Its Rove-CIA agent's identity source [Archive]

Bulldogcakes

07-03-2005, 05:38 AM

<a target="blank" href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm">Rove denies it</a> quote:

Lawyer Says Rove Talked to Reporter, Did Not Leak Name 
Sat Jul 02 2005 21:05:04 ET 
Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, spoke with TIME
mag's Matthew Cooper during a critical week in July 2003 when Cooper
was reporting on a public critic of the Bush administration who was
also the husband of a CIA operative. 

But Rove did not leak the name of the CIA op Plame, Rove's lawyer said again Saturday night. 

Robert Luskin said Rove never identified Plame to Cooper in those conversations. 
"Karl did nothing wrong. Karl didn't disclose Valerie Plame's identity
to Mr. Cooper or anybody else,'' Luskin said to the WASHINGTON POST.
Luskin said the question remains unanswered: ``Who outed this woman?
... It wasn't Karl.'' 

NBC's Lawrence O'Donnell claimed this weekend, 'Rove Blew CIA Agent's Cover'. 

"Emails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. I have known this for months," O'Donnell said. 

Developing...   Its
hard to imagine Rove staying in the White House while under indictment.
Bush's reaction will be interesting. He's usually very loyal to his
guys, even when he has every reason to can them (Rumsfeld). But if he
says "no comment" Rove's out. 




This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-3-05 @ 9:43 AM

Bulldogcakes

07-03-2005, 05:51 AM

Some background, for those who haven't followed this story quote: 
July 11 issue - Its legal appeals exhausted,
Time magazine agreed last week to turn over reporter Matthew Cooper's
e-mails and computer notes to a special prosecutor investigating the
leak of an undercover CIA agent's identity. The case has been the
subject of press controversy for two years. Saying "we are not above
the law," Time Inc. Editor in Chief Norman Pearlstine decided to comply
with a grand-jury subpoena to turn over documents related to the leak.
But Cooper (and a New York Times reporter, Judith Miller) is still
refusing to testify and faces jail this week.<hr size="1" noshade="noshade" />

At
issue is the story of a CIA-sponsored trip taken by former ambassador
(and White House critic) Joseph Wilson to investigate reports that Iraq
was seeking to buy uranium from the African country of Niger. "Some
government officials have noted to Time in interviews... that Wilson's
wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction," said Cooper's July 2003 Time online
article.
Now the story may be about to take
another turn. The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely
between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was
White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers
who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses
sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined
to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove's lawyer, Robert
Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the
article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove.The controversy began three days before the Time piece appeared, when
columnist Robert Novak, writing about Wilson's trip, reported that
Wilson had been sent at the suggestion of his wife, who was identified
by name as a CIA operative. The leak to Novak, apparently intended to
discredit Wilson's mission, caused a furor when it turned out that
Plame was an undercover agent. It is a crime to knowingly reveal the
identity of an undercover CIA official. A special prosecutor was
appointed and began subpoenaing reporters to find the source of the
leak. 

 
Another interesting factor is the potential chilling effect this
could have on White House/press corps relationship. If Journalists and
top White House officials get locked up for a story, people in the
White House will think twice before leaking info, and thats not
necessarily a good thing for Democracy. 

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html" target="blank">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?



This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-3-05 @ 9:57 AM

Yerdaddy

07-03-2005, 06:20 AM

Depends on what they're leaking wouldn't it? Disclosing the identity of an undercover federal agent is a crime, whether through leaks or otherwise. Most of the time leaking factual information about the workings of a branch of government is not a crime. I don't think the "chilling" effect is as strong as the press is making it out to be. Forcing the press to reveal their sources, on the other hand, is probably more significant. But the most interesting and disturbing thing to me is the fact that this story has been, for a long time now, about the press and the laws about revealing sources, and NOT about a White House that has made no attempt to discover and punish the person that it is known leaked Plame's name, violating the law and undermining national security, and the fact that there has been no pressure from Republicans in congress or the public on the White House to find and punish the person who did it. In fact the White House has delayed and obstructed the process, yet has suffered no political consequences for it. Clearly this White House feels that it is above the law, and it's base agrees with it. I find that very fucking scary. 

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

Bulldogcakes

07-03-2005, 06:26 AM

True. And undercover operatives HAVE to have these protections, they
could get KILLED depending on the nature of their work. But dont give
the Journalists a total pass here, they're breaking the law just as
much as Rove is. They could obfuscate the identity. They named her
directly, and its their business to know the law on these matters.As
to the White House and House Republicans, I dont expect them to
investigate themselves. Theres enough career Justice Dept officials who
work during both Republican and Democratic administrations to
handle that. And Clinton obstructed and blamed everyone but himself for
the whiole Monica scandal, so thats par for the course. 

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html" target="blank">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?



This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-3-05 @ 10:31 AM

Yerdaddy

07-03-2005, 07:09 AM

The journalists who were willing to reveal the name of the agent were contemptable swine and should be sodomized by red-assed babboons, but I think someone with legal background explained that what they did isn't actually illegal. Leaking and reporting that leak, in this case, is legally different but morally the same. So... I agree with you? I think. What was I talking about? <img src="http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/billcat.gif" border="0" />Ack! As to the White House and House Republicans, I dont expect them to investigate themselves. Theres enough career Justice Dept officials who work during both Republican and Democratic administrations to handle that. And Clinton obstructed and blamed everyone but himself for the whiole Monica scandal, so thats par for the course. I think you have to differentiate the circumstances under which these two obfuscations occured, the issues they were about, and the reactions of the officials and publics of both parties. (My Chatty Kathy way of saying "it's apples and oranges.") The Clinton perjury was committed within a well-financed, politically motivated sexual harrassment lawsuit that was shortly thereafter indignantly thrown out by the judge. It did not involve national security issues, or any other aspect of Clinton's actual job as president. And, if you go back over the Congressional testimony during the impeachment hearings, Democrats almost universally condemned Clinton's act of perjury. The issue for Democrats at the time was whether Clinton's perjury amounted to "high crimes and misdemeanors" [sp?] and merited the occupation of the entire federal government and removal of a sitting president.What's freaking me out is the fact that this leak is directly tied to the country's national security, the quality of the administration's handling of our affairs, was clearly commited as an attack against a critic of the administration rather than a defense against one, and the near total lack of concearn within the Republican party about the actual crime itself. Fortunately, Bubba never recanted this denial: <img src="http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/clinton.jpg" border="0" /> My pudgy intern ass dodged a bullet on that one!

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

JerryTaker

07-03-2005, 01:37 PM

I just had CNN on, and this is my problem with the media and how it's being reported:(paraprasing)
"it is said that the white house may have leaked the name of Plame in
retaliation to her husband, who made comments critical of the Bush
Administration" Now, my understanding of this
story is this, Bob Woodward, Plame's husband, was US ambassador to
Niger, and when Bush gave an address that Saddam Hussein was attempting
to get Yellowcake Plutonium from Niger, Woodward, again the US AMBASSADOR TO NIGER, remarked that NIGER HAS NO YELLOWCAKE FOR HUSSEIN TO TAKE. so his wife is magically outed by Robert Novak, who works for CNN.so
my point here, is, why does CNN reference her husband in a way that for
all anyone knows, could have been a raving lunatic calling Bush a 'Nazi
baby killer" when he was simply calling Bush on a lie? why would CNN,
which many here would call "Liberal Media" report the story as, "well,
both sides of this issue may have been wrong here" and not simply
report the friggin' facts? Wonderful, they just arrested
someone in the missing Aruba teen case, so this story can go back to
the back burner, holy hell! 
 

