Enjoy this Fourth of July because this may be our last.

This has been a horrible couple of weeks for Lady Liberty and Uncle Sam.

The Fascist Five have been dominating the Supreme Court in decision after decision, ignoring precedent and legislating from the bench so brazenly they have openly written about how they would do away with Roe v Wade "if they could" and how they think that forcing a school not to discriminate is somehow "a form of racism". They have overturned the standing opinion that "A student's right to free speech does not end at the classroom door." and have now said that a school officials right to discipline a student extends outside the classroom and have left gaping legal questions in their wake... "How far does a teacher's right to discipline a student extend? ...Into the home?"

I should also mention that Justices Thomas, Alito and Roberts are all guilty of Lying under Oath to Congress. They all said under oath that they would abide by Stare Decisis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stare_decisis)(precedent) during their confirmation hearings before Congress, but in four of their last five decisions they have purposely ignored precedent, thus putting the lie to their words.

And to top it all off, yesterday Bush commutes "Scooter" Libby's sentence because he said it was "harsh"...

Yes, this is the same guy who bragged about how many people he executed as governor of Texas.

Lets remember what Scooter was convicted of:

two counts of perjury, one count of obstruction of justice in a grand jury investigation, and one of the two counts of making false statements to federal investigators

And lets remember what this case is ultimately about, the outing of an entire undercover operation run by the CIA that has cost an untold number of lives as the undercover operatives of Brewster Jennings were all left exposed and it severely damaged America's intelligence about nuclear proliferation worldwide and ironically, especially towards Iran.

What does Bush do with this guy who got caught covering up what should be one of the biggest scandals in American history?

He lets him walk.

Oh, he has to pay a "fine" of $250k...pocket change for a multimillionaire like Scooter and his friends.

He already has that covered with a very tidy profit on top of it. (http://www.scooterlibby.com/)

Yes, crime certainly did pay for Scooter Libby.

I am forcibly reminded of Barbara Jordan's words (http://thesarcasticcynic.blogspot.com/2007/04/what-would-barbara-jordan-say-about.html):

James Madison, from the Virginia ratification convention. "If the President be connected in any suspicious manner with any person and there be grounds to believe that he will shelter him, he may be impeached."

But it won't happen and we all know it. Why?

Because the Democrats only barely have control of Congress. They lack the seats.

And instead of seeing the "Checks and Balances" at work, we all get to witness as our system is perverted to benefit the privileged few right in front of our eyes... with more than impunity... with contempt.

And instead of seeing badly needed action to remedy these critical wounds to our Democracy, true Patriots like myself are left furious and frustrated this Fourth of July, wondering what happened to America and why we celebrate this holiday anymore anyway...

But enjoy this Fourth of July anyway, because we are only one disaster away from Bush instituting Presidential Directive 51 (http://thesarcasticcynic.blogspot.com/2007/05/bushs-latest-attack-on-constitution.html)and ending the existence of the United States of America anyway.

From here (http://thesarcasticcynic.blogspot.com/2007/07/crime-paid-off-big-time-for-scooter.html).

yes, this will be our last 4th of July because of scooter libby :rolleyes:
one of the biggest scandals in american history?

man, you are really trying to bring fear again arent you? Sadly, you forget that not everyone is complelty ignorant of history, which is bad for you and your kind, because a completly ignorant public is what you need to acomplish whatever it is you try to acomplish with such obvious bullshit and exageration.

yes, this will beour last 4th of July because of scooter libby

I see your reading comprehension is up to second grade level Trav. Quite an improvement. :rolleyes:


one of the biggest scandals in american history?

Yes of course. The outting of an entire undercover CIA operation at Brewster Jennings, crippling our intelligence about proliferation of nuclear materials and costing an untold number of lives as uncover operatives around the world were left exposed in compromising positions.

But you would actually gave to give a shit about America instead of just your political party in order to see why this is a big deal, so that rules you out Trav.


Sadly, you forget that not everyone is complelty ignorant of history,
which is bad for you and your kind, because a completly ignorant public is what oyu need to acomplish whatever it is you try to acomplish with such obvious bullshit and exageration

ROFL!!! Your ignorance knows no bounds Trav.

