""At the end of the day," says the former intelligence official, "this could end up being a situation where there wasn't a crime until there was an investigation.""
So basically this article is an indirect way of saying that if there was a crime it's probably obstruction of justice or perjury or something like that.
To obstruct justice, would you not have to be blocking information about an illegal act that had been committed? If no crime was committed, how can one obstruct justice?
Please don't equivocate. They are trying to make bogus application of various laws to the political play of Washington. Any charges against the White House or staff will be bogus> But there should a charge against Joe Wilson, a former ambassador, who lied through his teeth to hurt the White House so Kerry would win. Wilson should do time in jail and in h*ll for his actions.
Please don't equivocate. They are trying to make bogus application of various laws to the political play of Washington. Any charges against the White House or staff will be bogus. But there should a charge against Joe Wilson, a former ambassador, who lied through his teeth to hurt the White House so Kerry would win.
Wilson should do time in jail and in h*ll for his actions.
To paraphrase/summarize Ayn Rand:
There is no way to control innocent men.
The solution (for those who see this as a problem) is to create a plethora of laws whereby everyone is guilty of something.
We have a plethora of laws. Rove et al are guilty of something and thereby controllable, if only a motivated prosecutor can find a suitable law.