   EDIT: I can't spell 


This message was edited by JerryTaker on 7-3-05 @ 5:40 PM

DarkHippie

07-03-2005, 02:48 PM

Um. . . . Bob Woodward?

<IMG SRC=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/HippieRat.jpg>
<marquee> Finally on Myspace http://www.myspace.com/darkhippie Please love me </marquee>

UnknownPD

07-03-2005, 03:46 PM

I think you have to differentiate the circumstances under which these two obfuscations occured, the issues they were about, and the reactions of the officials and publics of both parties. (My Chatty Kathy way of saying "it's apples and oranges.") The Clinton perjury was committed within a well-financed, politically motivated sexual harrassment lawsuit that was shortly thereafter indignantly thrown out by the judge. It did not involve national security issues, or any other aspect of Clinton's actual job as president. And, if you go back over the Congressional testimony during the impeachment hearings, Democrats almost universally condemned Clinton's act of perjury. The issue for Democrats at the time was whether Clinton's perjury amounted to "high crimes and misdemeanors" [sp?] and merited the occupation of the entire federal government and removal of a sitting president.I hate people who defend Clinton and his actions. This fucking guy was a Rhodes Scholar and one of the smartest men to ever be a President he had a chance to be one of the greatest Presidents of all time and pissed it away because he couldn't keep his cock in his pants. More importantly he isn't a stand-up guy. Lannie Guanier(sp?) a friend from college someone who was at his wedding was jettisoned because he didn't have the balls to take some heat from her. He let his entire cabinet go before the nation and say they believed he was telling the truth when he knew he was lying. No fucking balls this guy. He sent millions of american jobs overseas with his free trade initiatives, his welfare reforms threw millions off the welfare rolls and into the laps of States unprepared to deal with the consequences. And all of this happened because he'd lost the moral authority to lead the nation by getting sucked off by a fat chick. Thanks to this fuck we've got eight years of George W.. Fuck all the Florida crap, fuck all the conspiracy shit.... if Clinton hadn't been a fucking dickhead horndog and republican lackey Gore would have trounced W. 

This message was edited by UnknownPD on 7-3-05 @ 8:01 PM

Bulldogcakes

07-03-2005, 03:53 PM

There are criminal charges pending against the President's closest
aide in the White House. You call that "Inside Baseball"? I think
anyone can figure out this is a big story, one which will likely only
get bigger.I
think Rove's best defense is to claim he was unaware his wife was
undercover, which may or may not be true. But thats a tough sell
politically. Doesn't pass the laugh test.     

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a target="blank" href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-3-05 @ 8:00 PM

JerryTaker

07-03-2005, 07:03 PM

Joe Wilson, I'm also bad with names

 
Sweet Queen Bee, I hope it comes quickly,
I hope your thoughts don't drift to me
I'll die in here, you now are free...

UnknownPD

07-03-2005, 09:10 PM

You call that "Inside Baseball"? Yup, because whatever happens to Karl Rove is not gonna change your life one bit. It's just gonna be one more reason for Dems and Repulicans to be at each others throats while the real issues of the day go unaddressed. This is all show and window dressing. Unless your walking around with a few million to spare these fucks couldn't give a shit about you.

A.J.

07-04-2005, 12:04 AM

NIGER HAS NO YELLOWCAKE FOR HUSSEIN TO TAKENiger please.

<img src=http://img40.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/AJinDC-Sig.jpg>

A Skidmark/canofsoup15 production.

Red Sox Nation

Bulldogcakes

07-04-2005, 04:20 AM

quote: quote:You call that "Inside Baseball"?  Yup,
because whatever happens to Karl Rove is not gonna change your life one
bit. It's just gonna be one more reason for Dems and Repulicans to be
at each others throats while the real issues of the day go unaddressed.
This is all show and window dressing. Unless your walking around with a
few million to spare these fucks couldn't give a shit about you. 

 Oh come on. Every 4 years they come around and tell you what you want to hear. Thats not enough for you? 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg

My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

DarkHippie

07-04-2005, 06:22 AM

The truth is that nothing's gonna happen to Rowe, just like nothing's gonna happen to DeLay in his scandal.  The Conservatives have a headlock on society right now, and they're not going to let go.  No scandal can bring them down, not even Rowe's treason (and what else to you call outing a CIA agent, compromising and endagering her enitre information network?  Me might as well given Bin Laden Plame's name)Forgive me, I just finished "The spy that came in from the cold"

<IMG SRC=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/HippieRat.jpg>
<marquee> Finally on Myspace http://www.myspace.com/darkhippie Please love me </marquee>

Death Metal Moe

07-04-2005, 06:31 AM

<img height="240" src="http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/Pictures/Persons/084011/084011-185652.jpg" width="352" border="0" />"I had some yellow cake, but I ate it.  I mean it had strawberries and whipped cream, how could I NOT eat it?  I was hungry!"

<IMG SRC="http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y245/njdmmoe/DMF.jpg">

<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
<A HREF="http://thebigsexxxy.blogspot.com/">One Big SeXXXy Blog</A>

UnknownPD

07-05-2005, 09:43 AM

quote: <img height="240" src="http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/Pictures/Persons/084011/084011-185652.jpg" width="352" border="0" />"I had some yellow cake, but I ate it.  I mean it had strawberries and whipped cream, how could I NOT eat it?  I was hungry!"[/quote] Quote of the fucking day......all hail moe

angrymissy

07-05-2005, 11:51 AM

<img src="http://hostilism.com/ht/misc/niger_please.jpg" border="0" />

 <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/imagestorage/tiggy.gif" width="300" height="100" border="1"> 
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." [ Theodore Roosevelt ]

JerryTaker

07-05-2005, 12:19 PM

Why do I get the feeling that Rove knew it was ok for Bush to lie
about this, (fine, to make public declarations based on shakey
intellegence without being 100% sure of the facts) because he new that
any discussion including the words "Niger" and "Yellowcake" would
degrade into, well, this... 

 
Sweet Queen Bee, I hope it comes quickly,
I hope your thoughts don't drift to me
I'll die in here, you now are free...

Bulldogcakes

07-05-2005, 03:21 PM

Rove may well be charged, but from what I understand on this its a
difficult charge to prove. He had to "Knowingly" divulge this info,
which means you have to prove he knew she was undercover at the time
and knew the nature of her work. This will be tough to prove, and its
very plausible he honestly didn't know. Especially given the context of
the events. But if he's charged the political damage will be done. Like
Ollie North. The indictment is page 1, the aquittal page 15.

