Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) was aghast. He was indignant as hell about how having a high public official involved in something like perjury and obstruction of justice can damage the very foundation on which our nation was built -- and he had the harsh words to show for it.
"By his words and deeds he chose to place himself above the law. By his words and deeds he has undermined the rule of law in America to the great harm of this nation," the Kansas Republican said. "By his own words and deeds, he has undermined the truth-finding function of the judiciary, at great harm to that branch of our government. By his words and deeds, he had done great harm to the notions of honesty and integrity that form the underpinnings of this great republic."
And here's the Brownback kicker: "We have lost many things over the past few months: trust in public officials, respect for the rule of law, confidence in the truth of the White House's public statements. But perhaps the most tragic loss has been the steady erosion of our societal standards."
That's Brownback in his closed-door impeachment statement on President Bill Clinton, that was read into the Congressional Record on February 12, 1999.
You didn’t get all excited thinking he was commenting on that Scooter Libby thing, did you?
I can understand if you did. After all, Libby was convicted of those same charges and sentenced within federal guidelines to a 30-month prison sentence, only to have his friend George W. Bush decide on Monday that anything over, well, zero days in jail was "excessive" when it comes to a White House crony.
But then again, Brownback is hardly alone in the hypocritical silence being shown by the very same Republican Senators who in 1999 voted guilty on both the perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Clinton. The vote took place on that February 12, with the Senate acquitting Clinton of both articles of impeachment -- the perjury charge got 45 guilty votes while the obstruction-of-justice article resulted in a 50-50 split.
Of the 25 Republican Senators still in the Senate and who voted that day to convict Clinton on both articles of impeachment, not one of them has issued a public statement on the Libby sentence commutation in the three days since it occurred.
Not one.
There's not even a statement of support for Bush's lawless decision -- except from Fred Thompson who, while no longer in the Senate, has his sights set on convincing people that he's fit to be the next seedy Republican to occupy the White House.
All of this struck me as rather strange, so I thought I would go back and look at what some of them had to say about the rule of law, integrity and all of that stuff when it involved a Democrat and not one of their own.
And you're not going to believe this: What seems to be OK with them now, wasn't acceptable back in 1999.
Here's Wayne Allard (R-CO) on President Clinton:
"The Constitution is what preserves the rule of law, and guarantees that we remain a nation of laws, not of men.
"I hold the President to a higher standard because he is the chief law enforcement official of the nation. If he is above the law, then we have a double standard; one for the powerful, and one for the rest.
"The sworn oath is central not only to our Constitution, but also to the administration of justice. Our legal system would not function without it."
And John McCain (R-AZ) seems to think that swearing to tell the truth is a pretty darned important thing to abide by:
"All of my life, I have been instructed never to swear an oath to my country in vain. In my former profession, those who violated their sworn oath were punished severely and considered outcasts from our society. I do not hold the President to the same standard that I hold military officers to. I hold him to a higher standard."
Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) gives a moving statement about how we should hope that history looks back kindly at how we observed the rule of law:
"I was reminded as well, however, that the laws of our Country are applicable to us all, including the President, and they must be obeyed. The concept of equal justice under law and the importance of absolute truth in legal proceedings is the foundation of our justice system in the courts.
"A hundred years from now, when history looks back to this moment, we can hope for a conclusion that our Constitution has been applied fairly and survives, that we have come to principled judgments about matters of national importance, and that the rule of law in American has been sustained."
And George Voinovich (R-OH) made a good case for impeachment no matter the circumstances -- are we listening Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid? -- when he said "I sincerely believe that this country can survive the removal of a popular president who has forfeited public trust. But, our country cannot survive the abandonment of trust itself."
Imagine how well we could survive the removal of a president who's about as popular as Ann Coulter at a Democratic National Committee mixer.
So given all of that and the equally strident statements made in 1999 by so many of their colleagues, it's odd that there's not one similarly scathing statement about George W. Bush deciding to effectively pardon a convicted criminal just because he's a loyal Bushie -- oh, and also to keep him from coming forward with the truth about the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame.
It could be that the Senate is in recess and that all of their press secretaries are vacationing in Nepal and simply can't get to their laptops. No, it can't be that, because they seem to be finding time to comment on other issues that, perhaps, they consider more pressing. Kit Bond (R-MO) has released three statements since Monday but they have titles like "Bond Attends New National Guard Facility Ribbon-Cutting" and "Bond: Good Vision is Fundamental to Learning." Judd Gregg (R-NH) is all atwitter this week over his support for "Granite State Ocean And Fisheries Research" and Dick Lugar (R-IN) is incredibly excited about the "…first E-85 ethanol pump in Washington, D.C."
