Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
The Biggest Story is NOT the Indictment
Topic Started: Oct 28 2005, 08:14 PM (802 Views)
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
Quote:
 
Since when does an approval rating constitute innocence or guilt?

Maybe they figured that they didn't have the support of the American public who were for the most part heartily sick of the whole circus?


An approval rating makes a huge difference in Congressional votes, as you well know, Jolly. And impeachment is just a vote. Unlike in a trial, where the judge can set aside a guilty verdict if there was insufficient evidence to support it, the Senate's vote is the first, last, and final word. And it's public, so the Senators know that they will be held accountable for their votes.

I guarantee you that, if Clinton had been getting gutter-level approval ratings like W, the vote would have been very different.

By the way, John, I was thinking about it earlier. The biggest difference between impeachment and indictment is the potential consequences. Impeachment, if convicted, removes you from office; indictment, if convicted, puts you at risk of time in the big house, and fines. Beyond that, in a trial after indictment, you must be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; the only standard in an impeachment trial is each Senator's own conscience. And, as I just noted above, there is no check to make sure that the Senate follows a legal standard; they can impeach a President simply because they want him out of office, without regard to any evidence one way or another.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
My sense was that the Republicans were not interested in convicting Clinton and forcing him from office, but merely embarrassing him with impeachment proceedings. Had he been convicted, Gore would have taken office and would have had the opportunity to look "presidential" going into the campaigns. The Republicans were not about to let that happen.

Just my take on it.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
QuirtEvans
Oct 30 2005, 08:34 PM

By the way, John, I was thinking about it earlier. The biggest difference between impeachment and indictment is the potential consequences. Impeachment, if convicted, removes you from office; indictment, if convicted, puts you at risk of time in the big house, and fines.

I think the biggest difference is your dance card.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nina
Senior Carp
I'm wondering... if Plame didn't fit the definition of "covert" or whatever the legal requirement is, then she didn't. No one could charge Libby (or anyone) under that statute.

But surely it is illegal to leak the name of a classified member of the CIA, even if that individual doesn't fit the "covert" definition required by the treason statute? (I'm pretty sure it's treason, right?) I mean there must be some penalty for leaking classified information, even if it doesn't rise to the level of treason?

I'm just asking... I really don't know.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Leaking classified information is not a crime as such. It is a non-disclosure type of offense that carries penalties of its own but you can not be charged under the criminal code for revealing classified information alone.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jack Frost
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
Nina
Oct 30 2005, 11:13 PM
I'm wondering... if Plame didn't fit the definition of "covert" or whatever the legal requirement is, then she didn't. No one could charge Libby (or anyone) under that statute.

But surely it is illegal to leak the name of a classified member of the CIA, even if that individual doesn't fit the "covert" definition required by the treason statute? (I'm pretty sure it's treason, right?) I mean there must be some penalty for leaking classified information, even if it doesn't rise to the level of treason?

I'm just asking... I really don't know.

The specific requirement of the statute would be that Libby KNEW she was covert when he outed her. There is no question that she was covert...she was. All the evidence I have seen indicates Libby knew she was CIA but nothing says he knew she was covert.

In fact, she was. But if Libby did not know it at the time of the leak, he did not violate that law.

jf


Quote:
 
Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
No, she was not covert under the statute because she had not been out of the country within the past five years.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3