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a target="blank" href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-5-05 @ 7:22 PM

Recyclerz

07-10-2005, 08:06 PM

For those keeping score at home:<a title="Washington Post" target="_self">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/10/AR2005071001000.html</a><a href="http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/">http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/</a>Rove's lawyer is getting, dare I say, Clintonesque in his public defense of his client. <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />The best part of this is that if indictments start getting handed out to the yahoos running the good ship W (starting with Rove) that should tie things up in Washington so that the more egregious ambitions of the Boy Emperor (more & better tax cuts for investment income while wages still get hammered; turning Social Security into a privatized insurance scam, et al.) are dead in the water.  Hell, if he turns over Iraq policy to some adults (James Baker, Brent Scowcroft, his Dad) the Republic may yet survive!  Hell, I'll even spot him one Torquemada for the Supreme Court if he agrees to go quietly otherwise.If this FitzPatrick guy comes through he's gonna be bumping dear old Mom down a notch on my Xmas list this year. <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/wink.gif" border="0" />

<IMG SRC="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">

[b]There ain't no asylum here.
King Solomon, he never lived 'round here[b]

Bulldogcakes

07-11-2005, 03:20 PM

Good luck with your wish list Recyclerz, but I seriously doubt all of your scenarios. Worst case scenario? Rove resigns.   

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg

My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

Yerdaddy

07-12-2005, 12:00 AM

Worst case scenario? Rove resigns.Best case scenario? He takes the Vince Foster way out. Calous? Maybe. But this shit stain has done enough damage to my country for one lifetime.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

PapaBear

07-12-2005, 12:29 AM

Dammit!!! I was almost finished with a thoughtful response to this
whole subject, when my (IE has encountered a problem and needs to
close, now known as my Firefox has encountered a problem and needs to
close) issue happened. I'll sum it up this way. The press
couldn't get enough about a blowjob in the White House, less than 10
years ago. Now they seem to be asleep at the wheel on this one. The
mass media have been beat down to being a bunch of journalistic pussy
bitches!!!! 


<center><img src="http://www.geocities.com/pauleight/pb_sig.gif"></center>
<center>Get Small</center><center>LENNY IS</center>
<center>Thanks Monsterone for the sig!</center>

TheMojoPin

07-12-2005, 08:29 AM

quote:  quote: Worst case scenario? Rove resigns.  Best case scenario? He takes the Vince Foster way out.   Murdered under orders of the president?

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">

1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

DarkHippie

07-12-2005, 09:10 AM

Best case scenario? He takes the Vince Foster way out. Best case is that he's convicted of treason.  I'm not for execution,  but his acts put dozens of agents' lives at risk and severely damaged our intelligence network.  Who knows what the final results will be.

<IMG SRC=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/HippieRat.jpg>
<marquee> Finally on Myspace http://www.myspace.com/darkhippie Please love me </marquee>

Recyclerz

07-12-2005, 01:38 PM

Thanks for the encouragement (?!?) Bulldog, but I'm still hoping for my scenario to play out.  All recent second terms of re-elected presidents have been overshadowed by major scandals/distractions (Watergate, Iran-Contragate, Blowjobgate) and, I believe,  these guys have  just had a beartrap close on them.  It seems to me that Rove's job in the second term, since it would of no use to beat up the Democrats anymore having won the election, would be to instill "discipline" on the Republicans in Congress to get as much of his/W's agenda through as possible.  The Congressional leaders were already getting uppity, pulling away on W's Social Security plans, stem cells, etc.  Now, with W's Nurse Ratchett otherwise distracted, they'll be pushing their own ideas to the fore.  Now I think most of their pet issues are as bad as W's, but if there is a pissing match going between Congress and the White House a lot fewer bad ideas will be enacted into law than would otherwise be the case.  And that's what I'm praying for.More tasty morsels:  It looks like Matt Cooper gave up Rove without "permission"<a title="Behind the Music" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/politics/11time.html" target="_self">http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/politics/11time.html</a>Best Bit: [Cooper’s] lawyer, Mr. Sauber, called to alert him to a statement from Mr. Luskin in The Wall Street Journal. "If Matt Cooper is going to jail to protect a source," Mr. Luskin told The Journal, "it's not Karl he's protecting."  That provided an opening, Mr. Cooper said. "I was not looking for a waiver," he said, "but on Wednesday morning my lawyer called and said, 'Look at The Wall Street Journal. I think we should take a shot.' And I said, 'Yes, it's an invitation.' " In court shortly after 2, he told Judge Thomas F. Hogan of the <address>Federal District Court</address> in Washington that he had received "an express personal release from my source."  That statement surprised Mr. Luskin, Mr. Rove's lawyer. Mr. Luskin said he had only reaffirmed the blanket waiver, in response to a request from Mr. Fitzgerald.I misidentified my new hero in my earlier post - it's Patrick FitzGERALD.  He's so dreamy...<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/rolleyes.gif" border="0" />

<IMG SRC="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">

[b]There ain't no asylum here.
King Solomon, he never lived 'round here[b]

Bulldogcakes

07-12-2005, 04:32 PM

quote: quote:Worst case scenario? Rove resigns. Best case scenario? He takes the Vince Foster way out. Really?
You mean Hillary will secretly kill him to cover up their relationship
and one of her goons from Arkansas dump his body in a park!!! Wow! Wait
till Rush Limbaugh sobers up long enough to hear this!!! All recent second terms of
re-elected presidents have been overshadowed by major
scandals/distractions (Watergate, Iran-Contragate, Blowjobgate) Very true. And its really getting boring. I
know you guys would love Rove's head on a stick, but I dont see it.
This law is very narrowly written, and was done so to avoid prosecuting
people for stuff like this. Sorry, but I think you're setting
yourselves up for disappiontment here. The more I've looked into this,
the more I see why he hasn't even been charged yet. He may, but even if
he does its going nowhere.  

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a target="blank" href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-12-05 @ 8:37 PM

HBox

07-13-2005, 01:09 AM

<a href="http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/07/12/fox-news-anti-national-security/" target="_blank">Fox News: <strike>We Report, You Decide</strike> Just Bow Down Before Your Republican Overlords Already!</a> 

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3254/sig7oo.jpg

PapaBear

07-13-2005, 01:21 AM

The link doesn't let me see the video. ??? I'm starting to hate my computer. 


<center><img src="http://www.geocities.com/pauleight/pb_sig.gif"></center>
<center>Get Small</center><center>LENNY IS</center>
<center>Thanks Monsterone for the sig!</center>

HBox

07-13-2005, 01:22 AM

The video only works in IE, and only if you have Quicktime. 

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3254/sig7oo.jpg

PapaBear

07-13-2005, 03:49 AM

Holy F'N CRAP!!! I finally saw it. Holy F'N CRAP!!! It beffudles me to think that, people who say shit like that, actually believe they are Americans.I really hope, the people who agree with that "journalist" are brainwashed. I'd hate to think they are just that stupid. 