But maybe it's just possible that all of these Republican Senators are a bunch of cynical, hypocritical cowards who simply don’t have the guts to speak with what little conscience they have on this issue.
I think I'll go with that one.
Update: Wow, a lot of you are really curious about the 25 Republican Senators (who are still in the Senate) who were so harsh on President Clinton in 1999, only to turn a blind eye to the Libby commutation. Here they are.
_______
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
Need I remind you?
However the Democrats are doing the exact same thing by screaming about Dick Cheney and Haliburton yet suspiciously avoiding concerns or even talking about Diane Feinstein's MILCON scandal,
Diane Feinstein did not steal 2 elections.
Diane Feinstein is not the vice-president of the United States.
She is not the incompetent Secretary of Defense.
She is not the eternally-indolent Secretary of State.
Screaming?
I'd believe that if something were happening because of it.
No impeachment proceedings are scheduled yet.
I think you are confused between local and federal issues.
Corruption is corruption, but what has happened in the case of Cheney is much worse than anything Feinstein has done. Let her face institutional censure or local repercussions.
Something more profound is necessary in the case of the Bush Executive and you know it.
A waking dream of life and light
Hath left me brokenhearted, Edgar A. Poe.
You're serious, aren't you?
Steal 2 elections? GW is a nightmare, but sadly he won both fair and square. No matter how you count the votes, he won both elections.
Confused between local and federal issues? That would be you. Did you not know Dianne Feinstein is a Senator? That IS federal.
Stealing or redirecting BILLIONS of dollars to companies that profited off the war, to companies your significant other owns is not a significant crime? I would posit that it is worse than what Scooter Libby was charged of.
Democrats are just as corrupt as Republicans. Maybe someday you'll realize that they're two sides of the same coin. *shrug*
memory enhancers would be applicable here
Where were you during those times ,sounds like you were in a whole different world than the rest of us,Gore won the popular vote even in Florida thats when GW stepped up and stated ,wait that can't be, we were supposed to win in Florida and all the reps appointed by GW's brother moved into action and changed the results to favor GW.
And the dems are not just the other side of the coin, the dems are mad the reps are maddogs. I won't even go into what happened in Ohio and half dozen other states the last presidential election just read something besides comic books and you'll see for yourself.
A ≠B
As "crasmane" has pointed out, this is not an equivalent equation. Are there Dems who are corrupt? Don't tell me you're surprised the answer is yes. But there's just no comparison when you stack them next to Repug corruption... that we ALL KNOW ABOUT. Now add what we don't know... yet.
I suppose now we'll all be hearing about Al Gore's son being caught with a joint or two and some Xanax he doesn't have a prescription for [from Rush no less...oy!], and comparing that to the treason of outing a covert CIA agent for political points.
I'm sorry... A ≠B ... period.
you are...correct. sadly.
But the Ds are not really an opposition party, now, are they. Your "coin" metaphor is appropo.
However, there is a wee bit of difference in scale between Feinstein or Jefferson and cheney (who started two wars in order, partially, to funnel cash to his company, and, by extension, to himself). I don't think the body count attributable to Feinstein's graft is anywhere near the 700K or so that cheney has tallied.
_______"We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you!" - Greta Thunberg
When Feinstein declares
When Feinstein declares herself to be a fifth branch of the federal government, then I'm sure we'll be just as concerned about her as we are about the likes of Scooter, his ex-boss Dick Cheney and their recently announced fourth branch of government.
A SC member for around 16 hours, I see. It's sort of humorous when lurking wingnuts get so torqued by something they read here on SC that they sign on, just to parrot some talking point circulating around Wingnutville.
_______Have you torqued a wingnut today?
Republicans want less government for the same reason criminals want less cops.
The rule of law means nothing
after the 2000 selection.
_______A waking dream of life and light
Hath left me brokenhearted, Edgar A. Poe.
That's not the only hypocracy
Flashback: November 2000.
I remember bush crime family don James Baker, flown in to Florida, to stop the damned recount, in selection 2000. I remember how gravely scantimonious he looked, and how for weeks, he constantly had his 3 chins bobbing, going on about "THE RULE OF LAW!" We can't violate the RULE OF LAW, it is the very bedrock of our republic, etc ect, ad nauseum.