It was Karl Rove who described YOU, their base, as "ignorant of history, inattentive to the news and possessed of short memories."

He certainly has your number Trav!

:thumbs:

Lets break out the violins for the CIA. we all know the left wing loves the CIA and only wants to protect them and their operations! your sucha phony man. you dont care about the CIA, you care about how fake concern for their covert missions can help you "get bush and rove". No one is buying it. Save your pathetic attempts to insult me by sayig I dont care about America too. Its about the most childish thing you can say.

Yes of course. The outting of an entire undercover CIA operation at Brewster Jennings,.....
Richard Armitage admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Novak about Superspy.
Karl Rove admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Bob Woodward about Superspy.

Neither of them got convicted, tried or even indicted for this.

Does that tell you anything about her true covert status?????

C'mon already.


And you're either falling into a trap or doing this purposely, but Scooter Libby's trial and conviction had nothing to do with Valerie Plame's status as an operative.
There was NO case to be made about her status since she was not covered by the statute.
Libby was Fitzgerald's safety valve to look like he did something.

Save your pathetic attempts to insult me by sayig I dont care about America too.
I find it absolutely odd that it is dharmabum accusing trav of being uncaring towards America.

"People say that if you don't love America, then get the hell out. Well, I love America." -Ron Kovic

[FONT=Helv] Lets break out the violins for the CIA.

Thanks for proving my point, that you do not give a shit about America or our national security. You are a partisan hack who cares more about protecting and defending criminal behavior because you share party affiliation then about protecting our national security or intelligence capabilities.

:stfu

why do you have to keep saying I dont care about america? do you think that makes you look like you care more then me? apprently you seem to have to reassure everyone you care about america more then I do. what was it bill mahr said again?

Richard Armitage admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Novak about Superspy.
Karl Rove admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Bob Woodward about Superspy.

Neither of them got convicted, tried or even indicted for this.

That is what happens when you send a Republcian (fitzgerald) to prosecute them... nothing gets done.


Does that tell you anything about her true covert status?????

No, it does not. Her covert status is not at question.
Are you really such a hack that you would ignorantly suggest that it is?

Give me a break.


but Scooter Libby's trial and conviction had nothing to do with Valerie Plame's status as an operative.

Are you playing ignorant or is this genuine?
His trial and conviction sprang directly from his lying to the grand jury investigating the outting of valerie plame and thus the entire operation at Brewster Jennings.



Libby was Fitzgerald's safety valve to look like he did something.

Which takes us right back to what happens when you send a Republican to prosecute other Republicans... nothing gets accomplished, because Republicans believe loyalty trumps responsibility or the rule of law, as we see time and time again, from Nixon to Reagan now to Libby.

:rolleyes:

why do you have to keep saying I dont care about america?

Because it is painfully obvious. You keep beating it like a drum.

:rolleyes:

it is painfully obvious I don't care about america because I constantly point out your hypocrisy? How about showing some concern for other CIA operations that have been outed, like the secret prisons in Eastern Europe? how about some sympathy for CIA agents killed in Iraq and Afghanistan? It is obviou you only care about Valeri Plame because her husband stood agaisnt Bush. I guarentee you if Valeri Plame was just some CIA agent who got caught spying in Africa you would be glad the racist scum got waht he deserved. Stop being a lair you A hole.

That is what happens when you send a Republcian (fitzgerald) to prosecute them... nothing gets done.Okay.
Fitzgerald's ratio of Democrat to Republican prosecutions is 60+ to 2.

He finds out on his first day who the leaker is and continues this anti-administration prosecution, ostensibly to find out who the leaker is.

Yeah, that's some Republican.

Dhrama, why weren't Rove or Armitage prosecuted for revealing her "covert" status (or her husband at cocktail parties for that matter?).

Because she was not covert as per the statute. And Fitzgerald knew it.

It's so obvious.

Okay.
Fitzgerald's ratio of Democrat to Republican prosecutions is 60+ to 2.