<center><img src="http://www.geocities.com/pauleight/pb_sig.gif"></center>
<center>Get Small</center><center>LENNY IS</center>
<center>Thanks Monsterone for the sig!</center>

TheMojoPin

07-13-2005, 06:31 AM

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHH!!!Are there people who STILL take this network seriously?!?And the sad thing is, his idea of rewarding Rove isn't all that unlikely...a poster in the comment area of that site made the same point that "The Daily Show" did last night...Condi: Biggest national intelligence failure ever happened on her watch, Refused to brief the “president” about national security bulletins warning of an attack. Promoted.Tenet: Chief architect of the Iraq Disaster. Fudged intelligence. Overall general screw up. Presidential Medal of Freedom.Wolfowitz: Original member of PNAC; huge backer of Operation: Haliburton’s Rich. Supports pre-emption. Mentioned we’d be greeted with candy and flowers. Promoted.I'm sorry, but that video is infuriating.  Gibson is harping on the idea that Wilson was wrong for the Niger investigation because he was openly "anti-Bush/against the war in Iraq"...call me crazy, but isn't war always the LAST option?  Shouldn't we as a nation should have been actively looking for ways to keep Saddam in check WMD-wise WITHOUT putting Americans in danger?  That should be the last resort...you should WANT someone who is going to check harder than a "hawk" as to whether or not a reason to go to war actually EXISTS in the first place...The apathy in this country these days is absolutely stunning.  It's a broken a record at this point, but WHAT does his administration have to do to piss people off?  They get a free pass over EVERYTHING with at least 50% of this country just because their logo is an elephant!

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">

1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Knowledged_one

07-13-2005, 06:44 AM

I think the reason whether right or wrong is that the democratic party did its best to distance itself from the common man and alienated everyone while doing it.  I still can't believe the shock since the democrats have lost 3 straight elections with 2000, 2002 and 2004 and im not just talking about the presidential race.  The democrats have lost ground with the house, senate and governors.The democrats are like the national league in MLB all-star games they can't get the win because they don't get it.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/aggie2323/celticssig.jpg">
"Sure I wave the American flag. Do you know a better flag to wave? Sure I love my country with all her faults. I'm not ashamed of that, never have been, never will be." -- John Wayne

TheMojoPin

07-13-2005, 06:53 AM

What does ANY of that have to do with ANYTHING in this thread?  How does that excuse Republicans from this kind of wrongdoing on a massive scale?  What are Democrats doing or not doing, SPECIFICALLY, that isn't as insane and negative as what we're talking about and linking to in this thread? <img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin" border="0" /> 1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 7-13-05 @ 11:07 AM

Knowledged_one

07-13-2005, 06:59 AM

Mojo i was merely responding to your point about apathy.  I wan't even trying to make it a contention point that is merely why i think people have apathy towards this stuff, i also believe that the people Clinton pardoned in his last days was also a reason why people feel this way as well.And i also think it makes Americans feel better when we are at war kicking someones @$$, instead of them taking the fight to us

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/aggie2323/celticssig.jpg">
"Sure I wave the American flag. Do you know a better flag to wave? Sure I love my country with all her faults. I'm not ashamed of that, never have been, never will be." -- John Wayne

TheMojoPin

07-13-2005, 07:05 AM

So because Clinton was a skeev...it gives the NEXT administration free range to do countless more things countless times worse and more devastating?  Again, there's NO excuse for that kind of apathy.  It shines incredibly poorly on us as a nation.Is your argument against all of the issues in this thread REALLY, "well, hey, look at Clinton?"And who are we kicking the ass of that could have possibly attacked US?  Certainly not Iraq...And here we go again...<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin" border="0" /> 1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 7-13-05 @ 11:08 AM

Knowledged_one

07-13-2005, 07:09 AM

I am bowing out of this thread and all political threads.Everyone has a different  opinion and no one will ever change who they support.  It causes more headaches then solutions.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/aggie2323/celticssig.jpg">
"Sure I wave the American flag. Do you know a better flag to wave? Sure I love my country with all her faults. I'm not ashamed of that, never have been, never will be." -- John Wayne

TheMojoPin

07-13-2005, 07:23 AM

Well, wait a minute, why just bow out?  All I'm doing is asking questions about the responses you offered up...there are no attacks of any kind...it's a debate.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">

1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

UnknownPD

07-13-2005, 07:38 AM

house, senate and governorsActually this is wrong. While it is true on the Federal level at the state level Democrats have actually gained govenors and legislators.Here's my problem with all of this. NONE of this will amount to shit. Democrats will use it to strengthen their base, Republicans will use it to whine about the liberal media....and absolutely NOTHING will get done. Everything is done for the gotcha factor and to advance the cause of getting more of "my kind" elected. I doubt there's a single politician whose view is other than what's best for me to get reelected.

HBox

07-13-2005, 08:17 AM

<a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955" target="_self">Silly us. Karl Rove is a hero. Give him a medal and a tickertape parade!</a>I want to vomit. <a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955" target="_self"></a>

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3254/sig7oo.jpg

JerryTaker

07-13-2005, 09:14 AM

This is why I hate the world....From HBOX's article:Mr.
Rove provided important background so Americans could understand that
Mr. Wilson wasn't a whistleblower but was a partisan trying to
discredit the Iraq War in an election campaign. Thank you, Mr. Rove. a few paragraphs later:The
same can't be said for Mr. Wilson, who first "outed" himself as a CIA
consultant in a melodramatic New York Times op-ed in July 2003. At the
time he claimed to have thoroughly debunked the Iraq-Niger yellowcake
uranium connection that President Bush had mentioned in his now famous
"16 words" on the subject in that year's State of the Union address. ok, really slow..... WHAT ELECTION CAMPAIGN IN JULY OF 2003?!?!?!?!?!?!? seriously,  how are people so frickin' dumb that they swallow this shit? 
 

 
Sweet Queen Bee, I hope it comes quickly,
I hope your thoughts don't drift to me
I'll die in here, you now are free...

Furtherman

07-13-2005, 09:26 AM

I'm trying to figure out what dimension John Gibson lives in and if it rains donuts there.

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/Furtherman/furtherblur.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

Recyclerz

07-13-2005, 10:51 AM

<img height="232" src="http://www.goodrock.com/productpics/shirts/thumbs/psim0029.gif" width="140" border="0" />Mmmm, donuts. <img height="299" src="http://www.southerner.net/blog/karl.jpg" width="216" border="0" />Mmmmm, Karl Rove (or anybody from this misbegotten regime) being held accountable for their actions and their consequences.  [edited to make point more wordy.]Beautiful, beautiful dreams....  <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/wink.gif" border="0" /> <img src="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US" border="0" /> There ain't no asylum here. King Solomon, he never lived 'round here

This message was edited by Recyclerz on 7-13-05 @ 2:58 PM

HBox

07-13-2005, 11:23 AM

<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/200507080002" target="_blank">More of the wisdom of John Gibson.</a> 

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3254/sig7oo.jpg

HBox

07-13-2005, 11:34 AM

<a href="http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/1999/bush_speech_042699.html" target="_blank">And here's an interesting Bush speech.</a>As our analysts know, as our
collectors of intelligence know - these are our enemies. To combat them
we need more intelligence, not less. We need more human intelligence.
That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather
intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human
sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. (Applause)


Even though I'm
a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt
and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our
sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

 
<a href="http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/1999/bush_speech_042699.html" target="_blank"></a>

