Attorney General tells ABA: Not every crime is a crime
By Steve Benen Tuesday Aug 12, 2008 1:00pmIt’s been about two weeks since the Justice Department’s inspector general released a report on the unprecedented politicization of employment practices at the Justice Department. The IG report concluded that disgraced officials such as Monica Goodling and former chief of staff D. Kyle Sampson “routinely broke the law” by applying political litmus tests, even when hiring prosecutors and immigration judges.
Since then, no one in the Bush administration has wanted to talk about the scandal. The good news is, Attorney General Michael Mukasey addressed the subject this morning in a speech to the American Bar Association. The bad news is, what he had to say was far from encouraging.
Initially, it seemed like Mukasey was, at long last, prepared to be candid and forthcoming. The problem came when the nation’s chief law-enforcement officer addressed what he was prepared to do as a consequence of the DoJ’s rampant lawbreaking.
Mukasey said he will not prosecute the DoJ employees who repeatedly and flagrantly violated the law.
Attorney General Michael Mukasey said Tuesday that the Department of Justice would not pursue criminal charges against former employees implicated in an internal investigation on politicized hiring practices.
“Where there is evidence of criminal wrongdoing, we vigorously investigate it,” Mukasey said in a speech at the American Bar Association. “And where there is enough evidence to charge someone with a crime, we vigorously prosecute. But not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime.”
Wait, not every violation of the law is a crime? Isn’t that the definition of a “crime”?
Login or Register to post comments.
Great so I guess illegal immigration is now not a crime? Because I have been listening to the talking heads for the last fews years who have told me that illegal immigrants where inherently bad because they broke the law.
I can think of tons of things I'm going to have to do now that now every crime is a crime.
And red is blue and up is down in GOP land.
Up is Down
Black is White
War is Peace
violation of a law by a republican is ok.
and not every AG is ethical or fit for the job, but he won't tell you that.
Jon Stewart should have asked Chuck Schumer about this scandal when he was on the Daily Show last week.
In a word, IOKIYAR.
Man, I hope we catch every one of these assholes in this administartion having oral sex with a consenting adult in privacy.
THEN, this nightmare can finally be over !
Well, you heard it here first: not all violations of the law are crimes.
I mean, it's not like anyone can show that the president lied about an immaterial fact in a deposition for a civil case that was dismissed on its (lack of) merits without reference to the president's testimony.
In this case, apparently, Monica Goodling (like Lynndie England before her) just took it upon herself without notifying any of her superior who would naturally have been shocked, SHOCKED!, to discover what she was doing, to singlehandedly corrupt the Justice Department under the nose of the Attorney General who had no indication whatsoever that anything was awry.
Damn those bad apples!
He's implying that only civil wrongs were committed.
Jesus...
IllinoisDem @ 6:
Chucky has some dirt on his hands here. He and Jon probably agreed backsatge not to bring it up.
He might be right, actually.
The top cop in the U.S. can spew this bullshit to protect his cronies, because most Americans will never know he said it...and a majority of the rest will agree because their ignorant...the rest will be a small minority that can't do anything about it anyway.
This is great news! I can't wait until it becomes part of case law so that I can use it someday! "Yes, your honor, my client did indeed kill the victim with malice aforethought, which we do not contest, but I'm certain that you're aware that not every violation of the law is a crime, so I move for dismissal of all charges." Holy cow. What have we become?
I'm appalled.
Consigliere!
The law stops here.
Where exactly does Mukasey draw the line?
But not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime.
That is -- assumably -- only possible if the violator did not know s/he was committing a crime - but even then it's a stretch. "But officer, I didn't know the speed limit was 35 - it was 70 just a mile back", and you still get the ticket, or arrested.
The bottom line is that Mukasey is himself merely a tool who has sold his soul to the devil long ago.
How about this instead?
But not every criminal, or even every violator of the law, is a Bushie.
It's time to also hold accountable the shills like Schumer and Feinstein.
This is not about 'counsel the president feels comfortable with' - it's not my fault the guy's an imbecile who needs his hand held and has to have surrogate mommies like Harriet Miers frosting his cupcakes.
