SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Neocon who wrote (126616)2/12/2001 1:33:31 PM
From: Little Joe  Read Replies (1) of 769667
 
Neocon:

"My own take is that the Boland Amendment was unconstitutional, and that the Administration had a moral obligation to the Contras"

I do agree that the Boland may have been unconstitutional and was vague in its meaning. But the real difference between Reagan and Clinton, is that what Reagan did was not to benefit himself. Whether he was legally correct or not, he certainly was not acting to protect himself personally. I have never understood dems outrage about this, since Congress deliberately writes vague laws and then complains that they were "broken" when someone trys to take advantage of the ambiguity. I was an attorney for a government agency for many years. Trust me when I say most of the laws Congress passes cannot be understood without Court interpretation, which is ridiculous. (Not necessarily the court interpretation, but the idea that our laws require so much interpretation.

Little joe
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News