The Daily Static
  The Daily Static
UF Archives
Register
UF Membership
Ad Free Site
Postcards
Community
Geekfinder
UFie Gear
Advertise on UF
Forum Rules
& FAQ

Username

Password


Create a New Account

  
 

Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
GWB reaches new lows. by Peace_man 2007-07-03 10:39:27
His administration shows just how corrupt it really is. Can anybody tell me how freeing Scooter Libby from the punishment for his crimes upholds the laws of the US? It makes a mockery of the ability of the courts to maintain a balance of power.

It puts quotes in a different light: "I stand behind my friends". "Heckuva job, Brownie". It makes it apparent that as long as you support GWB you don't have to obey those pesky laws he is sworn to uphold. "To keep America secure".

[ Reply ]
  Sandy Burger has better friends. by Fnord_Hero2007-07-03 10:46:19
  Just to be precise here, by hadji2007-07-03 10:47:35
    And now a little perspective by lab rat2007-07-03 10:52:59
      Those were some interesting reads. (n/t) by kc5sdy2007-07-03 11:29:45
      Interesting, by binkley2007-07-03 20:17:15
    Sorry. Insert "some of" in my post. by Peace_man2007-07-03 10:54:47
      In that case, to answer your question, by hadji2007-07-03 11:02:56
        The reason why I think this potentially by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:06:03
          Yes, it has been done in the past. by subbywan2007-07-03 11:08:17
            nixon was pardoned by ford... by Fnord_Hero2007-07-03 11:13:13
              Yeah, and Ford's pardon helped keep it unclear. by kelli2172007-07-03 11:25:03
            The pardon of Nixon by Ford... by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:16:47
          I don't see how it does that by MatthewDBA2007-07-03 11:09:20
            It negates the most severe of the court's by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:18:35
              It does negate those things. But again, by hadji2007-07-03 11:22:49
                Don't they only insist on that if there is a risk by Classic_jon2007-07-03 11:25:39
                  I'm not sure. I'm just going by what I've heard. (n/t) by hadji2007-07-03 11:28:58
                  IIRC, by krikkert2007-07-03 11:49:23
                    Thanks, I ma just curious as to how he falls by Classic_jon2007-07-03 12:10:58
                It's very unusual. by lheggland2007-07-03 11:28:22
          What you're still missing is that this wasn't by hadji2007-07-03 11:09:42
            He's also not ruling out a complete pardon. by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:21:13
              No more so than any other president by subbywan2007-07-03 11:22:42
              We'll see what happens then. by hadji2007-07-03 11:23:48
    And Libby is not done with his appeals. by Fnord_Hero2007-07-03 11:07:49
    Thanks Hadji. by binkley2007-07-03 20:23:47
  Of course Libby should be spared jail. by shminux2007-07-03 10:47:49
  He's not freeing him from by MatthewDBA2007-07-03 10:48:07
  You need to re-read the article by Classic_jon2007-07-03 10:50:21
  No big deal. by VivianC2007-07-03 10:51:21
    Just keep one thing in mind re: Clinton/Libby - by subbywan2007-07-03 11:03:58
      Contempt for by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:17:47
    So you're equating by SoylentGreen2007-07-03 11:14:27
      Lying under oath is lying under oath. by lheggland2007-07-03 11:25:27
        One was only accused of it, the other convicted (n (n/t) by subbywan2007-07-03 11:27:19
          No both were convicted by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:29:46
    A small point. by kelli2172007-07-03 11:16:43
      Very well then we'll just say that by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:25:43
        No .. he was accused of that. by subbywan2007-07-03 11:28:21
          Ummm by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:31:15
            Then you're comparing apples to oranges (n/t) by subbywan2007-07-03 11:31:57
              They're both convictions by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:32:47
                Yes, but it's like saying by subbywan2007-07-03 11:34:44
                  Which I didn't do by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:46:06
