Recent content by BrandonE

Again, I'm asking about the immunity from being sued, not whether or not he'd actually be jailed for it.

I think you've taken my post too seriously.

You mean, now they're saying he can't even be brought to court? On what grounds?

Teenage girls are addicted to texting, and teenage boys are addicted to teenage girls. Thus, teenagers are addicted to texting eachother.

I've asked multiple times where there's a law that says he's immune. I'm not saying there isn't one; I'm saying I'd like to see one. Could you please provide that? I don't know why you'd consider it immature to ask for a citation. Now, I'm sure you can debate the legal side of this, but when...

I need to know what law says that the Attorney General can knowingly break the law and be immune for it, and, again, what obligations Eric Holder has to defend him. If it was illegal for Nixon, a president, to cover up a spying operation, I don't understand how it wouldn't be legal for Ashcroft...

I completely agree; he should do what he promised he would do or expect that the people who put him into office will not do the same again in 2012. So, going back to the original topic; for me, this is the straw that broke the camels back. Again, I'm no expert on the position of an Attorney...

Obama's set to lose majority in the White House because the base that elected him are frustrated with his lack of meaningful change. He's hurting himself by continually trying to appease the people that will disapprove of him regardless of what he does. And AGAIN, he's not merely choosing not to...

That's not what I asked. That said, I don't care if you call it radical or not: John Ashcroft is a war criminal. More importantly, I couldn't care what the GOP thinks, and neither should Obama, as we all know well that no level of appeasement is going to stop them from calling him a radical...

I just don't get it; is it Eric Holder's responsibility as AG to take this case? Or, did he volunteer to represent him? If the former, why does a war criminal have the privilege of having the most powerful attorney in the country to defend him? If the latter, EVEN IF the Obama administration...

Isn't the position of Attorney General supposed to be mainly one of prosecution, not defense? Why would the federal government feel the need to defend a now private citizen? More importantly, even if they have to defend him, this mention of absolute immunity is utter bunk. To even imply that any...

People might defend unjust presidents, but I'm pretty sure no one is gong to jump to defend a disgraceful AG. And, again, he's actively defending this guy, not just choosing not to prosecute. He's effectively saying that what John Ashcroft did was "good."

https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/39731486#39731486 It's one thing for Obama to not want to prosecute Bush and Cheney as war criminals, as although it sets a horrendous precedent, he has priorities, and prosecuting former presidents could create further rifts in a country when we need to...

The only gateway is that dealers might want to get you on harder stuff. Legalize it, and you have better odds of milk being a gateway to alcohol than cannabis to cocaine. Yup, you can't legislate morality.

I don't get why people dislike the proposition of taxing so much; whether or not the government needs all the money they get in taxes (They don't), they are spending an unsustainable amount. If they'd be reasonable enough to tax cannabis and lower taxes elsewhere (They won't be), then I'd be all...