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3254/sig7oo.jpg

Bulldogcakes

07-13-2005, 03:42 PM

H-box, maybe I could suggest some good porn sites to take your mind off this? You
seem all wrapped up in something nobody (outside Washington) cares
about, and God forbid anyone takes Rove's side on this. No, he's
malicious and evil and must be hated by everyone. No debate here,
unless your bashing Rove. 
I think I agreed with most of that WSJ article. You could
understand that if one of your guys (ambassadors work for the White
House) stabs you in the back, and lies about you on top of it, you
might be annoyed at the guy. EVERY White House wants its employees to
push the Party line. But I still dont think he did anything illegal,
since her name came up because SHE was the one who got him the job in
the first place, which was factual. And I've yet to see any data
suggest he knew she was undercover at the time. (If you have some,
please post it. I've yet to see it) 
And lets get this straight, once and for all. THE FAMOUS 16 WORDS ARE 100% ACCURATE. The British
government found a link with Saddam, a link they still believed even
after we didn't. So whats the media's point? That Bush had his mind
made up, and cherry picked the facts to support his decision? WELL
THANK YOU CAPTAIN OBVIOUS! WHO DOESN'T DO THAT? And for those who say
he "Intentionally mislead" the American public, I think you're adding malice where there is none, due to your own bias. 


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg

My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

Sir Okonkwo

07-13-2005, 06:15 PM

quote: H-box, maybe I could suggest some good porn sites to take your mind off this? You seem all wrapped up in something nobody (outside Washington) cares about, and God forbid anyone takes Rove's side on this. No, he's malicious and evil and must be hated by everyone. No debate here, unless your bashing Rove. I think I agreed with most of that WSJ article. You could understand that if one of your guys (ambassadors work for the White House) stabs you in the back, and lies about you on top of it, you might be annoyed at the guy. EVERY White House wants its employees to push the Party line. But I still dont think he did anything illegal, since her name came up because SHE was the one who got him the job in the first place, which was factual. And I've yet to see any data suggest he knew she was undercover at the time. (If you have some, please post it. I've yet to see it) And lets get this straight, once and for all. THE FAMOUS 16 WORDS ARE 100% ACCURATE. The British government found a link with Saddam, a link they still believed even after we didn't. So whats the media's point? That Bush had his mind made up, and cherry picked the facts to support his decision? WELL THANK YOU CAPTAIN OBVIOUS! WHO DOESN'T DO THAT? And for those who say he "Intentionally mislead" the American public, I think you're adding malice where there is none, due to your own bias. <img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" border="0" /> <a href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html" target="blank">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a> Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly? How do you sleep at night? Exposing a CIA operative puts ALL AMERICANS AT RISK! Why would you defend such an action, unless you want to see Americans die?  I do doubt that that's what you want to see, so why?  Why defend it?

Yerdaddy

07-14-2005, 06:35 AM

You seem all wrapped up in something nobody (outside Washington) cares aboutNo, no republicans care about this. You could understand that if one of your guys (ambassadors work for the White House) Wilson had been ambassador under democratic and republican presidents, but was not ambassador under Bush. Or Rove, for that matter.EVERY White House wants its employees to push the Party line. "Everybody does it, so it's ok." Not an excuse when I was eight - not an excuse for the White House. And especially not with my national security.  <img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5" border="0" /> Fuck it from behind.

This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 7-14-05 @ 10:55 AM

Yerdaddy

07-14-2005, 06:56 AM

But I still dont think he did anything illegal, since her name came up because SHE was the one who got him the job in the first place, which was factual. She reccommended him as a uniquely qualified person to undertake the investigation into the suspicions. For example: He had been ambassador to several relevant African countries and was acting ambassador to Iraq during the First Gulf War, (he was the guy who, when Saddam threatened to hang him with his own necktie for demanding American hostages released, wore a noose around Baghdad and got the American hostages released. Under Bush I. Partisan?) She did not send him, authorize him, or "get" him the job. CIA officials with the authority to vet that task were responsible for selecting him for the mission. The oft-repeated discription of his wife sending him simply defies logic. Sadly, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was guilty of repeating that same piece of misinformation.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

Yerdaddy

07-14-2005, 06:57 AM

Which leaves this claim spurious:And I've yet to see any data suggest he knew she was undercover at the time. (If you have some, please post it. I've yet to see it) That is going to be difficult to prove - proving what someone knew or thought always is - but the idea that her reccommendation somehow proves his lack of qualifications is ridiculous, leaving the only rational reason to reveal her identity to destroy her career and deter others from opposing the administration. Even if we assume that he didn't know she was covert, honestly, do you seriously find it acceptable, let alone plausible, that he leaked a CIA agent's identity without checking to see if she was undercover? Even this absurd defense that he's taking makes him hugely irresponsible with the law and national security. And it would make Bush equally irresponsible for ignoring it for two years now. But, then, the idea that this scenerio is how it happened is just silly. Rove has a long record of shit like this. It's been his job for decades and it's his job in this White House. 

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

Yerdaddy

07-14-2005, 06:59 AM

[is there a size limit on posts now? why the hell did I have to break this into little bits to get it to post?] And lets get this straight, once and for all. THE FAMOUS 16 WORDS ARE 100% ACCURATE. The British government found a link with Saddam, a link they still believed even after we didn't. The British claims were based on horribly forged documents, (including those supposedly signed and dated by officials who were not even officials they were supposedly signed and dated the documents, and I think one was dead at the time), and only when they finally turned those documents over to the IAEA was the public informed that they were "cheaply forged." If the administration was basing the 16 word claims on this evidence, they did so knowing that the Brits had nothing, and dispite their own CIA's investigation, (Joe Wilson), and the State Dept and Energy departments' stated skepticism of the claims at the time. So, yes, they cherry-picked data, a.k.a. they fucking lied! Just like that WSJ collumnist did. He doesn't care about any truth that might oppose his ideology, so he refuses to even look at it when he's considering his words and actions. No more blaming Clinton's blowjobs! This administration lied us into a war that has cost us dearly! If we continue to ignore that fact as a public then we deserve the consequences.Let's also not forget that Bush could have resolved this issue two years ago, when he said he wanted to, with three words - "who did it?" - and has chosen not to. The fact that he hasn't done this is something that was once called a cover-up. But, like every other law, moral principle, or standard of failure, republicans have placed holding political power above them. 

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

HBox

07-14-2005, 02:13 PM

Thank you yerdaddy. I didn't really feel like
defending my outrage over this, nor do I think I should have to. This
isn't about Joe Wilson or even Valerie Plame. I doubt our intelligence
operations were significantly damaged in this.It's about the
lengths this administration, and Karl Rove in particular will go to. If
they can get away with this, what will they do next?

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3254/sig7oo.jpg

HBox

07-14-2005, 02:20 PM

If the administration was
basing the 16 word claims on this evidence, they did so knowing that
the Brits had nothing, and dispite their own CIA's investigation, (Joe
Wilson), and the State Dept and Energy departments' stated skepticism
of the claims at the time.Just so nobody missed it. 