                    And it wasn't any court. by RetiQlum22007-07-03 12:09:57
                      I thought I read by MatthewDBA2007-07-03 12:10:46
                        No by DesertRat662007-07-03 12:12:12
                          Ouch. by MatthewDBA2007-07-03 12:15:27
                          Bwuhahahaha! by RetiQlum22007-07-03 12:28:22
                      No he wasn't. by kelli2172007-07-03 15:42:17
                    Yes, you did. by subbywan2007-07-03 13:25:11
                      You might as well save your time. by Peace_man2007-07-03 13:34:03
                        I'm not after him to admit anything. by subbywan2007-07-03 13:51:39
                          Ah, OK. Good luck with that. by Peace_man2007-07-03 14:01:03
                      OK now how did I equate them? by DesertRat662007-07-03 14:22:10
                        Because the convictions are not the same by subbywan2007-07-03 14:31:21
                          I think you're repeating me by DesertRat662007-07-03 17:49:17
  Remember The last Clinton? by JaR2007-07-03 10:53:03
    How sure are you those are all Clintons by subbywan2007-07-03 10:58:39
      Becaue Clinton was still president in Jan 2001 (n/ (n/t) by lab rat2007-07-03 11:01:36
        Yes, but there were 50 Govs who could do it too ( (n/t) by subbywan2007-07-03 11:04:47
          Crurious, Can governors give a USDOJ pardon? (n/t) by Classic_jon2007-07-03 11:07:14
            Interesting article president vs Governor pardons by Classic_jon2007-07-03 11:12:47
            That's what I was trying to determine. (n/t) by subbywan2007-07-03 11:24:22
        And the same list is here as well by Classic_jon2007-07-03 11:05:08
          Ta. That's what I was looking for by subbywan2007-07-03 11:05:45
    Don't forget the FALN Pardons by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:02:44
      Oh, I remember those, I also remember those bums. by Fnord_Hero2007-07-03 11:20:27
  Malicious Prosecution doesn't uphold the law eithe by DesertRat662007-07-03 10:53:44
    You are still gloating about Clinton's by Peace_man2007-07-03 10:56:49
      Apples to Oranges by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:04:04
      and did Clinton get 3 years for perjury by Fnord_Hero2007-07-03 11:09:31
    Dick Armiatage by Fnord_Hero2007-07-03 11:08:50
    D. C. Simpson has this to say: by kelli2172007-07-03 11:11:45
      Horse Hockey by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:21:10
        I would guess... by Illiad2007-07-03 11:23:06
          Ever notice... by kelli2172007-07-03 11:37:00
            BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:47:09
              Truth usually is. (n/t) by Phoon2007-07-03 11:52:06
                You really don't want to go there by DesertRat662007-07-03 11:57:58
                  Oh, and don't forget the Kennedy Clan. by lheggland2007-07-03 11:59:52
                  My former congresscritter. I did not vote for the by lab rat2007-07-03 12:10:35
                  There are people defending him? by vetitice2007-07-03 12:22:26
                    I'm not surprised at all. (n/t) by lab rat2007-07-03 13:14:17
                      Any idea who? (n/t) by vetitice2007-07-03 14:51:14
            Yep, the Republicans. by lheggland2007-07-03 11:52:36
            Ever notice by altordwm2007-07-03 11:54:05
            Not really... by imperito2007-07-03 11:57:18
              There's research to the effect of what I said. by kelli2172007-07-03 12:21:29
                Sorry, I'll have to call you on that. by Phoon2007-07-03 12:59:41
                  Here's one. by kelli2172007-07-03 15:27:03
                    Good, good. Thanks. (n/t) by Phoon2007-07-03 16:13:19
                    The media one is easy to challenge by DesertRat662007-07-03 17:42:04
  Come on, Peace_man. by hadji2007-07-03 11:19:23
    I only go where my perusal of the current news by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:28:27
      Except that your ire is conditional and there's no by subbywan2007-07-03 11:29:20
        Fair and balanced? When could you ever accuse by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:33:58
          Fear-mongers by subbywan2007-07-03 11:36:18
