Misconduct in Sen Stevens Prosecution

[printcraft]

OK, let's assume they were trumped up. Why would the Bush Justice Department go ahead with the case. Oh let guess, he wanted another Democrat in the Senate, right? You think that the prosecutor had no bosses (Republican ones) to answer to? I wonder how it is that those other federal prosecutors all got fired for supposedly either prosecuting (or not prosecuting) cases in line with the Bush administration policies? Sounds like the Republicans had the power to reign in a "rogue Democrat" if they wanted too.

.............

Democrat activist prosecutor. Pressing just before the election.
Not really accidental timing.
And a bunch of dumbass go along to get along Republicans not stopping the shi* at the time. Power to reign in but NOT THE POLITICAL WILL.

If they would have put a smack down on the prosecutor at that time
it would have been a "OH LOOK, the Republicans are abusing power to win"
all over fuc**ng MSNBS with keith olberman.

 

[CarmelHP]

Clinton fired every US Attorney when he came in without a peep, Bush fired 8 and the lefties like finity went freaking nuts as if the fabric of the Republic had been shred by that act. Now it's "Bush's Justice Dept." Talk about denial finity, is there no craven, despicable act that your fellow travellers engage in that you will not defend?

 

[finity]

Nobody would have cared if Bush fired all the prosecutors when he came into office. That was pretty much standard practice. It was the timing & (at least perceived) reasons that they were fired that was the problem.

It was Bush's Justice Dept. You don't seem to be the one who should accuse others of being in denial.

Read my posts in this thread & tell me exactly where I defended any "craven, despicable act". Didn't happen.

It seems your obsession with Obama has clouded your reasoning skills.

 

[CarmelHP]

Nobody would have cared if Bush fired all the prosecutors when he came into office. That was pretty much standard practice. It was the timing & (at least perceived) reasons that they were fired that was the problem.

It was Bush's Justice Dept. You don't seem to be the one who should accuse others of being in denial.

Read my posts in this thread & tell me exactly where I defended any "craven, despicable act". Didn't happen.

It seems your obsession with Obama has clouded your reasoning skills.

Why did Clinton fire the DA's, their shoe size? It was within Bush's discretion to fire them for any reason, but your sniveling, craven fellow travelers thought they could make hay out of it with their lap dog press...and did.

So, tell us how Obama is "defending the rest of the Bill of Rights" by making an enemies list of gun owners and constitutionalists? I'm sure you'll defend it, there is nothing he can do that you won't whip up an apologia for.

 

[finity]

Why did Clinton fire the DA's, their shoe size?

Maybe. It was his right to do so as you say below. That is a better reason than to have the appearance of having fired select prosecutors for the reason that it had something to do with politically motivated investigations.

It was within Bush's discretion to fire them for any reason, but your sniveling, craven fellow travelers thought they could make hay out of it with their lap dog press...and did.

So what your saying is that your pissed because they were successful in letting "the people" know about a potential miscarriage of justice & that there was actually a popular backlash against it contributing to the Republicans overwhelming defeat in 2006 & 2008? OK, it's good that we cleared that up.

So, tell us how Obama is "defending the rest of the Bill of Rights" by making an enemies list of gun owners and constitutionalists? I'm sure you'll defend it, there is nothing he can do that you won't whip up an apologia for.

Well here goes.

All of this assumes you are talking about the recent DHS report on the increase in right-wing extremism. If not then exactly what are you talking about so I can answer more effectively.

There was actually another report that was released at the end of January by the same DHS about "left-wing extremists" also. Both reports seem to have been commissioned during the previous administration & were part of an "ongoing review of extremism on both ends of the political spectrum".

So do you have a problem with "enemies lists" in general or was it just because you thought (wrongly) that they were just picking on right-wingers?

Have you actually read the report? I found the word "constitution" in the report once referring to DC v. Heller & the 2A. There was nothing about "constitutionalists".

I did find a reference to people who were in favor of state control versus federal control but you already know that the federal government does have control over some things per the Constitution & there are, in fact, groups who don't like the federal government having any control at all, in opposition to the Constitution. There was no reference to the 10A either.

