William Jefferson (D-La). Just another crooked politician?

[red states rule]

Facts? Liberals don't care about facts. Just like they do not think they should have to follow the laws they endorse and pass. They are the "enlightened" the "saviors" petty rules and facts do not apply to them, the ends are all that matter. Any lie is acceptable as long as it is all for " the good" of all us ignorant hicks that are to stupid to take care of ourselves.

One of the rules libs by is "Don't do as I do - do as I say"

You are not allowed to point out the hyprocricy of the left - that is hate speech

 

[Shogun]

more comedy gold from the local "humorist"



RSR talking about "do as I say and not as I do"...


after yesterday one might think you'd be shying away from your life motto.

 

[TheStripey1]

I do not recall libs being this open minded over Tom Delay

Open minded? All the lefties have said if he's guilty, send him to prison... have you ever said the same about one of your own corrupt politicians?

Tom DeLay deserves to be tried and if found guilty, imprisoned. Do you think he should be let off simply because he is a republican? Republicans break the law too.

If any politician is corrupt... they should be investigated, and if the evidence warrants it, indicted and then prosecuted, if found guilty they should be incarcerated in a REAL prison not a country club and then we should just throw away the key...

 

[TheStripey1]

Facts? Liberals don't care about facts. Just like they do not think they should have to follow the laws they endorse and pass. They are the "enlightened" the "saviors" petty rules and facts do not apply to them, the ends are all that matter. Any lie is acceptable as long as it is all for " the good" of all us ignorant hicks that are to stupid to take care of ourselves.

You mean like you have been saying about poor wittle libby? He lied under oath but you don't care about that... you think he should be left off...

why the disparity?

 

[red states rule]

Open minded? All the lefties have said if he's guilty, send him to prison... have you ever said the same about one of your own corrupt politicians?

Tom DeLay deserves to be tried and if found guilty, imprisoned. Do you think he should be let off simply because he is a republican? Republicans break the law too.

If any politician is corrupt... they should be investigated, and if the evidence warrants it, indicted and then prosecuted, if found guilty they should be incarcerated in a REAL prison not a country club and then we should just throw away the key...

The video and cash was taken from his freezer BEFORE the Nov election. Dems still backed him

After the election, the CBC defended him

Sna Fran Nanput him the Homeland Security panel

So much for Dems cracking down on those caught breaking the law

 

[Bullypulpit]

Is it my fault libs can't compete in the arena of ideas and can't dispute the facts?

If you actually presented any facts to dispute, I'd be more than happy to either refute or accept them. But as it stands, all you do is cut-and-paste the talking points of the Bush administration and its noise machine with nary a thought as to the reliability or credibility of the sources. Oh, and you do occasionally post a story which you think proves your point about 'libruls', only to have it thrown back in your face because you failed to actually read it.

 

[red states rule]

If you actually presented any facts to dispute, I'd be more than happy to either refute or accept them. But as it stands, all you do is cut-and-paste the talking points of the Bush administration and its noise machine with nary a thought as to the reliability or credibility of the sources. Oh, and you do occasionally post a story which you think proves your point about 'libruls', only to have it thrown back in your face because you failed to actually read it.

I have posted the facts how Dems defended Cold Cash even after the story of the video of him taking the bribe and the FBI finding $90,000 is his freezer

Care to dispute those facts?

 

[Bullypulpit]

I have posted the facts how Dems defended Cold Cash even after the story of the video of him taking the bribe and the FBI finding $90,000 is his freezer

Care to dispute those facts?

Not having seen these 'facts', I can only say that if they were truly defending him, they aren't any better. Give me a link to your 'facts', and I'll get back to you.

 

[maineman]

As I can recall, democrats never "defended" Jefferson. They all said what I have said: he is innocent until proven guilty. And clearly, his constituents seem to feel that way too.

I really would love to see quotes where democrats defended Jefferson's right to take bribes, or where they said he was perfectly justified in taking them.

Seriously: what "defense" of Jefferson did any democrat offer for any of his alleged illegal actions?

maybe RSR can post quotes that disprove my assertion.

 

[CockySOB]

As I can recall, democrats never "defended" Jefferson. They all said what I have said: he is innocent until proven guilty. And clearly, his constituents seem to feel that way too.

I really would love to see quotes where democrats defended Jefferson's right to take bribes, or where they said he was perfectly justified in taking them.

Seriously: what "defense" of Jefferson did any democrat offer for any of his alleged illegal actions?

maybe RSR can post quotes that disprove my assertion.

Odd how that phrase comes up when the subject is a Democrat, yet gets shelved in favor of opinion and speculation when a Republican is the subject.

And yes, in the USA the accused is innocent until proven guilty. including Jefferson.

