Blackhatjack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 12:56 PM
Original message |
Cheney needs a Pardon! ....Is there any doubt? .... |
|
The whole Libby trial is shining a light on the antics of Uncle Dick, and likely will pull the curtain back on Bush's lies that he did not know who was leaking classified info to the press, and much more.
Cheney will have to leave office to get his pardon, and it will surely be needed.
The only question is what will the circumstances be in which the pardons are handed out by Bush, and why has he not already executed this plan before the Libby case came to trial?
Makes me very uneasy to think that Bush might be planning an attack on Iran in the next few weeks, and will use those circumstances to justify "putting this distraction behind us" as we face a mortal enemy.
|
BuyingThyme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 12:59 PM
Response to Original message |
1. This is why they're going to blame Karl Rove. |
|
If they can convince the sheep that this was just politics (Rove), a pardon is easy.
|
Uben
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:00 PM
Response to Original message |
|
...until Bush is out of office to pursue charges against Cheney.
Them BUsh will not be able to pardon him, or anyone else!
|
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. I would prefer seeing investigation after investigation |
|
and picking off the insiders one at a time, leaving them isolated and impotent.
That's off the table if the administration invades any other country, if it vetoes every bill that crosses Stupid's desk, or if they go nuts enough over the investigation to declare martial law and attempt to suspend Congress.
I would greatly prefer to see them in prison by January, 2009, but I know that is unlikely to happen.
|
fooj
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
3. It certainly pulled the curtain back on little Temmeh Russert, eh? |
tblue
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I think they were so arrogant and so well entrenched, they "never imagined" anyone of them would |
|
actually ever need a pardon.
At the same time, I'm sure the pardons are already written up and ready to be dispatched at the opportune time. * may even be blackmailing his little cronies and henchmen — protect the President at all cost.
And, I don't like the thought of "wagging the dog" with Iran. But I think you are probably absolutely right. War is always, always *'s first/last/only resort.
|
BuyingThyme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
it looks like Randi is selling grape juice.
|
Jackpine Radical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Aaaack!! Paranoid, tinfoil, wacko thinking. Unfortunately... |
|
that's the only kind of thinking that ever turns out to be on the mark with this bunch. No matter how crazy our thinking gets, you can't keep up with a Neocon.
Aw, shit. Back under the bed with the dust bunnies for me the rest of the day.
|
Blackhatjack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:04 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Once the pardon is granted, no criminal charges will be filed .... |
|
.... and the only liability will be civil.
However, the pardon is limited to the actions described within the document, and would not cover lying under oath or other crimes committed after the date of the pardon issuance.
|
lovuian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. It would be overturned in Congress |
|
a pardon from Prez who is guilty isn't worth the paper its written on
|
Blackhatjack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-26-07 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. I see nothing in the Constitution that allows Congress to overturn a Cheney Pardon... |
|
... the power to pardon is not reviewable, unless it is shown that the issuer committed a crime in issuing the pardon. In that event, the President would not be exercising his constitutional authority.
The examples most often cited would be a President that was blackmailed by the person to be pardoned, or a President that 'sold' the pardon for cash or consideration. In those situations, the President would be acting outside the scope and course of his constitutionally mandated and defined authority, and therefore his attempt to make these acts legitimate by claiming they were done pursuant to his constitutional power would fail.
Lacking these circumstances, I suspect that the SCOTUS would not uphold a Congressional attempt at revoking the President's issuance of a pardon.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 08th 2024, 05:50 AM
Response to Original message |