12 May 13
Originally posted by normbenignAnd even at that, Nixon did not face any jail time.
When Nixon was caught in his 2nd term covering up a sloppy burglary, there was bipartisan outrage. These days, it is doubtful that any President would resign or be impeached, because his party is solidified in support. The House Impeached Bill Clinton, but the Senate refused to convict.
The same situation exists today, so that even if Obama were im ...[text shortened]... e brought to light, and even if the top guy isn't touchable, the practices ought to be stopped.
Again, another example of a system gone awry without checks and balances. It is then no wonder that these scandEls keep popping up. They have no fear and can do as they please with impunity.
12 May 13
1 edit
Something else also troubles me.
During the Iran/Contra investigation the press had 24/7 coverage of the hearings of Oliver North. In fact, it made him a celebrity.
Where is the coverage of the Bengazi affair?
Obama drones will insist that the media coverage of the Iran/Contra scandEl was justifiable as where the Bengazi affair is not. If so, who went to jail? Who was punished?
12 May 13
Originally posted by whodeyRe Iran/Contra:
Something else also troubles me.
During the Iran/Contra investigation the press had 24/7 coverage of the hearings of Oliver North. In fact, it made him a celebrity.
Where is the coverage of the Bengazi affair?
Obama drones will insist that the media coverage of the Iran/Contra scandEl was justifiable as where the Bengazi affair is not. If so, who went to jail? Who was punished?
After Independent Counsel Lawrence E. Walsh’s appointment in December 1986, 14 persons were charged with criminal offenses. Eleven persons were convicted, but two convictions were overturned on appeal. Two persons were pardoned before trial and one case was dismissed when the Bush Administration declined to declassify information necessary for trial. On December 24, 1992, President Bush pardoned Caspar W. Weinberger, Duane R. Clarridge, Clair E. George, Elliott Abrams, Alan D. Fiers, Jr., and Robert C. McFarlane.
http://middleeast.about.com/od/usmideastpolicy/a/me081109f.htm
Casper Weinberger was the Secretary of Defense and he was charged with 5 felonies. He was scheduled to go on trial and faced 20 years in prison.
12 May 13
Originally posted by whodeyNixon resigned the Presidency! He escaped prison by Gerald Ford's action. Most Americans thought further punishment to be "piling on".
And even at that, Nixon did not face any jail time.
Again, another example of a system gone awry without checks and balances. It is then no wonder that these scandEls keep popping up. They have no fear and can do as they please with impunity.
I don't know what you can suggest that would prevent the abuse of power and the confidence of Presidents that they can cover up scandals.
12 May 13
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperThe Bush administration took swift and positive actions recognizing attacks on embassies as attacks on the homeland.
No.
Would your opinion change on all the embassy attacks that took place under Bush change if you were one of the Americans killed?
It was the Clinton administration that treated such attacks as "criminal violence".
12 May 13
Originally posted by no1marauderSuch is the power of the Presidency, and so it probably will not change the way in which Presidents act in spurious manners. They are confident in their ability to distribute the blame, and to get their pals off.
Re Iran/Contra:
After Independent Counsel Lawrence E. Walsh’s appointment in December 1986, 14 persons were charged with criminal offenses. Eleven persons were convicted, but two convictions were overturned on appeal. Two persons were pardoned before trial and one case was dismissed when the Bush Administration declined to declassify information neces ...[text shortened]... nd he was charged with 5 felonies. He was scheduled to go on trial and faced 20 years in prison.
They tend to justify these actions by the notion that the people involved where doing their patriotic duty. Some probably actually believed this to be so.
12 May 13
Originally posted by normbenignIs that why there was so many under Bush?
The Bush administration took swift and positive actions recognizing attacks on embassies as attacks on the homeland.
It was the Clinton administration that treated such attacks as "criminal violence".
12 May 13
1 edit
Originally posted by normbenignFine. So people are found guilty, only to be pardoned.
Nixon resigned the Presidency! He escaped prison by Gerald Ford's action. Most Americans thought further punishment to be "piling on".
I don't know what you can suggest that would prevent the abuse of power and the confidence of Presidents that they can cover up scandals.
Big woopie!!!
Now where is the justice? Where are the checks and balances?
12 May 13
Originally posted by no1marauderAs I said, there are no real consequences for these guys. They all end up with a get out of jail free card.
Re Iran/Contra:
After Independent Counsel Lawrence E. Walsh’s appointment in December 1986, 14 persons were charged with criminal offenses. Eleven persons were convicted, but two convictions were overturned on appeal. Two persons were pardoned before trial and one case was dismissed when the Bush Administration declined to declassify information neces ...[text shortened]... nd he was charged with 5 felonies. He was scheduled to go on trial and faced 20 years in prison.
My guess is that the guilty decisions were just for show.
12 May 13
Originally posted by whodeyI agree. That's the way it is. Better that in the past there was some accountability, than the present situation where they circle the wagons, and nobody even has to answer hard questions.
Fine. So people are found guilty, only to be pardoned.
Big woopie!!!
Now where is the justice? Where are the checks and balances?
Originally posted by normbenign"and nobody even has to answer hard questions."
I agree. That's the way it is. Better that in the past there was some accountability, than the present situation where they circle the wagons, and nobody even has to answer hard questions.
That makes perfect sense considering there's been nine congressional hearings asking hard questions.
I do understand your frustration. Americans were killed in Benghazi and it's frustrating for you that no matter how hard you Conservatives have tried, you still haven't been successful in exploiting their deaths.
12 May 13
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperI am a liberal. I am a Democrate. Begazi is a scandal. Hopefully a full and transparent investigation can be conducted so our embassies will be properly protected. Obama, Regan, Bush, Clinton ... the lot of them are humans. None of them are gods. Some of them are far more to my liking than others. Stop demonizing and idolizing politiians.
Bengazi isn't a scandal. It's a "scandal." It exists only in the fantasy of you right wingers who gleefully exploit the deaths of Americans to drum up "controversy."