"If the president does it, it's not illegal"

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #255,867 by GBert 5/18/06 10:17:28 AM Reply	"If the president does it, it's not illegal" Governing by decree is the surest way to stop the terrorists hating us for our freedoms. Have whatever values you have. That's what America is for. You don't need George Bush for that.
Post #255,870 by Another Scott 5/18/06 10:24:24 AM Reply	Nice segue to Tom Toles 5/18/2006 cartoon. 27 kB .img [image\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/images/Toles/c_05182006_520.gif\|0\|The Terrorists Hate Our Freedom\|437\|520] Cheers, Scott.
Post #255,877 by GBert 5/18/06 11:25:38 AM Reply	awesome, i hadn't seen that ! Have whatever values you have. That's what America is for. You don't need George Bush for that.

So USA Today is full of it, I guess? - (bepatient) - (30) - May 16, 2006, 05:48:47 PM EDT

Or 2 of 3 carriers are. -NT - (Silverlock) - May 16, 2006, 06:18:47 PM EDT

Definitely calls for an investigation - (Simon_Jester) - (22) - May 16, 2006, 06:51:46 PM EDT

its fear of lawsuits, their denials are very carefully - (boxley) - (21) - May 16, 2006, 08:11:37 PM EDT

I did notice that.... ( && Nacchio) - (Simon_Jester) - (4) - May 17, 2006, 09:37:51 AM EDT

Non-denial denials anyone? - (Silverlock) - (3) - May 17, 2006, 11:17:37 AM EDT

Lawyers bill by the minute.... You expected a quick answer? -NT - (jbrabeck) - (1) - May 17, 2006, 11:45:58 AM EDT

These lawyers are probably internal counsel or on retainer - (drewk) - May 17, 2006, 11:50:57 AM EDT

Lawyers bill by the minute.... You expected a quick answer? -NT - (jbrabeck) - May 17, 2006, 11:46:16 AM EDT

So you think there is a legal distinction - (bepatient) - (15) - May 17, 2006, 04:24:57 PM EDT

Sure, leave it to the lawyers to have one. - (a6l6e6x) - (14) - May 17, 2006, 04:39:12 PM EDT

you think they want to defend that - (bepatient) - (13) - May 17, 2006, 04:53:06 PM EDT

I wouldn't either, but IANAL. - (a6l6e6x) - (2) - May 18, 2006, 01:15:44 PM EDT

s/and/in/ -NT - (CRConrad) - (1) - May 18, 2006, 06:22:47 AM EDT

Thanks! You are right. -NT - (a6l6e6x) - May 18, 2006, 01:17:06 PM EDT

Well, those comments wouldn't go before a Jury, would they? - (Simon_Jester) - (1) - May 17, 2006, 05:59:47 PM EDT

The EFF v. AT&T case? That was filed on 1/31/2006. - (Another Scott) - May 17, 2006, 08:02:03 PM EDT

They won't need to defend anything - (Silverlock) - (7) - May 18, 2006, 09:13:06 AM EDT

"If the president does it, it's not illegal" - (GBert) - (2) - May 18, 2006, 10:17:28 AM EDT

Nice segue to Tom Toles 5/18/2006 cartoon. 27 kB .img - (Another Scott) - (1) - May 18, 2006, 10:24:24 AM EDT

awesome, i hadn't seen that ! -NT - (GBert) - May 18, 2006, 11:25:38 AM EDT

permits no violations of securities law, does not - (boxley) - May 18, 2006, 11:34:45 AM EDT

Yeah, right. - (ben_tilly) - (2) - May 18, 2006, 01:05:46 PM EDT

the purpose of a presidential finding is to cover - (boxley) - May 18, 2006, 01:39:47 PM EDT

Your point is the most valid - (bepatient) - May 18, 2006, 03:31:40 PM EDT

One other possibility... - (jb4) - (3) - May 17, 2006, 06:13:56 PM EDT

Huh? I was under the impression, this IS "Carnivore". DYMV? -NT - (CRConrad) - (2) - May 18, 2006, 06:31:32 AM EDT

Not supposed to be... - (jb4) - May 18, 2006, 02:29:04 PM EDT

No, Carnivore is Dead... *BUT*... - (folkert) - May 18, 2006, 04:13:37 PM EDT

Now Wired is into the act.... - (Simon_Jester) - (1) - May 17, 2006, 06:19:29 PM EDT

CCCP redux. -NT - (mmoffitt) - May 18, 2006, 09:41:35 AM EDT

I don't usually win conversations this decisively.
103 ms