Les Cohortes Célestes ont le devoir et le regret de vous informer que Libres Propos est entré en sommeil. Ce forum convivial et sympathique reste uniquement accessible en lecture seule. Prenez plaisir à le consulter.
Merci de votre compréhension. |
|
| Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise | |
| | |
Auteur | Message |
---|
Invité Invité
| Sujet: Al-Qaida's budget slips through the cracks 14/11/2008, 22:57 | |
| Rappel du premier message :
U.S. clamps down on banking transactions; terror group finds new funding
By Robert Windrem and Garrett Haake NBC News updated 7:56 a.m. ET Nov. 14, 2008 Seven years after the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. intelligence officials believe they've won many small victories against al-Qaida's ability to finance its operations, but they remain unable to put a concrete dollar figure on their impact.
That's because they have no reliable estimate of al-Qaida's overall budget, according to current and former U.S. counterterrorism officials, which means the only measures of the organization's economic health are sporadic, anecdotal and fragmentary.
"When you see a cell complaining that it hasn't received its monthly or biannual stipend and it's unable to pay the salaries of the people in the cell, unable to make the support payments to the families of terrorists living or dead, that's a tremendous indicator we have pressured the financial channel," said Adam Szubin, the director of the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control and the man in charge of tracking terrorist finance. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27644191 |
| | |
Auteur | Message |
---|
Shansaa
Nombre de messages : 1674 Date d'inscription : 02/11/2008
| Sujet: 148 - Sylvette 4/1/2009, 22:47 | |
| En 2 messages, c'est trop long.... 1) - Citation :
*1 la probite et l'honnetete intellectuelle: oui c'est un fait que si l'on ecoute les anti-Bush, il est surprenant que Carl Rove ne se promene pas avec des cornes sur la tete, une cape rouge et un trident. mais bon. Les Bush haters n'ont-ils pas toujours discredite toutes les personnes prochent de Pres. Bush Ou ce sont des imbeciles incultes ou ce sont des montres prets a tout pour reussir : "mafia texane". (Pres Bush, lui etant, une fois l'un une fois l'autre, selon l'interet du moment!) Eeuhh Permettez moi de vous rappeler que Rove, le grand cerveau de l'administration Bush (surnomme Bush's brain d'ailleurs), qui s'il est un brillant stratege et un homme d'une exceptionnelle intelligence, n'en reste pas moins un menteur (oui je le dis) un tricheur pret a tout pour arriver a ses fins. L'exageration des WMD de l'Irak, c'est lui, l'affaire Plame c'est lui parce que Joe Wilson avait "ose" devoile les mensonges de l'administration sur les WMD, meme si je sais que vous soutiendrez le contraire. Libby "Scooter" dont on a fait le principal accuse et qui a ete condamne a ete gracie par Bush, Ben voyons, alors que devoiler le nom, l'identitie d'un agent est un crime federal. Il était devenu l'une des principales cibles de la Justice américaine en raison de son implication dans de nombreuses affaires douteuses de l'administration (cité a comparaître devant la Commission des affaires judiciaires du Sénat afin d'être entendu dans l'affaire du licenciement abusif de plusieurs procureurs fédéraux jugés trop démocrates, mais Bush l'a couvert en décrétant une immunité spéciale pour Rove, conseiller "dans l'exercice de ses fonctions", Ben Voyons....!!! Parmi les autres coups tordus il y a aussi l'utilisation frauduleuse de papier à en tête d'un démocrate, des scandales d'espionnage téléphonique illégal et anti-constitutionnels, l'intimidation et les menaces envers certains journalistes ou opposants politiques, la diffusion dans les médias de rumeurs malveillantes contre ses adversaires, bref la liste est longue. "Les fourberies et les manipulations douteuses qui ont jalonné sa carrière font de Karl Rove la figure même du parfait salaud politique" a ecrit un journaliste, je suis d'accord. "C'est une grosse perte pour nous, [...], un grand collègue et un bon ami. Il nous manquera beaucoup. Mais [...] il continuera à être l'un des meilleurs amis du président", a déclaré l'actuel secrétaire général adjoint de la Maison Blanche.
Il ne me manquera pas une seconde. - Citation :
*2 Oui un peu comme ceux du rapport de l'equipe de transition d'Obama concernant le scandale de Blagojevic. Nous verrons bien. Tout finit par se savoir, tot ou tard dans un sens ou dans l'autre. - Citation :
Mais si Pres. Bush lit, tant mieux, j'espere qu'il en aura tire quelques lecons.
Bien evidemment, il nous le prouve tous les jours: - Meme si vous n'appreciez pas ses decisions ca ne veut pas dire qu'elles soient forcement mauvaises - et meme si les media les ont toujours critiquees. Ah bon, excusez moi je n'avais pas remarque la culture abyssale de cet homme qui est incapable de parler de quoique ce soit si ce n'est pas prepare a l'avance. Je ne demande qu'a etre convaincue remarquez, c'est dur de ne pouvoir defendre le president de son pays quand on l'attaque sur ce point. - Citation :
Voyons - en politique etrangere - a quel point Obama va reellement se differencier de Pres. Bush. On verra aussi. J'espere que cela changera vu le desastre de notre reputation et de nos actions. Mais je ne pense pas que dans un premier temps le changement soit vraiment perceptible helas. On ne peut pas tout transformer d'un coup. Je souhaite qu'Obama tienne la route de ce qu'il a promis de faire. - Citation :
*1 timing parlons-en justement: depuis quelques semaines, la critique de Pres. Bush est presque inexistante et puis ces reportages sortent dans la presse elite - la meme qui le harcelait jusqu'a present.
Je pense, qu'elle tente de se faire du bien a elle-meme, une sorte de regret de derniere minute. Je ne le crois pas une seconde. Je penche plutot pour une espece de statu quo car l'homme n'est plus qu'a quelques jours de s'en aller et on adopte la politique de "Ne tirez pas sur l'ambulance". - Citation :
De plus, n'etant vraiment pas certains des positions d'Obama, les media la jouent un peu "cool" imaginez qu'ils continuent a attaquer ce que Pres. BUsh dit en ce moment par exemple au sujet de Gaza et qu'Obama suive la meme ligne de politique exterieure, ils n'auraient pas l'air tres malins. S'il Obama suit la meme politique au MO, il sera largement temps de le critiquer. | |
| | | Shansaa
Nombre de messages : 1674 Date d'inscription : 02/11/2008
| Sujet: 149 - Et de 2 4/1/2009, 22:50 | |
| - Citation :
*2 evidemment tout le monde ne peut pas partir de la Maison Blanche la risee du monde, apres avoir menti sous serment et a la population tout entiere par camera interposee, avoir eu a subir la honte d'un empeachment, l'horreur de la Somalie, la participation au Kosovo, le refus de l'offre de ben laden (mais bon on ne l'a appris que plus tard...), plus tard aussi la mauvaise situation economique et les semance d'un terrible probleme auquel nous faisons face actuellement avec la mauvaise gestion de Fanny Mae et Freddy Mac et c'est pourtant vrai qu'avec tout ca, il avait encore de meilleurs resultats au sondage. Clinton n'a jamais ete la risee du monde. C'est plutot Ken Starr et une partie de l'Amerique puritaino-conservatrice qui l'ont ete. Il a menti oui mais si la Chambre a effectivement vote l'impeachment, le Senat lui l'a acquitte. Dont acte, et tout ca pour une pantalonnade qui aurait du rester dans la sphere privee et qui ne regardait personne que lui et sa famille. Mais il ya eu un procureur qui essayait d'avoir Clinton depuis des lustres, frustre par les resultats du whitewatergate et une bonne femme en mal de pub qui est passee par la et qui a obtenu l'immunite pour un acte totalement illegal (enregistrements de conversations telephoniques) parce que ca servait le but de Starr. Je ne suis pas sensible a cet argument de "Oh but he lied..." Si on n'etait pas alle mettre le nez dans ses affaires privees, il n'y aurait pas eu ce pathetique episode. Je vous rappelle aussi que quand il a quitte la Maison Blanche, son taux de popularite ou approval rate, (whichever you prefer) etait de 68%, du jamais vu. Tous les sondages de l'epoque et les analystes politiques ont demontre que si Clinton avait pu se representer pour un 3e mandat il aurait ete reelu. Economiquement, encore non. Deja Clinton est parti en transformant un gros deficit en un surplus record, les caisses etaient pleines, un surplus qui aurait pu etre utilise a ameliorer le systeme de securite sociale au lieu d'etre reste inutilise pourtant. Bush s'en va en laissant une ardoise que vont payer nos enfants et petits enfants, merci ! Et que dire des creations d'emploi et de la baisse du chomage et de l'inflation, des augmentations de salaire, du remboursement de la dette nationale, des coupes des depenses federales et des diminutions d'impot pour la classe moyenne sous Clinton ? F. Mae et F. Mac, ok il aurait du y avoir moins de laxisme, sinon d'encouragement a emprunter plus qu'il ne fallait mais plus que le pret ce sont les termes du prets qui sont en cause car les "adjustable rates" beneficiaient surtout aux preteurs qui eux s'enrichissaient a qui mieux mieux. - Citation :
Une chose est certaine, la presse elite ne l'a jamais denigre, ni ridiculise (excepte pour ses "indiscretions" - je suis tres diplomate ce soir), ni demonise comme ce fut le cas pour Pres. Bush, des l'annonce de sa candidature alors evidemment... Peut etre que justement la presse n'a pas juge bon de demoniser un homme pour des affaires de pantalon et tant mieux. Cela n'a en rien nui a la situation du pays. On ne peut pas en dire autant du futur ex. Il aurait peut etre mieux fait d'avoir une Monica lui aussi | |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 150 - Avant de repondre a Shansaa - Pour ceux qui auraient oublie et je l'avoue aussi, un peu pour le plaisir... 4/1/2009, 23:59 | |
| apres 8 ans, on voudrait nous faire regretter l'ere Clinton, periode de securite, de stabilite, de justice, d'espoir, d'humanite, vous pouvez continuer. La lumiere en comparaison de l'ombre dans laquelle Pres. Bush nous aurait jetesm quoa. L'histoire serait-elle reecrite ou bien espere-t-on que nous ayons totalement perdu la memoire? Peut-etre les deux. The A to Z Guide of Clinton Scandals Whitewatergate, Travelgate, Cattlegate and now Indonesiagate . . . there seems to be more gates in the Clinton White House than on the barns of America.