This is about confirming someone who will do their job.
Mukasey's only job is keeping members of the Bush Administration out of jail. I say we borrow one of Uncle Dick's new Six Flags Over Halliburton theme parks and have us some waterboardin' parties. Yeeehah. And if they don't want to talk, we can take them on Uncle Dick's Duck Hunting Adventure.
I'd say we should make 'em stand atop boxes and wear underwear on their heads, but they're Republicans - they might like it.
You have GOT to be fucking kidding me!!!!
Mukasey must go!
SORRY CHARLIE...THE SPECIFIC WORDING OF THE LAW IS... a violation of the law by a democrat
Well Bush got his moneys worth, didn't he, this man Mukasey is one worthless tool.
Well if this is a legal precedent, I'm gonna go outside the White House and smoke a Marley! Put that one in your pipe and smoke it, Mukasey!1
So is he saying that Goodling, et al. lacked the requisite intent? Or is he saying that they were ignorant of the law?
Can the lawyers hired by Goodling be fired? We routinly reopen cases when it is found out that a DA or cop was crooked, so why cont we get rid of the lawyers hired by Goodling. I'm not talking about wholesale firing of every lawyer hired during the Bush admin, although......, but just the ones that were hired by her. I'm sure that there are some rules that govern just this situation, how do they work and are they something that can be done by the courts or by the next admin?
BTW where I come from what Mukasey is doing by not going after the people that committed this crime called is obsruction of justice, or am I wrong on this also?
Shadowgm Hussein @ 19:
Obama short-lister, Evan Bayh, voted to approve Mike "Snotty" Mukasey, in case it has escaped your atttention...
29% of Real Muricans' Agree
http://tinyurl.com/65gbdj
I swear, the a-holes and crooks in Bush's regime aren't even trying to sound sane or rational anymore. This kind of doublespeak is so absurd that even George Orwell would say it's too far out there to be believable. Any minute now, one of Bush's cronies is going to say that "2+2=5" with a straight face--and the mainstream media will ignore it, or agree with it, while the rest of America scratches its head and tried to figure out this new math.
I sincerely hope Obama wins and changes things, but I'm afraid THIS is the new America in which we live. The Democrats have gone along with this kind of insane word-twisting (and have done it themselves--depends on "what the meaning of the word 'is' is", remember?) and I have little hope that Obama can correct America's course.
We've fallen ass-over-teakettle down the rabbit hole (to swipe a phrase from Harlan Ellison) and landed right in the middle of 1984.
Cut him some slack, he's the Attorney General of the Justice Department, not the Attorney General of Merriam-Webster. Leave the definitions to the definition guys, leave the legalesin' to the experts. Learning what 'crime' means isn't in his purview.
http://thesebastards.blogspot.com
Paul B. @ 28:
The Dems have made it worse by doing NOTHING.
jeff @ 25:
If they were 'career' hires, rather than 'political' hires, they're safe as fuking houses.
If Obama makes it, he should collate and distribute through the whole federal Govt a list of all Bushite "career" hires, with the tacit instructions to shun them, fuck widdem (super-glue their phones to the cradles, change the keys on keyboards, pee in their water bottles, crap in their lunch boxes, whatever) and otherwise make their lives living hell...
Attorney General tells ABA:
Mucousy declines to bat.
Is this his themesong?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0GWIOjCyw0
So, if I kill someone but it is an accident (or at least looks like one)...I haven't committed a crime. Yaaah...no more negligent homicide.
What the fuck makes my comments worthy of moderation?
i wanted to see more heat on goodling hoping she would talk more guess not.
Liberal AND Proud @ 33:
Gee...what does the judge say? "Bummer....you're free to go?"
Shadowgm Hussein @ 19:
This is the ONLY reason I'm registered as a Dem, so I can vote for a different Dem in the senatorial primaries and hopefully kick Schumer out. Tried that with Hillary and it didn't work, the idiots wanted the corporatist tool instead of the Dem that actually suggested being honest about Israel. I just hope my paperwork for ex-pat voting didn't get purged, f'ing republicks though I did send it in twice to hopefully prevent that.
