Judy, you poor, poor thing! I don't think that would be such a bad deal...of course you'd have to prove Bush was responsible for 911. A court wouldn't even allow MIHOP/LIHOP to be admitted as part of the charges. Considering that briefing you're always referring to when talking of his guilt was passed on from the previous administration who had a much more intimate knowledge of the situation, I'd say Bush wouldn't be the only one sitting at the defense table. Oh, and Clinton didn't have a congress holding up approval of the very cabinet officials that would help assess the threat and perhaps prevent it. Considering Bush had only been in office less than a year...I'd say that bodes pretty well for our side.
Iraq? Long before Bush even decided to run for president, every single intelligence agency in the world said Saddam had WMD's! As did Clinton & Ted Kennedy. Remember the aspirin factory? The report Powell gave to the UN was based on intel gathered from the world intelligence community, not just the US. If one of your arguements is going to be "Bush lied about the intelligence to get us in a war" then you'll have to bring a number of members of the dem party as well, since the intel he was using was passed to him from those who came before. If you're going to argue even if there were WMD's that's not reason enough to go to war, may I direct you to the treaties and resolutions? Broke every single ****ing one of them. THAT is reason enough.
Volumes of documentation is available (most is available to the general public) to prove the above...can your boy king say the same? Oh, and all things being equal...we get should get 2 issues also. I'll take Fast & Furious for $1000, Alex!
Cindie
