AG Ashcroft violated election laws in 2000

[Donutboy 0]

they haven't bashed ashcroft in a long time...

must be making the retread rounds again.

we'll be hearing soon about the high-level bush administration leak that outed the CIA lady pretty soon....

Well, it IS a federal crime that you're making fun of, unlike oral sex in a back room of the White House.

[Donutboy 0]

but you forget, david...saddam said he destroyed them, and therefoer they're not there anymore.

i trust him, don't you?

i think it's incredibly mean and insensitive of the US to not trust saddam and actually demand proof that he destroyed those WMDs (that actually never existed in the first place) that we either did or did not sell him.

i think the entire US government should attend 'how to trust ruthless dictators' school....

Well, when the UN had made hundreds of inspections ever since the first Gulf War and found no evidence of..... well, anything and since Saddam had made us the offer to check for ourselves before the invasion, I don't think we had to rely on his word. We could have saved hundreds of American lives by simply sending our own search teams over there. Of course, there's nothing like a war to drive up a president's numbers and take the spotlight off of the criminal dealings at Enron and why the VP refuses to divulge what policy issues they helped him to formulate. What's a few hundred American lives? Right?

[Tigermike 3,057]

Actually there has been an award for libs concerning John Ashcroft!

Damn Those Conservatives Award

First Place

“Attorney General John Ashcroft has earned himself a remarkable distinction as the Torquemada of American law. Tomas de Torquemada...was largely responsible for... [the] torture and the burning of heretics – Muslims in particular. Now, of course, I am not accusing the Attorney General of pulling out anyone’s fingernails or burning people at the stake (at least I don’t know of any such cases). But one does get the sense these days that the old Spaniard’s spirit is comfortably at home in Ashcroft’s Department of Justice.”

– Former CBS Evening News anchor Walter Cronkite in his syndicated column published in the September 22 Philadelphia Inquirer. [65 points]

http://www.mediaresearch.org/notablequotab...003/best1-3.asp

[MDM4AU 336]

Donutboy, while I applaud your effort in pointing out the hypocrisy the Republicans display time and again, matters such as this are of no concern to 99% of the posters on this board, as evidenced CCT's wanting to know why Ashcroft wasn't fined when the snippet of the article you posted clearly says there was a $37,000 fine. The only interest these people have in learning of political wrongdoing is when it involves Democrats. Especially if there is sex involved.

Demoncratic a**holes like you two are the ones that set the bar. You know, if she has her lips around your sclong, technically it ain't sex. So I am just following your moral lead by saying that technically, Ashcroft didn't get fined. Oh how these things always escape you mindless followers of socialistic lies.

Oh we never denied there was a sex act performed. We just don't see an impeachable offense there. I mean, it's not like desertion or revealing an American CIA agent's identity, is it?

Let me refresh your liberal mind for a moment. CLinton denied it fully in the beginning. Remeber the "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky." Remeber the public address he made when he admitted lying about the "sex act." The impeachable offense here, for those that have conveniently forgotten, was perjury - LYING under oath.

You know LYING, right? What you accuse Bush of everyday and twice on days when you have exhausted your search for "BAD BUSH" articles by Michael Moore and the whole DNC Hate Crowd.

Funny how you don't feel the same way about a Dem President that lied under oath, no less.

All of you try to claim that it is about the act in the Oval Office. You conveniently sweep away the leagal ramifications of lying under oath regardless of how minor YOU may think the lie may be.

And, IMHO, cheating on your wife is appalling, much less in the Tax Payer provided Oval Office. That office was not built to be the President's own personal brothel or to be turned into a cheap motel for a fling.

Now that we are caught up, tell me why Clinton lying UNDER OATH is not a problem. You know, since you seem to feel that Bush lies everytime he opens his mouth.

[Tiger Al 0]

MDM, cheating on your wife IS a bad thing. Lying about it under oath IS a bad thing. Problem is, his cheating on his wife shouldn't be an impeachable offense unless your name is Hillary Clinton. The other thing about it is that Clinton DID admit that he did it, that it was wrong and that he was sorry for doing it. Normally, that's all we ask of public figures, or you and me for that matter, is to admit you were wrong and apologize for it. That was done but some people, including most on this board, don't want to simply move on.

[MDM4AU 336]

Again, I understand adultery is not an impeachable offense. And some may want to claim that it is or should be. But just as there are those here that act as though it is, there are those here that act as though the only thing he did wrong in that whole event was let some intern tend to his parts. Both are wrong but it only seems that those on the right are the one's called out here.

[Tiger Al 0]

Again, I understand adultery is not an impeachable offense. And some may want to claim that it is or should be. But just as there are those here that act as though it is, there are those here that act as though the only thing he did wrong in that whole event was let some intern tend to his parts. Both are wrong but it only seems that those on the right are the one's called out here.

What does that have to do with what YOU believe??? If you think he's squared himself then what does it matter what someone who thinks he did absolutely nothing wrong says??? Clinton himself admitted that he was wrong to do it and then to lie about it. Why isn't that enough?

[MDM4AU 336]

AGAIN, my point was some of the libs on here refuse to acknowledge that he lied under oath. To them it is always, "all he did was fool around with an intern!" The same people that accuse Bush of lying everyday. Tha same people that act so appalled about lying or what may look like lying.

I think perjury/impeachment is quite enough. I am not now asking for his execution, I am just pointing out the ignorance of some on here to act like the whole Lewinski Scandal was simply over sex or what "is" is.

[AUloggerhead 2,255]

... Clinton himself admitted that he was wrong to do it and then to lie about it. Why isn't that enough?

You need to direct that question to the Arkansas Bar. Apparently, they thought so much of clinton's forthrightness & honesty {... bwahahahahaha, sorry even I can't keep a straight face and say those words in the same sentence with clinton ...} that they stripped him of his license to practice law.

[Tiger Al 0]

AGAIN, my point was some of the libs on here refuse to acknowledge that he lied under oath.  To them it is always, "all he did was fool around with an intern!"  The same people that accuse Bush of lying everyday.  Tha same people that act so appalled about lying or what may look like lying.

I think perjury/impeachment is quite enough.  I am not now asking for his execution, I am just pointing out the ignorance of some on here to act like the whole Lewinski Scandal was simply over sex or what "is" is.

OK, MDM, your point is duly noted. It was the lying that you objected to and also that the bed wetting libbies won't acknowledge that his lying was bad. It was. Let's move on now, OK???

[AUBoggs 0]

Donutboy, while I applaud your effort in pointing out the hypocrisy the Republicans display time and again, matters such as this are of no concern to 99% of the posters on this board, as evidenced CCT's wanting to know why Ashcroft wasn't fined when the snippet of the article you posted clearly says there was a $37,000 fine. The only interest these people have in learning of political wrongdoing is when it involves Democrats. Especially if there is sex involved.

It all depends on how you define, 'fine'...