|
GWB reaches new lows. | by Peace_man | 2007-07-03 10:39:27 |
|
Come on, Peace_man. | by hadji | 2007-07-03 11:19:23 |
|
I only go where my perusal of the current news | by Peace_man | 2007-07-03 11:28:27 |
|
Except that your ire is conditional and there's no | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 11:29:20 |
|
Fair and balanced? When could you ever accuse | by Peace_man | 2007-07-03 11:33:58 |
|
Fear-mongers | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 11:36:18 |
|
That's right. | by Peace_man | 2007-07-03 11:38:54 |
|
Dude, you're not far behind them. | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 11:42:33 |
|
You may see me as fear-mongering. | by Peace_man | 2007-07-03 11:57:03 |
|
I've already stated the reason. | by hadji | 2007-07-03 12:14:14 |
|
How many past presidents have used it | by Peace_man | 2007-07-03 12:22:39 |
|
Isolating that one point is irrelevant. | by hadji | 2007-07-03 12:28:12 |
| Politics. |
by Peace_man |
2007-07-03 12:39:59 |
IMO the jail sentence was the only real punishment. $250,000 is not much of an issue to someone in Scooter's position - and someone already mentioned that there is a fund raising effort under way.
His inability to practice law, and other possible restrictions on him, aren't too serious. He is still able to work for the current administration in other capacities. I don't think he was using his ability to practice law in his capacity as chief of staff.
A full pardon may well raise too much concern of exactly what I'm trying to raise in this thread. Instead, simply negating the only real punishment does almost as good a job. Without raising insurmountable concerns about abuse of powers.
This is just a guess - but from what I see here, a full pardon would be a lot more difficult to brush off. GWB is not likely to be concerned about opinions on this board, but if they reflect opinions elsewhere, he probably is concerned. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
If GWB was concerned about opinions, | by hadji | 2007-07-03 12:44:08 |
|
Possibly. I expect that it is not the opinions of | by Peace_man | 2007-07-03 13:09:30 |
