Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment
    #8549039 -

(The Politico) Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.), one of the most vocal opponents of the Bush administration on Capitol Hill, said Scott McClellan's book and testimony justify the beginning of impeachment hearings against Vice President Dick Cheney.

During questioning of McClellan, Wexler asked the former White House press secretary if he believed Bush authorized the leaking of Valerie Plame Wilson's name. When McClellan said no, Wexler said this meant that Cheney must have been the source of the leak, meaning Cheney was seeking to retaliate against the wife of an administration critic. In Wexler's view, this would be enough to support the initation of impeachment hearings against Cheney immediately.

Wexler also suggested that Congress should use its authority under the inherent contempt statute to arrest Andrew Card and Karl Rove if they don't respond to Judiciary Committee subpoenas.

"We have the power of inherent contempt, and need be, we should use it," Wexler thundered.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4198871.shtml


--------------------
Alcoholics Anonymous

Narcotics Anonymous

Get help, help is free and available 24/7/365.

God bless you all and I hope you receive the help you need to turn away from your lives of sin.

Mushrooms and drugs make you gay, you can reverse this homosexual condition with rehab, get help! Stop being gay!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Chemy]
    #8549088 -

we will impeach a pres for having consensual sex but no way would they impeach a pres for leaking a CIA agent for spite
or even waging an unjust war for 7 years
naw only sex


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Coaster]
    #8549177 -

Coaster said:
we will impeach a pres for having consensual sex but no way would they impeach a pres for leaking a CIA agent for spite
or even waging an unjust war for 7 years
naw only sex


we didn't impeach a president for having consensual sex, he just got media coverage for that and the resultant circus.

He got in trouble the same way libby did, only he wasn't prosecuted

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Coaster]
    #8549186 -

Coaster said:
we will impeach a pres for having consensual sex but no way would they impeach a pres for leaking a CIA agent for spite
or even waging an unjust war for 7 years
naw only sex


If Cheney leaked that agents identity that makes him a disgusting piece of shit, "go fuck yourself" yeah he should,.


--------------------
Alcoholics Anonymous

Narcotics Anonymous

Get help, help is free and available 24/7/365.

God bless you all and I hope you receive the help you need to turn away from your lives of sin.

Mushrooms and drugs make you gay, you can reverse this homosexual condition with rehab, get help! Stop being gay!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Chemy]
    #8549387 -

Quote:
He got in trouble the same way libby did, only he wasn't prosecuted


He was prosecuted..  that's what the impeachment, and resultant trial were.  He was not convicted and therefore finished his term.  Libby was not an elected official and was therefore prosecuted in criminal court.  Different processes for different people. 

Lying under oath about a whether a man got a blow job from a fat chick, and exposing a CIA spy in retribution for her husband's speaking out against a policy, are two very different birds.  I'll let you decide which is worse.

Card and Gonzales should be burned at the stake.  But that's another story.. sadly.


--------------------


I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Chemy]
    #8549834 -

> If Cheney leaked that agents identity that makes him a disgusting piece of shit, "go fuck yourself" yeah he should,.

Because Cheney is a disgusting piece of shit, I have no doubt at all that he was involved with the leak in an conscious effort to destroy Plame's career.

> Lying under oath about a whether a man got a blow job from a fat chick, and exposing a CIA spy in retribution for her husband's speaking out against a policy, are two very different birds.

Perjury is perjury is perjury.  That being said, lying under oath about a blow job is perjury.  Exposing a CIA spy as retribution is NOT perjury.  Lying under oath about exposing a CIA spy as retribution IS perjury.

> I'll let you decide which is worse.

It doesn't matter which is worse... perjury is illegal while revenge is not.  Now if laws were broken while performing the act of revenge, then we have something to talk about...


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Seuss]
    #8549861 -

Seuss said:
Perjury is perjury is perjury.  That being said, lying under oath about a blow job is perjury.  Exposing a CIA spy as retribution is NOT perjury.  Lying under oath about exposing a CIA spy as retribution IS perjury.


Bush did this when he swore to uphold and defend the constitution, and then called it "just a goddamned piece of paper." As we know, he has yet to be impeached for it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Disco Cat]
    #8549905 -

Ok...

More hyperbole..

What is the impeachable offense?  Citation please and source for claims he commited such.


Quote:
Lying under oath about a whether a man got a blow job from a fat chick, and exposing a CIA spy in retribution for her husband's speaking out against a policy, are two very different birds.  I'll let you decide which is worse.



What's your point?

As for the prosecuted remark I think it clear you knew what I meant, the common refrence to a criminal action, not the more proper general sense.  And I don't get your different processes thing.  You just trying to say someone was treated better or something (bush better than clinton)- I take it your realize the only thing that was clear out of the clinton debacle was that there was no bar to suit of a sitting president.

