• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Petraeus sentenced: 2 years probation; $100K fine

Re: Traitor General Petraeus gets off with misdemeanor and probation. No jail or fe

That is practiced by folks on both the left and right, ALL THE TIME!!!
It's business as usual for the Left
 
Re: Traitor General Petraeus gets off with misdemeanor and probation. No jail or fe

It's business as usual for the Left

And right. Stop patronizing.
 
If there was no crime, he couldn't really obstruct justice now, could he? Why was there no prosecution of the actual leaker?

Obviously, a jury which heard the entire fourteen day trial, which you did not, disagrees with you. At any rate, that criminal was convicted. The failure of justice was Rove and Cheney's absence in the court room as pointed out by at least one juror, Libby was guilty, but was the fall guy for those two pos's that walked.
 
If there was no crime, he couldn't really obstruct justice now, could he? Why was there no prosecution of the actual leaker?

Excellent question.... but don't expect a response.
 
Excellent question.... but don't expect a response.

Do you really think justice is ever served, hmm?

Collins, a former Washington Post reporter, said jurors wanted to hear from others involved in the case, including Bush political adviser Karl Rove, who was one of two sources for the original leak. Defense attorneys originally said both Libby and Cheney would be witnesses, and Rove was on the potential witness list.

“I will say there was a tremendous amount of sympathy for Mr. Libby on the jury. It was said a number of times, ‘What are we doing with this guy here? Where’s Rove? Where are these other guys?”’ Collins said. “I’m not saying we didn’t think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells put it, he was the fall guy.”

Jury convicts Libby on four charges - politics | NBC News
 
Do you really think justice is ever served, hmm?

Collins, a former Washington Post reporter, said jurors wanted to hear from others involved in the case, including Bush political adviser Karl Rove, who was one of two sources for the original leak. Defense attorneys originally said both Libby and Cheney would be witnesses, and Rove was on the potential witness list.

“I will say there was a tremendous amount of sympathy for Mr. Libby on the jury. It was said a number of times, ‘What are we doing with this guy here? Where’s Rove? Where are these other guys?”’ Collins said. “I’m not saying we didn’t think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells put it, he was the fall guy.”

Jury convicts Libby on four charges - politics | NBC News

Rove wasn't there because there was no proof he did anything. So yes, in this case justice was served, at least as far as Rove goes. Libby, not so much.

Libby got screwed because the prosecutor couldn't justify all that time and money without some results to please his masters.
 
Rove wasn't there because there was no proof he did anything. So yes, in this case justice was served, at least as far as Rove goes. Libby, not so much.

Libby got screwed because the prosecutor couldn't justify all that time and money without some results to please his masters.

Lol. You just ignored and dismissed the jury who actually attended the fourteen days of trial and convicted Libby on four felonies. Your just another patronizing neo-con.
 
Re: Traitor General Petraeus gets off with misdemeanor and probation. No jail or fe

And right. Stop patronizing.
The right, not so much, but it's "codified" in Alinsky's writings of which there are no shortage of followers on the left
 
Obviously, a jury which heard the entire fourteen day trial, which you did not, disagrees with you. At any rate, that criminal was convicted. The failure of justice was Rove and Cheney's absence in the court room as pointed out by at least one juror, Libby was guilty, but was the fall guy for those two pos's that walked.

I would say the jury was duped noting that juries are not allowed all of the information in many cases
 
Lol. You just ignored and dismissed the jury who actually attended the fourteen days of trial and convicted Libby on four felonies. Your just another patronizing neo-con.

Noting that just as I said, the jury had to make a decision without having all the information. Again, how could he cover up a crime that was never committed?
 
Lol. You just ignored and dismissed the jury who actually attended the fourteen days of trial and convicted Libby on four felonies. Your just another patronizing neo-con.



Typical partisan liberal.

Resort to name calling as soon as you realize you are losing the debate.

You're dismissed.

The jury also didn't hear how Judith Miller's claim that Fitzgerald withheld information from the jury.
 
Last edited:
He was taking artistic liberty. He might of said instead "The CIA is just having its way" instead of "reining supreme"...;)

But that's not at all what he claimed. He claimed the MIC was reigning over the US. That's pathetic idiocy.
 
But that's not at all what he claimed. He claimed the MIC was reigning over the US. That's pathetic idiocy.

Are you suggesting that Ike was being pathetically idiotic in warning the country to beware the MIC?
 
I would say the jury was duped noting that juries are not allowed all of the information in many cases

Ok, well there you have it then. We have a failed justice system. Yet another thing America needs to repair. The jury's are all duped.
 
Typical partisan liberal.

Resort to name calling as soon as you realize you are losing the debate.

You're dismissed.

The jury also didn't hear how Judith Miller's claim that Fitzgerald withheld information from the jury.

I think that you're dismissal of the jury's conclusion means that you are the one who must be dismissed, hear?
 
Are you suggesting that Ike was being pathetically idiotic in warning the country to beware the MIC?

That was his point indeed. To expose the dangers of an all too big and powerful MIC that would have the power to influence USFP as we have seen. Imagine what he would think today about news medias own investments in defense contractors. IOW, it's here, Ike's worries.
 
That was his point indeed. To expose the dangers of an all too big and powerful MIC that would have the power to influence USFP as we have seen. Imagine what he would think today about news medias own investments in defense contractors. IOW, it's here, Ike's worries.

Ike's worst nightmares have come to pass, with a vengeance.
 
Are you suggesting that Ike was being pathetically idiotic in warning the country to beware the MIC?

Did Ike claim the MIC was reigning over the country? No, he didn't. So lets not compare Ike with nutjob BS.
 
2 years probation; $100K fine

(& 2016 pardon)
 
I think that you're dismissal of the jury's conclusion means that you are the one who must be dismissed, hear?

Hint: one juror's opinion is NOT the "jury's conclusion".
 
Did Ike claim the MIC was reigning over the country? No, he didn't. So lets not compare Ike with nutjob BS.

No he did not use those words, "reigning over the country".

What he did say was to beware the undue influence of a permanent arms industry. If one is able to read between the lines a bit, one can understand what he was talking about.
 
No he did not use those words, "reigning over the country".

Good, then stop comparing nutbag idiocy on the internet to Ike. I'm sure he'd appreciate it.
 
Back
Top Bottom