Triet Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden said earlier this week (9/3/2008) that he and running mate Barack Obama could pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration if they are elected in November. Biden's comments, first reported by ABC news, attracted little notice on a day dominated by the drama surrounding his Republican counterpart, Alaska governor Sarah Palin. But his statements represent the Democrats' strongest vow so far this year to investigate alleged misdeeds committed during the Bush years. When asked during a campaign event in Deerfield Beach, Florida, whether he would "pursue the violations that have been made against our Constitution by the present administration", Biden answered in the affirmative. "We will not be stopped from pursuing any criminal offence that's occurred," he continued, going on to praise congressional committees for the deliberate pace of their inquiries into alleged Bush administration misdeeds. Members of Congress are "doing the right thing, they're not making false accusations about anything ... they're collecting data, subpoenaing records, they're building a file", Biden said. "If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued, not out of vengeance, not out of retribution, out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president -- no one is above the law." Obama sounded a similar note in April, vowing that if elected, he would ask his attorney general to initiate a prompt review of Bush-era actions to distinguish between possible "genuine crimes" and "really bad policies". "f crimes have been committed, they should be investigated," Obama told the Philadelphia Daily News. "You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve." When asked about his comments by Fox news today, Biden said he has no evidence that criminal charges would be warranted and no intention of pursuing action against the current president. "What is true is the United States Congress is trying to preserve records on questions that relate to whether or not the law has been violated by anyone," Biden said, adding: "But, you know, there's been an awful lot of unsavoury stuff that's gone on. And the mere fact ... that it occurred in a previous administration doesn't mean [a subsequent] Justice Department, if, in fact, there's evidence, shouldn't pursue them. "But I have no evidence of any of that. No one's talking about pursuing President Bush criminally." Congressional Democrats have issued a flurry of subpoenas this year to senior Bush administration aides as part of a broad inquiry into the authorisation of torturous interrogation tactics used at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp. Three Bush White House veterans have been held in criminal contempt of congressional committees for refusing to respond to subpoenas in an inquiry on the firing of federal prosecutors: former counsel Harriet Miers, former political adviser Karl Rove, and current chief of staff Josh Bolten. The battle over Miers's and Bolten's testimony is currently before a federal court. Your boy is going to be a big flop in Washington, and I can't wait till it happens.-Rocky RhodesMccain is weak, lame and a poor choice for President-JimP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Williams Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Nevermind... I thought you were asking about prior convictions. I don't know the answer to this one. I thought Nixon pardoned Agnew before he was convicted. It was a long time ago and I don't remember for certain, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditch Jigger Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Was Nixon convicted--or even charged--when Ford pardoned him? "…if catching fish is your only objective, you are either new to the game or too narrowly focused on measurable results.” - D. Stuver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Williams Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Or maybe that's what I'm thinking about, Ditch. I do seem to remember during that period one of the players being pardoned without ever being tried for anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick9915 Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Didn't Bush try to pardon himself for war crimes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
younger1955 Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Ford pardoned Nixon before he was ever officially charged. If I remember correctly, it was given one month after Nixon's resignation and was one of Ford's first official acts. At the same time, he gave amnesty to all the Vietnam War draft dodgers, which was nice since it allowed someone I knew to come home from Canada. Call me Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triet Posted November 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 2 ways to look at it. A pre-emptive pardon may say that someone is guilty or it may just be a notice not to harrass them. I wonder if Bush can pardon anyone who has ever worked for him for anything that they have done or may ever do Your boy is going to be a big flop in Washington, and I can't wait till it happens.-Rocky RhodesMccain is weak, lame and a poor choice for President-JimP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Purser Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 I believe Bush I pardoned one of the Iran/Contra figures before he went on trial. There was a lot of controversy about whether or not it was legal and a lot of speculation that it was done to prevent congress from offering the guy a plea deal in return for testimony about what really happend, who knew it, and when. Can't remember the guy's name right now. Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well-warmed, and well-fed. - Herman Melville Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Patrick, Do you have a source or was your question hysterically driven? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick9915 Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Patrick, Do you have a source or was your question hysterically driven? wBUkxvfL_eE I can't say if it's the truth because it's clearly an Op-Ed piece but it was on a somewhat reputable news channel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditch Jigger Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Boy, Jack Cafferty's come up in the world. I remember when he was doing the 11 o'clock news on Channel 5 in NY--when it was an independent in the pre-Fox days. I think one newspaper critic used to refer to him as Jack Cadaver because he looked like he was a walking skeleton He's a buffoon. Don't take him seriously. "…if catching fish is your only objective, you are either new to the game or too narrowly focused on measurable results.” - D. Stuver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Please, Dems. Expend your hard fought, newly won political capital on pursuing 'war crimes' charges against George W. Bush. Nothing will confirm the Dems as looney tunes tools of the wacked-out Left faster than that. Go for it. I dare you. I double dare you. It's what the 'people' want. "I think, that all right thinking people, are sick & tired of being told that they're sick & tired of being sick & tired. I, for one, am not. And I'm sick & tired of being told that I am." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick9915 Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Please, Dems. Expend your hard fought, newly won political capital on pursuing 'war crimes' charges against George W. Bush. Nothing will confirm the Dems as looney tunes tools of the wacked-out Left faster than that. Go for it. I dare you. I double dare you. It's what the 'people' want. So you don't think any of what Dubya has done is a war crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Williams Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 So you don't think any of what Dubya has done is a war crime? Absolutely, I think democrats should hound him mercilessly, pressing forward with everything they have. Leave no stone unturned. Go for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choppersdad Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 So you don't think any of what Dubya has done is a war crime? WOW...just effing WOW!!! The phrase "nut job" comes to mind for many here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.47546a87236486dddbeeedfca043fbd6.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to register here in order to participate.
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now