So just in case you've lost track of the scandals that have hit this current White House, The Post's Deborah Orin and Thomas Galvin have pieced together your cut-out-and-keep A to Z guide of Clinton scandals . . from Arkansas to Zippers. A is for Arkansas, where Bill Clinton got his political start, where Hillary Rodham Clinton worked at Rose Law Firm, and where Whitewater began as a land deal between the Clintons and Jim and Susan McDougal. B is for Billing-gate, Hillary Clinton's missing law-billing records. Those records -- which raised questions about Mrs. Clinton's role in the Castle Grande deal -- were subpoenaed in 1994. They were missing until early 1996, when they turned up in a White House room next to her office. She says she doesn't know how they got there. C is for Cattlegate, Hillary Clinton's mysterious ability to turn a $1,000 investment into a $100,000 profit on cattle futures, a feat experts say was virtually impossible in normal trading. C is also for Castle Grande, a real-estate scheme that federal regulators say was a sham. A federal inspector general's report found Hillary Clinton drew up the legal papers that were used to improperly funnel hundreds of thousands of dollars to Seth Ward, father-in-law of her ex-law partner Webster Hubbell. D is for Billy Dale, the career head of the White House Travel Office, who was fired along with six other career staffers, to make way for Clinton cronies in Travelgate. The White House then brought in the FBI to justify the firing, and Dale was hit with criminal charges that wrecked his life for two years. A jury cleared him in just two hours. E is for Mike Espy, the former agriculture secretary who was forced out over charges that he got gifts and favors from Arkansas-based Tyson foods, whose owners were longtime Clinton backers. A special counsel has brought several indictments, though not against Espy. F is for Filegate, the improper White House rummaging through 900 FBI files on Republican officials in the Bush and Reagan administration. The White House says it was an innocent snafu. Republicans suspect an enemies list. Whitewater independent counsel Ken Starr and several congressional committees are probing. G is for Golfgate, ex-White House aide David Watkins' improper use of presidential helicopters for a personal golf outing. He was forced to resign. In the 1992 presidential campaign, Clinton aides tried to use taxpayer funds to help settle a sexual harassment case filed by a fellow campaign worker against Watkins. H is for Hillary Clinton, whose role has been questioned in Filegate, Travelgate, Billing-gate, Whitewater and Castle Grande. She denies any wrongdoing. H is also for Hubbell, in jail after pleading guilty to bilking law clients on charges brought by Whitewater independent counsel Starr. Hubbell was previously the associate attorney general, the No. 3 Justice Department office. I is for Indonesiagate, featuring the Lippo group, a firm with long-standing ties to Bill Clinton, Clinton cronies and Arkansas. Republicans want to know why an Indonesian couple -- of apparently modest means -- with ties to Lippo gave $452,000 to the Democratic National Committee and what the firm may have gotten in return. Lippo also hired Hubbell, at a reported fee of $250,000, for the five months when he left the White House and went to jail. J is for Paula Jones, who accuses President Clinton of sexual harassment, saying he dropped his pants and asked for oral sex in an Arkansas hotel room while he was governor and she was a state employee. The U.S. Supreme Court will rule this fall on whether her case must wait until after Clinton leaves office, as he demands. K is for William Kennedy, another ex-Hillary Clinton law partner who became a White House lawyer and was forced to resign after concealing his failure to pay nanny taxes. He was reprimanded for his role in Travelgate. L is for Craig Livingstone, the ex-bar bouncer with a history of drug use who was the head of White House security. Two FBI agents say it was Hillary Clinton who demanded his hiring, which she denies. Disgraced Clinton political guru Dick Morris's hooker pal, Sherry Rowlands, claims Morris told her a "paranoid" Hillary Clinton was behind Filegate. He says he only told her that's what polls show. M is for Jim and Susan McDougal, the Clintons' Whitewater partners, both of whom have been convicted of fraud. Jim McDougal is said to be helping Whitewater independent counsel Starr. Susan McDougal is in jail for refusing to say whether President Clinton lied when he denied knowing about an illegal $300,000 loan to bail out Whitewater. The loan wasn't repaid, and taxpayers were left holding the bag. M is also for disgraced political guru Dick Morris. N is for Bernard Nussbaum, the former White House lawyer who barred federal investigators from searching Vince Foster's office after Foster's death. Nussbaum also withheld Foster's diary on Travelgate problems from federal probers for more than a year. Nussbaum was forced to resign for botching damage-control efforts. O is for Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary, the frequent flier who drew up an enemies list of reporters, hired an image consultant at taxpayer expense, and has run up huge tabs on overseas trips. P is for Pardons, which President Clinton has refused to rule out for individuals like Susan McDougal who potentially could provide evidence against him. P is also for White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta, expected to leave in a second Clinton term -- with the prospect that his deputy, Harold Ickes, could replaces him. Senate Republicans want perjury charges brought against Ickes for his answers on Whitewater damage control. Q is for all the questions -- unanswered -- on Whitewater, Filegate, Travelgate, Cattlegate and Billgate. R is for Sherry Rowlands, the $200-an-hour hooker who revealed her ongoing affair with Clinton political guru Dick Morris, the author of Clinton's family-values strategy, forcing Morris to resign. R is also for the Rose Law Firm, where Hillary Clinton, Vince Foster, Webster Hubbell and William Kennedy were partners, as was Joseph Giroir, a key figure in the Lippo group. S is for Kenneth Starr, the Whitewater independent counsel probing Filegate, Travelgate and Vince Foster's death. He has won 15 convictions or guilty pleas, including both McDougals and former Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, who was forced to resign. Starr says his probes are active and ongoing, and there is widespread speculation he will have more indictments after the election, possibly including one of Hillary Clinton. T is for Travelgate, the Clintons' firing of career travel staffers like Billy Dale to make way for Clinton cronies. White House memos say Hillary Clinton was behind the firings -- she denies it -- and that she was spurred on by Clinton Hollywood pal Harry Thomason, who was seeking a piece of the lucrative White House charter business. U is for undue influence and the question of whether that is what Lippo was seeking though megabucks contributions to Democrats. Lippo has close ties to Indonesia's brutal dictatorship, responsible for near-genocide in East Timor, which it occupied two decades ago. V is for Vince Foster, the former Hillary Clinton law partner who became a White House lawyer and was found dead, an apparent suicide with a gunshot wound to the head. He apparently was a central figure in Travelgate and Filegate and handled Whitewater matters for the Clintons. Starr is examining his death and has yet to confirm former prober Bob Fiske's conclusion that it was a suicide in the park where Foster was found. W is for Whitewater, the Arkansas land deal that started it all, with questions about whether the Clintons improperly benefitted from funds Jim McDougal's Madison Guarantee savings-and-loan, which went belly up, costing taxpayers an estimated $60 million. X is for the Xeroxed copy of Hillary Clinton's law billing records that were found in the white House book room, two years after they were first sought. The pages had Mrs. Clinton's fingerprints around the section on Castle Grande - there were red ink notations in the late Vince Foster's handwriting. Y is for the the young White House aides who were hired by the Clinton administration despite FBI background checks that found "recent" use of hard drugs like cocaine, crack and hallucinogens. Z is for zippers -- the one Paula Jones claims that the then-Arkansas governor undid (see J) and the one Gennifer Flowers claims Clinton undid during what she insists was a long-running affair. He denies the claims. [Source: The New York Post, Wednesday October 16, 1996]
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 5/1/2009, 01:50, édité 1 fois |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 151 - 5/1/2009, 01:36 | |
