dblfugger9
|
posted on November 16, 2005 08:11:07 PM new
isnt anybody going to discuss the new news about this?
hmmmm...
|
Bear1949
|
posted on November 16, 2005 08:43:09 PM new
Ironic that since Rove wasn't indicted, it just isnt any fun for the demoncrats.
I gave my liberal neighbors son a book for his birthday. He went crazy trying to find where to put the batteries.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 16, 2005 08:45:28 PM new
That's the truth, bear.
|
mingotree
|
posted on November 17, 2005 12:50:01 AM new
It ain't over yet, folks. And it would be nice to know that even with this administration's low ethics and morals that justice may be done and a traitor will pay for his crime.
But, I'm sure you good neocons, being very un-American , would rather traitors get away with their subversive anti-American security crime.....such a shame....
|
fenix03
|
posted on November 17, 2005 06:05:28 AM new
Aren't you curious who that "high ranking, but not Scooter Libby, White House Official" that told Woodward is?
Too bad Libby lied to the grand jury. Woodwards info would have gotten him off the hook if only he had just told the truth in the first place.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on November 17, 2005 06:25:14 AM new
Allegedly lied, innocent until proven guilty
Ron
|
rustygumbo
|
posted on November 17, 2005 08:37:35 AM new
"Allegedly lied, innocent until proven guilty"
Tell that to Linda who constantly accuses people of crimes... aka her constant bashing of John Kerry, claiming he is a traitor, etc.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 17, 2005 08:46:28 AM new
Well..fenix...it's been said it wasn't Rove.
-------------
But I totally agree with the Editoral piece in the WA Times today....
"In light of these facts, it is at least doubtful whether a reasonable jury would find Mr. Libby guilty. Moreover, as argued by Washington lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey in an article appearing on today's op-ed page, under the U.S. Attorney's Manual provisions, no prosecution should be commenced unless the attorney representing the government believes that he has evidence that will probably be sufficient to obtain a conviction. Accordingly, Mr. Fitzgerald should do the right thing and promptly dismiss the indictment of Scooter Libby."
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20051116-100221-5614r.htm
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 17, 2005 08:49 AM ]
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on November 17, 2005 09:10:07 AM new
I think the swiftboat people moved Kerry from alleged to did.
Ron
|
mingotree
|
posted on November 17, 2005 09:12:28 AM new
""I think the swiftboat people moved Kerry from alleged to did.""
Yes, but there was NO proof of their ALLEGATIONS , no trial, no conviction, no PROOF.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 17, 2005 09:25:16 AM new
Oh yea...proof. Can't help but wonder why after all this time and his 'promises' to do so for almost two years now....kerry STILL hasn't allowed the release of all his military records.  Nope....nothing to hide in there. right.... LOL
---------
That statement reminds me of the thread 'Most Hatefilled Poster'....when HANDS DOWN cf/mg/lb WON. BUT that didn't make it true either....all those people saying so wasn't proof of the facts.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on November 17, 2005 09:38:49 AM new
That smearing technique in which lies are used to damage character was so successful that it has been named, "Swiftboating". It's incredible to what extent the GOP will slouch in the use funds to lie and spread false information to damage good character;
Fact check - Navy Records do Not Support Allegations
|
mingotree
|
posted on November 17, 2005 09:46:50 AM new
Chapter Two: Around the Bend:
""That statement reminds me of the thread 'Most Hatefilled Poster'....when HANDS DOWN cf/mg/lb WON. BUT that didn't make it true either....all those people saying so wasn't proof of the facts."""
A) all WHAT people?
B) Hate-filled...you mean people who defend god but advocate torture and genocide are loving, sweet, beautiful people ??
C) I notice you get more and more personal as you back farther and farther away from answering questions...it's funny to watch.
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on November 17, 2005 09:55:36 AM new
So you are saying that wasn't him that threw his medals over the fence? Spoke in front of congress?
Went to France?
But does it really matter? He won't be running again and President Bush won't be running again.
Ron
|
dblfugger9
|
posted on November 17, 2005 10:38:37 AM new
This more or less speaks to the confidence and integrity of the mainstream news media and it's journalists,imo. When Woodward was asked if he knew anything about it on some talk show, he stated, "I wish I did have a bombshell or even a firecracker, but I dont." If he was lying to protect his source, he did not have to speak so emphatically to the lie.
The other thing I keep saying, is what responsiblity does the newspaper publishers hold for this? If they knew outing a CIA operative was in the worst interest of national security - why did they go ahead and publish it? Whatshisname, the old man, could have written whatever he wanted, ultimatly, SOMEBODY had to give editorial permission to make this a go or a no-go.
.
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Nov 17, 2005 10:39 AM ]
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 17, 2005 10:46:19 AM new
That's right, dbl. And exactly what happened with See-BS when they chose to run those documents against this President....without ANY proof that they were true. Then, they ended up with egg on their faces....and many won't believe another thing they say again. Rather[biased.com] ran with the story the whole time.
-------
oh and helen....you better go google where it's been proven kerry DIDN'T/Wouldn't sign a release for this FULL military records. Just part of them.
------
And Ron...I think you may be surprise...cause I've read that kerry is running in 2008....and the dem party is very divided between whether they'll support kerry or clinton. But clinton's way out in front for the time being.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
dblfugger9
|
posted on November 17, 2005 10:51:24 AM new
yeah, they screwed-up big time, Linda. They all had to learn a valuable lesson from that. I was watching some panel discussing this very same thing the other night. They concluded its because 'the business' is and has always been so scoop-driven. But now that much information involves the internet and in real time, etc. we will see a lot more of 'allegedly", "were working on it", "what we've got so far" kind of prefaces to alot of newscasts.
edit on spelling for the purists!