I do however, remember that several years ago after 9/11, that there was a directive/memo/something of the sort circulating among LE to be on the lookout for extremists. Those were described as having a lot of written information about the Constitution & those that quoted things from the Constitution or stated things like "I know my rights". I'm sure you remember that don't you & were sufficiently outraged. I know I was. If you don't remember I'll try to find it for you (& you weren't sufficiently outraged, IMHO).

Nowhere in the report did it list "gun-owners" in general as a threat. There was actually a reference to "law-abiding Americans". Let me quote it directly:

Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred rightwing extremists—as well as law-abiding Americans—to make bulk purchases of ammunition. These shortages have increased the cost of ammunition, further exacerbating rightwing extremist paranoia and leading to further stockpiling activity. Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move at this time.

Notice the bolded references to "law-abiding Americans" stand in contrast to "rightwing extremists". The report acknowledges there is a difference. There was even no judgement passed on the last assertion that buying guns was a "wise move".

There was a reference to "right-wing extremists groups" (hence the name of the report).

Many rightwing extremist groups perceive recent gun control legislation as a threat to their right to bear arms and in response have increased weapons and ammunition stockpiling, as well as renewed participation in paramilitary training exercises. Such activity, combined with a heightened level of extremist paranoia, has the potential to facilitate criminal activity and violence.

Notice it says "has the potential", which it does. It also says "combined with a heightened level of paranoia", which is also true.

The report didn't say that all "gun-owners" who stockpile ammunition or get training were members of a "right wing extremist group". If you made that connection then that's your problem (or shoud I say 'paranoia').

There are right wing extremist groups who are anti-government & are stockpiling ammunition that could lead to crime & violence. Those are all undeniable facts.

 

[CarmelHP]

More leftist deceit from finity. The DHS report was actual leftist GROUPS known to have engaged in terrorism in the past, like ELF. It wasn't a broad brush indictment of an entire segment of the population. It mentioned no rightwing extremist GROUPS and lumped (even in your cherry picked quote) as rightwing extremists everybody who believed certain perfectly legal things.

It's amazing finity, no, not amazing, disgusting, that you could rant for hours about Bush's treatment of foreign Muslim terrorists oversees but you can't work up even a tas, tsk for Obamy's burgeoning domestic surveillance apparatus.

 

[hornadylnl]

All of this assumes you are talking about the recent DHS report on the increase in right-wing extremism. If not then exactly what are you talking about so I can answer more effectively.

There was actually another report that was released at the end of January by the same DHS about "left-wing extremists" also. Both reports seem to have been commissioned during the previous administration & were part of an "ongoing review of extremism on both ends of the political spectrum".

So do you have a problem with "enemies lists" in general or was it just because you thought (wrongly) that they were just picking on right-wingers?

Have you actually read the report? I found the word "constitution" in the report once referring to DC v. Heller & the 2A. There was nothing about "constitutionalists".

I did find a reference to people who were in favor of state control versus federal control but you already know that the federal government does have control over some things per the Constitution & there are, in fact, groups who don't like the federal government having any control at all, in opposition to the Constitution. There was no reference to the 10A either.

I do however, remember that several years ago after 9/11, that there was a directive/memo/something of the sort circulating among LE to be on the lookout for extremists. Those were described as having a lot of written information about the Constitution & those that quoted things from the Constitution or stated things like "I know my rights". I'm sure you remember that don't you & were sufficiently outraged. I know I was. If you don't remember I'll try to find it for you (& you weren't sufficiently outraged, IMHO).

Nowhere in the report did it list "gun-owners" in general as a threat. There was actually a reference to "law-abiding Americans". Let me quote it directly:

[/color][/font][/color][/font]

Notice the bolded references to "law-abiding Americans" stand in contrast to "rightwing extremists". The report acknowledges there is a difference. There was even no judgement passed on the last assertion that buying guns was a "wise move".

There was a reference to "right-wing extremists groups" (hence the name of the report).