| Eeuhh Permettez moi de vous rappeler que Rove, le grand cerveau de l'administration Bush (surnomme Bush's brain d'ailleurs), J'adore lorsque vous commencez vos messages par "Eeuhh..." ca fait tres.. gamine. Serieusement: Par qui? par les Bush Haters? des lors, la valeur? D'ailleurs, je l'ai toujours entendu surnomme l'"architecte"* mais evidemment, Bush's brain, c'est mieux pour la gauche, on ne peut pas oter a Carl Rove ses capacites mais on degomme Pres. Bush. aie aie aie... * un peu comme Carville "l'architecte de la victoire de Bill...." (interessant comme caractere James, hein? lui aussi, il en veut!) ====== qui s'il est un brillant stratege et un homme d'une exceptionnelle intelligence, n'en reste pas moins un menteur (oui je le dis) un tricheur pret a tout pour arriver a ses fins. Un menteur, un tricheur? Un menteur, je ne connais pas d'hommes en politique qui ne "rearrangent" pas les faits, mais un menteur? un menteur, menteur? comme Clinton? un gars qui prete serment et ment? Le meme qui puni par les barreaux d'Arkansas et par la Cour Supreme, a perdu son droit d'excercer (s'il en fait la demande il peut depuis 1996)? un menteur comme ca? Ah? mais je ne l'ai pas vu inculpe ni pendant qu'il etait a la Maison Blanche ni apres, d'ailleurs. Un tricheur? J'ai bien une idee de ce a quoi vous faites reference mais je prefererai que vous expliquiez quand meme. Pour arriver a ses fins? mais Shansaa, vous ne semblez pourtant pas naive, vous connaissez beaucoup de gens qui gravitent autour d'elus (sans parler d'elus eux-memes) surtout a ce niveau-la et qui ne soient pas des combattants, des gens pour qui la reussite est tout. Rien de mal a ca, si? Le probleme c'est quand la loi est enfreinte, or je le repete a part des jugements dans les journeaux, Carl Rove n'a fait l'objet, pour autant que je sache, d'aucun appel devant les tribunaux (Bonjour Mr. Blagojevich) et encore moins ete declare coupable par un jury ou un juge. Vous avez des preuves de ce que vous avancez contre Carl Rove, auquel cas, il faudrait peut-etre prevenir les autorites? . ========= L'exageration des WMD de l'Irak, c'est lui, Ah bon? (Il me semblait que c'etait les services secrets qui avaient prepare les rapports, mais bon) La encore vous devez avoir des preuves, a moins que vous ne jugiez a la Dan Rather, vous etes convaincue, ca doit donc etre vraie (et pas vous, hein, mais Dan Rather, lui, concocte de faux documents qu'il calque sur ses convictions - Bonjour l'ethique, quand je pense que tant l'ont defendu!) ======== l'affaire Plame c'est lui Ah bon ca aussi? Il me semblait qu'au contraire il avait ete demontre qu'il n'avait jamais donne le nom de la dame, mais bon, la encore il a ete juge et condamne sans qu'il n'ait jamais ete convoque devant le juge. C'est un monde ca tout de meme d'autant que le procureur est le meme que celui qui s'est agrippe a Libby et qui s'agrippe maintenant a Blagojevich donc s'il avait vraiment voulu Rove... Ce n'etait pas Richard Armitage qui a finalement ete reconnu comme le responsable de la fuite? ======= parce que Joe Wilson avait "ose" devoile les mensonges de l'administration sur les WMD, meme si je sais que vous soutiendrez le contraire. La il me semblait que c'etait l'affaire du Yellow cake au Niger uniquement et d'ailleurs contrairement a ce que Joe Wilson avait mis dans son rapport, saddam avait bel et bien envoye un emissaire pour au moins se renseigner sinon pour acheter. ====== Libby "Scooter" dont on a fait le principal accuse et qui a ete condamne a ete gracie par Bush, Ben voyons, alors que devoiler le nom, l'identitie d'un agent est un crime federal. La encore, vous defigurez la realite des choses, il a ete condamne pour faux serment et obstruction de justice, ce qui est incense a partir du moment ou il a ete reconnu innocent de ce dont il etait accuse. Il est nouille lui aussi, il n'avait qu'a repeter ce que les Clinton disent toujours lorsqu'ils sont devant un juge: " I have no recollection whatsoever..." ===== Il était devenu l'une des principales cibles de la Justice américaine en raison de son implication dans de nombreuses affaires douteuses de l'administration (cité a comparaître devant la Commission des affaires judiciaires du Sénat afin d'être entendu dans l'affaire du licenciement abusif de plusieurs procureurs fédéraux jugés trop démocrates, mais Bush l'a couvert en décrétant une immunité spéciale pour Rove, conseiller "dans l'exercice de ses fonctions", Ben Voyons....!!! Parmi les autres coups tordus il y a aussi l'utilisation frauduleuse de papier à en tête d'un démocrate, des scandales d'espionnage téléphonique illégal et anti-constitutionnels, l'intimidation et les menaces envers certains journalistes ou opposants politiques, la diffusion dans les médias de rumeurs malveillantes contre ses adversaires, bref la liste est longue.
"Les fourberies et les manipulations douteuses qui ont jalonné sa carrière font de Karl Rove la figure même du parfait salaud politique" a ecrit un journaliste, je suis d'accord. Alors la, je refuse de repondre au paragraphe par paragraphe, d'autant que j'ai l'impression de lire une page de chez Madame Huffington. Juste le coup de papier a en tete: il avait 19 ans, et ca tenait plutot de la farce que d'autre chose, mais bon. oh et puis l'histoire des rumeurs malveillantes, ca me fait bien rire, je crois que vous voulez sans doute parler de l'ere clinton, pendant laquelle, il vallait mieux ne pas etre mal vu du couple sous peine de voir sa vie detruite dans les quotidiens. (la, les preuves existent, toutes les femmes qui ont ose parler des agissements de Bill) =======
"C'est une grosse perte pour nous, [...], un grand collègue et un bon ami. Il nous manquera beaucoup. Mais [...] il continuera à être l'un des meilleurs amis du président", a déclaré l'actuel secrétaire général adjoint de la Maison Blanche. Il ne me manquera pas une seconde. La, je peux tres bien comprendre, j'ai eu le meme sentiment de soulagement lorsque Bill, Hillary, et leur clique sont partis. (Evidemment, le probleme est qu'ils reviennent, mais bon.. un vrai manege) il y en a des pas mal dans le groupe aussi, d'ailleurs c'est deja bien parti entre Blagojevich, Reid et maintenant Richardson, on ne devrait pas s'embeter. Pour en revenir a James Carville, il a ecrit un article interessant a ce sujet dans lequel il dit etre convaincu que 2009 ne serait pas une tres bonne annee pour les Democrates. |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 152 - Shansaa 5/1/2009, 10:56 | |
| Clinton n'a jamais ete la risee du monde.vous arrivez a rester serieuse en ecrivant ca? Des que Clinton est mentionne, les blagues sur les cigars et pipes, la robe bleue, etc.. ressortent. Il y a peu de temps c'etait encore le cas ici. ------ C'est plutot Ken Starr et une partie de l'Amerique puritaino-conservatrice qui l'ont ete.Ben je voudrais savoir combien dans le monde connaissent le nom de Ken Starr. C'est etre puritain que de demander a ce que son president se restraingne de se payer des petites jeunes alors qu'il se trouve dans le bureau oval, meme s'il allait dans le couloir exterieur pour se soulager? Je comprends qu'etre president puisse rendre nerveux, mais la... ------Il a menti oui mais Non, non , non, il a menti Point, a la limite on peut ajouter: SOUS SERMENT -----si la Chambre a effectivement vote l'impeachment, le Senat lui l'a acquitte. Dont acte, La encore, pas d'accord, les votes se sont faits selon les partis. Pour rien au monde, un Democrate n'aurait voulu que son vote cause le rejet de Clinton. Ce qui est important: c'est ce que j'ecrivais hier soir. Clinton a ete puni par ses pairs. Il n'a plus eu le droit de pratiquer le droit. Maintenant: "Dont acte" -----et tout ca pour une pantalonnade qui aurait du rester dans la sphere privee et qui ne regardait personne que lui et sa famille. Mais, mais. L'i mpeachment n'avait rien a voir avec Monica Lewinsk, That woman he never had sexual relations with...-------Mais il ya eu un procureur qui essayait d'avoir Clinton depuis des lustres, frustre par les resultats du whitewatergate et une bonne femme en mal de pub qui est passee par la et qui a obtenu l'immunite pour un acte totalement illegal (enregistrements de conversations telephoniques) parce que ca servait le but de Starr. Je ne suis pas sensible a cet argument de "Oh but he lied..." Non, sauf lorsqu'il s'agit de Libby? Mais bien sur qu'il a menti , sous serment lors d'un proces ou il etait accuse de harassement sexuel. Mais bon, la femme venant d'un trailer park elle aurait du etre fiere de ce que le president des Etats Unis s'occupe d'elle (enfin de lui demander de s'occuper de lui). D'ailleurs, une commentatrice Democrate de l'epoque avait dit chez O'Reilly: mais si Bill Clinton m'avait fait cet honneur, j'en aurais ete fiere... Pauvre femme... ------ Si on n'etait pas alle mettre le nez dans ses affaires privees, il n'y aurait pas eu ce pathetique episode. Une fois de plus, vous melangez tout. C'est une erreur ou vous le faites expres? ------Je vous rappelle aussi que quand il a quitte la Maison Blanche, son taux de popularite ou approval rate, (whichever you prefer) etait de 68%, du jamais vu. Tous les sondages de l'epoque et les analystes politiques ont demontre que si Clinton avait pu se representer pour un 3e mandat il aurait ete reelu. Oui, les problemes economiques n'ont fait surface qu'apres son depart. Je vous rappelle aussi que si la crise financiere, largement due a son mandat, n'avait pas eu lieu juste avant les elections, l'election d'Obama etait loin d'etre gagnee. Comme quoi le timing, hein? -----
Economiquement, encore non. Deja Clinton est parti en transformant un gros deficit en un surplus record, les caisses etaient pleines, un surplus qui aurait pu etre utilise a ameliorer le systeme de securite sociale au lieu d'etre reste inutilise pourtant.Voir plus haut. ------Bush s'en va en laissant une ardoise que vont payer nos enfants et petits enfants, merci ! Et que dire des creations d'emploi et de la baisse du chomage et de l'inflation, des augmentations de salaire, du remboursement de la dette nationale, des coupes des depenses federales et des diminutions d'impot pour la classe moyenne sous Clinton ? Pres. Bush a eu a faire face a la realite de la reussite economique de Clinton et aux consequences du 11 septembre egalement dues a Clinton qui n'avait pas accepter de l'offre de prendre ben laden, causant son installation en afghanistan. Il faudrait peut-etre ne pas oublier tous les details. ----- F. Mae et F. Mac, ok il aurait du y avoir moins de laxisme, sinon d'encouragement a emprunter plus qu'il ne fallait mais plus que le pret ce sont les termes du prets qui sont en cause car les "adjustable rates" beneficiaient surtout aux preteurs qui eux s'enrichissaient a qui mieux mieux. Rappelez-moi, Shansaa, avec quel argent, Obama a ete elu? ------Peut etre que justement la presse n'a pas juge bon de demoniser un homme pour des affaires de pantalon et tant mieux. Cela n'a en rien nui a la situation du pays. Pardon, mais je me dis qu'au lieu de s'amuser en travaillant, s'il avait ete un peu plus serieux, peut-etre aurait-il compris l'importance de prendre ben laden (etant intelligent, lui et doue en affaires etrangeres, lui) et les Etats Unis n'auraient peut-etre pas eu a subir les attaques du 11 septembre ----- On ne peut pas en dire autant du futur ex. Il aurait peut etre mieux fait d'avoir une Monica lui aussi WOW! Sinon les lois, au moins l'ethique aurait du instruire Clinton de ne pas user de son autorite pour profiter d'une stagiaire de facon en plus si minable. (Encore, il aurait eu une affaire avec elle...) Ce qui me gene beaucoup, je dois le dire, c'est que dans cette histoire, Clinton et sa famille sont les victimes, pas un mot pour cette petite idiote de Monica Lewinski Enfin, je vois ca en tant que femme et en tant que mere, je suppose que toutes les femmes et toutes les meres ne reagissent pas de la meme facon.