 

[maineman]

Odd how that phrase comes up when the subject is a Democrat, yet gets shelved in favor of opinion and speculation when a Republican is the subject.

And yes, in the USA the accused is innocent until proven guilty. including Jefferson.

and can you find any evidence of MY railing against republicans DEFENDING Cunningham or Delay when they were first indicted?

I'll answer that for you: I believe you could search the entire internet and every message board on which I have ever posted and you will not find one single instance of my castigating republicans for NOT throwing any of their unconvicted colleagues under the bus.

 

[CockySOB]

and can you find any evidence of MY railing against republicans DEFENDING Cunningham or Delay when they were first indicted?

I'll answer that for you: I believe you could search the entire internet and every message board on which I have ever posted and you will not find one single instance of my castigating republicans for NOT throwing any of their unconvicted colleagues under the bus.

I was thinking more of Libby, Cheney and GWB regarding the Plame brouhaha.... Lots of speculation there about her legal status under the law, yet absolutely zero facts.

 

[maineman]

I really do not think that her "legal" status was as important as her actual status. The DCI said she was covert and that her outing was a loss to the agency. The men you mentioned were willing to throw away a valuable CIA asset - one that was working hard on Iranian nuclear issues - for political gain.

That disgusts me...and I really don't understand people who want to rationalize and marginalize that betrayal.

 

[CockySOB]

I really do not think that her "legal" status was as important as her actual status. The DCI said she was covert and that her outing was a loss to the agency. The men you mentioned were willing to throw away a valuable CIA asset - one that was working hard on Iranian nuclear issues - for political gain.

That disgusts me...and I really don't understand people who want to rationalize and marginalize that betrayal.

Huh? So you're saying that the rule of law isn't important to you? You're fine with lynching someone based on an opinion you formed sans any facts?

If you can prove in court that someone DID violate the IIPA, by all means they need prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But what you continue to neglect are the last three words there - "of the law."

 

[maineman]

Huh? So you're saying that the rule of law isn't important to you? You're fine with lynching someone based on an opinion you formed sans any facts?

If you can prove in court that someone DID violate the IIPA, by all means they need prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But what you continue to neglect are the last three words there - "of the law."

again...whether or not she was covert as technically defined by the IIPA is not the issue for me. There is plenty of factual evidence to show that members of the Bush administration revealed her identity. there is the statement from the DCI himself that her outing was detrimental to our intelligence operation.

 

[maineman]

and I have never squawked that anyone should be prosecuted for a violation of the IIPA. I have always only said that her outing in fact damaged our intelligence efforts...and the outing was done by the Bush administration... and either they were evil and traitorous in a nearly feral sort of way, or they were inept and bumbling. either way, the actions of members of the Bush administration damaged our intelligence efforts - and no one from the administration has EVER apologized to the American people, let alone to the CIA or Valerie Plame

 

[Bullypulpit]

As I can recall, democrats never "defended" Jefferson. They all said what I have said: he is innocent until proven guilty. And clearly, his constituents seem to feel that way too.

I really would love to see quotes where democrats defended Jefferson's right to take bribes, or where they said he was perfectly justified in taking them.

Seriously: what "defense" of Jefferson did any democrat offer for any of his alleged illegal actions?

maybe RSR can post quotes that disprove my assertion.

Ahhh...Support for the rule of law and due process constitute complicity to RSR and his fellow travelers. How dense of me!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

As I can recall, democrats never "defended" Jefferson. They all said what I have said: he is innocent until proven guilty. And clearly, his constituents seem to feel that way too.

I really would love to see quotes where democrats defended Jefferson's right to take bribes, or where they said he was perfectly justified in taking them.

Seriously: what "defense" of Jefferson did any democrat offer for any of his alleged illegal actions?

maybe RSR can post quotes that disprove my assertion.

Ya Pelosi didn't want to assign him to any important positions after firing the senior Dem she didn't like.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I really do not think that her "legal" status was as important as her actual status. The DCI said she was covert and that her outing was a loss to the agency. The men you mentioned were willing to throw away a valuable CIA asset - one that was working hard on Iranian nuclear issues - for political gain.

That disgusts me...and I really don't understand people who want to rationalize and marginalize that betrayal.

You have NO evidence those men did anything of the kind. If you do present it. As I recall NO ONE was charged with outing her, not even Libby.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

and I have never squawked that anyone should be prosecuted for a violation of the IIPA. I have always only said that her outing in fact damaged our intelligence efforts...and the outing was done by the Bush administration... and either they were evil and traitorous in a nearly feral sort of way, or they were inept and bumbling. either way, the actions of members of the Bush administration damaged our intelligence efforts - and no one from the administration has EVER apologized to the American people, let alone to the CIA or Valerie Plame

Wait a minute, earlier you were saying that you DID NOT say anyone in the admin outed her.... which is it?