39% of Americans believe Bush should be impeached.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:05:20 -0700, Hatunen wrote
(in article ):

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 18:39:14 -0400, "Matthew L. Martin"
wrote:

George Graves wrote:

Would you like to explain how Clinton's perjury in any way ivolved double
jeopardy? This I gotta hear!

Having been tried, convicted and sentenced, Bill Clinton (or anyone
else) can not be tried for the same offense again.

That was simple, not unlike yourself.

Simplistic is more like it.

Again: Impeachment does not introduce double jeopardy
considerations. Period.



Exactly.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:10:33 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):

George Graves wrote:



And there is no such thing as "legal council". Counsel, yes.


Hmmm, so there is no difference between medical council, legal council,
social counsel or psychological council? Thanks for the info. And all this
time, I assumed that they were different disciplines.


I know I am not as smart as any of you guys. Especially, I don't
understand the use of the word "council" when applied to the fields of
medicine and law, as you state them above.

Please help me understand these unusual uses of the word "council."

And, what is a "social counsel?"

What a social counselor does.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:24:27 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):



George Graves wrote:

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 15:06:28 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):



George Graves wrote:



On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 12:53:04 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):





On 2007-07-08 13:53:32 -0400, George Graves said:





On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 06:49:25 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):





On 2007-07-07 22:34:26 -0400, George Graves
said:





OK, I'm all for it. What are the charges? Remember, these have to be
legitimate charges, instances where he broke US law.




Anyone who consider's Clinton's impeachment to have been based on
"legitimate charges" is living out in the never-never land of the far
right.





Anyone who condones perjury in a court of law, by anyone, high or low,
has
no
right to live under a Democratic Republic. That means you, buddy.




Is that a threat, or just the empty bluster it looks like?




I'm no Republican, but had I been the Judge, Clinton would
have done time.



Just curious, what about Scooter?



Scooter GOT time, but Bush pardoned him.


LOLOLOL Oh man...... what happened to .......

It undermines our entire court system if ONE perjurer is
allowed to get away with lying under oath, much less the sitting President of

the United States.

"Do as we say, not as we do", NeoCON/Jesuslander mentality, hummm.....
possibly?



Did I say that I AGREED with Bush's action? I did not. I was merely pointing
out that it has nothing per se to do with the US system of jurisprudence, but
its rather a presidential privilege just as a governor has the privilege of
granting stays of execution and commuting death sentences to life in prison.
You guys should start reading for content instead of looking for NeoCons
under every bed...

George Graves wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:10:33 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):


George Graves wrote:



And there is no such thing as "legal council". Counsel, yes.


Hmmm, so there is no difference between medical council, legal council,
social counsel or psychological council? Thanks for the info. And all this
time, I assumed that they were different disciplines.


I know I am not as smart as any of you guys. Especially, I don't
understand the use of the word "council" when applied to the fields of
medicine and law, as you state them above.

Please help me understand these unusual uses of the word "council."

And, what is a "social counsel?"


What a social counselor does.

Okay, that makes sense. At least it did, once I Googled the phrase.

But, you need to help me understand medical, legal, and pyschological
councils (if you would be so kind, that is).

George Graves wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:24:27 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):



George Graves wrote:



On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 15:06:28 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):





George Graves wrote:





On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 12:53:04 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):







On 2007-07-08 13:53:32 -0400, George Graves said:







On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 06:49:25 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):







On 2007-07-07 22:34:26 -0400, George Graves
said:







OK, I'm all for it. What are the charges? Remember, these have to be
legitimate charges, instances where he broke US law.






Anyone who consider's Clinton's impeachment to have been based on
"legitimate charges" is living out in the never-never land of the far
right.







Anyone who condones perjury in a court of law, by anyone, high or low,
has
no
right to live under a Democratic Republic. That means you, buddy.






Is that a threat, or just the empty bluster it looks like?






I'm no Republican, but had I been the Judge, Clinton would
have done time.





Just curious, what about Scooter?




Scooter GOT time, but Bush pardoned him.




LOLOLOL Oh man...... what happened to .......

It undermines our entire court system if ONE perjurer is
allowed to get away with lying under oath, much less the sitting President of





the United States.

"Do as we say, not as we do", NeoCON/Jesuslander mentality, hummm.....
possibly?





Did I say that I AGREED with Bush's action? I did not. I was merely pointing
out that it has nothing per se to do with the US system of jurisprudence, but
its rather a presidential privilege just as a governor has the privilege of
granting stays of execution and commuting death sentences to life in prison.
You guys should start reading for content instead of looking for NeoCons
under every bed...


HAHAHAHAHA!! If they had their way, they would be under all our beds!!
Keepin us "moral"............