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 5/1/2009, 11:37, édité 2 fois |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 153 - Clinton's impeachment 5/1/2009, 11:06 | |
| |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 154 - Ce n'est pas tous les jours qu'on a un impeachment, alors... 5/1/2009, 11:13 | |
| Clinton Impeachment
The impeachment of President Bill Clinton arose from a series of events following the filing of a lawsuit on May 6, 1994, by Paula Corbin Jones in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. In her complaint initiating the suit, Ms. Jones alleged violations of her federal civil rights in 1991 by President Clinton when he was governor of Arkansas and she was an Arkansas state employee. According to the allegations, Governor Clinton invited Ms. Jones to his hotel room where he made a crude sexual advance that she rejected. After Ms. Jones filed the lawsuit, the attorneys for President Clinton moved to delay any proceedings, contending that the Constitution required that any legal action be deferred until his term ended, an issue ultimately decided against the President by the Supreme Court of the United States in its decision of Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997). Following the Supreme Court decision allowing the Jones lawsuit to proceed, pre-trial discovery commenced in which various potential witnesses were subpoenaed for information related to the Jones incident and, over objections of the President's attorneys, Mr. Clinton's alleged sexual approaches to other women. On April 1, 1998, Judge Susan Webber Wright granted summary judgment in favor of President Clinton, dismissing the Jones suit in its entirety, finding that Ms. Jones had not offered any evidence to support a viable claim of sexual harassment or intentional infliction of emotion distress. Ms. Jones appealed Judge Wright's decision to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, but before a decision on the appeal was rendered, Ms. Jones and the President settled the case on November 13, 1998.
The name of Monica Lewinsky, who had worked in the White House in 1995 as an intern, was first included on a list of potential witnesses prepared by the attorneys for Ms. Jones that was submitted to the President's legal team. Image source: CNN.com
Ms. Lewinsky's name had been provided to the attorneys for Ms. Jones by Linda Tripp, a former White House employee who had become a confidante of Ms. Lewinsky and had secretly tape recorded various conversations she had with Lewinsky relating to her contacts with the President. On January 12, 1998, Ms. Tripp also provided the tapes of her conversations with Ms. Lewinsky to Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr, who had been appointed to investigate charges relating to the Whitewater real estate venture in Arkansas of the President and Mrs. Clinton. On the same day, Ms. Lewinsky's sworn affidavit was sent by her lawyers to the Jones attorneys in which she asserted in part: I have never had a sexual relationship with the President, he did not propose that we have a sexual relationship, he did not offer me employment or other benefits in exchange for a sexual relationship, he did not deny me employment or other benefits for rejecting a sexual relationship. On January 15, Starr obtained approval from Attorney General Janet Reno, who in turn sought and received an order from the United States Court of Appeals, to expand the scope of the Whitewater probe into the new allegations. On the following day, a meeting between Ms. Lewinsky and Ms. Tripp at a hotel was secretly recorded pursuant to a court order, with federal agents then confronting Ms. Lewinsky at the end of the meeting with charges of her perjury and demanding that she cooperate in providing evidence against the President. Ms. Lewinsky initially declined to cooperate, and told the FBI and other investigators that much of what she had told Ms. Tripp was not true. On January 17, President Clinton was deposed in the Jones lawsuit. He denied having "sexual relations" with Ms. Lewinsky under a definition provided to him in writing by her lawyers, and also said that he could not recall whether he was ever alone with her. On January 21, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and ABC News reported that Starr had expanded his investigation of the President to include the allegations related to Lewinsky. After repeated media inquiries, on January 26 President Clinton asserted in an appearance before the White House press corps: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky," and denied urging her to lie about an affair. The President's attorneys failed in efforts to block Starr's expansion of his investigation, which also included whether the President himself had lied under oath in his own deposition taken in the Paula Jones litigation. In July 1998, after being granted sweeping immunity from prosecution by Special Prosecutor Starr, Ms. Lewinsky admitted that she in fact had had a sexual relationship with the President that did not include intercourse, but denied that she had ever been asked to lie about the relationship by the President or by those close to him.
On August 17, the President testified for over four hours before Starr's grand jury on closed-circuit television from the White House. In his testimony, he admitted the Lewinsky relationship, but denied that he perjured himself in the Paula Jones deposition because he did not interpret the conduct with Ms. Lewinsky as constituting sexual relations. On the same evening, he appeared on national television and admitted that he had an "inappropriate relationship" with Lewinsky and had misled the American people about it. On September 9, Independent Counsel Starr submitted a detailed report to the Congress in which he contended that there was "substantial and credible information that President William Jefferson Clinton committed acts that may constitute grounds for an impeachment" by lying under oath in the Jones litigation and obstructing justice by urging Ms. Lewinsky "... to to file an affidavit that the President knew would be false". On September 11, the House of Representatives approved House Resolution 525 by a vote of 363 to 63 authorizing a review by the Committee on the Judiciary of the report of the Independent Counsel to determine whether sufficient grounds existed to recommend to the House that an impeachment inquiry be commenced and also approved the public release of the Starr report. On September 21, the Judiciary Committee released nearly 3,200 pages of material from the grand jury proceedings and the Starr investigation, including transcripts of the tesimony of President Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky. On October 8, House Resolution 581 introduced by Congressman Henry J. Hyde, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was approved by the House in a 258 to 163 vote to authorize and direct the Judiciary Committee to investigate whether sufficient grounds existed for the impeachment of the President. After its staff interviewed various witnesses in private, the Judiciary Committee's public hearings commenced on November 19 with an opening statement by Congressman Hyde followed by additional hearings in which the Committee reviewed the issues and allegations of the Starr report and additional testimony provided by witnesses to its staff. The Committee also heard contrasting views from constitutional experts on the legal basis for impeachment as applied to the factual allegations pertaining to the Lewinsky matter. A motion sponsored by Democrats to adopt a censure resolution as an alternative to the proposed impeachment was defeated on December 8. On December 11 and 12, the Committee approved four articles of impeachment for presentation to the full House, and on December 16 released its full Report supporting its recommendation. After debate, the House approved two of the Articles alleging that the President had provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury regarding the Paula Jones case and his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and that he had obstructed justice through an effort to delay, impede, cover up and conceal the existence of evidence related to the Jones case. After the House vote, President Clinton appeared before the media at the White House, saying in part: I have accepted responsibility for what I did wrong in my personal life. And I have invited members of Congress to work with us to find a reasonable, bipartisan and proportionate response. That approach was rejected today by Republicans in the House. But I hope it will be embraced by the Senate. I hope there will be a constitutional and fair means of resolving this matter in a prompt manner. The Impeachment Trial in the Senate commenced on January 7, 1999, with the announcement by the Sergeant-at-Arms of the presence of the managers on the part of the House of Representatives to conduct proceedings on behalf of the House concerning the impeachment of the President of the United States. After Congressman Hyde read the Articles of Impeachment approved by the House, the Senate then adjourned, reconvening later that day with Chief Justice Rehnquist present, who was sworn in as presiding officer for the trial and who in turn swore in the 100 senators as jurors for the proceedings. The President's case was outlined in the White House Trial Memorandum submitted on January 13, which was countered by the House Rebuttal to White House Trial Memorandum. In subsequent sessions, the Senate voted to adopt a series of motions to limit evidence primarily to the previously video-taped depositions, affidavits and other documents previously introduced, and also voted to close its final deliberations to the public. The Senate voted on the Articles of Impeachment on February 12, with a two-thirds majority, or 67 Senators, required to convict. On Article I, that charged that the President "...willfully provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury" and made "...corrupt efforts to influence the testimony of witnesses and to impede the discovery of evidence" in the Paula Jones lawsuit, the President was found not guilty with 45 Senators voting for the President's removal from office and 55 against. Ten Republicans split with their colleagues to vote for acquittal; all 45 Democrats voted to acquit. On Article II, charging that the President "...has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice"..., the vote was 50-50, with all Democrats and five Republicans voting to acquit. Following the vote, President Clinton, in televised remarks from the White House, said: Now that the Senate has fulfilled its constitutional responsibility bringing this process to a conclusion, I want to say again to the American people how profoundly sorry I am for what I said and did to trigger these events and the great burden they have imposed on the Congress and on the American people. I also am humbled and very grateful for the support and the prayers I have received from millions of Americans over this past year. Now I ask all Americans, and I hope all Americans here in Washington and throughout our land, will rededicate ourselves to the work of serving our nation and building our future together. This can be and this must be a time of reconciliation and renewal for America.
|
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 155 - Shansaa 5/1/2009, 11:44 | |
| J'avoue que vous etes tres convaincante et j'ai presque commence a douter de ma memoire, presque, hein? mais non, quand meme pas. C'est fou a quel point vous reecrivez l'histoire, meme lorsqu'elle est irrefutable. 'ttention, nous vivons un moment historique (c'est pas moi qui l'ecrit c'est le NYTimes - je suppose que les autres elections c'etait du pipi de chat, mais bon) essayez de ne pas melanger les details. (par exemple, la en ce moment c'est par la mafia de l'Illinois que le scandale arrive rien a voir avec le Texas, hein?) |
| | | Shansaa
Nombre de messages : 1674 Date d'inscription : 02/11/2008
| Sujet: 156 - Sylvette 5/1/2009, 12:39 | |
| Bonjour Sylvette, "apres 8 ans, on voudrait nous faire regretter l'ere Clinton, periode de securite, de stabilite, de justice, d'espoir, d'humanite, vous pouvez continuer. La lumiere en comparaison de l'ombre dans laquelle Pres. Bush nous aurait jetesm quoa. L'histoire serait-elle reecrite ou bien espere-t-on que nous ayons totalement perdu la memoire? Peut-etre les deux."
