Comments on: Exactly What is the Argument in the Trib Editorial http://archpundit.com/blog/2007/11/06/exactly-what-is-the-argument-in-the-trib-editorial/ Illinois, From Misery Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:34:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Narc http://archpundit.com/blog/2007/11/06/exactly-what-is-the-argument-in-the-trib-editorial/comment-page-1/#comment-880 Narc Tue, 06 Nov 2007 21:44:34 +0000 http://69.89.31.63/~archpund/2007/11/06/exactly-what-is-the-argument-in-the-trib-editorial/#comment-880 If this torture method is so blatantly illegal, why is Congress considering a new law to explicitly outlaw it. It's already illegal. Is there any reason to believe that Mukasey would prosecute lawbreakers under the new law when he won't prosecute them under the old one? If this torture method is so blatantly illegal, why is Congress considering a new law to explicitly outlaw it. It’s already illegal. Is there any reason to believe that Mukasey would prosecute lawbreakers under the new law when he won’t prosecute them under the old one?

]]> By: Jerry 101 http://archpundit.com/blog/2007/11/06/exactly-what-is-the-argument-in-the-trib-editorial/comment-page-1/#comment-881 Jerry 101 Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:23:49 +0000 http://69.89.31.63/~archpund/2007/11/06/exactly-what-is-the-argument-in-the-trib-editorial/#comment-881 ummmm...if CIA agents and their bosses were, you know, BREAKING THE LAW, shouldn't they be prosecuted for, you know, BREAKING THE LAW? How stoopid is the Tribune? By agreeing that an illegal practice is illegal, it may open law breakers to prosecution for breaking the law? And that's...bad?! WTF?! I mean, next thing you know, somebody's going to ask Mr. Mukasey if he thinks that insider trading is illegal, and that may open insider traders to prosecution for breaking the law. Is that a bad thing tribune? If Mukasey says that murder is illegal, and that opens murderers up for prosecution, is that a bad thing? Since when is it a bad thing for law breakers to be prosecuted for such law breaking? ummmm…if CIA agents and their bosses were, you know, BREAKING THE LAW, shouldn’t they be prosecuted for, you know, BREAKING THE LAW?

How stoopid is the Tribune? By agreeing that an illegal practice is illegal, it may open law breakers to prosecution for breaking the law? And that’s…bad?!

WTF?!

I mean, next thing you know, somebody’s going to ask Mr. Mukasey if he thinks that insider trading is illegal, and that may open insider traders to prosecution for breaking the law. Is that a bad thing tribune?

If Mukasey says that murder is illegal, and that opens murderers up for prosecution, is that a bad thing?

Since when is it a bad thing for law breakers to be prosecuted for such law breaking?

]]>