Should Cheney be held criminally negligent if in fact he broke the law? I now hear Alcohol could have been a?
104708
No, alcohol was not involved.  Nice try to spread rumors...\nNo he can not be criminally liable for what had happened.  Even if his license was not stamped for the fowl he was hunting, that is a simple ticket IF the game warden so chose to give one.   OH, and he has to be caught shooting and have collected that game without a license.  You know, something called burden of proof, and the bill of rights?
485318
Ahem... No.\n\nIt is called assult with a deadly weapon - and drunk or not, it is illegal and not OK.
1033645
Folks are kind of missing that it wasn't a voluntary act.  If he did it himself then yes he is guilty of public indecency, if he had it done to him then he was actually a victim in the eyes of the law.\n\nWhether he would get a drunk and incapable/disorderly charge is another thing.
741480
This must be new, haven't heard of this yet.  1st amendment is the reason why.  Shoot, Mr Cheney told a senator to go f*&^ himself in the senate house, balls being met with balls is OK in my book.  I admit it, I like Cheney, alot more politicians should be told to go f#%$# themselves.
499651
Pray for his health...Cheney would finish out his term!!!As much as I'm not a Bush fan believe me Cheney is one of the few that could be worse.
132168
One way to look at it is to contrast something Bush did about 6 years ago. He was hunting with Karen Hughes (no he didn't pepper her with bird shot, unfortunately) and they killed some protected species od dear.\n\nThe first thing they did was go out and tell people, apologize and then thats the end of that.\n\nCheney didn't do that, nor would he talk to the Sheriff until the next day. They were drinking there, and Cheney is on various heart medications (although all the details are hidden too) which don't mix with alcohol.\n\nSo was he impared? Probably not, but we'll never know now.
211056
We should probably make sure we know the answer to the question of whether it "was illegal" or not. The jury still seems to be out on that one. One camp (the executive branch)holds that Congress's authorization of "any and all necessary force" gave Bush the authority, and another doesn't (the Legislative). Sounds like it's time for the good old Judicial branch to step in and resolve the dispute. Then we can talk about whether or not a censure (different from censor) is appropriate.
7576
he can be impeached for high crimes and mistemeaners. So there would have to be a specific charge.  If he was given erroneous information and he thought it to be true, then it is not a lie.
599197
Cheney's friend did not die, the same can not be said for Mary Joe Kapekne.  Before you go and say that was so long ago do not forget the rape case in the Kennedy coumpound in West Palm Beach, and just recently another Kennedy was popped driving under the influence and was given the same preferential treatment as good old Teddy. Let's not forget Jefferson who accepted a $100,000 bribe then gets upset because the FBI searched his office as part of the investigation. What Clinton did (&^%*# an intern) would have gotten any CEO of a US company fired, but nothing was done for that (remember the empeachment was for lying to the Grand Jury under oath). Another Dem smacks a security guard because he asked her for I.D... Let's face it ALL politicians get preferential treatment. That's the problem, if you want to say the other side gets more preferential treatment I could go on. If I really have to go on, there is just no sense of doing so.
406055
What makes you think Cheney did that on accident? I sure don't think it was an accident, I think he really wanted to kill the man for not following orders about Scooter Libby. These people are Nazi's.
961638
The Democrat operative Richard Armitage admitted to being the leaker. Nothing is going to happen to him because no crime was committed.\n\nThe Liberal press did very little coverage of it. That is why you didn`t know.\nThat is also why you see all the posts here of uniformed answers about Scooter Libby who was indited for an unrelated issue and had nothing to do with the outing.
160659
I was going to say that Traitor may be too strong of a word for this however, after thinking about it Ive changed my mind.  As a former Vice President one would hope he would have had a little more respect for America, the administration and our armed services.  In times of war the last thing we need is a former VP giving the enemy ammo to use against us or fanning the fire.  This could lead to added hostility and attacks on US troops.  If that is the case we have Al Gore to blame.
1127080
enlightenment - You state:\n\n"I would imagine Rather (and his producer Mary Mapes) did believe the documents to be true and regardless of the particular memo, the story he broke IS TRUE."\n\nSo, in your view, the manufacturing of evidence is okay if you believe something to be true? Rather against the Constitution, isn't it (pun intended)? So, in your view, it is okay for the police to plant cocaine in someone's car because they "know" someone is guilty? Come on, you can't really believe that!!!
1172591
You bet, nobody should be above the law, if it is ok for Bush to break the law then it is ok for all of us. He needs to be reigned in someway in his last two years to keep him from doing any more damage to the constitution or the country.
166623
No, they would not arrest you immediately, unless they really believed you committed a crime.  Otherwise, it would be wrongful arrest.\n\nAnd yes, ideally they want to question everyone immediately while facts are still fresh.  However, if you (this applies to everyone) request a lawyer, they will not be able to question you anymore, sometimes for days.  My guess is that in this case, Cheney's attorney probably told him to not answer any questions right away, which he does not have to do.
891133
so Greenpeace has been jailed? and you claim Bush is a liar! if you are captured on the battlefield, you are an "enemy combatant", not a suspect in custody, there is a vast difference. you have the rights guaranteed (if you're in uniform) by the Geneva Convention, not Miranda, understand? if you are not in uniform, then by the laws of war, you can be summarily executed on the field of battle without trial. this is not some new thing Bush made up, either. Major Andre, the Brit who took the plans for the defense of West Point from Bendict Arnold was summarily executed when he was captured because he was out of uniform. you libs really need to learn the laws before going off half cocked accusing someone of breaking them
146022
My understanding is that it is not illegal to accidentally shoot someone while hunting.  If that is correct, then the answer is never.\n\nAccording to CNN, Cheney has been officially cleared and the shooting was ruled a hunting accident.