Thanks for at least admitting the bias exists. That is more than I expected from you.


He finds out on his first day who the leaker is and continues this anti-administration prosecution, ostensibly to find out who the leaker is.

A prosecution that failed to actually prosecute anyone for the still outstanding original offense...

Very successful from a Republican perspective.

:thumbs:

Dhrama, why weren't Rove or Armitage prosecuted

Because Fitzgerald is a Republican loyalist.

Its so obvious.

:thumbs:

He finds out on his first day who the leaker is and continues this anti-administration prosecution, ostensibly to find out who the leaker is.


Richard Armitage admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Novak about Superspy.
Karl Rove admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Bob Woodward about Superspy.

That is like criticizing the FBI for finding out who the mob hitmen were and then continuing the investigation to find out who ordered the hit. There were several simultaneous, or near simultaneous leaks. It is a logical thing to wonder if someone ordered those leaks.

Armitage and Rove were not prosecuted, because they did not lie to the prosecutors and the grand jury. Libby did. If Libby hadn't lied, he wouldn't have been prosecuted either.

so basically Liby got in trouble for lying, not for leaking? how could a guy who perpetrated the greatest national security leak in world history not get in trouble for it? It's an outrage!

so basically Liby got in trouble for lying, not for leaking?

Yup, he was a token prosecution to give the appearance of progress and good faith effort.


how could a guy who perpetrated the greatest national security leak in world history not get in trouble for it?

Because the Republican picked to prosecute the case made sure it went nowhere.

It's an outrage!

Now you are catching on!

:banana:

so basically Liby got in trouble for lying, not for leaking? how could a guy who perpetrated the greatest national security leak in world history not get in trouble for it? It's an outrage!

Yes, just like Clinton got in trouble for lying not for getting a blow job.

Dharm, Dharm, Dharm,

Under federal law Plame was not consiered a super spy, or

a covert officer,or a covert spy.

Your pal Libby was brought to trial for no reason.

Wipe up your tears and take in some facts.


Richard Armitage admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Novak about Superspy.
Karl Rove admitted to the Grand Jury that he told Bob Woodward about Superspy.

Neither of them got convicted, tried or even indicted for this.

Does that tell you anything about her true covert status?????

C'mon already.


And you're either falling into a trap or doing this purposely, but Scooter Libby's trial and conviction had nothing to do with Valerie Plame's status as an operative.
There was NO case to be made about her status since she was not covered by the statute.
Libby was Fitzgerald's safety valve to look like he did something.

The difference is Libby was brought to trial for no reason.

Oh and libby was not pardoned as of yet.

Yes, just like Clinton got in trouble for lying not for getting a blow job.

Your pal Libby was brought to trial for no reason.


Here are some facts for you sisko.

1. Libby ain't my "pal", he is yours.

2. Your pal Libby was convicted of:

two counts of perjury, one count of obstruction of justice in a grand jury investigation, and one of the two counts of making false statements to federal investigators

That ain't "nothin".
:thumbs:

Yes, just like Clinton got in trouble for lying not for getting a blow job.

he got in trouble? i do not remember him ever being punished.

Yeah - bushie chimp owed a BIG favor - paris hilton got jail time - and this LIAR (federal crime) gets none.

Brooks: "Fitzgerald's ratio of Democrat to Republican prosecutions is 60+ to 2"
Dhrama: "Thanks for at least admitting the bias exists. That is more than I expected from you."
Whoops my mistake. I meant Republican to Democrat.
Actually though, you are admitting that the ratio does show a bias.
Whoops on your part too!

Armitage and Rove were not prosecuted, because they did not lie to the prosecutors and the grand jury.
But they admitted to "outing" Plame.
Why weren't they prosecuted for that if she was covert??

Dharm, Dharm, Dharm,

Under federal law Plame was not consiered a super spy, or

a covert officer,or a covert spy.

Which is of course irrelevant to the crime Libby was convicted of.


Your pal Libby was brought to trial for no reason.

Apparently he lied to a grand jury and obstructed the administration of justice. Are you saying these are not criminal acts?

maybe we can get him and sandy burglar, who stole classified materials in his socks and underwear presumably to cover up clinton administration shorcomings on the war on terror before 9-11.

But they admitted to "outing" Plame.
Why weren't they prosecuted for that if she was covert??
BAM!!!!

The point they'll all avoid.

BAM!!!!

The point they'll all avoid.

Hardly. The point is irrelevant. Clinton wasn't prosecuted for getting a blowjob and Libby wasn't prosecuted for "outing" Plame. The point the republicans want to avoid is that Libby was prosecuted, and convicted of perjury. He was subsequently sentenced to 2.5 years in jail. That doesn't sound like an "excessive" sentence for a government worker who lies under oath. Especially for one so highly placed in the administration. This wasn't just some coffee-fetching flunky in the Department of the Interior. Libby was the Vice-President's right-hand man. I for one, would like to send a message to these jokers that if they lie under oath, they go to prison. Bush seems to want to send a different message.

Hardly. The point is irrelevant. Clinton wasn't prosecuted for getting a blowjob and Libby wasn't prosecuted for "outing" Plame.
Vile, it is irrelevant when it comes to Libby's prosecution, but it is extremely relevant when someone says a spy was outted (which the point I was addressing)

Exactly.

But they admitted to "outing" Plame.
Why weren't they prosecuted for that if she was covert??


Brooks, do you also think that because Nixon was never convicted in an impeachment trial that no crimes were committed?

That sounds like the same illogic you are using here.

:rolleyes:

Brooks, do you also think that because Nixon was never convicted in an impeachment trial that no crimes were committed?
That sounds like the same illogic you are using here.
The special prosecutor was already in place to supposedly find out who violated the statute that criminalized outing a covert spy.
Two men admitted it to him very early on and he did nothing.

With the wave of his finger he could have had an indictment. He didn't try.
With a little more effort he could have had a prosecution. He didn't try.
With almost no effort he could have had a conviction. He didn't try.

What does that tell you about Fitzgerald's perception of her covert status?

Dhrama, just curious as to the title of this thread.
How has this "paid off" for Libby?

Lol!

This wasn't just some coffee-fetching flunky in the Department of the Interior.


Hey ! watch it pal! :D

So Libby was convicted of lying about a crime that actually wasn't a crime. That deserves jail time according to some. Wow! The hatred around here is palpable.

So Libby was convicted of lying about a crime that actually wasn't a crime.

Lying under oath was the crime.


That deserves jail time according to some. Wow! The hatred around here is palpable.

Almost as palpable as the hypocrisy.

The special prosecutor was already in place to supposedly find out who violated the statute that criminalized outing a covert spy.
Two men admitted it to him very early on and he did nothing.

Only if you irrationally believe that starting an investigation is "nothing."

:rolleyes:


With almost no effort he could have had a conviction. He didn't try.

Again, only if you call beginning an investigation "not trying".
By the way, he DID have a conviction... Scooter Libby. ;)

:rolleyes:


What does that tell you about Fitzgerald's perception of her covert status?

Her position as a covert agent is not in question except to wild-eyed wacko conspiracy theorists.


The claim that she was not covert is a lie. A big fat stinking lie told by lying liars who are covering up for treasonous partisan hacks who seriously compromised America's national security by putting party over country. (http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340)

:thumbs:

Dhrama, just curious as to the title of this thread.
How has this "paid off" for Libby?

You mean how has his CRIME paid off?
He did commit a crime you know. He was convicted in a court of law. You remember "Law", don't you? :rolleyes:

Firstly he won't have to serve any time whatsoever dispite being convicted of :

two counts of perjury, one count of obstruction of justice in a grand jury investigation, and one of the two counts of making false statements to federal investigators

Libby's fine was a paltry $250k but his "defense trust" (http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/conason/2005/11/15/libby_defense/index.html) will easily be able to cover that given the list of multimillionaires who make up his advisory committee.

This conviction has the potential to be Mr. Libby's most profitable venture ever.

