|
Jeb Bush can't let a dead woman die | by Kickstart | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
I can see both sides of this | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 10:04:13 |
|
Wrong issue. | by BloodyViking | 2005-06-17 10:56:57 |
|
No matter how you look at it 911 will get | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 11:04:26 |
|
No blame to Jeb for not investigating it then. | by Peace_man | 2005-06-17 11:20:57 |
| Why is it revenge motivated suddenly? |
by classic_jon |
2005-06-17 11:47:24 |
Could it be...gasp...that he is doing his job? Sorry for the sarcasm but it burns me up to see someone that *might just be doing the right thing* AND that is in their job description to get disparaging remarks because they are doing so.
Would it be revenge motivated to investigate a murder that happened 15 years ago if it was found worthy of at least a preliminary look? Don't the police investigate murders if there is new evidence brought forward? Is it revenge motivated to go after people who commited war crimes in WWII? There is a double standard here that seems to be applied anytime the "Bush" name is brought up. That being said I *DO NOT* agree with everything Bush Jr. or Jeb Bush do but man, give them some room to do something without going "OMG they are out to get us all because their name ends in Bush."
Please, correct me if I am wrong but, that is the way it comes across. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Sorry, but no. | by Kickstart | 2005-06-17 11:58:33 |
|
Jerk or not, is is not the responsibility | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 12:24:21 |
|
For one thing, | by BloodyViking | 2005-06-17 12:34:51 |
|
It is the contention of his lawyer that she would | by merlin | 2005-06-17 12:41:16 |
|
I interpereted the article as saying that now | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 12:43:23 |
|
Innocent until proven guilty. Unless married. | by toxin | 2005-06-17 14:34:00 |
|
1) It was not investigated because previous | by toxin | 2005-06-17 14:23:07 |
|
I will agree with you on all points except the | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 14:58:45 |
|
The thing is, the red herring simply acts to | by toxin | 2005-06-17 15:19:07 |
|
So, by your line of reasoning a suspected murderer | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 15:42:13 |
|
the new information jeb refers to | by gibuu | 2005-06-17 14:48:38 |
|
You have a valid point, but were not the parents | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 15:02:28 |
|
He is using the power of his position to | by Peace_man | 2005-06-17 12:10:04 |
|
The prosecutor has to abide by the law | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 12:29:34 |
|
How much fact finding do you think they need? | by Peace_man | 2005-06-17 12:53:22 |
|
How can he abuse it if it is in his job | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 13:05:53 |
|
I guess I have a different idea of what a | by Peace_man | 2005-06-17 13:31:20 |
|
Ok, to put it in those terms | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 13:41:31 |
|
He could make the request as innocent as | by Peace_man | 2005-06-17 14:00:01 |
|
So, from what you are saying it would not be | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 14:35:16 |
|
It wold not be illegal. He would be fired. | by toxin | 2005-06-17 14:49:15 |
|
How could he be fired if what he did was | by classic_jon | 2005-06-17 15:33:22 |
|
Courts are seperate | by rfrovarp | 2005-06-17 14:09:22 |