Now that the shoe's on the other foot, We are confronted with yet another groove-warn republikan phrase "You have got to understand". That has been their immediate answer to ALL their fuck ups, all their red-handed crime and treason "You have got to understand", as if to say "If you weren't so fucking stupid, you would see that sometimes you have to break the law in order to promote THE RULE OF LAW".
Of course, the toothless democrat congress will do NOTHING, maybe a couple of them will huff and puff. OF COURSE LIBBY WILL BE PARDONED. Perhaps on the last day of this mis-administration, I wouldn't be a bit surprized if bush didn't pardon HIMSELF and cheney. The democrats would huff a little, puff a little, but bush will be grinning ear to ear, thinking "You aren't going to haul MY ass to the Hague for war crimes".
WORST PRESIDENT EVER? I guess it depends upon your perspective. If the measure of success is the accomplishment of goals, then I suppose bush is a success.
If you count extermination of the middle class, an unfair tax burden, an illegal war, the reduction and abolishment of many civil liberties, all goals of the administration WHICH HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED,
by looking at it thru that perspective, then bush is the MOST SUCCESSFUL PRESIDENT EVER.
I am sick unto death of all of this. Thomas Jefferson's noble experiment had a mighty run, but in the end was extinguished by Their GREED and Our SLOTH and TIMIDITY...
Some things never change: winter, spring, summer, fall and rEPUBLICAN LIES....
Intriguing Legal Question
"Perhaps on the last day of this mis-administration, I wouldn't be a bit surprized if bush didn't pardon HIMSELF and cheney."
I wouldn't be a bit surprised either. But it would raise an intriguing legal question: Can a president pardon somebody in advance, i.e. before the person has even been charged?
Second question: Where can I get me one o' them "Hypocrites R Us" buttons?
Looks like it
Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon of any crimes associated with Watergate and Dicky had not at that time been charged with anything. Likewise, Bush the first pardoned Casper Weinberger of any crimes associated with Iran-Contra after Cap was charged but a couple weeks before the trial was to start. Looks like preemptive pardons are part of our history.
_______Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana
It's Obvious
The Republicans were O So Moral when it came to Bill Clinton "lying" about a personal indiscretion that frankly was nobody's business but his and Hillary's. It was only a fluke that it went as far as it did. There a big difference between a blow job and covering for someone that blew the cover of a functioning CIA Agent. The Republicans show once again how repugnant they really are.If Bush has done one thing that I would like to thank him for, it's completely destroying the GOP.
_______Timothy V. Gatto
"completely destroying the GOP"?????
It's a nice thought, but you may want to get your hands on a wooden stake...ya know, just in case.
_______“When I was crossing the border into Canada, they asked if I had any firearms with me.
I said, "Well, what do you need?”
― Steven Wright
lol
Bill Clinton lied to a grand jury, he also conspired to coerce witnesses to lie under oath. It doesn't matter if he was talking about his garden, his porno collection or sex. Lying when you're under oath, and conspiracy are huge criminal offenses.
Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction, but he did not do it in front of a judge.
And you can be pretty damned sure
that bush will never let himself be put in a position where he is held responsible for anything he says. If he talks at all, he will be sitting on cheney's lap - no oath, no transcripts, preapproved questions and a written guarantee that no one will ever discuss openly what was said behind closed doors.
_______Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana
K-CR, just for
K-CR, just for clarificaiton, my post was in response to the nut-job and not to you.
Our newest nutcase!
Hey nut-job, how is life in La La land? Who are you freeturds blowing for President in 2008?
I guess lying to congress (a felony) is not lying to a judge, so Smirk is Kewl. It is funny how Starr couldn't get enough evidence to indict Clinton, even though he had widened his sixty million dollar investigation beyond Whitewater to include evidence from the Paula Jones case. of course, that is the same as your boy Scooter who was convicted of felonies.
Now that the coke-snorting, alcoholic deserter has commuted Scooter's sentence, he can continue his pursuit of family values by writing a sequel to his novel that involved a child being forced to have sex with a bear, and Smirk can call his good buddy Jeff Gannon.
Bush merely told lethal lies front of the whole country
So it's only logical, proportionate and relevant to keep on harping about the Clenis while our soldiers and Iraqis continue to die everyday and our country is bled dry as a consequence of Dubya's lies. But hey, at least Dubya didn't lie in front of a judge or a grand jury.