:thumbs:

The aroma of hypocrisy is indeed strong.

For how many years have democrats been telling us that little lies in front of a grand jury are insignificant? And now they tell us that lies do matter?

For how many years have republicans been telling us that honesty matters and now that their ox is being gored we're told that it was about faulty memory?

Stop it.

For how many years have democrats been telling us that little lies in front of a grand jury are insignificant?

Really, who? Who said that? When did they say that?
I have never heard anyone make that claim before.

Really, who? Who said that? When did they say that?
I have never heard anyone make that claim before.

Playing dumb suits seems a natural fit for you. What do you think the reference point is when they say he's only lying about a blowjob?

You been living under a rock for the last 8 years?

Lying under oath was the crime.



Almost as palpable as the hypocrisy.

I think now would be the time to bring up Clinton, since so many people are fond of it. Seems to me he was impeached for lying under oath, as so many are fond of pointing out.

Libby isn't home free quite yet -- there are lots of possibilities that could play out.

1) A pardon from Bush would mean he can not plea the 5th when called back in front of congress (which is surely coming - LOL). That will lead to perjury sure as the sun is coming up tomorrow which in turn will lead to jail time.

2) His probabion is revoked and he then has to go to jail ... ROTFLMAO

3) The dems wait until after Bush is out of office and bring Scotter in on new charges -- including treason. There are no shortages of charges.

[QUOTE=Vilepagan]Lying under oath was the crime.



This entire Business about Lying,while on the Stand ,to me
is offensive and Unamerican.
Show me a Lawyer who doesn't lie,or most witness,and I'll
show you an Earth from The Twilight Zone.
I remember,hearing Johnny Cochran insisting,many times,that
the OJ Trial wasn't about race.
Then he went and Literally made it ALL about Race.
Even went so far as to wear.the Color Bands of,Like,
Ethopia on his Ties.
And what about Nifong,as the utter shamster,lyin crook of
Courts,he turned out to be.
I did Jury duty once.Heard the little spiel about how for all it's
problems,Our System of Jurisprudence,is still the envy of the World.
Just what Gave The Fitz the Effrontery to continue on with an
Investigation,when he knew all along that Richard Armitage was
the leaker and Plame WASN'T Covert,thereby covered by an
Espionage act.
Here's what I tink.
********************************************
Olberman : Bush,Cheney should resign
After hearing Keith Oberman,last nite on his SPECIAL COMMENT
which i knew was gonna be like his other,Hatefull and stinkin
manipulations about Bush the Man,He { OBERMAN } needs to be
Literally yanked from his MSNBC Studios and hauled off by Special
Presidential Authority to :

Leavenworth Penitentiary and let sit,Unlawyered for a determinant time as
wood befit a Barn Owl,who liked to Crap and screech the nite away
in the same Barn as housed a Great Kentucky Derby winning mare,
in retirement.

Libby knows a lot more than he's telling.
He probably told Bush he'd sing if he didn't get a pardon.
He might have to anyway unless he flat out lies in front of Congress.
Maybe Bush pardoned him so he could have him whacked before he sings?
I certainly wouldn't put it past him.

Some of the blogs are reporting Libby's wife made a remark ... and I'm srictly paraphrasing here ...

If Scooter goes down, he won't go down alone ...

His jail time was commuted like the next day ... you can't make this stuff up.

Playing dumb suits seems a natural fit for you. What do you think the reference point is when they say he's only lying about a blowjob?

You been living under a rock for the last 8 years?

Making up lies do not give you any credibility with me.

:thumbs:

Making up lies do not give you any credibility with me.

:thumbs:

You think i would be concerned about what you thought? To paraphrase lil red riding hood, my what a big ego you have.

And because i like to torment you i offer the following, from a thread you are part of 100% correct.

Lying about a sexual fling -- as it concerns what sort of job a politician will do running the country-- is of ZERO concern to me. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero.

Lying about who wrongfully provided you with classified information, for the purpose of ruining the lives of certain of your political opponents........Yes. To me, that absolutely is a very *big deal*.

