Yes but Bush has love for Jesus.  Doesn’t that count for anything?

...a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury…

...and of course the Bush Regime would NEVER prosecute anyone who didn’t have access to the full rights of the legal system.  Because we all know how sacred the Constitution and the rule of law and due process is to this Administration, riiiiight???

Unfair trial, my fat, white, dimpled patootie.  Gitmo is too good for these traitors.

Yep… the impeachment thing is what prompted me to start blogging in the first place.  And here’s what I said today on the Libby thing.

Glrf.

Iceland.  I’m thinking Iceland.
I was considering France, but then they elected Sarkozy.
Iceland seems nice.

I heard this on Radio 4’s “Today” programme (where politicians go to get beaten up). They never gave the reason. Unbelievable. What’s worse is the Republicans who want him pardoned. Why? Given many politicians are lawyers do they not understand the concept of “broke the law”? 

We all have our suspicions why he did what he did- pity there is a whitewash in the Whitehouse.  (Hmmm, time to break out the TARDIS and ask Nixon if he needs a speech writer...)

Hey, Libby did it all for love of Jesus and America.  Don’t go badmouthing our true patriots.  People like Libby are the only reason Bin Laden isn’t President.  Etc.

The law and government sometimes conflict, but what you’ve gotta understand is that the law is a tool of the government, created by the government, right or wrong it’s only meant to apply to those who the center of power wishes (some are immune) - it’s a tool for controlling those outside the power hierarchy, keeping them from gaining influence and thus becoming a threat from inside the country.
In ‘democracy’ the government has to answer to citizens, so law takes on the secondary role of controlling crime, a different power heirarchy which backbites by asking for laws over itself - it backbites because majority verdict allows punishment of others on the same level of individual power (as voters), by combining individual power into a collective, regardless of the morality of the decision.

If a government can’t prevent internal revolution (whatever faction), it’ll lose power before the election even happens, so holding onto military power is higher prioity than crime, and in a way a criminal gang in itself is much like a weak government at war with the police, while managing and distributing assets, land and labour as it deems fit - if a gang siezed undisputed power militarily over an area it could declare itself a state- indeed, when a government doesn’t recognise another that’s it’s way of saying “we’ll treet you like a criminal gang, and so will distribute your assets differently, and so will be at war with you”

No trees in Iceland. Long nights in winter, and the booze is expensive.

I actually get where GW is coming from on this issue. He does not want to see his friend and co-worker “ Turned Out “ in the Pen.

Yo Bitch !!!

From Dispatches from the Culture Wars…

This whole thing is hypocritical on so many levels that it almost boggles the mind. Let’s detail them…

If you’re a military vet and you commit perjury and obstruction of justice, you must spend a minimum of 33 months in prison for your crimes and that sentence cannot be reduced at all because to do so would result in people who commit the same crime being treated disparately by the legal system. But…

If you’re a Bush aide and you commit perjury and obstruction of justice, a 30 month sentence is not only too much despite being on the low end of the Federal sentencing guidelines, it has to be eliminated completely. Because of your long record of service to the country. And the fact that this results in those convicted of the same crime being treated disparately.....I’m sorry, what was the question? Brief? What brief? We don’t know what you’re talking about (sticking fingers in ears) LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA.