not have morals is absurd at best. If you know ANYONE who was 'hurt' by that nonsense then I feel sorry for you...and them.

A lie?

Bush on the Constitution: 'Just a ******** piece of paper'

By DOUG THOMPSON

Dec 9, 2005, 06:39

C'mon ... Doug Thompson has a horrible reputation for making up stories...and sources. He just recently apologized and recanted an article about Ron Paul because it was discovered that his sources were bogus. He's done that before too. Some news websites have banned him because of his bogus stories. You can't seriously think that Doug Thompson is a good source of 'inside' info.

Can you just see a White House aide bumping into Doug 'unnamed sources' Thompson. "Hey Doug, guess what GW just said." Then this guy is lucky enough to find three other 'no-name' sources who are willing to talk to one of the most unreputable journalists in Washington DC.

He was the guy that broke the story about how Bush knew that Iraq never sought to buy yellowcake from Niger. And he cited his source as Terrance J. Wilkinson...who was a COMPLETE FRAUD. Surely you remember that.

Sometimes you guys really don't seem to realize that your news sources are willing to say and do anything to discredit Bush.

He pwned you

[Axxman]

Fascism:

1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.

2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

I thought Bush was fighting conservative, religious fundamentalism, extremists. Sounds to me like you could care less about the law as long as you get your way. That's very unChristian of you. Sounds like you'd put your political views before the welfare of another human, again, very unChristian.

I would rather "lose" the country than live under the tyranny of people like you. I will pray for God to soften your heart and reveal the truth of the message of Jesus, which is PEACE LOVE AND SALVATION.

Ouch..that hurts j/k lol

I could care less about the law...as long as God gets His way. Thats hardly unChristian. You can call me fascist, it doesn't bother me. Fact is, my loyalties lie with God first...my country, the constitution, the bill of rights, and the rest of it fall somewhere below that. I don't practice the idolatry of many of my fellow countrymen in placing Country before God. The fact is, the country is not yours to lose (nor mine)...it is Gods and you will live under whatever 'tyranny' He chooses. Much like our Brothers and Sisters in China, Afghanistan, Columbia, etc.

BTW...thanks for the prayers...although I could have gone without the assumption that I know nothing about the truth of peace, love, and salvation.

[Burning_Ember]

Axxman, do you know what logical fallacies are? Here is one you should stop using.

Quit poisoning the well and try addressing what was said. Bill O'Reilly has made up and/or flat out lied plenty, but that doesn't mean every time he opens his mouth he is a dirty lying scoundrel. Your post is not a properly constructed argument.

Freedom, of speech and action are some core American values. When a friend of mine got banned from the U.S. under threat of full body cavity search and detention at Gitmo for cooking food for the homeless and writing poetry critical of the Iraq war, that is indicitive of Fascist behaviour on the part of the Administration... He isn't allowed to publish much of his poetry critical of U.S. policy in America.

[sarcasm]

Because remember kids, when the homeless are fed and theere is freedom of speech, the terrorists win!

Because everyone knows that happy homeless people and artistic expression is EXACTLY what Osama wants! You don't want that to happen, now, do you?

[/sarcasm]

But seriously, when fascist elements in a government emerge, the first things to go are artistic expression and rights to protest in a non-violent manner.

Regardless of whether Bush said that (it appears he did) it is evident that is how he treats it.

Butero, Obstruction of Justice is no mild charge. Regardless, he is guilty of committing those crimes, and should be punished justly for them.

I am not a Liberal arguing whatever you are making that generalization about. Stick to what I am arguing and counter that, rather than setting up strawmen.

[forrestkc]

You discredit yourself by even mentioning a lie about Bush's alleged quote. The very fact that you would cite such nonsense as credible evidence that Bush may or may not have morals is absurd at best. If you know ANYONE who was 'hurt' by that nonsense then I feel sorry for you...and them.

A lie?

Bush on the Constitution: 'Just a ******** piece of paper'

By DOUG THOMPSON

Dec 9, 2005, 06:39

C'mon ... Doug Thompson has a horrible reputation for making up stories...and sources. He just recently apologized and recanted an article about Ron Paul because it was discovered that his sources were bogus. He's done that before too. Some news websites have banned him because of his bogus stories. You can't seriously think that Doug Thompson is a good source of 'inside' info.

Can you just see a White House aide bumping into Doug 'unnamed sources' Thompson. "Hey Doug, guess what GW just said." Then this guy is lucky enough to find three other 'no-name' sources who are willing to talk to one of the most unreputable journalists in Washington DC.

He was the guy that broke the story about how Bush knew that Iraq never sought to buy yellowcake from Niger. And he cited his source as Terrance J. Wilkinson...who was a COMPLETE FRAUD. Surely you remember that.

Sometimes you guys really don't seem to realize that your news sources are willing to say and do anything to discredit Bush.

I found it believable as both Bush and Cheney have certainly been known for their use of 4 letter words. Bush has 28% approval rating, why work to discredit him, he is regarded as a failure by the American people anyway. All the bad coverage on Bush is blamed by the right as liberal bias. (edited by moderator).