What's your point Trav? I seem to recall you shouting just as loud as anyone that Clinton should have been punished for lying.

Btw, in my world lying about a blowjob isn't a big deal, while lying about who told you classified information, and who you told it to, is a big deal. Do you honestly see no difference?

Ok. But in this case the lie was not about a blowjob! See the difference? It was about real issues..

Also, once the judicial system made a decision (they could have thrown the case out - but they didn't) we have to respect it.

Her position as a covert agent is not in question except to wild-eyed wacko conspiracy theorists.


Then why do Armitage, Rove and Joe Wilson walk among the free?

For how many years have republicans been telling us that honesty matters and now that their ox is being gored we're told that it was about faulty memory?


Leave the oxen out of it. Statistically speaking, the sentence appears to be excessive.

You think i would be concerned about what you thought? To paraphrase lil red riding hood, my what a big ego you have.

And because i like to torment you i offer the following, from a thread you are part of

Since when are FT and Vilepagan spokespeople for the Democratic party???


:rolleyes:

Then why do Armitage, Rove and Joe Wilson walk among the free?

1. Joe Wilson never did anything wrong.
2. Prosecutor Fitzgerald said that it was specificly because of Libby's lying and obstructing justice. He said libby "threw sand in the umpire's eyes".

Thanks for confirming what I said, my wild-eyed conspiracy theory spewing friend. :)

1. Joe Wilson never did anything wrong.
2. Prosecutor Fitzgerald said that it was specificly because of Libby's lying and obstructing justice. He said libby "threw sand in the umpire's eyes".

1. Multiple witnesses, including NBC's Andrea Mitchell, have reported Joe Wilson introducing Superspy at parties as "My CIA wife".
He's as guilty as Rove and Armitage of outting an agent (in other words, not at all).

2. I understand why Libby was on trial. But if Fitzgerald's task was to determine who the leaker was, and two people say "It was me", then why didn't he indict them?
Could it be she wasn't really protected under the statute?

1. Joe Wilson never did anything wrong.
2. Prosecutor Fitzgerald said that it was specificly because of Libby's lying and obstructing justice. He said libby "threw sand in the umpire's eyes".

Thanks for confirming what I said, my wild-eyed conspiracy theory spewing friend. :)


What was in any way sandy about richard armitage telling robert nowak and nowak publishing it? If a crime was committed we know the various perpetrators to the 'alleged crime'. Yet they aren't even charged.

It seems you are saying the judge got even with Libby because he pissed him off, Dharmabum. Is that how the law works now, throw sand in the ump's eyes and get sent to jail?

1. Multiple witnesses, including NBC's Andrea Mitchell, have reported Joe Wilson introducing Superspy at parties as "My CIA wife".
He's as guilty as Rove and Armitage of outting an agent (in other words, not at all).

Has Andrea Mitchell been questioned under oath or are these just some more rumors you heard on Faux news? When did it supposedly happen, this year? :rolleyes:


2. I understand why Libby was on trial. But if Fitzgerald's task was to determine who the leaker was, and two people say "It was me", then why didn't he indict them?

and we are right back to what I have been saying all along about Fitzgerald being a Republican appointed to prosecute Republicans... and here you are whining about a lack of progress as if you are suprised... :rolleyes:

Could it be she wasn't really protected under the statute?

Nope, it could not. The director of the CIA confirmed that she was covert. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/) I know this will not stop you from continuing to dishonestly push your false conspiracy theories but for the record, the fact is, Valerie Plame was covert at the time of the outting.

:thumbs:

It seems you are saying the judge got even with Libby because he pissed him off, Dharmabum. Is that how the law works now, throw sand in the ump's eyes and get sent to jail?

Nope, I never said that.

This is the third time today that someone has made up some bullshit and tried to claim I said it.

:rolleyes:

and we are right back to what I have been saying all along about Fitzgerald being a Republican appointed to prosecute Republicans... and here you are whining about a lack of progress as if you are suprised... :rolleyes:Funny, in an earlier post you said that if someone's prosecution ratio of Democrats to Republlicans was 60 to 1 they have an obvious bias.

