Dean Says Cheney May Have Broken the Law

Discussion in 'The OT' started by tomcrown1, Feb 13, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tomcrown1

    tomcrown1 Hall Of Fame

    1,576
    0
    Jan 16, 2006
    http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/02/13/national/w075634S81.DTL

    "If Vice President Cheney has, in fact, ordered the leaking of political information — of intelligence information, that means he has to step aside," Dean said on CNN. "We don't know if it's true, but he has been accused of it. If it's true, he has to step aside."
     
  2. juan ellitinez

    juan ellitinez Icon/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,982
    0
    Jan 31, 2003
    ;) ;) Now there's an unbiased source!!
     
  3. pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    3,939
    0
    Jul 17, 2003
    Does that mean half the dems in the senate will do the same? :lol:

    Dean said on CNN. "We don't know if it's true, but he has been accused of it.

    And who's the one doing the accusing???

    This Dean character is just that, a character. Its really hard to take the guy seriously. Sure, if Cheney broke the law, he has to step aside. IF Dean broke the law, he has to step aside too. And Fitzgerald?

    Fitzgerald said in the documents it was his understanding that "Mr. Libby testified that he was authorized to disclose information about the NIE to the press by his superiors.

    Isn't disclosing testimony in a Grand Jury investigation also against the law?
     
  4. jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,001
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    Really?

    So, if Libby was encouraged or instructed to leak CIA secrets by Dick Cheney, his "superior", any speculation as to illegality is invalid if it comes from Howard Dean?:rotfl:

    And let's not forget who Libby's other "superior" was. He was Special Assistant to the President as well as being the VP's Chief of Staff. So George W Bush was also his "superior"!:D
     
  5. JM Anthony

    JM Anthony Child of the 60's DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,127
    1
    Nov 16, 2003
    At least he's an informed, knowlegeable source.

    John
     
  6. markh

    markh Hall Of Fame

    1,036
    0
    Mar 24, 2002
    Oh, I thought this was going to be about Cheney not having a quail license. :)
     
  7. pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    3,939
    0
    Jul 17, 2003
    could you imagine the story if he hunted with former VPs? (Dan Quail) :lol:
     
  8. Ray_Clum

    Ray_Clum Hall Of Fame

    1,131
    0
    Apr 22, 2002
    As a member of the vast, right-wing consipracy, I agree with Dean. IF Cheney pushed the leak out, then he should resign or be impeached. We cannot hold ourselves above the law.

    However, since it's Deano suggesting this, the first thing that came to mind was YEEE-HAWWW!
     
  9. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    And the big complaint people had about both Gore and Kerry? No emotion. :lol:
     
  10. DonLandis

    DonLandis Hall Of Fame

    3,363
    0
    Dec 17, 2003
    "And the big complaint people had about both Gore and Kerry? No emotion. "

    What people? Once again you are out of touch with the real world. The big problem we had with those two was obvious dishonesty and no real plan to defend this nation, no fiscally viable plan, just a mystery, to do their only real platform which was health care reform. All they did was rebutt ideas that the Republican opponent had. Your idea that the big complaint was that Al Gore stood like a tree and that Kerry reminded us of Lurch from the Adams Family was just a humorous way the Republican camp combatted the Democrats "Bush is a mental midget" claim. Truth is that Gore and Kerry are just that style of personality and Bush was a pretty smart and cunning man to fool all those academic snots in the Democratic Party.
     
  11. Jacob S

    Jacob S Hall Of Fame

    7,657
    1
    Apr 14, 2002
    If Cheney done something illegal then he will probably get a pardon from President Bush.
     
  12. olgeezer

    olgeezer Guest

    1,833
    0
    Dec 5, 2003
    ??????????????And what have we been smoking?
     
  13. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Talk about being out of touch with the real world... You actually think you are making sense, don't you. Of course the Democrats didn't have any plans. Particularly if you wrote them off before they were even nominated and never listened to anything they had to say. THAT might have messed up your preconceived notions. If you just keep telling yourself that Republicans actually have a plan, and Democrats don't...no it won't work, it still won't make it true. What plan did George Bush have to protect this nation when he was running against Al Gore. Worked like gangbusters, didn't it. Four years later, he still had no plan, just "stay the course" on the haphazard big picture BS that happened over the previous 4 years. I'm still waiting for a plan. Like a plan to get out of Iraq. We went in without a plan, and we still don't have a plan.

    Nope, the biggest weapon in the Republican arsenal was, "Gore/Kerry shows as much emotion as a redwood." Not to forget the "questionable medals." Republicans didn't really want to spend very much time actually discussing plans, they much preferred making it personal.
     
