It's not illegal if the President does it

[Electric Monk]

Poll question: It's not illegal if the President does it

[madokie]

1. How stupid of a poll is this anyway

We all play by the same rules

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wtmusic]

5. +1 nt

[yurbud]

18. Don't you know who said that originally?

and who later acted like it was even more true?

[JVS]

2. Isn't that also known as the Nixon Doctrine?

[Electric Monk]

4. Yes, and some people tried applying it to Shrub as well.

Successfully, it could be argued, since he has yet to be formally charged with anything.

[EFerrari]

6. The way Shakespeare said it about Caesar:

"Know, Cæsar doth not wrong, but with just cause"

[elocs]

7. It is said that questions are really statements in disguise. This is a good example.

Anyone with even a vague political awareness gets the point that is trying to be made.

[Tx4obama]

8. Please define what * IT * is, otherwise the poll is useless. n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

9. I don't know but

I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.

Stephen Wright the comedian said that
in 2006 and it was funny then.

Now how's that for irony?

[FiveGoodMen]

10. A president who is not bound by laws is a king (or dictator, take your pick)

The US is not supposed to have kings or dictators.

[jp11]

11. False but sometimes True

as the president will find someone to find a legal argument however thin to cover their actions and then an illegal act has legal cover. Presidents that come after are very unlikely to pursue legal actions against their predecessor possibly in fear that they may have their decisions challenged when truly legal or even remotely illegal with 'cover'. Does this mean a President can do whatever they want, no, but it gives them wide latitude to skirt laws if they so choose.

[Shagbark Hickory]

19. Thorough explanation +I

[jberryhill]

12. If "it" is - sleeping in the president's bed in the White House

Then it would be illegal for me to do so, and perfectly legal for the president.

How about if you define "it" in a meaningful way.

Giving an order to launch nuclear weapons? ONLY legal for the president.

I can rattle off dozens of examples of things which are exclusively lawful for only the president to do.

[alc]

13. other

illegal, but while he's in office, it's up to congress & supremes (and special prosecutors), not DA, judge, and jury to enforce. Allowing DAs to abuse laws would be a disaster. Congress and bogus impeachments are bad enough (though Clinton probably did break some laws about association with a subordinate). So the president is not equal under the law.

[MineralMan]

14. Worst. Poll. Everl

Unrecced.

[Electric Monk]

15. Taking some of the fun out of your wargasm?

[MineralMan]

16. Cute. You know nothing about me. That's clear.

I won't bother alerting on this personal attack. I'd rather see it stand.

I expressed my opinion. You're welcome to yours. If you didn't want opinions, you wouldn't have posted a poll, right? Well, now you have mine.

[NYC Liberal]

17. Other: it wasn't illegal when Millard Fillmore did it,

but otherwise it is illegal. Whatever "it" is.

[Festivito]

20. If you don't think you can convince a random group of 13 people, don't do it. /nt

[Solly Mack]

21. I've always felt that I only have to follow the laws my government follows.

Try and not get the undies in a wad over that comment - it's not directed at anyone specific.

Now, I know people will smirk and laugh and tell me to just try it and see what happens to me.....but what does that really tell you about the state we're in? Think about the full implications. (and that's the point of the statement - to get people thinking about what it really says about your relationship to government - if government can freely commit crimes..and you can just laugh it off for whatever reason)

If I go to jail for engaging in crimes my government also engages in.....my government can get away it but I can't...

What does that say about my government? What does that say about the people?

Sounds more like a government that is into controlling the population instead of fair and just governing.

Sounds like a government made up of politicians that only want to increase their wallet size (crime pays and government crime pays the mother-lode) and to push laws that control the citizens even more...so they can continue to plunder and commit more crimes.

If laws are tweaked or muddied or changed to turn the illegal to legal because the government now wants to break the law or to cover a past illegal action - that implies systemic corruption and criminal activity...and it has gone beyond a single person. (a head of state, for example)

What trust exist between citizens and a government like that?

Sounds like a citizenship that has been whipped into compliance and obedience.

A government that prides itself on actual freedom and justice...that strives to increase liberty and civil rights...demands that the highest of the high be subject to the law. Otherwise, it's all just words...all just lies. All just feel-good phrases to appease the population into more compliance.

You know, people like to use the 2 minutes of hate from "1984" as examples in a lot of things....but what people seem to forget is that those exact same 2 minutes of hate for the current enemy were also 2 minutes of slavish devotion to the ruling authority....or 2 minutes of love. Because words to control a people need not be about a common enemy or aiming hate/dislike/anger....but a belief or an idea that is good (freedom, justice, equality, no one is above the law, rule of law)...but not actually practiced...but because a person might embrace those ideas or beliefs...they feel all giddy and high for a few minutes from hearing some politician talk about them and forget that government ain't exactly practicing what its preaching. It can be another form of control.