In Wingnutville, it's also well known that contrary to popular belief, most of the rest of the world lost respect and trust for America back when Clenis lied about his blow jobs.
Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction, but he did not do it in front of a judge.
I guess the wingnut also thinks (using the t-word loosely) someone caught shoplifting a $2 trinket from Wal*Mart should receive the same sentence as CEO's caught plundering companies and ruining thousands of lives in the process. After all, both crimes are the same -- stealing.
_______Have you torqued a wingnut today?
Republicans want less government for the same reason criminals want less cops.
I don't accept lying to us as any better than lying to a judge
Ignoring the fact that GW nor Dickey will go in front of a judge or testify under oath. Further excluding the oath of office he did swear to,,,,,
So lying is okay so long as its not in front of a judge.
Sorry that doesn't cut it for me, I deserve truth even if I am not an appointed judge. Lying to me is no less bad in fact its worse in someways, I pay the mans salary along with the rest of America. Now when it comes to whats lied about there are varying degrees of forgiveness that need be applied.
The difference between Clintons lie and Gw's and Dicky's etc,, is like comparing spitting on the sidewalk and slicing someones throat on the sidewalk.
Another thing while I am on it, You sit and hear all the "I don't recall" and our attorneys tell us we do not have to comply or technically its not spying on Amercans its spying on possble terrorists from the reps and more so from GW and Co. and its accepted. Clinton lied about a blow job his attorney advised him that when they ask did he have sex with Monica he could theoretically say no because the accepted definition says BJ's fall under fore-play meaning to prepare for or lead up to sex.
However the play on words only works for reps.
can I get a
AMEN TO THAT, best news in 56 years. Now lets hope for no ressurection.
Liby's Crime
So, Bush thinks that 30 months in jail is excessive for the crimes that Libby committed? When he was governor of Texas, he didn't think that the execution of prisoners for their crime was excessive. Some were executed even though they may have been innocent of the crime. And what about torture of so called "terrorists" held without being charged with anything?
why is everyone so surprised?
This whole rotten scene is playing out exactly as we all knew it would. George essentially lets Libby walk for fear he'd sing ; Congress huffs and puffs but nothing can or will be done, and the Republican hypocrites who were ready to throw Bill Clinton to the wolves for an event that in no way affected national security are being their usual double-standarded selves.
Business as usual in George Bush's America .
Scooter knows
exactly where all of the bodies are buried. Now that he has shaken the prison sentence, can the probation and fine be far behind? Dub said that he hadn't ruled out an outright pardon. If Scoots asks, he shall receive.
Neo-cons do not have to serve time - it's in their contracts. Ollie North and John Poindexter of Iran-Contra fame had their sentences reversed or thrown out. Both are doing rather well for one time convicted felons. Spiro Agnew paid back the amount of money he collected in bribes while Governor of Maryland, but never spent any time in the gray bar hotel. Jerry Ford pardoned Nixon before anyone had the opportunity to investigate all of the crimes that had been committed under Dick's watch, much less having time to plan legal maneuvers.
It appears to be enough to rail against graft, corruption, impropriety, degenerate morals or treason as long as it is your political opponent. When it is a slime ball on the same team, it evidently can be overlooked as a peccadillo.