            That's right. by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:38:54
              Dude, you're not far behind them. by subbywan2007-07-03 11:42:33
                I take issue with your second point. by hadji2007-07-03 11:44:45
                  And that is why #2 will not apply to you. (n/t) by krikkert2007-07-03 11:51:05
                  He seemed to be talking to PeaceMan, not you. (n/t by quilting_kitty2007-07-03 12:05:57
                    Yeah, but the statement seemed universal. by hadji2007-07-03 12:08:42
                      I didn't read it that way at all. by quilting_kitty2007-07-03 12:27:32
                        Fair enough. I was just saying how I first read i by hadji2007-07-03 12:36:38
                You may see me as fear-mongering. by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:57:03
                  I've already stated the reason. by hadji2007-07-03 12:14:14
                    Peace_man is, as I see it, by krikkert2007-07-03 12:15:55
                      I think the seriousness argument fails by hadji2007-07-03 12:22:11
                      The man is still convicted by MatthewDBA2007-07-03 12:24:07
                        The courts' function in maintaining this by Peace_man2007-07-03 12:30:38
                          That might be true: by MatthewDBA2007-07-03 12:36:36
                            True. It was clemency, not a pardon. (n/t) by krikkert2007-07-03 12:44:15
                          And one the Executive branches functions by lheggland2007-07-03 12:41:51
                            Which makes this a matter of opinion, as to by Peace_man2007-07-03 13:05:52
                    How many past presidents have used it by Peace_man2007-07-03 12:22:39
                      Isolating that one point is irrelevant. by hadji2007-07-03 12:28:12
                        Hadji, I must give you a compliment by Classic_jon2007-07-03 12:31:16
                          I despise being partisan just for the sake of by hadji2007-07-03 12:39:34
                            I must agree. by Classic_jon2007-07-03 12:56:44
                        Politics. by Peace_man2007-07-03 12:39:59
                          If GWB was concerned about opinions, by hadji2007-07-03 12:44:08
                            Possibly. I expect that it is not the opinions of by Peace_man2007-07-03 13:09:30
                      Others have claimed by MatthewDBA2007-07-03 12:28:55
                      Educate thyself by DesertRat662007-07-03 13:09:19
                        So Clinton enforced 18 months in jail, by Peace_man2007-07-03 13:24:25
                          Based on opinion polls by DesertRat662007-07-03 14:26:38
                  Yup. I love your posts. by subbywan2007-07-03 13:35:16
                    Always happy to be of service:-P by Peace_man2007-07-03 13:43:37
                      They do refute some. Just not on issues by subbywan2007-07-03 13:53:05
                        Don't most of these things devolve into by Peace_man2007-07-03 13:59:52
                          Generally only on the "agree to disagree" items by subbywan2007-07-03 14:11:38
              How? by lheggland2007-07-03 11:43:05
                Possibly in 1.5 years there will be a greater one. by Peace_man2007-07-03 11:59:45
                  No, by lheggland2007-07-03 12:08:10
                    Well he is. by hadji2007-07-03 12:09:23
  Due to the devolution of this debate into by hadji2007-07-03 11:59:02
    IMO it started there. (n/t) by DesertRat662007-07-03 12:00:39
      One could view the TLP as having had that tone, by hadji2007-07-03 12:04:31
        Nah, most of the first replies were tu quoque by altordwm2007-07-03 12:06:00
          'subsequent' doesn't only mean 'replies to'. (n/t) by krikkert2007-07-03 12:11:20
    Hmm, suggestion by hobbs2007-07-03 15:58:12
    Until either side can bother to elect someone by romandas2007-07-03 17:21:18

 

[Todays Cartoon Discussion] [News Index]

Come get yer ARS (Account Registration System) Source Code here!
All images, characters, content and text are copyrighted and trademarks of J.D. Frazer except where other ownership applies. Don't do bad things, we have lawyers.
UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)