HEY SCHUMER! get your arse over here. You got some 'splainin' to do.
constituent @ 34:
I really want to make some snarky comment about her no longer being in any position to talk...but I won't.
We're not going to prosecute them. They may have violated the law with their politicized hiring, but not every violation is a crime, as demonstrated by the fact that torts and contract breaches are violations of law but not crimes.
In other words, we're not going to prosecute Goodling and Sampson for their torts and contract breaches committed in the scope of their employment.
Does that clear it all up? I thought so.
"Not...every violation of the law, is a crime.” -- Mukasey
And now Mukasey proves that not every crime is a violation of the law. Undoubtedly, he's not violating the law in deciding not to prosecute, but he is committing a crime. And it's a crime against the Constitution and the entire country.
Mukasey will be remembered as the greatest AG since Alberto Gonzales.
Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein owe the country an apology.
Jo @ 37:
He was voting his 'international' constituency, Feinstein, too. Bayh, Carper, one Nelson, and Landrieu also. And Loserman...
Sun of a beetch! And people thought I was scary!
Good thing stealing elections isn't a crime, either! Otherwise that
uppityelitist black man could give the Republicans some trouble this fall...Wait, not every violation of the law is a crime? Isn’t that the definition of a “crime”?
The son of a bitch is just playing with words. He probably knows he'll enrage the netroots with the statement.
Technically, there are many violations of the law that are not crimes. Breach of contract, for instance, necessarily "violates the law," but it not a crime for which the breaching party can be punished. Negligently injuring someone is tortuous conduct, and thus a "violation of the law," but not punishable as a crime.
And if the talking heads of the chattering/hobnobbing class decide to yammer about this, that's how they'll defend the statement.
Of course, it distracts from what Mukasey really means -- what he knows he really means -- that not all technically criminal acts rise to the level of prosecutable crimes. And in his infinite wisdom, he'll use his executive discretion to determine whether a criminal act should be prosecuted. (And the yammerers will likely defend that kind of discretion as well, ultimately arguing that Mukasey has the right to abuse his discretion.)
As for where he draws the line, it's simple: Did the person in question break the law in order to further a sinister Bushevik agenda? If no, the person is a criminal. If yes, the person is a patriot to be protected from prosecution.
Shredder @ 39 is right.
This means that Goodling @ Sampson can be sued or fired for violating their employment contracts, but they can't be criminally prosecuted.
C'mon people, have a little faith in the legal system. I know it's hard these days.
"Not every violation of the law is a crime"...Huh!!??? Ya know folks...It's not like Monica and the rest of those political hacks were doin a California stop at a four way stop sign or a little 'innocent' jaywalking.. But OK, I'll just have to remember this sage revelation for my own personal future circumstances.... From the mind of this 'illustrius' AG and out his piehole... Sounds like muddying the distinction between civil and criminal to me... Also sounds like setting up a premise for a get out of jail free card for these cretins...... Personally??? I think Murkasey is another loser who needs shitcanned sometime shortly after next Jan. 20th...... Is he a different face than his pathetic predessessor?? Sure... Is he the one to reform the DOJ's tattered rep??? Ehhh not so much......................JD
Hmmmmmmm. Not every violation of the law is a crime. How can I use that to my advantage? I know, Humboldt county here I come!
ummm...his name was put forward for nomination by schumer
doesnt this prove that dems are as corrupt as repugs?
can we just blow this whole thing up and start again?
MSM is run by lunatics. 5 Minutes ago Russia was pulling out. Now they are going back in.
Which is it idiots?
In a country that uses Olly North to talk about Bill Clinton's lying
In a country that hires Watergate, Iran Contra and October Surprise principals as government employee and political appointies
What do you expect?
What it mean to be an American to you?
"Not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime."
What a wonderful lesson for children to learn about their country. I wonder if Republicans put their kids to bed at night with little gems like this?
38 Liberal AND Proud Says:
constituent @ 34:
i wanted to see more heat on goodling hoping she would talk more guess not.