_______Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana
It is more blatantly hypocritical than portrayed in all
of the above comments:
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/07/04/bush-filed-to-uphold-victor-rita-sentence/
HYPOCRITES ON REAGAN CRIMES
PRESIDENT REAGAN SCANDALS
INVESTIGATIONS OF IMPORTANT OFFICIALS
Attorney General—Cabinet--two OIC investigations-no charge
Asst. Attorney General—No Charge
Secretary of Defense—Cabinet—Pardoned
Asst. Sec. Of Defense—Guilty--to Prison
Secretary of Labor—Cabinet—Not Guilty
Secretary of Interior—Cabinet—Guilty—fined
National Security Agency--Director----Cabinet—Guilty
National Security Agency--Director----Cabinet—Guilty—Pardoned
National Security Agency—Director---Cabinet---Resigned
Asst. Secretary of Navy—--Guilty—Fined
Dep. Secretary of Air Force-Guilty—Fined
Director of CIA—Cabinet—Died during investigation
Asst. Director of CIA—Guilty—Fined
Director of HUD—Cabinet--Pled Fifth
Asst. Director of HUD—Guilty
Director of Superfund—Guilty—to Prison
Director of FAA—Guilty-Fined
Director of NASA-Guilty—Fined
Special Asst to President—Guilty
Communications Director for President—Guilty
EPA Administrator—Resigned
Asst. Secretary of State—Guilty
9 Cabinet Members—
REAGANGATES (32)
Illwind-gate
Superfund-gate
Hud
Wed-Tech
Interior
Labor
Oval Office
Lt Colonel
Iran-Contra
Basement
Faa
Nasa
Pentagon
Korea
S & L
Epa
Postal
Agriculture
Hhs
Home loan
Veterans
Fema
Legal Services
Civil Rights
Transportation
Product Safety
Economic Development
Synthetic Fuels
Social Security
Land Management
Osha
Cia
Sources—
Haynes Johnson book “Sleepwalkingâ€
“When The Pentagon Was For Saleâ€â€”Andy Pasztor—(awesome list of criminals)
2 books titled “Scandalsâ€
“The Clothes Lost The Emperorâ€-Paul Slansky (day by day chronology of 1980’s)
“Stealing From Americaâ€â€”
“Landslideâ€-Jane Mayer & Doyle McManus
Nathan Miller book states 233 were investigated
Haynes Johnson states 138 were --charged--indicted--found guilty -- investigated
p.s.—Newt and Gang spent $110,000,000-(GAO number) on Hearings and Investigations on Clinton
and one—(yes 1) person working for President Clinton was Found Guilty of a Felony. Evil man took few trips to ball games , etc. No quid pro quo per OIC –Pals doing what they had done for years—take pal to events. Pled guilty for did not have finances to fight the government and Smaltzsmear. His boss fought 37 such charges and was found not guilty on each charge.
I would appreciate anyone correcting what I write. I try to be honest but do make errors.
Clarence Swinney
Political Historian
Lifeaholics of America—retired
Burlington nc
Thanks. Hope it works.I need simple things.
SC is THE BEST.
corruption: circa last days
corruption: circa last days of william clinton, who was monica lewinsky's mom's boyfriend? NOT a democrat...
_______falloch
....and your point is?
and that compares to GW's mistakes how?
REPUBLICAN CORRUPTION
"The White House, that whole criminal mob, those arrogant goons who see themselves as justified to operate above the law-they disgrace democracy by claiming that what they do they do for democracy! They should be in jail."
"They should impeach him. Why can't they impeach him? If he's lying-if all these otherclowns are running his administration for him-then he's too stupid to be president. Either way, they should impeach him. In Canada, they'd call for a vote of confidence and he'd be gone!"
This is from a novel by John Irving, "A Prayer for Ownen Meany"(1989). Just fill in the blanks, Reagan/ Bush.
How soon things are forgotten.
NOTHING CHANGES IF NOTHING CHANGES..................
_______Nancy Shaw
said it before and I'll say it again
99.99% of republicans are all the same political copies of the rest.
Around election time you hear many of them shout about how they are different than the others so elect me. Unfortunately for this country a lot of people fall for it too. Take a couple hours and research our hisory ,you'll clearly find that our country always suffered during and after their terms in office, not the business side of America but the working side.
Do the dems always do just good things? nope but the good out weigh the bad by a large margin the good usually benefitting the working side over the business side,thats why business side always hypes how bad things are under dem rule its bad for them because its good for the working stiff who is trying to raise a family and corporate profits.
One more time I'll say it,
All these reps are the same,they talk loud but do what the party says do. Good bad , right wrong for the people has nothing to do with party line.
K-CR the following post was
K-CR the following post was to the nut-job, not you
Book Titles
FYI, the Haynes Johnson book mentioned earlier is actually called "Sleepwalking Through History," and the Paul Slansky book is "The Clothes Have No Emperor."
Follow us
Become a fan
Subscribe
Silence on Capitol Hill
I agree that the Republicans have been silent on Scooter Libby.
However the Democrats are doing the exact same thing by screaming about Dick Cheney and Haliburton yet suspiciously avoiding concerns or even talking about Diane Feinstein's MILCON scandal, where she was giving away unsolicited contracts totaling BILLIONS to her husband's companies for years, knowingly and without disclosure.
There are two sides to this coin, it's a pity you can only report half. A bit hypocritical, wouldn't you say?