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Nov 17, 2005 10:55 AM ]
|
dblfugger9
|
posted on November 17, 2005 10:53:56 AM new
and btw, Linda, in fashion circles, ts not auburn...lol..."it's bordeaux." ( i know..I dyed my hair that color for years!)
|
classicrock000
|
posted on November 17, 2005 12:05:36 PM new
"And Ron...I think you may be surprise...cause I've read that kerry is running in 2008....and the dem party is very divided between whether they'll support kerry or clinton. But clinton's way out in front for the time being."
ya mean thats what they get to choose from???
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beauty is only a light switch away
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 17, 2005 01:59:34 PM new
LOL....yep...haven't read too much about any 'new' blood they're offering up for the next slaughter. 
|
fenix03
|
posted on November 17, 2005 04:38:46 PM new
So Linda - you think that it is wrong and evil when Clinton lies but should be completely forgiven of Libby? he went out of his way to lie. You can play the "not convicted yet" game but there are 7 government offcials that went in front of the grand jury and gave testimony that was completely contridictory to what Libby claimed. All stated that they had spoken with Libby about PLame and her position in the CIA prior to the conversation that in which he claims he was told by Russert. His OWN notes anso contidict his testimony. So how is it now that you think that blantant lies given to a grand jury should be forgiven as inconsequential? Just because seems to no longer have been a purpose to the lies does not mean that were not told and that he should not held responsible for them.
Can you explain to me why you feel that Libby lying to a grand jury trying to unearth the truth regarding the motives (or lack of) the outing of a CIA operative are somehow more forgivable than a lie to a grand jury regarding an extramarital affair?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 17, 2005 05:22:34 PM new
Sure fenix, even though I've already stated it a million times.
clinton admitted to lying, obstructing justice and trying to block the civil rights of another person.
libby has not gone to trial yet....no proof the charges are correct. Matter of fact now that Woodward has admitted to bringing up the plame/cia issue BEFORE libby did....libby's case might even be dropped.
So....again....there has been NO PROOF of any wrong doing on libby's part....and may very well have been cleared up...no charges made....HAD Woodward told the grand jury what he KNEW two years ago.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
fenix03
|
posted on November 20, 2005 07:32:33 AM new
Linda - are you telling me that you think that 7 different government officials lied to the grand jury?
The assertion that the charges against Libby may be dropped because of Woodwards testimony is a dream of the republicans but it is far from realistic.
Woodwards testimony does not change the fact that Libby gave testimony that was later shown to not be true. Just because there may no longer be an obvious reseason for him to lie does not mean that he did not do it and it does not mean that it would be OK for him to do it.
For somereason republicans seem to be deadset on sendiung the message that lying to grand juries should not be a crime.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 20, 2005 07:37:53 AM new
fenix - I'm telling you that when the 'order' of the way things went down....the case is going to be argued that he was NOT lying. That when put in a timeline there IS reasonable doubt that it makes what he said, when he said it a lie.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 20, 2005 07:41:58 AM new
For somereason republicans seem to be deadset on sendiung the message that lying to grand juries should not be a crime.
This is just too funny a statement after the democrats, their president, hillary, etc.....lied. How funny that lying was just A okay for the dems to do....but now that they THINK they can pre-convict a republican before he's even gone to trial....is REALLY hysterically funny.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
cblev65252
|
posted on November 20, 2005 07:43:14 AM new
Lying is lying no matter who did it or what party they're affiliated with. It should be dealt with in the same way for everyone. That includes Libby.
You guys rant and rave about Clinton lying over sex in the White House (oh, good Lord no, not sex), but when it comes to one of your own and a lie about something that put a person and this country in jeopardy, the story is different. How does it feel to be on the other side of the fence? A lie is a lie is a lie. For Clinton and Libby.
fenix
But, you must remember this: Clinton lied. LOL!!!! I'm really surprised his name wasn't brought up in this thread before I did.
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 20, 2005 07:59:22 AM new
cheryl - We all KNOW it IS being dealt with....he's been indicted. Just like 61 people were during the clinton administration.....nobody's getting special treatment of any kind.
And it's all politics anyway. Just like sandy berger STEALING classified documents ....getting rid of some of them....right....to protect clinton. HE got a slap on the hand....and the dems are all hysterical about lying???? Especially since that hasn't even been proven.
It's wishful thinking on the dem party's part.....but trying to actually make it 'stick' is a whole different matter.
As I said before....now that Bob Woodard has admitted to not letting anyone know he knew before libby did....DOES change the whole issue and is part of why fitzgerald is/has opened ANOTHER investigation into it.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
fenix03
|
posted on November 20, 2005 08:21:24 AM new
::That when put in a timeline there IS reasonable doubt that it makes what he said, when he said it a lie.::
In what world Linda? Libby's notes show that Cheney told him of Plames employment prior to the phone call he had with Russert. SEVEN white house employees testified that they had conversations with Libby regarding Plame and her employment prior to the date of the phone call with Russert. So exactly does Woodward saying that someone else told him about Plame change those facts or change that timline that currently shows that Libby had conversations with 8 people about Plames position before he claims that Russert told him?
The Libby timeline has not changed. The facts that lead to the indictment have not changed. The only thing that Woodwards testimony shows it that it seems there may not have been a reason to lie... but it does not change the fact that he still did it.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
[ edited by fenix03 on Nov 20, 2005 08:22 AM ]
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on November 20, 2005 08:36:09 AM new
I want to know who leaked the CIA prisons.
That is more important than plame getting outed.
Ron
|
logansdad
|
posted on November 20, 2005 08:36:16 AM new
Years later it is difficult for the Neo-cons to accept the fact that Clinton was impeached and still could not be removed from office. That is why they keep bringing this up time and time again.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
|