Il n'est pas question de regrets ou pas. Vous avez ecrit une chose a laquelle je vous ai repondu. La situation economique du pays lors du depart de Clinton et la "risee" du monde. Deux points sur lesquels je suis en total desaccord avec vous comme la plupart des analystes et politologues. Maintenant on peu s'amuser a ecrire une liste alphabetique de tous "scandales" de tous les presidents mais quelle perte de temps surtout que dans ce cas certains sont crosspostes (j'avoue que le "Z" m'a fait rire. Si on va chercher jusque la....... !! Il n'en reste pas moins, malgre votre deplaisir que la presidence de Clinton n'a pas ete catastrophique pour les US a l'interieur comme a l'exterieur. On ne peut pas en dire autant de son successeur.
Cela ecrit, pardon pour les gros caracteres mais je n'arrive pas a faire activer la touche bold pour ce message.
| |
| | | Shansaa
Nombre de messages : 1674 Date d'inscription : 02/11/2008
| Sujet: 157 - Sylvette 5/1/2009, 12:40 | |
| - Sylvette a écrit:
- J'avoue que vous etes tres convaincante et j'ai presque commence a douter de ma memoire, presque, hein? mais non, quand meme pas.
C'est fou a quel point vous reecrivez l'histoire, meme lorsqu'elle est irrefutable.
'ttention, nous vivons un moment historique (c'est pas moi qui l'ecrit c'est le NYTimes - je suppose que les autres elections c'etait du pipi de chat, mais bon) essayez de ne pas melanger les details. (par exemple, la en ce moment c'est par la mafia de l'Illinois que le scandale arrive rien a voir avec le Texas, hein?) De quoi parlez-vous ? | |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 158 - Shansaa 5/1/2009, 13:03 | |
| Lorsque j'ai ecrit quoi? Si c'est au sujet de mafia, vous semblez jongler avec les faits (le mensonge sous serment de Clinton, qui a eu pour consequence l'impeachment, a eu lieu pendant une deposition pour le proces intente contre lui par Mrs. Jones. Monica Lewinski devait elle temoigner) et comme l'autre jour vous avez parle de la mafia texane (desolee, mais je ne connaissais pas), je vous prevenais simplement de ne pas faire erreur en enregistrant les faits historiques, le scandale Democrate pour le moment est bien du a la mafia de l'Illinois (celle-la oui elle est bien connue) pas a une supposee mafia texane. Je vous titillais! quoi que... |
| | | Shansaa
Nombre de messages : 1674 Date d'inscription : 02/11/2008
| Sujet: 159 - Sylvette 5/1/2009, 14:37 | |
| | |
| | | Shansaa
Nombre de messages : 1674 Date d'inscription : 02/11/2008
| Sujet: 160 - Sylvette 5/1/2009, 14:39 | |
| - Citation :
vous arrivez a rester serieuse en ecrivant ca? Des que Clinton est mentionne, les blagues sur les cigars et pipes, la robe bleue, etc.. ressortent. Il y a peu de temps c'etait encore le cas ici. Tout a fait. Vous persistez a parler de Clinton deprave sexuel et moi de son bilan economique. Avec ca nous ne sommes pas pretes d'avoir une discussion. Cela dit, Lewinski n'etait pas une pauvre petite interne abusee. Elle etait majeure, vaccinee et sacrement consentante pour ququlqu'u dont on "aurait" profite. Elle a meme garde sa robe tachee en souvenir. Arretons de nous effaroucher la dessus. Quant au puritanisme, je suis peut etre restee plus europeenne que vous mais je m'en fiche comme de l'an 40 que mon president "se paye" des petites jeunes dans le bureau ovale ou dans les couloirs. La maison Blanche n'etait pas devenue un bordel que je sache, simplement le lieu ou un homme, tout president fut-il, a eu une affaire extra maritale. Pour moi ce n'est pas plus que ca, ca n'a pas affecte le pays en aucune maniere. Ce ne sont pas ses sessions avec Lewinski qui lui ont fait negliger les "offres" de Ben laden dont vous parlez.... On a bien eu Mitterrand en France qui vivait 2 vies parralleles? Ca n'a choque personne parce que ca fait partie du domaine prive. Est ce que c'est si difficile a comprendre ? Autre detail sur l'impeachment : Que le vote se soit fait selon ou pas des partis il n'en reste pas moins que Clinton n'a pas ete destitue comme Nixon et qu'il a pu continuer de presider jusqu'a la fin de son mandat. Wikipedia l'explique, desolee pas le temps de faire plus precis :
The President of the United States Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998, and acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999. The charges, perjury, obstruction of justice and abuse of power arose from the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the Paula Jones law suit. The trial proceedings were largely party-line, with no Democratic Senators voting for conviction and only five Democratic Representatives voting to impeach. In all, 55 senators voted not guilty, and 45 voted guilty on the obstruction charge. The Senate also acquitted on the charge of perjury with 50 votes cast as not guilty, and 50 votes as guilty. It was only the second impeachment of a President in American history, following the impeachment of Andrew Johnson in 1868. - Citation :
Mais, mais. L'impeachment n'avait rien a voir avec Monica Lewinsk, That woman he never had sexual relations with... Ah ben alors, rappelez moi s'il vous plait sur quels faits exactement (les vrais, les premiers, ceux qui sont a la base de toute l'affaire) se fondent le mensonge et le parjure de Clinton ? - Citation :
Non, sauf lorsqu'il s'agit de Libby? gné ? - Citation :
Une fois de plus, vous melangez tout. C'est une erreur ou vous le faites expres? J'attends que vous m'eclairiez de vos lumieres Sylvette - Citation :
Oui, les problemes economiques n'ont fait surface qu'apres son depart. Mmmm je ne vous suis pas completement la dessus non plus. S'il est vrai que le boom technologique touchait a sa fin, ou est passe l'enorme surplus ? Quid du gouffre que representent les depenses Irakiennes ? Et Afghanes ? A ce point, fallait-il vraiment une 2nde baisse des impots pour alourdir le deficit deja en chute libre ? O'Neill etait contre, Bush aussi d'ailleurs mais Rove (Tiens encore lui...) l'a convaincu de s'en tenir aux "principes". Sans parler de l'effondrement du dollar. Bon j'arrete, c'est deprimant. - Citation :
Je vous rappelle aussi que si la crise financiere, largement due a son mandat, n'avait pas eu lieu juste avant les elections, l'election d'Obama etait loin d'etre gagnee. Peut etre, je n'ai pas de boule de cristal donc qui peut dire? Il est cependant vrai que l'ignorance de McCain sur le sujet et ses incomprehensibles volte faces l'ont totalement desservi. - Citation :
Pres. Bush a eu a faire face a la realite de la reussite economique de Clinton et aux consequences du 11 septembre egalement dues a Clinton qui n'avait pas accepter de l'offre de prendre ben laden, causant son installation en afghanistan. Il faudrait peut-etre ne pas oublier tous les details.
Pardon, mais je me dis qu'au lieu de s'amuser en travaillant, s'il avait ete un peu plus serieux, peut-etre aurait-il compris l'importance de prendre ben laden (etant intelligent, lui et doue en affaires etrangeres, lui) et les Etats Unis n'auraient peut-etre pas eu a subir les attaques du 11 septembre Clinton a ete laxiste sur la question mais il est trop facile de mettre 9/11 exlusivement sur son dos. Les services secrets ont plusieurs fois alerte Bush en 2000 et 2001 sur l'imminence d'une attaque sur les US mais il ne les jamais prises au serieux non plus. APRIL 10--"Under pressure from the September 11 commission, the White House today declassified and released an intelligence digest given to President George W. Bush weeks before the 2001 terrorist attacks. The confidential President's Daily Brief (PDB) for August 6, 2001 contained a two-page section entitled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US," and refers to possible hijacking attempts by Osama bin Laden disciples and the existence of about 70 FBI investigations into alleged al-Qaeda cells operating within the United States. The August 6 PDB, an excerpt from which you'll find below, was presented to Bush while he vacationed at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. The digest is prepared by the Central Intelligence Agency, an official form which briefs the president on the report's contents. While Bush critics have described the August 6 PDB as a warning of an impending al-Qaeda attack, Condoleezza Rice, Bush's national security adviser, testified Thursday that the document contained "historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information." (2 pages) " Dans un autre mail une interview de C. Rice. | |
| | | Shansaa
Nombre de messages : 1674 Date d'inscription : 02/11/2008
| Sujet: 161 - Rice on Ben Laden and 9/11 5/1/2009, 15:05 | |
| "And the Clinton administration, to its credit, gave us very good transition briefings about — about al-Qaida and Saddam and al-Qaida and the — the threat of Osama bin Laden."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4549089/ | |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 162 - Shansaa 5/1/2009, 17:29 | |
| Oh la la, Carter qui recherche de la souplesse... quelle formidable abilite de votre part a vous contortionner! Alors et puis ce sera tout, hein? Tout a fait. Vous persistez a parler de Clinton deprave sexuel et moi de son bilan economique. Avec ca nous ne sommes pas pretes d'avoir une discussion.Ayant repris point par point ce que vous ecriviez je n'ai pas plus ni moins parle de clinton deprave sexuel (c'est bien a vous de le reconnaitre!! ) que de son bilan economique, que vous. ===== Cela dit, Lewinski n'etait pas une pauvre petite interne abusee. Elle etait majeure, vaccinee et sacrement consentante pour ququlqu'u dont on "aurait" profite. Elle a meme garde sa robe tachee en souvenir. Arretons de nous effaroucher la dessus. C'etait une sotte, elle etait amoureuse de lui (enfin de ce qu'il representait) et prete a tout (la preuve.. elle se laissait traitee comme une prostituee, non payee d'ailleurs....) et en plus esperait-elle peut-etre qu'il laisse Hillary pour elle (la niaise..). Toutefois, la responsabilite reste tout de meme avec Clinton - lui, President, elle stagiaire (responsabilite une fois de plus due a l'autorite de son poste (je n'utilise pas position, ca va encore faire rire), la meme que celle d'un professeur d'universite vis-a-vis de ses etudiant(e)s par exemple); - Ensuite, lui age de 52 ans (et pere d'une fille de 18ans a l'epoque), elle de 25. Son experience et son intelligence sinon un minimum de decense aurait du lui dicter sa conduite. J'imagine un instant sa reaction (et celle d'Hillary) s'il avait appris qu'un vieux macho utilisait sa fille pour se soulager de la facon dont lui le faisait avec la fille de quelqu'un d'autre. ------ Quant au puritanisme, je suis peut etre restee plus europeenne que vous mais je m'en fiche comme de l'an 40 que mon president "se paye" des petites jeunes dans le bureau ovale ou dans les couloirs. La maison Blanche n'etait pas devenue un bordel que je sache, simplement le lieu ou un homme, tout president fut-il, a eu une affaire extra maritale. Mais non puisqu'il n'avait pas eu de " sexual relationship with that woman" et qu'il n'a pas menti; vous voyez bien que vous vous emmelez. ==== Pour moi ce n'est pas plus que ca, ca n'a pas affecte le pays en aucune maniere. Ce ne sont pas ses sessions avec Lewinski qui lui ont fait negliger les "offres" de Ben laden dont vous parlez....Ah bon, c'est formidable, vous etes tres sure de vous, vu que c'est tres subjectif, vous avez droit a votre opinion et moi a la mienne? ======== On a bien eu Mitterrand en France qui vivait 2 vies parralleles? Ca n'a choque personne parce que ca fait partie du domaine prive. Est ce que c'est si difficile a comprendre ?Pourquoi, s'est-il senti oblige de le cacher toute sa vie, si ca n'a choque personne? et pourquoi les journalistes ont-ils joue le jeu egalement, alors que quand meme la 2eme famille vivait aux frais des contribuables francais. ===== Autre detail sur l'impeachment : Que le vote se soit fait selon ou pas des partis il n'en reste pas moins que Clinton n'a pas ete destitue comme Nixon et qu'il a pu continuer de presider jusqu'a la fin de son mandat. Wikipedia l'explique, desolee pas le temps de faire plus precis :
The President of the United States Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998, and acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999. The charges, perjury, obstruction of justice and abuse of power arose from the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the Paula Jones law suit. The trial proceedings were largely party-line, with no Democratic Senators voting for conviction and only five Democratic Representatives voting to impeach. In all, 55 senators voted not guilty, and 45 voted guilty on the obstruction charge. The Senate also acquitted on the charge of perjury with 50 votes cast as not guilty, and 50 votes as guilty. It was only the second impeachment of a President in American history, following the impeachment of Andrew Johnson in 1868.C'est comme vous voulez, Nixon maintenant, "plus pire" sans doute...Dans ce cas, je joue le jeu l'espace d'une seconde, 1) il n'a pas ete destitue, il a demissionne avant afin de ne pas plonger le pays dans le desarroi que nous avons connu en 1998 et 2) le bien de notre pays, il avait deja fait passe le pays avant lui, acceptant la victoire de Kennedy alors que des fraudes avaient ete commises, le pere Kennedy ayant fait remplir les urnes de bulletins de vote avant le jour des elections. Bon, je retourne dans les limites de ce dont il etait question.Oui, les Senateurs ont vote en sa faveur, pour raison politique, mais Clinton, je repete a ete defait des licenses qui l'autorisaient a pratiquer le droit pas seulement en Arkansas mais par la Cour Supreme, alors lorsque vous dites qu'il n'a pas menti, il me semble, il me semble seulement que ce n'est pas l'avis des barreaux concernes. Mais, hein, la encore, vous avez le droit de penser ce que vous voulez, si ca vous fait du bien, c'est formidable non? ======= Ah ben alors, rappelez moi s'il vous plait sur quels faits exactement (les vrais, les premiers, ceux qui sont a la base de toute l'affaire) se fondent le mensonge et le parjure de Clinton ?J'ai fait un C.C. plus haut concernant l'impeachment, il vous suffit de le relire. ====== gné ?Genee? Moi, nullement, je trouve assez drole toutefois que vos principes et votre indignation ne s'appliquent qu'a ces affreux Republicains mais que lorsqu'il s'agit de Democrates, vous redevez tres tres liberale. Pour moi, un parjure se doit d'etre puni. Pour des raisons politiques, Clinton ne l'a pas ete. Je trouve seulement assez drole que Libby, que toute la gauche voulait voir enfermer dans une celleule (de preference a cote de celle de Carl Rove) dont on aurait jete la cle, ait ete reconnu non coupable et qu'il ait toutefois ete condamne a plusieurs annees de prison pour parjure et obstruction de justice. mais bon, ils devaient avoir leurs raisons. Alors que, toujours lors d'un proces mais la concernant un harcelement sexuel dont il s'etait rendu coupable, Clinton mente sous serment au sujet d'autres relations sexuelles avec une autre femme (et encore nous ne parlerons pas des autres ici - elles sont mentionnes dans la liste des scandales clintonnien de A a Z toutefois) et vous le defendez, disant que justement il n'a pa menti. Si vous refusez de traiter le sexe comme n'importe quel autre acte qui, impose a quelqu'un, se doit d'etre puni, c'est peut-etre que ce ne sont pas les conservateurs "puritains" mais bien les "liberaux" qui ont un probleme relationnel avec, ne pensez-vous pas? ====== Mmmm je ne vous suis pas completement la dessus non plus. S'il est vrai que le boom technologique touchait a sa fin, ou est passe l'enorme surplus ? Quid du gouffre que representent les depenses Irakiennes ? Et Afghanes ? A ce point, fallait-il vraiment une 2nde baisse des impots pour alourdir le deficit deja en chute libre ? O'Neill etait contre, Bush aussi d'ailleurs mais Rove (Tiens encore lui...) l'a convaincu de s'en tenir aux "principes". Sans parler de l'effondrement du dollar. Bon j'arrete, c'est deprimant.
La encore, tout ce que vous dites est " je ne vous suis pas completement la dessus non plus" mais les faits sont la: Les elections ont eu lieu en novembre 2000. L'economie etait sous disant florissante, au premier trimestre 2001, les chiffres donnaient la verite, les problemes remontaient a l'ete 2000. Voila c'est tout. ===== Peut etre, je n'ai pas de boule de cristal donc qui peut dire? Il est cependant vrai que l'ignorance de McCain sur le sujet et ses incomprehensibles volte faces l'ont totalement desservi.Pas besoin de boules de cristal, il suffit de regarder les sondages de fin septembre/debut octobre. ===== Clinton a ete laxiste sur la question mais il est trop facile de mettre 9/11 exlusivement sur son dos.Ah mais quand on est intelligent et capable comme Clinton, pourquoi n'a-t-il pas compris l'importance de prendre possession de ben laden (apres tout, Clinton avait deja essuye la premiere attaque des tours en '93) ===== Les services secrets ont plusieurs fois alerte Bush en 2000 et 2001 sur l'imminence d'une attaque sur les US mais il ne les jamais prises au serieux non plus. APRIL 10--"Under pressure from the September 11 commission, the White House today declassified and released an intelligence digest given to President George W. Bush weeks before the 2001 terrorist attacks. The confidential President's Daily Brief (PDB) for August 6, 2001 contained a two-page section entitled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US," and refers to possible hijacking attempts by Osama bin Laden disciples and the existence of about 70 FBI investigations into alleged al-Qaeda cells operating within the United States. The August 6 PDB, an excerpt from which you'll find below, was presented to Bush while he vacationed at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. The digest is prepared by the Central Intelligence Agency, an official form which briefs the president on the report's contents. While Bush critics have described the August 6 PDB as a warning of an impending al-Qaeda attack, Condoleezza Rice, Bush's national security adviser, testified Thursday that the document contained "historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information." (2 pages) " Dans un autre mail une interview de C. Rice. La derniere phrase dit tout.
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 5/1/2009, 22:14, édité 1 fois |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 163 - Team pressed Richardson, got nothing 5/1/2009, 18:08 | |
| POLITICO By JONATHAN MARTIN | 1/4/09 9:05 PM EST Barack Obama’s transition team pressed Bill Richardson about a federal probe into “pay-to-play” allegations against his office – the same investigation Richardson cited Sunday in withdrawing his name as commerce secretary.
But a Democratic source said Obama’s questioners came away empty handed. “Those guys were pressed for information and they gave nothing,” the source said.
Now some Democrats are questioning Obama’s vetting process —- and asking whether Obama’s team went far enough in pushing the New Mexico governor for information in face of the federal grand jury probe that has been public since August.
It's the first high-profile stumble for an Obama transition that generally has run smoothly so far—and it deprives Obama of the highest-ranking Hispanic member of his Cabinet, already prompting cries from Latino groups for a prominent replacement.