If its that former, again, what was the conduct, source, and what was the crime, citation to the code please.

Given your strong statement I'd like to see your evidence- no one yet has been able to answer these questions, be the first.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: johnm214]
    #8549984 -

johnm214 said:
Ok...

More hyperbole..

What is the impeachable offense?  Citation please and source for claims he commited such.


No, it's not hyperbole. "It's just a goddamned piece of paper" is not defending the constitution, it's relegating it as unimportant. You shouldn't need a citation to figure that out.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Seuss]
    #8550070 -

Seuss said:
> If Cheney leaked that agents identity that makes him a disgusting piece of shit, "go fuck yourself" yeah he should,.

Because Cheney is a disgusting piece of shit, I have no doubt at all that he was involved with the leak in an conscious effort to destroy Plame's career.


As anyone who has paid any attention to this is aware, the "leaker" was Richard Armitage, a career State Department hack.  Further, Plame was not covered by the statute, it was common knowledge that she worked for the CIA and her husband is a serial liar.  They are also both anti-Bush ideologues and always have been.  Her career should have been destroyed the old-fashioned way.  By firing her immediately after she arranged for her utterly unqualified husband to investigate the yellowcake claims in Niger.
Quote:
> Lying under oath about a whether a man got a blow job from a fat chick, and exposing a CIA spy in retribution for her husband's speaking out against a policy, are two very different birds.

Perjury is perjury is perjury.  That being said, lying under oath about a blow job is perjury.  Exposing a CIA spy as retribution is NOT perjury.  Lying under oath about exposing a CIA spy as retribution IS perjury.


She was not a spy and hadn't been for many years, nor was she "exposed" by anyone in the Bush administration.  As to Clinton, there seems to be a tremendous disconnect between what he was charged for and what the forgetful say he was charged for.  Although it is certainly true that the content of the lies he told were about receiving blow jobs and other sexual favors from a young employee, the context is that he was lying in court to pervert justice in a civil suit filed by Paula Jones as a result of his longstanding pattern of sexual harassment.  That is unacceptable by any standards, even the lowest.
Quote:
> I'll let you decide which is worse.

It doesn't matter which is worse... perjury is illegal while revenge is not.  Now if laws were broken while performing the act of revenge, then we have something to talk about...


Libby was convicted for impeding an investigation into a matter that never should have been investigated in the first place.  Fitzgerald knew who the leaker was (Armitage) from the very beginning.  He went on an entrapment hunt to get somebody for something because he well knew that there was no law against mentioning that Valerie Plame worked at the CIA and recommended her unqualified husband for a rather important counter- terrorism investigation.  The court believed Russert more than Libby.  Too bad for Libby.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8551319 -

wut do u mean too bad 4 libby he got 30 months off of jail
no1 gets pardoned without doing a single day in jail, cept libby


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Coaster]
    #8551335 -

Libby wasn't pardoned, his sentence was commuted.  He remains a disbarred felon who had to pay a huge fine.  On a witch hunt.  How many days in jail did Clinton spend?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8551365 -

cliton was never sentenced jail time
and o wow he had to pay 250k which he did the same day he got sentenced, im sure it really broke his wallet :rolleyes:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Coaster]
    #8551417 -

since clinton wasnt sentenced its no surprise he didnt serve jail time
howevr libby had a long trial and wasted tons and tons of taxpayer money to put him behind bars and he got 30 months and bush said that sentence is "too harsh" so instead of 30 months which is really small for his crime he gets 0 days which is unheard of
most people who get pardoned do so after some time in prison not zero time


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Coaster]
    #8551560 -

Clinton was sentenced.  His sentence was a fine.

Libby was also sentenced.  His sentence was a fine plus jail.  As is his Constitutional right Bush commuted the jail sentence but not the fine and did not pardon Libby.  He remains a convicted felon, as does Slick Willy.

They are both disbarred felons.

Why do you think that Libby committed a more serious crime when the investigation itself was a waste of taxpayer money, especially in light of the fact that Fitzgerald knew it was Armitage from the beginning and there was no wrongdoing involved in the first place?  Clinton was trying to defraud yet another victim of his predatory sexual practices out of her due compensation by perverting a court of law simply for monetary gain.  He could have just settled with Jones and let it be done with.  He knew he was guilty but he thought he could get away with it yet again.  Why is that so OK with you?  The guy is a serial molester.  Paula Jones, Juanita Broderick, Katherine Willey, Monica Lewinsky, others I forget.

Whatever.  BDS rampant on a field of  mushrooms.  That should be the Herald of the Politics Forum.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8551580 -

If it was such a frivolous suit, why did Libby obstruct it then? That was an act of monumental stupidity. I almost think he should have been forced into the sentence just to learn not to be such a damn mongoloid.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8551694 -

Quote:
the investigation itself was a waste of taxpayer money, especially in light of the fact that Fitzgerald knew it was Armitage from the beginning and there was no wrongdoing involved in the first place?


I suppose it never occurred to you that the investigation may have begun in an effort to determine whether Armitage was instructed to leak the story, or whether it was in fact a crime to out Plame, depending on her covert status at the time.  The real issue is whether or not the people who leaked Plame's identity did so thinking she was presently operating covertly, whether that order came from above Armitage, and if the leak was in retribution for criticisms of the Bush Administration. 

Chemy's original post is about whether McClellan's testimony provides enough evidence to initiate impeachment hearings against Cheney, not what Clinton did or didn't do.  I think we can safely leave Bill Clinton out of a discussion about Valerie Plame.  Or, will it keep popping up because it's a good way to distract from the actual conversation?


--------------------


I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.

Edited by thedefone (06/22/08 07:10 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: Redstorm]
    #8551719 -

I personally don't think he tried to do anything of the sort.  He just forgot and then tried to wing it.  Or maybe thought there was some political expedience.  There certainly was no legal reason to lie since no underlying crime was ever committed, as evidenced by the lack of any indictment against Armitage.  I thought it was a self-aggrandizing witch hunt by Fitzgerald.  Much like Starr when he couldn't get the goods (not that I don't think there were no goods there, just a lot of corpses) on Whitewater.  Clinton should have been convicted of perjury, just not by Starr.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: zappaisgod]
    #8551753 -

I gotta say, winging it in court doesn't say much more for his intelligence than lying does.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Wexler: McClellan's Testimony Justifies Cheney's Impeachment [Re: thedefone]
    #8551760 -

thedefone said:
Quote:
the investigation itself was a waste of taxpayer money, especially in light of the fact that Fitzgerald knew it was Armitage from the beginning and there was no wrongdoing involved in the first place?


I suppose it never occurred to you that the investigation may have begun in an effort to determine whether Armitage was instructed to leak the story, or whether it was in fact a crime to out Plame, depending on her covert status at the time.  The real issue is whether or not the people who leaked Plame's identity did so thinking she was presently operating covertly, whether that order came from above Armitage, and if the leak was in retribution for criticisms of the Bush Administration.


Armitage said it was him and that he was not ordered to do so.  Further, interviewing Libby had zero to do with determining whether what Armitage did was illegal.  That was well known in advance.  The woman who drafted the bill testified that people in Plame's position were intentionally excluded from the protection afforded foreign operatives.  She was no longer a foreign operative.  Further, if there is no underlying crime to investigate why bother investigating whether it was for retribution.  Retribution isn't a crime and Joe Wilson should have kept his mouth shut, especially in light of the fact that he was unqualified for the mission and got it with his wife's recommendation.
Quote:
Chemy's original post is about whether McClellan's testimony provides enough evidence to initiate impeachment hearings against Cheney, not what Clinton did or didn't do.  I think we can safely leave Bill Clinton out of a discussion about Valerie Plame.  Or, will it keep popping up because it's a good way to distract from the actual conversation?


Somebody else brought slick Willy up.  Threads tend to meander.  And I don't particularly find it all that distracting.  At any rate, I said it before and I'll restate the obvious.  There was no underlying criminal act in pointing out that Valerie Plame worked a desk at the CIA and that she recommended her incompetent husband for an important mission.  Otherwise we would be discussing the Armitage indictment.  But we're not, so it's all moot.  Wexler has been one of the most BDS afflicted Democrats for years.  He and the kook(inich).  They have no credibility even within their own party.  Just the similarly afflicted.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Do Not Name Names, Do Not Accuse, Do Not Say “Impeach”, Do Not Applaud Visionary Tools 451 2 07/26/08 10:13 AM
by Prisoner#1
* HR 799 - The Impeachment of Richard B. Cheney danknugz81 1,803 15 05/01/08 05:58 PM
by zappaisgod
* Impeach Obama
( 1 2 3 4 ... 31 32 )		 vetsinspandex 17,506 636 01/31/13 05:32 PM
by zappaisgod
* Scott McClellan You Lying Sack of Shit...
( 1 2 all )		 Madtowntripper 2,271 23 05/31/08 12:15 PM
by Yossarian22
* Kucinich says he will force House vote on Cheney impeachment lonestar2004 1,530 9 11/07/07 11:03 AM
by afoaf
* The Impeachment of Bush.
( 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 all )		 THE KRAT BARON 12,708 185 08/06/05 09:39 AM
by Los_Pepes
* Congressman Wexler questions Condi on Iraq War Lies Scratcher 262 1 02/14/08 10:23 AM
by afoaf
* Judge Samuel Kent Impeached By House KetamineKatalyst 317 2 06/21/09 09:18 PM
by djmako7

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,806 topic views. 1 members, 263 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 18 queries.