Page 86 of 112 FirstFirst ... 3676848586878896 ... LastLast
Results 851 to 860 of 1120

Thread: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat [W:613/629]

  1. #851
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    06-27-15 @ 05:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    2,191

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    You clearly know not of what you speak.


    If you're an 'Independent' then Hitler was a pacifist.



    You're the most fanatically conservative independent I've seen.. lol (Though in all honesty you don't strike me as truly conservative at all, simply a pro-wealthy CONservative who claims to be an Independent)

  2. #852
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,752

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    You have already been shown numerous times.
    You just deny.
    As for the prosecutor? His stature matters not. He is stretching the meaning here. He isn't above that.
    You have shown absolutely nothing. Poke a hole in this. I dare ya'.

    1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

    2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

    3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

    4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

    5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

    6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

    7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

    8) Perry has been indicted for that.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  3. #853
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan5 View Post
    If you're an 'Independent' then Hitler was a pacifist.



    You're the most fanatically conservative independent I've seen.. lol (Though in all honesty you don't strike me as truly conservative at all, simply a pro-wealthy CONservative who claims to be an Independent)
    Said the one who knows not of what he speaks. Figures.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  4. #854
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    You have shown absolutely nothing. Poke a hole in this. I dare ya'.

    1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

    2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

    3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

    4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

    5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

    6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

    7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

    8) Perry has been indicted for that.
    The above crap has already been refuted by others.
    All you do is deny because you lack understanding. Just like you didn't understand that James Ferguson wasn't indicted for the same thing or under the same law.
    You just don't understand. Nor could you, as your bias doesn't allow you to see reality in this instance.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #855
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,752

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    The above crap has already been refuted by others.
    All you do is deny because you lack understanding. Just like you didn't understand that James Ferguson wasn't indicted for the same thing or under the same law.
    You just don't understand. Nor could you, as your bias doesn't allow you to see reality in this instance.
    Refuted? In what way? Please be specific. Which number or numbers below are wrong, and why do you believe so?

    1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

    2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

    3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

    4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

    5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

    6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

    7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

    8) Perry has been indicted for that.
    Last edited by danarhea; 08-18-14 at 03:03 AM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  6. #856
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Refuted? In what way? Please be specific.
    You are in denial of the arguments you just engaged in?
    Holy ****.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  7. #857
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,752

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    You are in denial of the arguments you just engaged in?
    Holy ****.
    You are still not answering my question. Where is the hole in this?

    1) The law says that, if you intend to harm another by misusing government property that has come into the possession of the government employee by virtue of his or her employment, then you have committed a crime.

    2) The property in question consists of the funds for the Public Integrity Unit.

    3) The employee in question is Assistant DA Rosemary Lehmburg.

    4) Had Perry not made any threat, and just cancelled the funds, he could have given any reason he wanted, within reason... For example "The Public Integrity Unit is a waste of taxpayer money, and so I am vetoing the funds".

    5) However, Perry issued a threat against Lehmburg and her office. This was AFTER a grand jury already decided that she could keep her job.

    6) In making the threat, Perry showed that his action, if taken, would be to act against a public employee by using property of the state of Texas as a weapon.

    7) When Perry then carried out this threat, under the laws of the State of Texas, Perry had harmed Lehmberg by misusing government property (the funds).

    8) Perry has been indicted for that.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  8. #858
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    You are still not answering my question.
    What did you not understand about the following replies?
    You are in denial of the arguments you just engaged in?
    Holy ****.


    The above crap has already been refuted by others.
    All you do is deny because you lack understanding. Just like you didn't understand that James Ferguson wasn't indicted for the same thing or under the same law.
    You just don't understand. Nor could you, as your bias doesn't allow you to see reality in this instance.


    I am not going to rehash that of which you have already been shown wrong.
    There is no need because you are in denial and do not know of what you speak.
    Pointing out what others have already pointed out just will lead to more denials from you.
    You refuse to learn from them, and I know will will refuse to learn from me.


    You simply have no clue, just like you had no clue about what you claimed about James Ferguson.

    So when the Governor walks on this crap, what are you going to say?
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  9. #859
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    He is not coercing a person to quit their job. Surely everyone realizes the difference, which makes your argument desperate in the extreme. As I said in another thread, defending the indefensible is a losing proposition from the outset.
    Be honest - coercion is coercion, regardless of the goal the one doing the coercing is looking for. Politics is all about carrots and sticks - those who are elected to positions of power exercise that power, often through coercion. There's not a single personal benefit Perry was trying to realize - he was solely looking to have the DA do the right thing.

    I'll give you another example. Was Nancy Pelosi guilty of a crime to be prosecuted when she tried to coerce Charlie Rangel into resigning after his difficulties and when he didn't, removed him from his leadership positions in the Democrat House? How about when she did the same thing with William Jefferson, the Louisianna congressman indicted on bribery charges, even after he was reelected? Aren't those examples of a politician in a position of power using that power to get a politician to do the right thing?
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  10. #860
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Gov. Rick Perry indicted for abuse of power for carrying out threat to veto prose

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    The difference is very obvious: NO MEMBER OF CONGRESS IS THREATENED OF LOSING THEIR JOB BY THE PRESSIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IF HE ACTS ON HIS VETO THREAT!

    Moreover, no President that I'm aware of has ever vetoed a bill simply because it didn't contain the funding level he desired, i.e., the Transportation bill, Farm bill or the recent $3T Border that's been dwindled down by both chambers of Congress to around $650B. Heck, President GW Bush didn't veto TARP because it didn't contain the higher funding level he wanted. He took what Congress ultimately gave him.

    My point here is President's typically don't veto bills due to lower than expected funding nor do they do so because they want someone out of a specific government position. They do so because the bill laying before them contains provisions (or the lack thereof) they don't like.

    Now, you can argue that's exactly what Gov. Perry did - veto a bill because it contained a spending measure he didn't like - but given the fact that he'd used the funding of the PUI as the basis of his veto threat to pressure DA Lehmberg to resign - his rational for using his veto power goes contrary to common reasoning behind budget reduction measures to justifies him exercising said veto for budget purposes.

    In other words, if Gov. Perry had said, "Texas is running a budget deficit and we need to make some significant across the board budget cuts. This bill doesn't go far enough in bringing our state's deficit under control," I don't think anyone would have argued with him. But I'm pretty sure that's not what happened here.
    The point isn't, have Presidents done it - the point is, can Presidents do it.

    And again, it's pretty sad when an action is indictable when you're honest about it but not indictable when you're dishonest about it. What you're suggesting is that politicians are better off being dishonest. That's a sad commentary on politics in America.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Page 86 of 112 FirstFirst ... 3676848586878896 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •