If you think that your plan would make him go away, you are being decidedly foolish. He is gradually being marginalized into a celebrity figure, as opposed to a serious elder statesman, and that is just fine with me. The fewer people who take him seriously, the better that will be for everyone. I would be most happy if he was placated with rock star status and the illusion of importance and channeled away into a little sub-culture somewhere.
Also...I am on record as saying that I trust President Bush to do what is best for the country concerning this individual. Whatever is best for the country as a whole, mind you, NOT whatever requirements YOU think are necessary.
Good day.
Sure ... from now on, let all mafia bosses be "marginalized". That's much better than jail. Afterall, what is a little perjury here and an obstruction of justice there? What's a little blackmail here and a bribery there? Hey, what's a treasonable act here and a murder (no, a mass murder!) there? No big thing.
So what if he still gets $300,000 a speech and democRATS get to escape looking themselves in the mirror and knowing that they elected, reelected and still support one the biggest criminals to ever occupy a government office in this country? So what if he still has friends in high places (like the head of the DNC) and is just waiting for the next democRAT administration (and there will be one) to invite him to take that "elder statesman" roll he obviously would like. So what if he, his wife and his party may have blackmail information on dozens of top Republicans. He's still being "marginalized".
Who cares if the dozens, perhaps hundreds of democRATS who committed crimes the last nine years are still in party positions, government positions and media positions ... i.e., waiting for another chance to commit and cover up more crimes. Afterall, as all move-on'ers know, this is ALL about Clinton.
Also...I am on record as saying that I trust President Bush to do what is best for the country concerning this individual. Whatever is best for the country as a whole, mind you, NOT whatever requirements YOU think are necessary.
It is not MY requirement that the laws of this land be obeyed ... even by our government officials. Blame it on the Constitution and the laws established under the Constitution. I see nothing in the Constitution or our laws that give the President the right to ignore serious crimes just because he deems it "politically expedient". If you do, then point it out. I'm sure we'd all be interested in hearing this.
Sounds to me like its "ok" with you if Bush decides that he's ABOVE the law by deciding WHO gets punished by the law and who doesn't. How does that differ from a two-bit dictator or a king? Afterall, if "for the good of the country" he can singlehandedly decide not to investigate crimes as serious as election tampering, blackmail of congress, murder and mass murder, perhaps he will decide "for the good of the country" that we would be better off if his party remained in office. Then it is only a short step before he and his party are committing and covering up the same crimes that Clinton and his party committed and covered up to stay in office. But, heck, we are all one big happy family ... and besides ... he's been "marginalized".