[forrestkc]

Quit poisoning the well and try addressing what was said. Bill O'Reilly has made up and/or flat out lied plenty, but that doesn't mean every time he opens his mouth he is a dirty lying scoundrel. Your post is not a properly constructed argument.

I want you to provide proof that Bill O'Reilly has "made up and/or flat out lied plenty." If he has done this plenty of times, you should have a good number of specific incidents you can site.

Butero, Obstruction of Justice is no mild charge. Regardless, he is guilty of committing those crimes, and should be punished justly for them.

I am not a Liberal arguing whatever you are making that generalization about. Stick to what I am arguing and counter that, rather than setting up strawmen.

I don't believe he is guilty of either of those crimes. He was convicted of perjury for not being able to remember events, and the jury didn't believe him. As for obstruction of justice, that was based on the idea he didn't provide information they thought he could remember. In addition, even if he were guilty of both crimes, I still would support Bush's actions because I don't go along with people being set up to commit crimes. I didn't support the Martha Stewart conviction either, and she is a Democrat. Also, if Libby should be punished justly for his crimes, then Bill Clinton should likewise have been sent to prison for perjury and obstruction of justice. He was disbarred, but if the just punishment is prison for those crimes, then Clinton is guilty too, and I don't care if you want me to stick with Libby or not. The comparison to Clinton is perfectly valid if prison is a just punishment for perjury and obstruction of justice, because it proves that punishments aren't always equal.

Come on, an attorney with Libby's resume and experience "cant remember events"? Think about that.

[kat8585]

Really? Hiliary had an awfully bad memory lapse during the Whitewater investigation. It was so bad, it was the but of jokes all over talk radio. There was even a parody song made up about it.

I especially liked that she had no idea how her billing records got into her private residence. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetic and transparent.

[forrestkc]

Really? Hiliary had an awfully bad memory lapse during the Whitewater investigation. It was so bad, it was the but of jokes all over talk radio. There was even a parody song made up about it.

Do you think that Hillary was covering up a crime then? If so, then why does Libby's poor memory not indicate he was doing the same?

[Burning_Ember]

I want you to provide proof that Bill O'Reilly has "made up and/or flat out lied plenty." If he has done this plenty of times, you should have a good number of specific incidents you can site.

I don't believe he is guilty of either of those crimes. He was convicted of perjury for not being able to remember events, and the jury didn't believe him. As for obstruction of justice, that was based on the idea he didn't provide information they thought he could remember. In addition, even if he were guilty of both crimes, I still would support Bush's actions because I don't go along with people being set up to commit crimes. I didn't support the Martha Stewart conviction either, and she is a Democrat. Also, if Libby should be punished justly for his crimes, then Bill Clinton should likewise have been sent to prison for perjury and obstruction of justice. He was disbarred, but if the just punishment is prison for those crimes, then Clinton is guilty too, and I don't care if you want me to stick with Libby or not. The comparison to Clinton is perfectly valid if prison is a just punishment for perjury and obstruction of justice, because it proves that punishments aren't always equal.

You want me to provide proof of Bill O'Reilly lying? Come on, you make this too easy.

My favourite is the Paris Business Review.

Here.

It went something like this.

O'REILLY: Now if the [Canadian] government -- if your government harbors these two deserter [sic], doesn't send them back ... there will be a boycott of your country which will hurt your country enormously. France is now feeling that sting.

MALLICK: I don't think for a moment such a boycott would take place because we are your biggest trading partners.

O'REILLY: No, it will take place, madam. In France ...

MALLICK: I don't think that your French boycott has done too well ...

O'REILLY: ...they've lost billions of dollars in France according to "The Paris Business Review."

MALLICK: I think that's nonsense.

Can you say, "doesn't even exist?" No such Paris Business review even exists. Not to mention that imports from France actually increased (check the "here" link) during that time period according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Check that out here.

So much for Bill's boycott actually working! You can also check out The Fifth Estate (a documentary program) from the CBC, it is viewable online and interviews some people who were on O'Reilly's show.

There was the numerous times he made numerous false claims about the war in Iraq, and other terrorist groups, long after such claims were proven to be false.

He also repeated a lie about the "war on Christmas."

Or when he said that there was no way a Far Right-Wing person could get on the cover of Time, when in fact she was on the previous month, and several Right-Wing people were featured in the Magazine before.

Or there was LOADS of misinformation about various topics.

Or when Bill lied about The Swift Boat Veterans.

Or when Bill lied AGAIN about his French Boycott.

So yes, I was able to provide many instances of Bill O'Reilly lying. I'll let you digest this first and respond before I post on the rest of the stuff you said.

[Marnie]

Wow, you have a lot of nerve using Media Matters as a source. Media Matters exsists solely to discredit anybody with a conservative viewpoint! Burning Ember, are you one of the hundreds of college interns they use to sit through hours and hours of conservative talk radio and TV shows and take things out of context? Media Matters is the most biased subscriber-based website I've ever seen. How lazy do you have to be to get your info from them??