  14. Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    You have to remember they all do this. "Bush is a moron" and "Bush was AWOL" stuff. The country is divided. Bush won because the GOP's get out the vote workers were better, and because Bush gave a more positive "this is what I'll do" stump than Kerry. Kerry lost because he couldn't articulate what he would do, only that he wouldn't be Bush. Same reason Dole lost against Clinton in 96.

    When you're not of either party, it's very easy to see how they both play it.
     
  15. Cholly

    Cholly Old Guys Rule!

    5,053
    72
    Mar 22, 2004
    Indian...
    Bush won reelection with the help of the religious right in the states that could have gone either way. Had it not been for the emotional issue of "abortion rights", Kerry could well have been the winner.

    The GOP has recently gone overboard regarding religious issues. This past week, there was an article in our paper about the GOP sending emails to all churches in our area, requesting copies of their membership lists, with the intent of using the information to contact the church members, their excuse being that they believe a majority of churchgoers vote Republican. There's been a big backlash over this from church officials of all faiths.
     
  16. pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    3,939
    0
    Jul 17, 2003
    I think it was more a backlash of the same-gender marriage issue that finally motivated millions of bible-belt believers to cast their votes.

    As to the use of church to try and extend political reach, this is clearly a bipartisan issue. Clinton was unashamed to use the church pulpit for political purposes. Dems do it all the time. Even at the funeral of Mrs King, political jabs were made - using what should have been a solemn occasion to try and score political points. So if you somehow think the request 2 years ago (and not repeated since, so far as I can tell) by the GOP is somehow unique, then you are most sincerely mistaken. As to the request for church directories themselves, the church generally (at least southern baptists) rebuffed the GOP - indicating that it was not ethical to give them the directories, possibly not legal. That does not mean Christians are not moved to vote Republican more often than democrat, based on moral issues. Its an individual voter's response to issues that are important to him/her - nothing more or less, and certainly nothing wrong with doing so. That's the American way - one person, one vote, the will of the people as opposed to the will of a handfull of people who "know what's best".
     
  17. Cholly

    Cholly Old Guys Rule!

    5,053
    72
    Mar 22, 2004
    Indian...
    pjmrt -- I'm not disagreeing entirely with you. I wouldn't want either party to solicit for church membership lists (or mosque or temple membership lists).
    Here's a link to the article I mentioned: http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/breaking_news/13903107.htm

    I really don't care whether it's Republicans or Democrats. To me, it's just plain wrong.

    That being said, Mr. Clinton spoke in churches as a private citizen, as has Carter and Pres. Bush. They didn't assume the role of clergy. They all have been openly critical of their political opponents. If they have been invited to speak in a church, they certainly have the right to express their opinions.
    Most churches do not condone abortion or homosexuality. That's a given, whether you're in the Bible Belt or the Northeast.
     
  18. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Yes Cap, because I am not of either party, it is easy for me to see how they both play it. But because you tend to the Republican side of neither, you took my statement to be partisan, when I was responding to Don's also "not of either party (but much more not Democrat than Republican)" comments about how the Democrats had no plans like the Republicans did. I admit to a tendency more to the Democrat than the Republican side. In your "neutrality" such an admission would be refreshing. :lol:
     
  19. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    pjmrt, Mrs. King was a very political individual. Somehow, I believe she would have been much more dissapointed if speakers would not have taken the opportunity to make some points when the public's attention was focused on the event celebrating her life. You could hardly celebrate her life without getting political. Just because it wasn't the politics you appreciate didn't mean she wouldn't have been pleased with them. When you die, you can have all the conservative speakers you want.
     
  20. jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,001
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    This same issue was raised a few years back about the Paul Wellstone funeral. And not mainly by "friends of Paul". Just as "friends of Coretta" were not the ones complaining about her funeral.

    Not being a "funeral kind of guy", I don't have much experience in this arena. But it seems that black funerals, and Democrat funerals for much the same reasons, are not as "scripted" as similar white or GOP functions.:shrug:

    How people decide to mourn, or celebrate the lives of the departed is none of my business. All the more so if I AM the "departed". I hope a few toasts will be raised in my memory when I die, but if they aren't, I'll be the last to know it or be able to be offended by the slight.

    It's often said funerals are for the living. Welstone's, and Mrs. King's were certainly more "alive" then any of the funerals I've had the misfortune to attend.

    Short story here-

    About six months ago the local "Coca-Cola man" died suddenly of a stroke. Well loved and respected by all who knew him, his cortege was led by his casket on the bright red Coca-Cola flatbed truck which we all recognized as our former cue to honk and wave to Walter. That fueral was quite "alive" also. The only "disrespect" being he had wished to be cremated as he would have been embarrassed by the fuss.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

spam firewall