... |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 164 - Comme quoi assez semble n'etre jamais assez! 5/1/2009, 18:22 | |
| J'avoue avoir bien ri aux depends des Democrates en general et de Reid en particulier avec cette histoire, mais la tout de meme... Un afro-americain vient d'etre elu President des Etats Unis alors qu'il ne represente que moins de 15% de la population et les Americains Blancs, les Democrates en l'occurence, sont toujours racistes?
Alors faisons comme dans les bureaux federaux, donnons un quota de sieges politiques aux minorites ca ira plus vite!
Incroyable.
Senate Dems in tough spot on Burris
The defiant move by Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to name a Senate successor to Barack Obama has triggered a political and legal mess that could drag on for months and is already prompting uncomfortable racial questions for Democrats.
The case also presents Senate Democrats with a major distraction hanging over their return to Washington this week for the start of the new Congress.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has made clear that he won’t swear in Roland Burris, the 71-year-old former state comptroller and attorney general who was appointed to the Senate by Blagojevich last week. But Democratic Senate aides are tamping down the idea that Burris would be physically blocked by Capitol Police when the Senate is gaveled into session Tuesday. Burris has said that he will leave upon being denied entry to the Senate chamber.
But Reid’s office isn’t backing down on its plan to not seat Burris — and top advisers to Burris are suggesting that Reid doesn’t want an African-American to succeed Obama.
“It’s interesting that all those who are viable are white women and the ones who are unacceptable are black men,” Prince Riley, a senior consultant to Burris, told Politico.
...
Senate Dems in tough spot on Burris |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 165 - L'intolerance d'Hollywood 5/1/2009, 21:04 | |
| Hollywood Conservatives Encouraged to Come Out of the Closet
Monday, January 05, 2009
By SE Cupp
FOX NEWS
A once-timid group of social outcasts is emerging from the shadows in Hollywood. If the past year is any indication, Tinseltown may have to get accustomed to the loud presence of a growing minority.
After years of silence, conservatives are coming out of the closet.
Andrew Breitbart, the conservative founder of Breitbart.com and author of "Hollywood Interrupted: Insanity Chic in Babylon," is launching a Web site he hopes will help challenge the status quo in what he believes has been a one-party, left-tilting town. Set to debut on Jan. 6, "Big Hollywood" will be a place where center, right and libertarian-leaning celebrities and industry-insiders can weigh in on Hollywood politics, offer film, television and movie reviews, and have an open forum for political discussion.
"Our goal," says Breitbart, who lives in Los Angeles, "is to create an atmosphere of tolerance -- something that does not exist in this town. Breitbart has invited a number of conservative politicians, commentators and journalists to write regularly about the cult of celebrity, liberalism in popular culture, and politics. Among the names who will be contributing, he says, are Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va), political commentator Tucker Carlson, and former Tennessee Senator and Republican presidential contender Fred Thompson.
The site will also feature the punditry of some well-known Hollywood actors, directors, producers, and writers, Breitbart says.
As celebrities like Jon Voigt, Gary Sinise, Charlton Heston, Patricia Heaton, Stephen Baldwin and Kelsey Grammer came out publicly with their political ideas over the past few years, the news that there were, in fact, conservatives in Hollywood, had many wondering who would be next.
Recently, there have been rumors that Robert Downey Jr. is a closet Republican, though his publicist will neither confirm nor deny it, saying only, "We unfortunately have no comment, as RDJ does not comment on political matters."
But Breitbart says the goal of Big Hollywood is not to "out" conservative celebrities, and he will not pressure celebrities like Downey to jump into the fray. He says conservative celebs who aren't comfortable with full transparency will be allowed to write under an alias.
"I want them to come on their own volition," he says. "'Big Hollywood is going to have to be a compelling daily read that speaks to Hollywood conservatives' unique burden before some will stick their necks out and choose to speak up for what they believe."
Sticking their necks out has not always been good for business. Mark Vafiades, president of the Hollywood Congress of Republicans, says, "I'm hoping that one day politics won't make a difference in Hollywood. But because there is still subtle intolerance here, conservatives remain somewhat shy.
"If you come to an audition wearing a Bush or McCain button, the casting director will most likely pick another actor. Just being on a set you hear people bashing Bush and the right, because they assume everyone agrees."
Some have suggested the purported anti-conservative tilt in Hollywood is overstated -- if it exists at all. Perez Hilton, the self-proclaimed "Queen of All Media" and author of his eponymous gossip site, said, "I think Hollywood is very tolerant. They may mock you for your political beliefs, but at least they'll do it to your face!
"It won't ever interfere with people getting a job. Kelsey Grammer still works!"
But some conservatives in the entertainment industry say there may not be a literal blacklist in Hollywood, but there is pressure to keep silent.
"Conservatives don't necessarily have to be covert about their politics, but in many cases they are because the liberals aren't fair and balanced towards those with differing points of view," says Jerry Molen, the Oscar-winning producer of big Hollywood hits like "Schindler's List," "Jurassic Park" and "Rain Man."
"In too many cases, conservatives are immediately labeled racist, homophobic, bigoted, hateful, demonic, or even un-American without the benefit of debate, and are locked out of the hiring process, with a few exceptions."
But the doors may be slowly opening "An American Carol," a conservative parody that lampooned liberal Hollywood this year, galvanized conservative celebrities like Robert Davi, Dennis Hopper, Kevin Farley, Voigt and Grammer, all of whom had roles in the film.
And conservative film festivals, including the American Film Renaissance and the Liberty Film Festival, have also helped bring to market conservative projects that a few years ago might have had a difficult time getting made.
Some industry insiders credit John McCain with helping to embolden Hollywood conservatives during this year's presidential election. Andrew Klavan, a conservative author and screenwriter of psychological thrillers including True Crime and Don't Say A Word, said, "For people who had a lot to lose, McCain gave them some cover. He wasn't a true Republican like Bush was. He was someone even the left liked, whereas Bush was demonized. Hollywood conservatives could support McCain without necessarily supporting the GOP."
Klavan suggested that a spate of recent political movies like "Rendition" and "Redaction" also strengthened the conservative cause.
"These movies are genuinely anti-American. Never before have we had anti-war movies made while our troops were at war. Many people like me were ashamed of the industry, and there's been a bit of a backlash."
Vafiades says increasing numbers of conservatives have joined his organization in the past year, and more organizations like his are sprouting up.
But hush-hush groups like "Friends of Abe," a secretive society of Hollywood conservatives, still operate well under the radar. And the increased spotlight on conservative celebrities has not changed the political climate as much as Breitbart, Vafiades, Molen and Klavan would like.
They say liberal celebrities still have an easier time "being political" than conservatives do.
"Sean Penn is out dancing with dictators, and no one gives him flak. Instead they give him Oscar nominations," says Klavan. "Jon Voigt may have some semblance of job security, but he still has to be careful about what he says." |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 166 - 5/1/2009, 22:17 | |
| le 162 a fait l'objet d'une "edition" |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 167 - le manege continue a tourner 5/1/2009, 22:29 | |
| Leon Panetta to Be Nominated as CIA Director
By SIOBHAN GORMAN
In a surprise move, President-elect Barack Obama has picked Leon Panetta, a former congressman and chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, to be the next director of the Central Intelligence Agency, according to Democratic officials. His appointment is expected to be announced later this week. Et le plus important:
The pick was unexpected because many of the names discussed for the job had been intelligence professionals. Mr. Panetta, whose background is in politics and government, has not worked for an intelligence agency. He was selected for his management experience, one Democratic official said, citing Mr. Panetta's tenure as chief of staff and director of the Office of Management and Budget in the Clinton administration's first term. In those posts, Mr. Panetta was involved in setting the intelligence budget and handling key foreign-policy issues such as the Bosnian conflict, the official said. |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 168 - The GOP can stand on both principle and partisan self-interest. When opportunities like that arise, they should be grabbed. 6/1/2009, 08:29 | |
| January 5th, 2009 9:41 AM Eastern
Republicans Should Support Burris and Urge Senate to Seat Him
By Betsy Newmark High School History and Government Teacher/Blogger
When Roland Burris shows up at the Senate this week asking or demanding to be seated, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has already gone on record saying that Democrats will refuse to seat him. There will need to be a vote on the question and the Republicans, although they don’t have the power to determine what happens, will have to choose whether to support Reid or vote to seat Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s choice for the seat. They should vote to seat him. In this case, the right choice and the politically astute choice are the same.
......
Whatever happens, it is clear that the whole procedure is a mess. But it is a Democratic mess and the Republicans can just step out of the way. As Matt Lewis argues, the Republicans can stand on conservative principles and say that they are, reluctantly, supporting Supreme Court precedent and the rule of law. They can talk about how Illinois could have and should have avoided the whole meshugas by instituting a special election as soon as the news of Blagojevich’s attempt to sell the seat emerged. In the first hours after the story broke there were several Democrats who called for a special election. It’s clear to everyone that the only reason they didn’t do that was their fear that a Republican might possibly, in overwhelmingly Democratic Illinois, be able to win in the midst of all the disgust over the Democratic sleaze that has since come to light. In that light, there is another political plus in seating Burris. The guy seems to be a towering mediocrity as Steve Chapman reminds us. He never was able to even convince Democrats that he deserved to be elected to an office higher than state attorney general or comptroller. Once news of his grandiose and egotistical monument to himself leaked out, the guy became a joke. He would be a placeholder for the next two years. Then in 2010 when the next election took place the Republicans would be able to make the same arguments running against whichever Democrat got the nomination as they would have made in a special election held this year. Their chances of winning would be slight, but it was always going to be difficult to win that seat. However, if the Democrats’ machinations work out and Lieutenant Governor Pat Quinn becomes governor and is able to nominate someone young and untainted by this whole scandal, that person would be in a much stronger position to run as the incumbent in 2010 than he or she would be in running for an open seat now amidst all the news of Democratic corruption. So the Republicans can just sit back and enjoy the sight of the Democrats arguing amongst themselves about how sleazy the whole process has been and how tainted someone from their own party is. The GOP can stand on both principle and partisan self-interest. When opportunities like that arise, they should be grabbed. |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 169 - But it already IS a circus 6/1/2009, 15:50 | |
| Showdown Looms in Senate as Burris Insists Seat Is His
Now in Washington, D.C., Roland Burris says he's the legally appointed senator from Illinois but Democrats vow to block him from entering the floor.
FOXNews.com
Monday, January 05, 2009
Calling himself "the magic man," Roland Burris on Monday said he is going to Capitol Hill to be seated as the next senator from Illinois.
Burris remains defiant as he prepares to claim the post that Senate Democrats have vowed to deny him. He said Monday, as he arrived at an airport just outside Washington, that he is "ready, willing and able" to serve as senator.
The Senate was scheduled to convene at noon Tuesday with its newest members. Yet the controversy over the appointment of Burris by a governor accused of trying to sell the old seat of President-elect Barack Obama and the ongoing dispute over election results in Minnesota practically guaranteed that both seats would remain empty by day's end.
The former Illinois attorney general said the appointment by Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is entirely legal and that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has threatened to bar Burris from the Senate, does not know the law. "This is all politics and theater, but I am the junior senator according to every law book in the nation," Burris said before boarding his flight to the nation's capital. "This appointment is legal. What don't you all understand that what has been done here is legal? That's legal."
Burris signaled late Monday that he would not breach protocol by attempting to walk onto the Senate floor on Tuesday uninvited.
"I'm not going to make a scene," Burris said. "I don't want to give you all a circus."
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 6/1/2009, 15:57, édité 1 fois (Raison : «Un conciliateur c'est quelqu'un qui nourrit un crocodile en espérant qu'il sera le dernier à être mangé.» Winston Churchill) |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 170 - Si doute il a pu y avoir, il n'existe plus 6/1/2009, 16:30 | |
| Obama Names 4 for Justice Jobs in Break From Bush Path By ERIC LICHTBLAU Published: January 5, 2009
WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama reached back to the Clinton administration again Monday to fill four top Justice Department posts with lawyers whose records signal a sharp break from the legal policies of the last eight years. et le NYTimes de continuer toujours egal a lui-meme: Mr. Obama said he would nominate David W. Ogden, a Washington lawyer in private practice, as deputy attorney general; Elena Kagan, dean of the Harvard Law School, as solicitor general; Thomas J. Perrelli, a Washington lawyer, as associate attorney general; and Dawn E. Johnsen, an Indiana University law professor, as head of the Office of Legal Counsel. All four held senior legal posts in the Clinton administration. Many of Mr. Obama’s picks in other cabinet departments have taken on a decidedly centrist bent. But at the Justice Department, where controversial Bush administration policies like interrogation tactics and eavesdropping will come under review, the nomination of Eric H. Holder Jr. as attorney general last month and Monday’s selections of four top aides suggested a strong effort to stake out a new direction. ... |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 171 - Pardonne 6/1/2009, 16:41 | |
| Jailed for Aiding Israel, but Pardoned by Bush By ERIC LICHTBLAU Published: December 23, 2008
WASHINGTON — Charlie Winters was an unlikely soldier in the fight for a Jewish state 60 years ago. An Irish Protestant from Boston, he took up the clandestine cause from his perch in Miami and helped ferry military planes to Israeli fighters, even flying a B-17 bomber across the Atlantic Ocean himself in 1948. The Israelis have long considered him a hero; Prime Minister Golda Meir hailed his efforts. Yet in the United States, he was a criminal, imprisoned for 18 months for violating the 1939 Neutrality Act and breaking an embargo on weapons to Israel. But on Tuesday, President Bush pardoned Mr. Winters nearly a quarter-century after his death. In recent months, prominent Jews including Steven Spielberg and members of Congress mounted a campaign for clemency in Mr. Winters’s memory. “This is a present for my father,” said Jim Winters, 44, a Miami businessman who knew nothing about his father’s imprisonment until after his death. “This was a monumental challenge, but my dad’s favorite saying was ‘Keep the faith,’ and we did,” Mr. Winters said. Mr. Bush issued 18 other pardons on Tuesday, as well as one sentence commutation, to people convicted for largely run-of-the-mill crimes. There were no big names on the list, despite speculation that the president might consider leniency for figures like I. Lewis Libby Jr., the former White House aide. ...
|
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 172 - 6/1/2009, 21:11 | |
| Team Obama dabbles in dramaBy ROGER SIMON | 1/6/09 4:24 AM EST
For an outfit known for its lack of drama, Team Obama has become a downright thrill show.
Bill Richardson! Rick Warren! Rod Blagojevich! Roland Burris! Talk about a ride through the fun house.
President-elect Barack Obama doesn’t bear responsibility for all these speed bumps on the road to a better, happier, more respected America, but he certainly bears responsibility for some of them.
Obama’s selection of Bill Richardson for secretary of commerce didn’t seem like an awful idea. Richardson certainly has accomplished some things in his life, and he wanted an administration job really, really badly. He wanted to be vice president and didn’t get it. He wanted to be secretary of state and didn’t get it. So he lowered his sights to “Anything in the Cabinet Whatsoever,” and he got it.
|
... Obama’s selection of Bill Richardson for secretary of commerce didn’t seem like an awful idea. Richardson certainly has accomplished some things in his life, and he wanted an administration job really, really badly. He wanted to be vice president and didn’t get it. He wanted to be secretary of state and didn’t get it. So he lowered his sights to “Anything in the Cabinet Whatsoever,” and he got it. Exactly why Obama felt he had to give Richardson something is unclear. Maybe it was an act of compassion. Maybe Richardson had threatened to hold his breath until he turned blue. In any case, he got the nomination. But Richardson clearly did not get the vetting that is supposed to go along with it. ... Hey, call me cynical.
The transition team “pressed” Richardson and came away “empty-handed.” The transition team felt he was “not forthcoming.” But he got the nomination anyway? How did that happen?
How come somebody didn’t say, “Gov. Richardson, we think you are very well-qualified for the position of commerce secretary, but so are about 11,000 other people in these United States, and we think we can find somebody who is a little more forthcoming.”
Or how come somebody didn’t say to Obama, “Before we name this guy, let’s keep looking into this. After all, a late appointment is better than an embarrassing appointment.”
So blame this drama on Team Obama.
...So why did Obama give a prominent role in his Inauguration to Warren? It is understandable in terms of raw politics. The Democrats want to reach out to evangelical voters (Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean has been meeting with groups of evangelicals for years), and Warren is considered a moderate by many. So why not toss him a speech? After all, 2012 is right around the corner.
But the angry reaction of the gay community and others caught the Obama people flat-footed. They didn’t fully appreciate how volatile Proposition 8 had become as an issue.
Nor was Obama’s defense especially satisfying. Obama said that Warren had invited Obama to Camelback Church to give a speech, and now Obama was inviting Warren to speak.
But this isn’t just any speech. It is an inaugural invocation, and it has huge symbolic importance. And the new administration is going to be on tenterhooks until it hears what Warren actually plans on saying.
So for this drama, blame Obama....As for Rod Blagojevich and Roland Burris, neither has learned the difference between being spectacular and being a spectacle.
More on them in the future, but Obama has shown a wise amount of distance from both. Their drama cannot be laid at his feet. But, unavoidably, he is going to have to bear their burden on his shoulders.
Dernière édition par Sylvette le 6/1/2009, 21:29, édité 1 fois (Raison : «Il n'y a rien de négatif dans le changement, si c'est dans la bonne direction.» Winston Churchill) |
| | | Invité Invité
| Sujet: 172 - Understimulated Obama has only himself to blame for the delay in the spending bill. 7/1/2009, 08:05 | |
| By John DickersonPosted Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2009, at 7:42 AM ET President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden meet with congressional leaders Washington officials can't say for sure how many people are coming to town for Barack Obama's inauguration. Estimates have ranged from 2 million to 4 million. Perhaps the confusion lies in figuring out how many are coming to see his swearing-in and how many are lining up to get their share of the coming stimulus package. With a price tag approaching $1 trillion, the steel companies, universities, mayors (link for subscribers only), governors, ethanol producers, and health care technology companies all want something from the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan." (Legislative titles inflate like their price tags.) This grabbiness is partially why no one in Washington is talking any more about having legislation ready for President Obama to sign on his first day in office or in the "very first days of his administration," as his press secretary Robert Gibbs once put it. It's now unlikely to be ready before the middle of February. Obama is preaching urgency. He told congressional leaders Monday that he really wanted them to make that new deadline. Americans are hurting, and Congress needs to move quickly. He plans to give a speech Thursday once again outlining his plans to jump-start the economy, create jobs, and increase long-term productivity through investment in everything from schools to roads. Shansaa : vous expliquiez il y a quelques temps, qu'Obama n'etant que President-elu, il ne pouvait pas s'exprimer sur certains sujets (il etait question du capharnaum de l'Illinois - je ne vois d'ailleurs pas le rapport) Je suppose que ca depend des sujets.) ....... A politician can never go wrong urging Congress to pick up the pace, and in the Senate, where three open seats have turned into circus shows, you could see how Democratic leaders might get distracted. But if it takes awhile to put the stimulus package together, the delay is of Obama's own doing. To produce the thoughtful, bipartisan bill he has called for, Congress will have to take some time. |
| | | Contenu sponsorisé
| Sujet: Re: Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise | |
| |
| | | | Nouvelles en Langue Anglaise | |
|
Sujets similaires | |
|
| Permission de ce forum: | Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
| |
| |
| |
|