[SuziQ]

"President Bush can say all he wants that the solution to border security is new infrastructure and technology," Ramos told WND, "but as long as my husband is in jail the American people should know that President Bush doesn't mean a word he says."

The President didn't force her husband to shoot anyone, and if a jury convicted him, it possibly was on the strength of the EVIDENCE, again, nothing to do with the President.

[TBP]

You know how often the evidence is manipulated. Take teh Libby case, for example, where Libby is not allowed to bring in memory experts or to discuss the FACT that Valerie Plame was not covert, but the persecutor is allowed to rant about the war.

If he's convicted, will it be on the strength of the evidence or just the evidence the governmetn chooses to allow for its own reasons?

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

"the American people should know that President Bush doesn't mean a word he says."

As far as the southern border is concerned, how can you argue with this statement? Whatever the merits of the agent's case, it is plain that Bush will only act when forced into it. And this only puts more pressure on an underfunded and understaffed BP.

When the President calls law abiding citizens Vigilantes, what message does that send to the officers on the border?