- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 126,856
- Likes
- 147,502
- Points
- 115
Those are democrats. We're talking about a republican. Big difference.
Texas Gov Rick Perry Indicted
- Thread starter The_Lillard_King
- Start date
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
Those are democrats. We're talking about a republican. Big difference.
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,113
- Likes
- 10,942
- Points
- 113
You can add Nagin, who was just a mayor, and a bunch of Democratic governors in New Jersey.
George Ryan is a republican.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 126,856
- Likes
- 147,502
- Points
- 115
Once the chargers were proven true his republican party membership was revoked and it turned out he was democrat trying to make the republicans look bad. I'm surprised you didn't know about this.
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,113
- Likes
- 10,942
- Points
- 113
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...t-attorney-lehmberg-politics-column/14286703/
USA Today, for the win.
Again.
USA Today, for the win.
Again.
maxiep
RIP Dr. Jack
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 28,321
- Likes
- 5,919
- Points
- 113
Oh, now I'm certain politics didn't play a role in this indictment...
http://mediatrackers.org/national/2...ve-democratic-party-delegate-jury-proceedings
http://mediatrackers.org/national/2...ve-democratic-party-delegate-jury-proceedings
The_Lillard_King
Westside
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 12,405
- Likes
- 310
- Points
- 83
Everything about this situation wreaks of politics.
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,113
- Likes
- 10,942
- Points
- 113
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...est_thing_ive _seen_in_my_entire_career.html
SCARBOROUGH: They are talking about – yeah, this has to, because if you look at the statute it can't be the veto because that’s a governmental action by a governmental body. In this case, they are indicating him because the prosecutor is so desperate to do this, they’re indicting him for political speech which, of course, is the most protected speech under the United States Constitution, and he's done it all publicly, right? Nobody is suggesting that he's whispering behind closed doors and saying give me cash. I thought when I first heard this, when this news first broke Saturday afternoon, I said he must have taken cash under the table. There had to be more to this story. No! They were public veto threats that they indicted him for which, using this logic, Ronald Reagan could have been indicted when he threw that huge budget down saying if you send it to me, I will veto this budget and somebody lose their job because that, they said, we are going to veto -- I mean, is there anything else out there that he has done other than make public statements?
ROSS RAMSEY: He did a couple of things. It's not just that he made a public statement. That he said I'm going to defund this agency or I'm going to take away the state's funding for this agency if she doesn't quit. Now, one of the reasons that the partisans got involved on the other side and made the original complaint was that hers is the office that investigates state governments. She is the watchdog over public corruption, cases and things like that and Perry is in the case of a fox taking away the food supply of the watchdog at the – the henhouse and so there is a conflict of interest in it and a lot of people said at the time that he spoke up, you know, you ought to back out of this and you can veto that funding and you can demand her resignation, but you can't tie those two things together.
BRZEZINSKI: I totally agree and the question did he have the authority to do this and if he did, he did. Mark Halperin, I guess one other facet of this you could argue that she was investigated things – investigating things that were of very close interest to him.
MARK HALPERIN: She potentially was. This is the stupidest thing I've seen, I think, in my entire career. I hope some judge throws it out right away. It's not just kind of funny and ridiculous, but it’s an infringement on individual liberty. He’s got a First Amendment right just cause he’s governor of Texas and I think it’s – like you said, it's easy to joke about this, but this is a serious thing. It is ridiculous that he was indicted for this. Ridiculous.
[video=youtube;8z0lY9C5oC0]
SCARBOROUGH: They are talking about – yeah, this has to, because if you look at the statute it can't be the veto because that’s a governmental action by a governmental body. In this case, they are indicating him because the prosecutor is so desperate to do this, they’re indicting him for political speech which, of course, is the most protected speech under the United States Constitution, and he's done it all publicly, right? Nobody is suggesting that he's whispering behind closed doors and saying give me cash. I thought when I first heard this, when this news first broke Saturday afternoon, I said he must have taken cash under the table. There had to be more to this story. No! They were public veto threats that they indicted him for which, using this logic, Ronald Reagan could have been indicted when he threw that huge budget down saying if you send it to me, I will veto this budget and somebody lose their job because that, they said, we are going to veto -- I mean, is there anything else out there that he has done other than make public statements?
ROSS RAMSEY: He did a couple of things. It's not just that he made a public statement. That he said I'm going to defund this agency or I'm going to take away the state's funding for this agency if she doesn't quit. Now, one of the reasons that the partisans got involved on the other side and made the original complaint was that hers is the office that investigates state governments. She is the watchdog over public corruption, cases and things like that and Perry is in the case of a fox taking away the food supply of the watchdog at the – the henhouse and so there is a conflict of interest in it and a lot of people said at the time that he spoke up, you know, you ought to back out of this and you can veto that funding and you can demand her resignation, but you can't tie those two things together.
BRZEZINSKI: I totally agree and the question did he have the authority to do this and if he did, he did. Mark Halperin, I guess one other facet of this you could argue that she was investigated things – investigating things that were of very close interest to him.