[/color][/font][/color][/font]

Notice it says "has the potential", which it does. It also says "combined with a heightened level of paranoia", which is also true.

The report didn't say that all "gun-owners" who stockpile ammunition or get training were members of a "right wing extremist group". If you made that connection then that's your problem (or shoud I say 'paranoia').

There are right wing extremist groups who are anti-government & are stockpiling ammunition that could lead to crime & violence. Those are all undeniable facts.

Oh finity, I wondered where you've been hiding. I've read the report. Are you expecting me to believe that if Bush's homeland security chief issued a report about Earth Liberation Front and their propensity to violence and it mentioned greenies who recycle and plant trees could be recruited by ELF, you wouldn't see that as an attack on all environmentalists? The report didn't specifically say that pro lifers, gun owners, ammo buyers, veterans, etc. were prone to violence but the insinuation was so thick you could cut it with a knife. They also had to throw in that we are a bunch of racists and are prone to violence because the obamessiah got elected. Basically, if you didn't vote for Obama, your name is on a list.

So finity, how does it feel to be a right wing extremist prone to violence? After all, you're a gun owner, aren't you?

 

[finity]

Oh finity, I wondered where you've been hiding. I've read the report. Are you expecting me to believe that if Bush's homeland security chief issued a report about Earth Liberation Front and their propensity to violence and it mentioned greenies who recycle and plant trees could be recruited by ELF, you wouldn't see that as an attack on all environmentalists? The report didn't specifically say that pro lifers, gun owners, ammo buyers, veterans, etc. were prone to violence but the insinuation was so thick you could cut it with a knife. They also had to throw in that we are a bunch of racists and are prone to violence because the obamessiah got elected. Basically, if you didn't vote for Obama, your name is on a list.

So finity, how does it feel to be a right wing extremist prone to violence? After all, you're a gun owner, aren't you?

If they said that "greenies who recycle and plant trees could be recruited by ELF" I'd agree because they could be. Thats where ELF members come from. If they joined ELF & participated in illegal behavior, they would be criminals. Those are the facts.

Just like its a fact that the groups in the report recruit from those types of populations. It didn't say everybody in those groups were extremists just that's where right-wing extremist groups get their members.

Do you have a guilty consience (SP?)? Unless you are a member of a violent right-wing extremist group that performs illegal acts they weren't talking about you.

 

[finity]

The DHS report was actual leftist GROUPS known to have engaged in terrorism in the past, like ELF. It wasn't a broad brush indictment of an entire segment of the population. It mentioned no rightwing extremist GROUPS and lumped (even in your cherry picked quote) as rightwing extremists everybody who believed certain perfectly legal things.

Would it have made you FEEL better to have them include specific groups of right-wing extremists? OK, if it makes you FEEL better write them in your own copy.

It wouldn't have changed the facts or the truths in the report.

Right-wing extremist groups (fill in your favorite right-wing extremist group name) do in fact recruit from the specified sectors of society. They don't recruit from non-gun owners. They don't recruit from non-racists. They don't recruit from non-disillusioned veterans. Etc., etc.

The report didn't say all those segments of society are extremists. It didn't even say or suggest that they were PRONE to violence or extremism. IT JUST SAID THATS WHERE THEY RECRUIT MEMBERS FROM & TO BE ON THE LOOK OUT FOR POSSIBLE INCREASED RECRUITMENT.

Those are the facts. Sorry if it makes you FEEL bad.

 

[hornadylnl]

I'm sure you wouldn't be upset if the Bush DHS issued a report that lists every person who didn't vote for him as a potential threat, you and your buddies like Garafalo and the other leftist ilk wouldn't have been upset at all. This report puts everyone who didn't vote for Obama on a "list" as a potential terror threat. I guess we should put you on the same list as Bill Ayres.

Yeah, Finity, only those on the right can be racist. You acknowledge that only specific groups of people were listed on the leftwing report and that the rightwing report includes everyone. Why is one report list specific groups and the other report lists everyone who didn't vote for Obama?

If you are a gunowner, than you must be a right wing extremist. Or are you only here to troll?

 

[bullet293]

poor old crook