Harry Krause wrote:


Today, for the first time in 135 years, a senior aide to the POTUS has
been indicted

Probably so, Harry.

And probably the reason for the 135 yr span is because nobody else got
caught regardless of president and/or party.

Plus G-Dub's statement might have only been "wishful thinking".
You can't watch all the kids all the time.

I'm not one to belive that a person is guilty of a crime merely by
public opinion. But if a person is elected or appointed for public
servatude and trust, then they should be held accountable for their
actions. But anyone can make an accusation. and the people will decide
to themselves who is guilty or not.

Courts are obviously different. if a person is charged and found
guilty, then they should be punished.

Richard M. Nixon was charged, and I think it was wrong to recieve a
cheap presidential pardon by G. Ford. i think that if he was found
guilty by court and jury should have done time.

Same way with Bill Clinton. Wether or not he got some strange while in
office means very little to me. But lying (purgery) in a Court and
before a federal grand jury, should have had some recompence to it,
like it would for any person charged with the same offence.

Non-politicallyspeaking, and on the other hand, I believe OJ is guilty
as sin! but the courts excused him and he's free.

I'm a Republican, I make no apologies . And even though this guy
"Scooter" Libby is in the V. Presidents service, I believe that if
found guilty for the charges of obstruction of justice, perjury and
making false statements in the CIA leak investigation, he should be
prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Same way with Rove.