Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : 5spl -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (2002)	7/15/2005 8:54:17 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 2534

You said "Rove didn't name no names". I showed you that he did refer to "Wilson's wife". You showed me where a REPORTER said he said that. A reporter not under oath, either. Not that that makes a difference to some. Remember Slick Willie? All that OTHER sources are quoting that reporter. Or do you believe they were all physically present? Who is this "you" I am supposed to be part of??? I believe they're called "liberals". Do you deny membership? Do you honestly believe anyone would believe such a denial? You are equating treason with adultery in terms of gravity and importance of situation and importance? Really? Did Slick commit adultery? Absolutely. Did Rove commit treason? Well the first question is what did he say to whom? That's the subject of much debate. Much less clear cut that you want it to be. The real question maybe ought to be "Did Rove commit any crime at all?" Then there's that whole can of worms called "treason". You see, we play the game a little differently here. Treason isn't just whatever happens to piss off your absolute dictator; unlike you, we have none. Treason is defined in the Constitution: The Constitution of the United States of America Article III Section. 3. Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. Did he wage war against the United States? Clearly not. Did he "adhere" to the enemies of the US? No. Did he give them Aid and Comfort? I think you'd be hard put to argue that he did. I also think you're going to have a severe problem with that "two witness" requirement, since apparently there was at best one. I doubt Rove will confess to a crime he did not commit. I suggest you try again. I don't think your fantasies will stand up in court, regardless of how much that might disappoint you. I suggest you take this back to those liberal cesspools from which your wishes cames; they need an introduction to reality. Is that what they call "partisan" behaviour in the US? No. It's what's called "rule of law". As has been proven in the past, not even the President is above it, unlike your absolute dictator. Re Clinton - Yes, I do remember but I certainly don't feel responsible for one political party's partisan bickering against another in your country. I am not a member of either of your major parties, so really don't feel responsible in the least for what passes for politicking between them. Madam, that was an example of what is "evidence" and what is not. As an aside, let me comment that your ignorance of the American Constitution, American law, and American jurisprudence is rather impressive too. You might not like the outcome, but that's too **** bad. If that's a problem, I suggest you stick to paying attention to the mood swings of your absolute dictator and leave American matters to Americans.