--
Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove -SPAM- from email address
--------------------------------------
"Homer no function beer well without."
- H.J. Simpson

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 09:24:37 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):



George Graves wrote:

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 14:41:13 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):



On 2007-07-09 16:47:13 -0400, George Graves said:



On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 12:15:28 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):



On 2007-07-09 14:10:43 -0400, George Graves said:



Given most of this thread's respondents grasp of US law (as witnessed by
their inability to understand simple perjury laws) is woefully
inadequate,
I'd say very few.


We're not all the kind of Pharisee you are.



No, you're not. You don't know the law, and you don't seem to want to
learn
it and you don't seem understand the importance of being compelled to tell
the truth in a court of law. Whether it's stubbornness that makes you this
way, or willful ignorance, or just stupidity is not for me to comment
upon,
and I won't.


I've been a lawyer for 42 years. I just have a different political view
than you do.




A lawyer, huh? Then maybe you can tell me what either your or my POLITICS
have to do with the law? And by the way, sir, remind me not to choose your
firm If I ever need legal council.



I'd say George that is spot on relevant since we are discussing a
POLITICAL sentence communion.
Purely political to prevent Scooter from rolling over on the Bush Admin
once he gets a taste of prison.
Scooter ain't no Ollie North. Ollie was a hard core mercenary, Scoot AIN'T.
He would crumble like a cookie as soon as he met Bubba in the shower.

I still don't see what his political beliefs or my political beliefs have to
do with the law. The President's commutation of Libby's sentence, or any hard
pardon that might, eventually, come from this case, has nothing to do with
the courts and the law. The courts will either convict of exonerate him and
they will sentence him. What the President does AFTER that is a totally
different and wholly disconnected act over which the court has no say.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:53:21 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):

George Graves wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:10:33 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):


George Graves wrote:



And there is no such thing as "legal council". Counsel, yes.


Hmmm, so there is no difference between medical council, legal council,
social counsel or psychological council? Thanks for the info. And all
this
time, I assumed that they were different disciplines.


I know I am not as smart as any of you guys. Especially, I don't
understand the use of the word "council" when applied to the fields of
medicine and law, as you state them above.

Please help me understand these unusual uses of the word "council."

And, what is a "social counsel?"


What a social counselor does.

Okay, that makes sense. At least it did, once I Googled the phrase.

But, you need to help me understand medical, legal, and pyschological
councils (if you would be so kind, that is).

A counselor is anyone who gives council the is to say, expert advice. This
advice can be medical, psycological, marital (as in a marriage counselor),
legal (as in a lawyer):

From the Mac's built-in dictionary :

counselor (also chiefly Brit. counsellor)
noun
1 a person trained to give guidance on personal, social, or psychological
problems : a marriage counselor.
€ [often with adj. ] a person who gives advice on a specified subject : a
debt counselor.
2 a person who supervises children at a camp.
3 a trial lawyer.
4 a senior officer in the diplomatic service.
ORIGIN Middle English (in the general sense [adviser] ): from Old French
conseiller, from Latin consiliarius, and Old French conseillour, from Latin
consiliator, both from consilium Œconsultation or advice.¹
USAGE A counselor is someone who gives advice or counsel, esp. an attorney.

A councilor, on the other hand, is a member of a council, such as a town or
city council. Confusion arises because many: counselors sit on councils, and
councilors are often called on to give counsel.



Thesaurus

counselor
noun
I discussed college choices with my counselor.

adviser, consultant, guide, mentor; expert, specialist.

Clear now, Mr. Spade? (BTW, where did that falcon go?)

The point is that unlike what the poster who said that there is no such thing
as legal counsel, but rather, just counsel, there are all kinds of counsel
and counsellors.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:58:20 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):



George Graves wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:24:27 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):



George Graves wrote:



On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 15:06:28 -0700, Ric Seyler wrote
(in article ):





George Graves wrote:





On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 12:53:04 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):







On 2007-07-08 13:53:32 -0400, George Graves
said:







On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 06:49:25 -0700, sechumlib wrote
(in article ):







On 2007-07-07 22:34:26 -0400, George Graves
said:







OK, I'm all for it. What are the charges? Remember, these have to be
legitimate charges, instances where he broke US law.






Anyone who consider's Clinton's impeachment to have been based on
"legitimate charges" is living out in the never-never land of the far
right.







Anyone who condones perjury in a court of law, by anyone, high or
low,
has
no
right to live under a Democratic Republic. That means you, buddy.






Is that a threat, or just the empty bluster it looks like?






I'm no Republican, but had I been the Judge, Clinton would
have done time.





Just curious, what about Scooter?




Scooter GOT time, but Bush pardoned him.




LOLOLOL Oh man...... what happened to .......

It undermines our entire court system if ONE perjurer is
allowed to get away with lying under oath, much less the sitting President
of





the United States.

"Do as we say, not as we do", NeoCON/Jesuslander mentality, hummm.....
possibly?





Did I say that I AGREED with Bush's action? I did not. I was merely
pointing
out that it has nothing per se to do with the US system of jurisprudence,
but
its rather a presidential privilege just as a governor has the privilege of
granting stays of execution and commuting death sentences to life in
prison.
You guys should start reading for content instead of looking for NeoCons
under every bed...


HAHAHAHAHA!! If they had their way, they would be under all our beds!!
Keepin us "moral"............



Thankfully, their day in the sun is over. If the REAL Conservatives in the
Republican party were smart, they'd form a new party to distance themselves
from these people. We need a strong, national, third party anyway because the
two parties that we now have have not represented an increasing number of
Americans' interests in decades.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:28:17 -0700, George Graves
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:53:21 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):

George Graves wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:10:33 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):


George Graves wrote:



And there is no such thing as "legal council". Counsel, yes.


Hmmm, so there is no difference between medical council, legal council,
social counsel or psychological council? Thanks for the info. And all
this
time, I assumed that they were different disciplines.


I know I am not as smart as any of you guys. Especially, I don't
understand the use of the word "council" when applied to the fields of
medicine and law, as you state them above.

Please help me understand these unusual uses of the word "council."

And, what is a "social counsel?"


What a social counselor does.

Okay, that makes sense. At least it did, once I Googled the phrase.

But, you need to help me understand medical, legal, and pyschological
councils (if you would be so kind, that is).

A counselor is anyone who gives council the is to say, expert advice. This
advice can be medical, psycological, marital (as in a marriage counselor),
legal (as in a lawyer):

Come, come. A counselor doesn't give council, a counselor gives
counsel. You own quoted defintion below makes the difference
clear.

From the Mac's built-in dictionary :

counselor (also chiefly Brit. counsellor)
noun
1 a person trained to give guidance on personal, social, or psychological
problems : a marriage counselor.
€ [often with adj. ] a person who gives advice on a specified subject : a
debt counselor.
2 a person who supervises children at a camp.
3 a trial lawyer.
4 a senior officer in the diplomatic service.
ORIGIN Middle English (in the general sense [adviser] ): from Old French
conseiller, from Latin consiliarius, and Old French conseillour, from Latin
consiliator, both from consilium Œconsultation or advice.¹
USAGE A counselor is someone who gives advice or counsel, esp. an attorney.

A councilor, on the other hand, is a member of a council, such as a town or
city council. Confusion arises because many: counselors sit on councils, and
councilors are often called on to give counsel.


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:34:07 -0700, Hatunen wrote
(in article ):

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:28:17 -0700, George Graves
wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:53:21 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):

George Graves wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:10:33 -0700, Sam Spade wrote
(in article ):


George Graves wrote:



And there is no such thing as "legal council". Counsel, yes.


Hmmm, so there is no difference between medical council, legal council,
social counsel or psychological council? Thanks for the info. And all
this
time, I assumed that they were different disciplines.


I know I am not as smart as any of you guys. Especially, I don't
understand the use of the word "council" when applied to the fields of
medicine and law, as you state them above.

Please help me understand these unusual uses of the word "council."

And, what is a "social counsel?"


What a social counselor does.

Okay, that makes sense. At least it did, once I Googled the phrase.

But, you need to help me understand medical, legal, and pyschological
councils (if you would be so kind, that is).

A counselor is anyone who gives council the is to say, expert advice. This
advice can be medical, psycological, marital (as in a marriage counselor),
legal (as in a lawyer):

Come, come. A counselor doesn't give council, a counselor gives
counsel. You own quoted defintion below makes the difference
clear.

You're gonna crucify me for a spelling mistake????!!!!

From the Mac's built-in dictionary :

counselor (also chiefly Brit. counsellor)
noun
1 a person trained to give guidance on personal, social, or psychological
problems : a marriage counselor.
€ [often with adj. ] a person who gives advice on a specified subject : a
debt counselor.
2 a person who supervises children at a camp.
3 a trial lawyer.
4 a senior officer in the diplomatic service.
ORIGIN Middle English (in the general sense [adviser] ): from Old French
conseiller, from Latin consiliarius, and Old French conseillour, from Latin
consiliator, both from consilium Œconsultation or advice.¹
USAGE A counselor is someone who gives advice or counsel, esp. an attorney.

A councilor, on the other hand, is a member of a council, such as a town or
city council. Confusion arises because many: counselors sit on councils,
and
councilors are often called on to give counsel.