When I pointed out that he prosecuted 60 Republicans to 1 Democrat you don't see the bias in that, as shown in your above post.

Funny, in an earlier post you said that if someone's prosecution ratio of Democrats to Republlicans was 60 to 1 they have an obvious bias.

The key word being "If"...

:rolleyes:

Brooks: Funny, in an earlier post you said that if someone's prosecution ratio of Democrats to Republlicans was 60 to 1 they have an obvious bias.
Dhrama: The key word being "If"...
No, there is no "if" here. His ratio of Republican prosecutions to Democrat prosecutions is 60 to 1.

Which, as you previously stated, shows a bias.
At least you said that when you believed the statistics were reversed.

No, there is no "if" here. His ratio of Republican prosecutions to Democrat prosecutions is 60 to 1.

Ahhh.....I see.

IOW, it is the opposite of what you claimed before. :@@:

(I knew you had it backwards the instant that I read it. I thought about correcting it, but then I decided it would be more fun to let you wallow in your own bullshit for the longest time possible)

IOW, it is the opposite of what you claimed before. :@@:

(I knew you had it backwards the instant that I read it. I thought about correcting it, but then I decided it would be more fun to let you wallow in your own bullshit for the longest time possible)Free, I think you came late to this argument without the benefit of reading the relevant posts.

I accidentally stated "Fitzgerald's ratio of Democrat to Republican prosecutions is 60+ to 2."
to which Dhrama replied: "Thanks for at least admitting the bias exists. "
About an hour later I corrected myself: "Whoops my mistake. I meant Republican to Democrat.
Actually though, you are admitting that the ratio does show a bias."

So if your cleverly letting me "wallow" in my mistake "for the longest time possible" amounted to 75 minutes, I hope you enjoyed it.

But don't feel bad for me. It serendipitously showed Dhrama Queen's complete inconsistency.

When he thought Fitzgerald prosecuted more Dems, it showed a bias. Now that he realized the stat shows more Republicans were prosecuted, he's running from his original statement.

Free, I think you came late to this argument without the benefit of reading the relevant posts.


No. I read them.


So if your cleverly letting me "wallow" in my mistake "for the longest time possible" amounted to 75 minutes, I hope you enjoyed it.

Yep. 75 minutes.

And yes, thank you, I enjoyed it.

Did you enjoy Dhrama Queen's accidentally revealed hypocrisy as much?

Did you enjoy Dhrama Queen's accidentally revealed hypocrisy as much?

I am not aware of any poster by that name.

You tool. :rolleyes:

You tool.

Pot...kettle...black....

:rolleyes:

Did you enjoy Dhrama Queen's accidentally revealed hypocrisy as much?


Hey Brooks:

"If you have to exaggerate my point to make me wrong, you've already given up. "

:thumbs:

I am not aware of any poster by that name.The fact that he answered the accusation shows he knows who he is.

Shoe fits.

"If you have to exaggerate my point to make me wrong, you've already given up. "
Me: Fitzgerald has prosecuted sixty Democrats and one Republican.
Dhrama Q: "Thanks for at least admitting the bias exists."
Me: "Whoops my mistake. I meant Republican to Democrat."
Me again: "Funny, in an earlier post you said that if someone's prosecution ratio of Democrats to Republlicans was 60 to 1 they have an obvious bias.
When I pointed out that he prosecuted 60 Republicans to 1 Democrat you don't see the bias in that"
Dhrama Q: "The key word being "If"... "
(this, by the way was my favorite response)

So I'll ask you again, if someone's ratio of prosecutions by political party is sixty to one, does it show a bias?
You've actually already answered the question when it had your preferred ratio, but haven't answered it since then because you don't like the new ratio.

C'mon Q, don't be a hypocrite.

Dhrama Q: "The key word being "If"... "
(this, by the way was my favorite response)
Mine too.

The fact that he answered the accusation shows he knows who he is.


No, it merely means that I know you and what a childish disposition you posess.

:thumbs:

Still waiting for you to prove that "if" Brooks.

:rolleyes: