Story link to downplay liberal whining...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070704/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_interview;_ylt=AmNajP9qaEG4mDCrbEWOfj1h24cA
quote
Her husband's pardons, were simply routine exercise in the use of the pardon power, and none were aimed at protecting the Clinton presidency or legacy, she said.
Simply put, what is the value of protecting this "legacy"?
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
2007-07-03 22:58:32 · 6 answers · asked by koalatcomics 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Correctamondo.
Clinton's pardons included Susan McDougal who sat in jail for what? nearly a year because she refused to release information on the Clinton's involvement in White Water, Marc Rich who donated almost as much to the Clinton's as he owed in back taxes, Roger Clinton for his drug felonies and according to a lot of the mail fraud felons on the list, most likely a whole slew of co-horts in InfoUSA.
What legacy was he protecting? A legacy of complete corruption. ....the company one keeps.
He and the 380 harden career criminals he pardoned are probably getting together today to celebrate their own special brand of independence day.
2007-07-03 23:10:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
But Bush didn't pardon Libby yet. It was pretty unusual commutation. He bypassed justice department too. And the judge who sentenced Libby is actually questioning this commutation. I don't think you can compare this to Clinton's pardons no matter how bad they are. Lot of past presidents have granted way more pardons than Bush jr have so far. And this commutation is pretty rare and particularly this one is very unique and unusual.
What you're doing is equivalent to liberals complaining about how Clinton got impeached for having sex when in fact Clinton got impeached for perjury, lying under oath.
Some liberal might also say 'well at least Clinton didn't sign gazillion signing statement' or something like that. You can play this game all day figuring out who did what when. Figuring out who is worse than so and so... Who did what more than so and so...etc...etc...
It's not that tough to find some dirt on any politicians.
I don't know why Bush didn't just grant the stupid pardon like a man. Instead he did this weird commutation like a wuss. Which is likely to cause more controversy than if he had just granted full pardon.
At least Bill had balls to grant pardons instead of half whacked commutation thing that bypassed usual procedures like going through justice department.
2007-07-04 06:13:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Exactly, and if his pardons since 1993 were researched by people who think them two are so great, they would see the type of people he pardoned. Will surprise you, and prove HIllary is just up to her cover up thing , again. Amazing how many pardons were gave to people who committed crimes against the government, drugs, mail fraud, selling arms to terrorist etc.... Very scary to even think these two will have power in the white house again. If one is going to vote Democrat any way, any choice is better than these two.
2007-07-04 17:34:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Does it make you feel more secure in you're crumbling position to call people who disagree with you name? I think you're making up "facts" again, why don't you site a source for some of these. like most number of ......
Libby broke the law to protect the bush administration. If you say he's innocent you're saying the U.S. system of justice is wrong. bush pardoned him. The end effect is Bush can do whatever he wants by getting someone else to break the law and then pardoning them. I know you think it's ok for Republicans to be above the law but reasonable people think everyone should follow the same laws.
2007-07-04 06:09:04 · answer #4 · answered by crushinator01 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I've said it all along. The Clintons are Communists, crooks, and criminals. Why the liberals go for these idiots is beyond me!
2007-07-04 06:06:56 · answer #5 · answered by C J 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
whatever...every candidate has issues. pick the one who has the least that you can live with. God help us all.
2007-07-04 06:09:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