Sorry, Sam, but you're wrong on this one.

On Jan. 18, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales assured the Senate Judiciary Committee that the administration never intended to take advantage of it.

Gonzalez didn't say the administration wouldn't take advantage of it, he said they didn't intend to take advantage of it. There's an ocean of difference there.

Had Gonzalez said the administration had not done it, that would be different. But even had he said "We will not do it", situations change and, accordingly, so does the way things are handled.

Remember, we're talking about lawyers here. Every little thing means something, and it would be foolish to believe that Gonzalez phrased that statement the way he did without knowing how someone might try to spin it.

Sorry, but the very statement you offer as the noose to hang Gonzalez is the same statement which will not hang him and, in fact, will end up protecting him...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Steve, that is the statement that has him in the trouble he is in today.

This is what I want Bush and Gonzales to say to the dems and liberal media:



I can't believe this story about nothing has some much press time. Talk about the liberal media showing their true colors...

Kramer

__________________
“It's time to admit that public education operates like a planned economy, a bureaucratic system in which everybody's role is spelled out in advance and there are few incentives for innovation and productivity. It's no surprise that our school system doesn't improve; it more resembles the communist economy than our own market economy."
Albert Shanker, former president of the American Federation of Teachers

That may be, but it's silly.

He hasn't lied. He offered no timetable for the confirmations, so he's, technically, off the hook for that one. As for "not intending" to take advantage of something, it would have to be proven that, all along, the intent to fire the attorneys was there when he made his statement.

Intent is difficult, at best, to prove...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Well, whether he lied or misled the congress, he walked away with them thinking they would be approving all US attorneys. And they aren't being asked to approve this bunch. I doubt Karl Rove's friend would be approved.

Sam, I think you have to recheck on what the word Lie means.

It does not include saying something and then changing your mind or otherwise breathing your word.

For it to be a lie. first you have to prove it was an intentional mis-statement.

Doniston, it seems pretty darn intentional when the emails from Gonzales talking about replacing the attorneys were written before his appointment hearings where he promised congress he wouldn't appoint without congressional approval.

Haha! I can imagine how confused you might be with everything seeing how disconnected you are with reality. Looking at the world through 'liberal media' tinted glasses has warped your mind.

But keep touting the 'liberal media' argument, the more times conservatives use that line, the more people realize that it serves as pathetic political cover than anything serious to consider.

Thank God no democrat has ever lied under oath.

__________________
Anyone ask Hillary what kind of underwear she wears, yet?

Lt. Gov Diane Denish on Bill Richardson "The governor, she said, "pinches my neck. He touches my hip, my thigh, sort of the side of my leg."

Sam, I am interested in knowing if there has ever been a republican you didn't want to impeach or imprison. I'd like to impeach you for being so ridiculous but as far as I know you don't serve in our government.... Furthermore I wish the President had the courage and inclination to stop making excuses and simply tell all of the idiots out there: "As President of the United States I will fire whoever in my administration I damn well please, If you don't like it oh well, suck it up and drive on."

And so is stunning incompetence and mass killing, unfortunately. BUT NOT A BLOW JOB! THAT'S DEFINITELY ILLEGAL!!!!

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

No but perjury is as was just proven by the verdict handed down against Mr. Libby.

Perjury regarding a blow job, if I recall correctly. Nonetheless, would you agree that stunning incompetence and mass killing is at least slightly worse than lying about a blowjob, even if done so under oath?

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

Not necessarily. It depends on the lie, and the reasons for killing. As for stunning incompetence I would have to say that isn't so bad. In fact the majority of individuals around the world exhibit it on a daily basis.

Of course there have been Democrats who have lied under oath. If you would like to tell us about one, make a thread!

Impeachment for being ridiculous? I don't think that's in the Constitution. You wish we had a dictator for President? You like the Chavez and Saddam types? Maybe Bush should declare himself President for Life, like Chavez and Saddam did. In Russia 80 journalists have been killed in the past 10 years. That's good right? Keep 'em in line. Fuck the Constitution and it's rule of law. Let Bush make up his own rules! Long live the King!

You don't like our Constitution? Bush and Gonzales and Cheney don't either. That's the company you keep. That's un-American, IMHO.

Seriously, if the Democrats were fucking with our Democracy this way, I'd disown them. I wouldn't vote for them.