I really want to make some snarky comment about her no longer being in any position to talk…but I won’t.
________________________________________________________
You'd sic Bubba Clinton on her?
Or one of these?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2149/1496238005_a14a6c190d.jpg?v=0
way to go brownie...your doing a good job...keep up the good work...
Cool! Now if I'm arrested for smoking pot, I can say to the officer "But not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime.”
gar man @ 52:
Well, I'm gonna start growing HERBS!
L.A. Confidential @ 50:
This comment is just begging for ysbaddaden to answer...
!!!
'scuse me while I scoop my jaw up off the floor.
Why are these unspeakble villains being allowed to get away with this crap???
Rosie O day @ 22:
That's what I said when Congress confirmed this tool . He vowed to be an "independent advocate" which was bullshit.
Schumer, Feinstein, Bayh , Tom Carper of Delaware, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Ben Nelson of Nebraska were the dems who helped seal the confirmation. Obama, Clinton, and (drum roll)......McCaca were absent.
...another reason to count Bayh out as veepee.
It's not a crime when WE do something, but it IS a crime
when you lowly scum citizenry do. Got it?
miss_kitty @ 57:
It depends on what the definition of "is" is.
lucid fiction @ 60:
We already have the Color Coded Terrorism Threat system.
I guess the Bush Justice Department will simply have a Color Coded Law Violation system. The darker you are, the more likely you've committed a crime.
Why of course!!
Quite the philosopher this Mukasey who just happens to be a Attorney General in Bush/Cheney WH.
Naturally this novel view of the rule of law will then apply to the coming Obama WH then too?
Not really you say? Oh--- it only works out like this to/in a GOP run WH? I see. hhhmmm...
So why did Senate Democrats let this guy Mukasey become AG again?
Because he was an improvement over the guy he replaced who was so incompetent and in over his head?
Oh. This AG is so much better. I feel better now. Don't you?
displaced @ 46:
I explained as much at 45. I do believe in the legal system. I work hard to defend my clients.
I do not believe in the people running it a the federal level at the moment. The executive is controlled by the Know Nothings, the House by the Do Nothings, and the Senate split down the middle.
Mukasey knows people will leap to his defense with legal semantics unfamiliar to laypeople. He's setting up that argument for the chattering class. It's just a distraction that the Busheviks hope will enable him to elude any real discussion of precisely why they feel the administration's actions are not criminal.
See, the real issue is not whether all violations of the law are crimes. The real issue is whether the Bushevik's violations of the law are crimes. They know they are. We know they are. But the conversation has gone off on a tangent. As designed.
I'll remember that next time I have a crisis of conscience and commit some sort of "crime", I'll simply get past it by remembering the words of Mukasey that not every "crime" is a "crime". In fact, I'll have him subpoenaed as a witness and have him confirm his quote and then admit that I was thinking of what he said when I committed this so-called "crime". I'd even have my attorney quiz him on what criteria he would use to determine which "crimes" are really "crimes". I can see next week's "Law & Order" episode now, maybe Jack McCoy would plead it down to a 3rd degree "crime" - time served. Lenny would have had something snide to say.
have any of you given any thought to how easy it would be for a republican to pretend to be a democrat and get elected? then vote repub only on key issues...like mukasey...like FISA...like we are seeing with this drill more oil crap..think about it...how would we know...this would be so simple to do it isn't funny...and in blue states it wouldn't even require rigging the election machines would it? as it seems to me far too many vote for gop in these big issues that one would think otherwise....take pelosi even...impeachment is off the table...she could be one of them...
Liberal AND Proud @ 62:
That's why lilly white scum like Karl Rove don't go to jail.
hey, we live in the United States and it's true that not every crime is a crime. A crime is clearly based on class and political connections. If you are rich enough and connected enough, you don't have to worry much about breaking the law.
To quote Dylan: Steal a little and they throw you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king.
I think we're all perfectly aware of what they're really saying.
It's ok if you're a republican.
It's ok if you're "one of us".
Laws are for everyone else.