MARK HALPERIN: She potentially was. This is the stupidest thing I've seen, I think, in my entire career. I hope some judge throws it out right away. It's not just kind of funny and ridiculous, but it’s an infringement on individual liberty. He’s got a First Amendment right just cause he’s governor of Texas and I think it’s – like you said, it's easy to joke about this, but this is a serious thing. It is ridiculous that he was indicted for this. Ridiculous.
[video=youtube;8z0lY9C5oC0]
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,524
- Likes
- 25,678
- Points
- 113
Similarly, there were two Texas DAs that were arrested for DWI that Perry did not call upon to resign. They were Republicans.
barfo
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,113
- Likes
- 10,942
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,524
- Likes
- 25,678
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,524
- Likes
- 25,678
- Points
- 113
That's a pretty funny comment since you've been madly quoting every right-wing talking point (and talking head) in this thread.
barfo
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,113
- Likes
- 10,942
- Points
- 113
I read your talking points, too. I know your sources now.
Those DAs weren't head of the Public Integrity Unit and who were in jail.
It's funny that you think Axelrod and most recently Halperin are right wingers.
Those DAs weren't head of the Public Integrity Unit and who were in jail.
It's funny that you think Axelrod and most recently Halperin are right wingers.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,524
- Likes
- 25,678
- Points
- 113
gee, you've discovered google?
Yes, it's true they weren't in charge of investigating Rick Perry. Just other citizens.
I don't think that. Although I don't really know who Halperin is.
barfo
Fez Hammersticks
スーパーバッド Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 29,191
- Likes
- 9,889
- Points
- 113
Ah, this warms my cold black heart.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 126,856
- Likes
- 147,502
- Points
- 115
Hopefully just the democrats.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 34,408
- Likes
- 43,889
- Points
- 113
I dont know if it should be a felony, but if the threat of veto power is being used (abused?) to expand the power of the office beyond that which it statutorily holds, then I would suggest that there is a problem.
maxiep
RIP Dr. Jack
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 28,321
- Likes
- 5,919
- Points
- 113
This woman has a special place in government. She runs the part of the government that makes sure no one abuses their power. Yet, what does she do when she's brought in blowing almost three times the legal limit? She tries to use her position to bully the police officers.
Democrat, Republican, no matter. This woman has lost the public trust. Replace her with a Democrat, who cares? However, this woman needs to go.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 34,408
- Likes
- 43,889
- Points
- 113
I haven't watched the video, so I'll ask: did she offer or threaten action available specifically to her position in order to bully the officers, or did she simply pull the "Do you know who I am?" card? IMO, one is "abuse of power", the other is not.
As far as removing her from her position, aren't there statutorily enacted mechanisms available by which that can be accomplished (eg, recall)? If she's "lost the public trust", doesn't the public (ie, the electorate) have a process by which to demonstrate that? Perry attempting an end-run around said process is akin to vigilante justice. It's no less his job to force her resignation than it is my job to sentence an alleged criminal.
Again, I'm not necessarily saying she was right or should keep her job, and I'm not saying that Perry should do time, but I do think he overstepped his bounds.
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,113
- Likes
- 10,942
- Points
- 113
First the NY Times, now the Washington Post. For Perry? Who'd have ever thought that possible. They're normally as partisan as the grand jurors were.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rrys-indictment-is-bad-for-the-united-states/
There is little question that the indictment is absurd. And after watching the video of Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg’s behavior after her drunken-driving arrest, it’s no wonder that Perry declared a loss of public confidence in her ability to lead the public integrity unit. If you have not watched the video yet, tune in. It’s on its way to being a classic in U.S. politics.
But this indictment is bigger than just Texas. Proper prosecution of abusive public officials is a good thing. It reassures the public that the checks and balances in our democracy are working. Concocted, phony and retaliatory prosecutions serve only to reinforce the public’s skepticism about the motives of our country’s political leadership and undermine the public trust. If we needed further erosion of the public faith in our government, this indictment certainly supplies it.
Bogus charges against a political foe erode the relevancy of legitimate corruption charges when they are actually needed and warranted. By pursuing Perry’s indictment, the Democrats might actually do Perry some good. But in the meantime, they are contributing to the further disintegration of the ability of our two-party system to create a government that functions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rrys-indictment-is-bad-for-the-united-states/
There is little question that the indictment is absurd. And after watching the video of Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg’s behavior after her drunken-driving arrest, it’s no wonder that Perry declared a loss of public confidence in her ability to lead the public integrity unit. If you have not watched the video yet, tune in. It’s on its way to being a classic in U.S. politics.
But this indictment is bigger than just Texas. Proper prosecution of abusive public officials is a good thing. It reassures the public that the checks and balances in our democracy are working. Concocted, phony and retaliatory prosecutions serve only to reinforce the public’s skepticism about the motives of our country’s political leadership and undermine the public trust. If we needed further erosion of the public faith in our government, this indictment certainly supplies it.
Bogus charges against a political foe erode the relevancy of legitimate corruption charges when they are actually needed and warranted. By pursuing Perry’s indictment, the Democrats might actually do Perry some good. But in the meantime, they are contributing to the further disintegration of the ability of our two-party system to create a government that functions.