|
|
<< No Bush Financial Advantage? | Main | Why I Supported Medicare Bill >> March 27, 2004Kerry Dares GOP to Indict ClarkeThe Rightwing Attack Machine is trying to destroy Clarke's credibility. They are saying he's a liar. Problem with that line of attack is that if he lied, he did it under oath, and that's a federal crime. And they control the Justice Department. So, as they say, Bring It On. Kerry has now launched the counterattack in defense of Clarke by making this simple point: "My challenge to the Bush administration would be, if (Clarke) is not believable and they have reason to show it, then prosecute him for perjury because he is under oath, Kerry told CBS's MarketWatchAnd if they don't indict him, that just shows their rhetoric is itself a lie. Clarke is supposedly lying about the most crucial issues of national defense under oath. If anything warrants an indictment for perjury, it is that. So if they don't indict Clarke, either (1) they are lying and Clarke is telling the truth, or (2) they don't really take this national security rhetoric very seriously. So let's officially start Indictment Watch, Day One. As long as Clarke is unindicted, that means he's telling the truth, even according to the Bush Justice Department. Posted by Nathan at March 27, 2004 12:38 PM Related posts:
Trackback PingsTrackBack URL for this entry: CommentsI'm with Jeanne D'Arc: Frist should be censured for this bone-headed move. Posted by: Melanie at March 27, 2004 02:04 PM I'll bet money that it goes like this: The administration will declassify some, but not all of Clarke's sealed testimony. The testimony they declassify will suggest, on some readings, that Clarke has been inconsistent. Much hooing and hawing will be done about seeking an indictment. (Which, by the way, has absolutely no chance of happening since it would allow Clarke to call witnesses) Eventually they'll throw up their hands and declare that, because of national security concerns, they won't be able to seek an indictment. Tsk, tsk. That a man like Richard Clarke could get away with lying.... You gotta admit, that's pretty strong kung-fu. Posted by: zwichenzug at March 27, 2004 02:45 PM "My challenge to Kerry would be, if (Rice) is not believable and they have reason to show it, then prosecute her for perjury because she is under oath, the Bush administration told CBS's MarketWatch Heh heh heh. Posted by: wfeather at March 27, 2004 10:55 PM As long as he is unconvicted he is presumed innocent. Certainly a phony indictment is possible, followed, after the election, with a quiet dropping of charges. Would the Bush administration wrongly indict a man solely to magnify the appearance of impropriety? You decide. Posted by: Always Confused at March 28, 2004 08:23 AM 'Heh heh heh.' Posted by: bryan at March 28, 2004 12:16 PM Post a comment
|
Series-
Social Security
Past Series
Current Weblog
January 04, 2005 January 03, 2005 January 02, 2005 January 01, 2005 ... and Why That's a Good Thing - Judge Richard Posner is guest blogging at Leiter Reports and has a post on why morality has to influence politics... MORE... December 31, 2004 December 30, 2004 December 29, 2004 December 28, 2004 December 24, 2004 December 22, 2004 December 21, 2004 December 20, 2004 December 18, 2004 December 17, 2004 December 16, 2004
Referrers to site
|