"Many will see, but not see" and "Many will hear, but not hear"
Best to stay the hell out of White Man's Court
Just like I did on Sunday, when I guy attacked me with his car. I made every move to avoid hitting him, but I sure thought of playing his game since I was faster and more skilled. Just before the Stater came up behind me at 100 mph. I almost did the above as I got behind the attacker to let the stater by.
It ain't a crime if ya don't get caught...and if you happen to be a goddamn repuke, it ain't a crime if you do.
Liberal AND Proud @ 61:
Paging Dr Ysbaddaden, Paging Dr Ysbaddaden.
You're needed in Proctology.
Paging Dr Ysbaddaden.
.
Dear Attorney General Michael Mukasey,
If what you've said that not every CRIME is not a crime, then can we also assume that...
... NOT every RAPE is a rape?
... NOT every MURDER is a murder?
... NOT every LIE is a lie?
... NOT every SHOPLIFTING INCIDENT is a shoplifting incident?
... NOT every FRAUD is a fraud?
... NOT every ACT OF TREASON is an act of treason?
Am I correct in this train of thought...
... "It depends upon the meaning of what "IS" is."
.
Republican Justice.
Some impoverished 16 year old robs a 7 eleven so he can buy medicine for his sick mother or food for his siblings...the GOP wants to throw him in jail and throw away the key.
Some rich fund manager pilfers $100 million from a pension fund, he gets 6 months time served and three job offers.
miss_kitty @ 57:
Prophylactic pandemonium
I prefer lactation myself.
.. but the Department of Justice HAS invited all previous applicants who were not awarded positions to re-apply for any currently vacant positions ..
So everything is OK .. right?
Hmmm... so not every crime is a crime, huh? Well that's good to know... wonder how long before that becomes any person's defense?
I believe what they did was a violation of the Hatch Act.
"Penalties for Violating the Hatch Act
An employee who violates the Hatch Act shall be removed from their position, and funds appropriated for the position from which removed thereafter may not be used to pay the employee or individual. However, if the Merit Systems Protection Board finds by unanimous vote that the violation does not warrant removal, a penalty of not less than 30 days' suspension without pay shall be imposed by direction of the Board."
If the Hatch Act is the lawa that they have broken, the maximum penalty for a violation is termination of employment. Since Goodling and Sampson no longer work for the Federal government, it becomes a moot poiint.
mudshark @ 72:
When a student is taking a proctered test, just what is the tester testing?
rusty @ 66:
Heh, Pelosi isn't one of them. But yes, you're right. And it's yet another argument for electoral reform. We need a better way to keep our representatives accountable to the people. We need a better way to ensure that we are actually represented.
Electoral reform, though, hardly gets covered on the basic political blogs. At least, not the ones I've seen. So many of our problems stem from the system by which we elect representatives, the system by which we allocate power to representatives. If we don't change that, we'll bemoan our current problems eternally.
Perhaps I'll have to start my own party/movement/blog. I'm certainly done giving my all for the Democrats. I'll stay registered as a Democrat for now, given the realities of our political system, but I'll no longer give them money or campaign for them in general.
While I can appreciate the difference between tort law (a civil wrong for which there is a legal remedy - think personal injury) and criminal law, it is, at best, simplistic to assert that 'not every violation of the law is a crime,' as Mukasey did.
Not that we should have expected anything less from the Administration that brought us torture, rendition, indefinite detention of suspects, and erosion of the 4th Amendment from probable cause to reasonable suspicion.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 73:
So, Mukasey must believe that Bill Clinton is the most superior bard in the land. That is legal defense was totally on firm ground...AND...his impeachment was a fraud.
78 sturg111 Says: I believe what they did was a violation of the Hatch Act.
This was violated?
http://www.unificationfrance.com/IMG/jpg/battlestar_galactica_richard_ha...
I would like to do, to say, to react, to just give a damn to Muskasey's statement but its so pointless. NO ONE in this administration will be charged and even if charged they will be found NOT GUILTY and if indeed found guilty will be set free.
Anyone want to argue about America's sense of values under the administration of W?
Chico Hussein @ 4:
If Obama doesn't win I've got a nice place scoped out in another country.
Technically a misdemeanor is a crime but not generally jailable.
And then even when it crosses into crime there are various degrees.
Shouldn't it be ms.demeanor by now?
I agree with the Attorney General that not all unlawful acts are crimes. Traffic violations, for example, are unlawful but rarely are they criminal. However, I disagree that nothing criminal was taking place at DOJ. On the contrary, criminality appears to have become a way of life there.
ysbaddaden @ 79:
A terd?
By any other name is still a terd.
Justice is in the eye of the beholder.
Karen @ 64:
Bravo. That is exactly the kind of perspective we need. It comes down to asking the right question, and makes clear that Mukasey is obfuscating things with a semantic debate.
We need more republicans like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn_E665CV38
Liberal AND Proud @ 82:
More importantly,
why use the word "CRIME" to describe what is not a crime? If NOT every "CRIME" is a crime, then what qualified it as a "CRIME" to be called a "CRIME" that is not a crime?
Or for short: What is it if it is NOT A CRIME? And more importanatly, why why designate it a crime if it is NOT?
ISN'T THIS IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACT!!!!! THE ONE THAT OUR GOVERNMENT CREATED AND AUTHORIZED! No wonder why the whole world is laughing at us!
mudshark @ 88:
Sounds like a cross between turd and nerd.
surfjac @ 84:
America's values? The majority of Americans are progressives who disapprove (to say the least) of the Busheviks.
But enough of them have been lied to and terrified by campaign tactics and a complicit media that they operate under cognitive dissonance: They believe in progressive policies, but also that "the left," and "the far left," are evil, anti-American zealots hell bent on taking away their rights to raise their kids, go to church, and sing patriotic songs.
I know plenty of people like this. Ask them if they believe in Social Security? Yes. Do they believe in universal health care? Yes. Do they believe that everyone has the right to pursue happiness, and should basically be left alone to live their lives? Yes. Do they believes that the government should get warrants before wire tapping? Yes. How do they vote? Republican. It's the Christian, or small-government or whatever party instead of the scary left.
As I understand it, it's lawyer speak. What he's saying is that only civil laws were broken and breaking civil laws is not a crime because you don't usually go to jail for breaking civil law. A "crime", to a lawyer, is something you can go to jail, prison or pay reparations to the state in to form of fines etc. Civil violations don't concern the state necessarily but are between individual people (i.e. slander) the state just mediates it.
It's not a crime to use discrimination in hiring and firing employees but it is illegal and a violation of civil law, meaning the attorneys fired or disqualified by discrimination must file civil lawsuits and they would have a very strong case. Mukasey could do something but he has chosen not to.
The problem isn't really the in technicality of what he said, to a lawyer it makes sense. The problem is that Mukasey has evidence of a legal wrong doing and is choosing not to do anything because of how he's interprets the law should be enforced. In effect, he is acting as a judge and that's what he can't do anymore. He may have been a judge most of his career, but he's in the executive branch now. He's duty is to see the law is enforced and not interpreted or mediated. (This is pretty sketchy though. He's done far more galling things.)
Mostly, the media has done a terrible job at presenting this. They should have translated into English everyone uses and not English lawyers use.
Jesus, I guess the Senate is now have to ask all potential future AGs whether or not they believe that all crimes are crimes before they confirm them. I'd say this is shocking, but actually, I'm not shocked at all.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 92:
Either I'm watching FOX too much or I need to increase my meds...'cause that actually made sense.
Attorney General tells us "when a Republican breaks the law, it is not a crime.'
you see Turd Blossom and the Fourty Thieves are above the law. how can that be you may ask? simple, they are the law! and it's called a Fascist Regime.
Since we are on the subject. If the following were crimes, where is the answer. We know who were the victims were who were the perpetrators
JFK Assassination
MLK Assassination
RFK Assassination
Watergate
October Surprise
Iran Contra
Liberal AND Proud @ 98:
LMAO!!!!
That made my head hurt!
Not only have we slid to the bottom of the slippery slope of judicial doubletalk...now they're simply showing total contempt by piling manure on us.
displaced @ 46:
Very true. I'm quoting you because this can't be repeated enough, messing with our heads, they are.
The defining statement of the first decade of the twenty-first century. History book stuff.
Liberal AND Proud @ 67:
Be what you would seem to be -- or, if you'd like it put more simply -- Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.
-The Duchess / Alice in Wonderland
ysbaddaden @ 91:
Unfortunately we got something more like this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZhd4vuyrXE
Well this is a true crime. The head of the Dem party in Arkansas has been shot and is hospitalized. They think they caught the person that did the shooting.
Can't this man be impeached for not doing his job?
He was shot at the Dem Party headquarters in Arkansas
pissed off patricia @ 107:
Link?
MaGo @ 108:
Well, he can certainly be impeached for a high crime or misdemeanor, but you know how that conversation will go -- "Not doing my job is not a crime."
The Know Nothings in the chattering class will agree. The Do Nothings in the House will eventually agree.
Yes, he can be impeached. But he won't.
mudshark @ 110:
It's all over the cable news channels but I haven't seen it yet on the net
Mukasey's right, and it's very simple. When a Republican breaks the law, it's not a crime. When a Democrat breaks the law, it is a crime.Where has everyone been the last 8 years?
mudshark @ 110:
Holy shit!
WTF is goin on?
http://www.todaysthv.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=70759&catid=238
Shooting in Arkansas.
Mukasey, the lame duck AG.
mudshark @ 110:
Crime-ridden Arkansas town expands 24-hour curfew
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_re_us/arkansas_town_curfew
"The citizens deserve peace, that some infringement on constitutional rights is OK and we have not violated anything as far as the Constitution."
pissed off patricia @ 112:
Click.
pissed off patricia @ 109:
This is what Karl Rove, FOX News and their enablers have wrought. When you lower the level of political discourse to the point that anyone who disagrees with you is an "outsider", "not one of us" or "not patriotic", you give a wink and nod to every loony with a gun and too much time on their hands, to take their misguided view of "the law" into their own hands.
ANSWER:
Since we are on the subject. If the following were crimes, where is the answer. We know who were the victims (mankind), who were the perpetrators (republicans)
(single bullet) JFK Assassination
(worldwide contacts) MLK Assassination
(two bullets) RFK Assassination
(3 bums) Watergate
(Defeat Carter) October Surprise
(Terrorism) Iran Contra
http://www.todaysthv.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=70759&catid=238
Check it out.
Crime-ridden Arkansas town expands 24-hour curfew
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_re_us/arkansas_town_curfew
"Now if somebody wants to sue us, they have an option to sue, but I'm fairly certain that a judge will see it the way the way the citizens see it here," Mayor James Valley said. "The citizens deserve peace, that some infringement on constitutional rights is OK and we have not violated anything as far as the Constitution."
GOP logic, no?
mudshark @ 115:
I wonder if they'll find books written by Hannity and O"really or Savage. I hope Glen Beck sleeps well tonight.
White man in his 40s.
Let me guess..unemployed, bitter, angry, clutching a Bible and armed.
MaGo @ 108:
Republicans do not have to honor supeona's
They are saying someone walked into the headquarters and asked for the chairman. When the chairman came in, they shot him three times. Then the shooter led the police on a high speed chase until they stopped him. The police shot the suspect but as of now they do not believe he is dead.
The chairman is in critical condition. His name is Bill Gwatney.
CNN is doing the most coverage on this as of now.
mudshark @ 121:
I was thinkin the same thing....will they then try to label him as crazy liberal?
Before our pinhead President leaves office and someone wipe his enormous crap off our Constitution. Thanks for nothing, Nancy "Do Nothing" Pelosi. Hope you rot to.
liberalNmoderation @ 101:
LOL!!!
But really, basic common sense comes with a head ache.
If not every CRIME in not a crime, then why the heck call it a CRIME to describe what it is NOT?
If not every RAPE is not a rape, then why call it a rape to describe what it is NOT?
If not every FRAUD is not a fraud, then why designate it a fraud to describe what it is NOT?
If not every Attorney General is not an Attorney General for the Nation and Rule of Law, then why call him an Attorney General to describe what he is NOT...
... especially when he proceeds to refuse to enforce the Rule of Law in deference to being the Protectorate of the president and vice president?
.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 128:
Oh I'm agreein with yas for sure...but me brain don't like it none!
(speechless!)
Since the Repugs have taken over our justice system, they have subjugated our laws into varying degrees of prohibitions.
After applying subjective criteria to said prohibitions they relegate political laws/prohibitions to a "what's your thought on this today" discipline...............can you say applying personal bias to the rule of law?
Politics, being what they are today,the Repugs loath and despise most prohibitions such as a Senator not being allowed to receive a blow-job at a Minnisota airport.
Look no further than the Terry Schiavo case for the ultimate in hypocricy. Repug polititians wanted to take away the husbands right to end the suffering of his brain dead wife, and yet those same Repugs will look the other way when an insurance company will deny life saving measures to an insured patient that has a chance to recover.
liberalNmoderation @ 126:
I'm pretty sure this was politically motivated. Granted, by some lone lunatic.
WTF has happened to this country? We're resembling South America now.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 129:
Ok...that's all...WAITER! Check please.
Guess which one is Georgia on My Mind?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sZMJK791GM
wheeee @ 122:
in·fringe·ment -
1. a breach or infraction, as of a law, right, or obligation; violation; . transgression
----------------
breach-
1. the act or a result of breaking; break or rupture.
2. an infraction or violation, as of a law, trust, faith, or promise.
9. to break or act contrary to (a law, promise, etc.).
---------------------------
in·frac·tion
1. breach; violation; infringement: an infraction of the rules.
mudshark @ 133:
But you know, It might not even be a crime, after all...
Now they are saying the suspect's ID matched that of a man who had visited the state headquarters of the Baptist church there in Little Rock a little earlier. When he was at the church headquarters he was complaining about being out of work.
moniker @ 113:
Not only is it a crime, they get hauled off straight to prison in shackles without an appeal or an opportunity to speak to the press.
pissed off patricia @ 126:
They better have triple Secret Service protection on Mr. Obama. The divisions in this country are wide, deep and emotional. If, heaven forfend, that anything were to happen. It would not be pretty.
Yah, I know only Liberal lone assassins kill people.
Republicans kill in mass, they just use liberal solders to do it. Who become "red necks" once they pull the first trigger
pissed off patricia @ 138:
Unemployed. Check.
Baptist Church. Check. Was he carrying his bible?
Armed. Check.
miss_kitty @ 137:
Thanks for bring this full circle. It's only a crime if the GOP say it is. Otherwise, it's a maybe. Until they say it's not.
The AG is correct. Not every violation of a law, statute or code results in criminal prosecution. In my limited experience it appears that for several, if not most, statutory violations there are only civil remedies available to the injured party, especially in the area of labor/employment issues. Usually the penalties involve revocation of licenses and/or significant monetary fines. If a private employer uses unlawful hiring practices he/she may be looking at significant financial fines possibly resulting in the loss of the business (had a similar case not that long ago at the office involving an employers’ non-payment of mandatory workers comp insurance).
"These four employees" are the tip of the iceberg. If they were charged, they would talk and would, thus, uncover the entire truth of what was going on (probably is still going on) in the Department of Justice.
We can't have that, can we. After all, these people truly believe they were just being patriots and patriots don't commit crimes.
Liberal AND Proud @ 142:
I know, it's like you can profile these sorts of people right from the get-go. Scary shit!
* error: The previous post of mine wasn't meant to be in my word - I meant it to be quoted as the word of my sister who is a lawyer and knows more than I do about this stuff.
Look at our country.
Just look at it.
Sad.
Absolutely amazing. It's a good thing that these bozos will be out of office soon. Much more of this and I would honestly start fearing for people taking the law into their own hands. Seriously - if this crap goes on longer, some folks will get so tired of it that they might start shooting those involved. I wonder if *that* would be considered a crime?
Stupid Git @ 144:
Thank you for adding that at 144. Did you read any of the thread?
Login or Register to post comments.