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3254/sig7oo.jpg

Bulldogcakes

07-15-2005, 02:30 AM

The more you look, the LESS there is here. Story (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050715/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_rove) But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an
undercover job at the time Novak's column first identified her. "My
wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her
identity," he said.  But if you guys want to be outraged, be my guest.  

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg

My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

TheMojoPin

07-15-2005, 02:41 AM

That doesn't "de-cover" anything she did while she was covert with the Agency.Trust me, I know personally.  My dad was covert for over 6 years with the Agency (during which I only knew he worked for the "State Department").  He's been out in the open for over a decade now (just retired this past spring as a senior intelligence official) and still can't discuss his time "undercover."<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin" border="0" /> 1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 9-2-06 @ 8:00 AM

Sir Okonkwo

07-15-2005, 03:03 AM

quote: The more you look, the LESS there is here. <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050715/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_rove" target="blank">Story</a>  quote: But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak's column first identified her. "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity," he said.     But if you guys want to be outraged, be my guest.  <img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" border="0" /> <a href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html" target="blank">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a> Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly? His statement came out vague. He is saying "the minute she was outed, she was no longer covert"But keep apologizing for someone who hurt America, you're doing a wonderful job...

This message was edited by Sir Okonkwo on 7-15-05 @ 7:09 AM

HBox

07-15-2005, 09:51 AM

quote:But if you guys want to be outraged, be my guest.  
 quote:The leak of a CIA operative's name has also exposed
the identity of a CIA front company, potentially expanding the damage
caused by the original disclosure, Bush administration officials said
yesterday.

 



The company's identity, Brewster-Jennings &
Associates, became public because it appeared in Federal Election
Commission records on a form filled out in 1999 by Valerie Plame, the
case officer at the center of the controversy, when she contributed
$1,000 to Al Gore's presidential primary campaign.


After the name of the company was broadcast
yesterday, administration officials confirmed that it was a CIA front.
They said the obscure and possibly defunct firm was listed as Plame's
employer on her W-2 tax forms in 1999 when she was working undercover
for the CIA. Plame's name was first published July 14 in a newspaper
column by Robert D. Novak that quoted two senior administration
officials. They were critical of her husband, former ambassador Joseph
C. Wilson IV, for his handling of a CIA mission that undercut President
Bush's claim that Iraq had sought uranium from the African nation of
Niger for possible use in developing nuclear weapons.





The Justice Department began a formal criminal investigation of the leak Sept. 26.





The inadvertent disclosure of the name of a business
affiliated with the CIA underscores the potential damage to the agency
and its operatives caused by the leak of Plame's identity. Intelligence
officials have said that once Plame's job as an undercover operative
was revealed, other agency secrets could be unraveled and her sources
might be compromised or endangered. 

But if you want to think there's nothing wrong with this, be my guest.<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A40012-2003Oct3&notFound=true" target="_blank">Link here.</a> 

<img border="0" src="http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/9734/sig6nj8wg.jpg" />

This message was edited by HBox on 7-15-05 @ 1:52 PM

Bulldogcakes

07-15-2005, 04:27 PM

America has something it would like to say to you guys<img width="172" height="240" border="0" src="http://www.rareads.com/scans1/35174.jpg" /> 
You know whats a scandal? Men hired by the President to
break in to the oppositions headquarters. Or a President, an intern,
and blowjob soaked blue dress. Or a dead body somewhere. Sorry folks,
you got nothin. This is just more of the Inside Washington BS that
makes the rest of us turn the channel and watch a Baseball game. <img width="256" height="250" border="0" src="http://www.stevengriffinphotography.com/images/overalls-man.jpg" />"You
know I heard he gave up an agent who was undercover, and that aint
right. But it turns out that aint true. But the IRS records. . . . .
.uhhhh. . .. . some front company. . . . . .uhhhh. . . . I need a beer. 
 

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a target="blank" href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-15-05 @ 9:54 PM

TheMojoPin

07-15-2005, 04:54 PM

Bulldog sez: "VIVE LA APATHY!!"That can't be for real...is it?  "This is too complimicated for us reg-lar folks...so why bother?"  That's a legitimate excuse to let bad shit go down in your book?Gack.<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin" border="0" /> 1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 7-15-05 @ 8:58 PM

Bulldogcakes

07-15-2005, 04:56 PM

The apathy is well deserved. And this is just partisan hackery, and
I've been following politics too long to be interested in, or fall for
this kind of garbage. But if you hate GW, this is your latest excuse to
do so. 
Issues? YesPartisan politics? No.   

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a target="blank" href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-15-05 @ 9:02 PM

TheMojoPin

07-15-2005, 05:07 PM

THIS is "partisan hackery," but trying to impeach the president over a sex scandal isn't?  If you're going to cast stones, please don't miss one of your prime examples of a "real scandal."I'll agree with you on one thing...neither of these things are anywhere near Watergate-level.  In fact, all Bush has to do is stick to his own promise and fire Rove.  Boom, problem solved.  Is it so awful to expect the man to stick by his word?  They had no problem calling this a leak and a breach of security before...why not now?  It just makes the administration look hypocrticial, and it's something easily fixed.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">

1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

Bulldogcakes

07-15-2005, 05:32 PM

Why would he fire Rove if he's exonerated? Maybe he should just clarify where "Talking to the press" ends and "Leaking" begins. But we all know how loyal GW is, dont hold your breath. 
 BTW-You
blame the PUBLIC for the apathy? Thats like a business that blames the
public for not buying its products. Thats just ridiculous. 50% doesn't
even vote in PRESIDENTIAL elections, much less this BS. Maybe YOU GUYS
in Washington should stop your bullshit and stick to things people CARE
about. You are the elected REPRESENTATIVES, right?   

<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a target="blank" href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-15-05 @ 10:02 PM

TheMojoPin

07-15-2005, 06:14 PM

Come on...you're now basically saying our elected officials can get away with things they shouldn't just because you don't like how many people vote?  That's pretty weak...And Rove hasn't been anywhere near "exonerated."  Even if it was a mistake it just shows gross incompetance from the man when it comes to matters of national security.  If he's gonna blab that information to the press by mistake, who knows what else he'll let slip down the line?I agree with you, this ISN'T a huge deal.  Rove either leaked or screwed up.  Step up and fire him and the administration sticks to their word over this issue.  Then they can appoint whoever they want to replace him.  Whoopedee-doo.  Problem solved, everyone's happy, except Rove, but hey, he fucked up.  T.S. for him.<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin" border="0" /> 1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 7-15-05 @ 10:15 PM

HBox

07-15-2005, 10:37 PM

<a href="http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Lou_Dobbs_Bullshit.wmv" target="_blank">Nothing
new here, but very funny. Turn your speakers up and listen closely
after Lou Dobbs says "Dana Bash reports" and he cuts to the story.</a> 

http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/9734/sig6nj8wg.jpg

Yerdaddy

07-16-2005, 02:11 AM

<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050714/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_investigation_35" target="_self">"America doesn't care"?</a>Still, several top GOP officials — including some White House advisers — said the fight was becoming a distraction to Bush's agenda. The GOP officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of Bush's friendship with Rove, said the president may face a credibility problem because his spokesman said in September that anybody involved in the leak would be fired.These Republicans, all admirers of Rove, said they were surprised and disappointed when Bush stopped short of publicly backing his longtime aide.Their concerns were reflected in a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll that showed a plurality of voters rate Bush negatively on "being honest and straightforward" for the first time in his presidency. The focus on Rove comes as Bush publicly wrestles with a Supreme Court vacancy and growing voter unease with his policies on     Iraq and     Social Security.A survey of Republicans outside Washington revealed similar concerns, though few officials were willing to go on record."I think he should resign," said Jim Holt, a GOP state senator from Arkansas who is running for lieutenant governor. He joked, "I hope Karl Rove doesn't come gunning for me."<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050714/ts_nm/bush_poll_dc_3" target="_blank">It seems to be effecting the public plenty.</a>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush's personal credibility appears to be eroding at a time when Iraq has become the top public priority and the White House is engulfed in controversy over senior Bush adviser Karl Rove, a poll released on Wednesday suggested. The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed the percentage of Americans who believe Bush is "honest and straightforward" fell to 41 percent from 50 percent in January, while those who say they doubt his veracity climbed to 45 percent from 36 percent.It should be known that I responded to Bulldogcakes because I respect his opinions and I've tried not to waste time arguing with people who's opinions I don't respect. On this one I don't understand the position he's taking. Clearly there are negative consequences for the White House leaking Plame's identity. Clearly, even if the public were apathetic, as it is on many important issues, that would not be a reflection of the importance of this issue. The Watergate story, which he has declared as important, had revealed clear evidence of crimes committed by members of the Nixon administration and the fact of a cover-up at the time that Nixon was overwhelmingly re-relected. Yet he's not condemning the press or the Justice Dept for continuing to investigate the matter. So, Dog, what's the deal? Why the determined resistance to the serious issues involved in this case? It's not public apathy because it it was the news media would have dropped the story for one that would sell more soap. It's not that no harm was done because, as HBox's last link demonstrates, clearly harm was done far beyond just the career of Plame herself. It's not that Rove was warning of Wilson's nepotism in getting the job becuase he was clearly qualified and chosen by CIA officials other than Plame. I can understand if you take the tack that it wasn't Rove. I'm not sure that it was him, (I'd still like to see him take one for the team and eat a bullet), ony that, according to all the original articles, the sources of the information was "White House officials". But why are you trying to make the story go away? Not that it will, of course, but I'm curious about your position here. BTW: Funniest claim so far in this issue is the WSJ collumnist that Wilson had already "outed himself as a CIA contractor." You can't out a CIA contractor if he isn't covert, you fucking retard!

Bulldogcakes

07-16-2005, 03:38 AM

quote:<a target="_blank" href="http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Lou_Dobbs_Bullshit.wmv">Nothing
new here, but very funny. Turn your speakers up and listen closely
after Lou Dobbs says "Dana Bash reports" and he cuts to the story.</a> 
 Way to disprove that whole silly Republican complaint about the "Liberal Media" 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg

My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

Bulldogcakes

07-16-2005, 04:03 AM

damn double post. 


This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-16-05 @ 8:05 AM

Bulldogcakes

07-16-2005, 04:05 AM

quote:"I
think he should resign," said Jim Holt, a GOP state senator from
Arkansas who is running for lieutenant governor. He joked, "I hope Karl
Rove doesn't come gunning for me." A
guy from Arkansas running for lieutenant Gov? Its a big country,
someone's going to go off the reservation. Call me when you get a high
ranking Washington pol. 

 
quote:The NBC News/Wall
Street Journal poll showed the percentage of Americans who believe Bush
is "honest and straightforward" fell to 41 percent from 50 percent in
January, while those who say they doubt his veracity climbed to 45
percent from 36 percent.
 This
poll doesn't mean much unless it has follow up questions that tie this
scandal to his falling #s. This could be reflective of the ongoing war
in Iraq, the Failure of his Soc Sec reform, whatever. 
 quote:On this one I don't understand the position
he's taking. Clearly there are negative consequences for the White
House leaking Plame's identity. Clearly, even if the public were
apathetic, as it is on many important issues, that would not be a
reflection of the importance of this issue. The Watergate story, which
he has declared as important, had revealed clear evidence of crimes
committed by members of the Nixon administration and the fact of a
cover-up at the time that Nixon was overwhelmingly re-relected. Yet
he's not condemning the press or the Justice Dept for continuing to
investigate the matter.Here's
my position. I originally thought there was a crime here, and Rove was
caught red handed. But as I've looked into this there's less and less
there. And I've found all the arguements against Rove to be thoroughly
unpersuasive. So I'm just chalkng this up to the usual mud slinging
that goes on in Washington, and the usual folks who line up on both
sides to defend and attack each other. None of which affects my life in
any meaningful way. And
Mojo, I contend its stories like this that CAUSE apathy. Because for
those of us who dont have a dog in this fight, you just tune it out. 


<img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg" />

<a target="blank" href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html">My brand spankin new site Bully Baby</a>

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-16-05 @ 8:07 AM

Yerdaddy

07-16-2005, 07:43 AM

Here's my position. I originally thought there was a crime here, and Rove was caught red handed. But as I've looked into this there's less and less there. And I've found all the arguements against Rove to be thoroughly unpersuasive. So I'm just chalkng this up to the usual mud slinging that goes on in Washington, and the usual folks who line up on both sides to defend and attack each other. None of which affects my life in any meaningful way. I'm not buying it. You're ignoring too much information. But I'll let it drop.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

East Side Dave

07-16-2005, 08:56 AM

CIA- Central Intelligence Agency. Great movie: Patriot Games. All about that shit. Check it out. 

<img src=http://www.richstillwell.com/ESD.gif>
Big Ass Mafia

Click this link (http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/thenight/ppr/index.shtml) to hear my show on 90.5 The Night FM;
Friday and Saturday Night: Midnight to 5 AM you bastards!

furie

07-16-2005, 09:29 AM

Or a dead body somewhere. you mean like in the white house?You'd think that would be a scandal, but apparently that wasn't enough for the American people either. 

<img src="http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y178/furie1335/rfsigs/rom.jpg">

<a href="http://fallingtowardsapotheosis.blogspot.com/">mental vomit</a>

TheMojoPin

07-16-2005, 01:03 PM

Look, he either leaked it or he screwed up.  Either is pretty intolerable given his position.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">

1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

HBox

07-17-2005, 08:56 AM

<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8605680/" target="_blank">Cooper speaks.</a> 

http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/9734/sig6nj8wg.jpg

FMJeff

07-18-2005, 12:31 PM

gotta give republicans one thing though...they really go out of thier way to protect thier own....

<center><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/imagestorage/fmjeff.gif">
 
It made my heart sing.

HBox

07-18-2005, 12:49 PM

If this was some no name representative from
Bumblefuck, OK, they'd throw him to the wolves. This is the Republican
Mother Brain. They'll go down in flames if they have to defending
him. 

http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/9734/sig6nj8wg.jpg

Bulldogcakes

07-18-2005, 05:34 PM

quote:gotta give republicans one thing though...they really go out of thier way to protect thier own.... 
 Very true. Much less likely to throw someone overboard then the Democrats. For better or worse, they are loyal. 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg

My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

Yerdaddy

07-18-2005, 11:58 PM

Loyalty is only a virtue to the degree that the object of that loyalty is virtuous. Every authoritarian regime, from Hitler to Saddam Hussein to the Taliban has surrounded itself with loyal servants. Give me loyalty to principles or loyalty to country over loyalty to a party, an ideology or to an administration any day.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

HBox

07-19-2005, 03:53 PM

There was an article in that liberal rag the
Wall Street Journal today that said that there was evidence that it was
known within the government that Plame's undercover status was common
knowledge. Here's an excerpt:A classified State Department memo that may be
pivotal to the CIA leak case made clear that information identifying an
agent and her role in her husband's intelligence-gathering mission was
sensitive and shouldn't be shared, according to a person familiar with
the document... The memo's details are significant because they will
make it harder for officials who saw the document to claim that they
didn't realize the identity of the CIA officer was a sensitive matter.
Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, may also be looking at
whether other crimes -- such as perjury, obstruction of justice or
leaking classified information -- were committed... The paragraph in
the memo discussing Ms. Wilson's involvement in her husband's trip is
marked at the beginning with a letter designation in brackets to
indicate the information shouldn't be shared, according to the person
familiar with the memo. Such a designation would indicate to a reader
that the information was sensitive. The memo, though, doesn't
specifically describe Ms. Wilson as an undercover agent, the person
familiar with the memo said. 


http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/9734/sig6nj8wg.jpg

Bulldogcakes

07-19-2005, 04:16 PM

Why are they calling Ms Plame Ms Wilson? Is she undercover again? 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg

My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?

HBox

07-20-2005, 08:58 PM

<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8635385/" target="_blank">If there's proof that Rove read this memo, he could be going to jail.</a> 

http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/9734/sig6nj8wg.jpg

PapaBear

07-20-2005, 09:06 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if Bush comes out and says Rove doesn't know how to read. It's pretty cut and dry, if he did read it.

<center><img src="http://www.geocities.com/pauleight/pb_sig.gif"></center>
<center>Get Small</center><center>LENNY IS</center>
<center>Thanks Monsterone for the sig!</center>

DarkHippie

07-21-2005, 05:44 AM

Why are they calling Ms Plame Ms Wilson? Is she undercover again? Plame is her maiden name;  Valerie Plame Wilson.

<IMG SRC=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/HippieRat.jpg>
<marquee> Finally on Myspace http://www.myspace.com/darkhippie Please love me </marquee>

CaptClown

08-05-2005, 10:37 AM

So what happened?

Director of the C.Y.A. Society.
Field Marshal of the K.I.S.S. Army
Poison Clan rocks the world

TheMojoPin

08-05-2005, 05:35 PM

Not a goddamned thing.Shocker, I know.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">

1979 << On the streets of your town... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

HBox

08-05-2005, 05:49 PM

It's not over. This will get kicked into high gear
again when the prosecutor announces whatever he's decided he's gonna
do. 

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9434/sig3wm.jpg

CaptClown

08-05-2005, 07:57 PM

So what happens if we find out that it was Wilson who outted his wife in a drunken rage?

Director of the C.Y.A. Society.
Field Marshal of the K.I.S.S. Army
Poison Clan rocks the world

HBox

08-05-2005, 08:08 PM

We already know who outed her: Karl Rove and
Scooter Libby. The only thing yet to see is if there is enough evidence
to prosecute them. 

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9434/sig3wm.jpg

high fly

08-06-2005, 11:06 PM

It's always such a drag to see someone who came into office vowing to "usher in a new era of personal responsibility" once againfail to hold someone accountable for their actions.Remember when Bush first came into power, when he said he'd fire anyone for just the appearance of impropriety.There's certainly plenty to fire "Hot Karl" on, but that would require bush having a shred of  honesty.Bush is a lying sack of shit.But we already knew that, didn't we?

" and they ask me why I drink"
http://64.177.177.182/katylina/highflysig.jpg
Big ups to sex bomb baby Katylina (LHOOQ) for the sig!

Recyclerz

09-29-2005, 04:39 PM

Judith Miller out of jail and getting ready for her aria!  Nice.<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9535787/">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9535787/</a> 

<IMG SRC="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">

[b]There ain't no asylum here.
King Solomon, he never lived 'round here[b]

Bulldogcakes

10-02-2005, 06:00 PM

Interesting
analysis on Judith (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2005/09/30/BL2005093000669.html) 
So what was Miller doing in jail? Was it all just a
misunderstanding? The most charitable explanation for Miller is that
she somehow concluded that Libby wanted her to keep quiet, even while
he was publicly -- and privately -- saying otherwise. The least
charitable explanation is that going to jail was Miller's way of
transforming herself from a journalistic outcast (based on her gullible
pre-war reporting) into a much-celebrated hero of press freedom.
Note
to reporters: There is nothing intrinsically noble about keeping your
sources' secrets. Your job, in fact, is to expose them. And if a very
senior government official, after telling you something in confidence,
then tells you that you don't have to keep it secret anymore, the
proper response is "Hooray, now I can tell the world" -- not "Sorry,
that's not good enough for me, I need that in triplicate." And if
you're going to go to jail invoking important, time-honored
journalistic principles, make sure those principles really apply.

http://home.comcast.net/~bob80/RFnetBulldogcakes3.jpg

My site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

"A dog recently saved his owner's life, because he had been trained to dial 911. Unfortunately, operators had trouble finding the address 'woof, woof.'"-Norm MacDonald

bobrobot

10-17-2005, 02:22 PM

<img title="Rove" height="500" alt="Rove" src="http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y46/bobogolem/arrestwing.jpg" width="409" border="0" />

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y46/bobogolem/bobobigjoe.jpg
If I got a biscuit, you get half !

high fly

10-20-2005, 04:34 PM

This administration has set quite a low standard for the handling of classified information in time of war.*On the trip to Africa, apparently the memo that revealed Plame's identity was left laying around like last week's edition of Time magazine.*They have hired Douglas Feith, consultant Michael Ledeen and Richard Perle, all of which have been caught passing classified information to foreign governments.*On top of that, they got mixed up with Manuchir Ghorbanifar, who got us into the ol' arms-for-hostages fiasco by the reagan administration.*And then to add fuel to the fire, they had a spymaster's dream, generals and officials from a foreign country participating in policy-making meetings held by the Office of Special Plans where highly classified information was discussed.

" ...and they ask me why I drink"

http://64.177.177.182/katylina/highflysig.jpg

Big ups to sex bomb baby Katylina (LHOOQ) for the sig!

Yerdaddy

10-21-2005, 10:52 AM

<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-libby21oct21,1,1542092.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage" target="_blank">Bush Critic Became Target of Libby, Former Aides Say</a><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051021/pl_nm/bush_leak_dc_4;_ylt=AvOw3yVPVTR9oWW7sLtdUr7sbr8F;_ ylu=X3oDMTA2ZGZwam4yBHNlYwNmYw--" target="_blank">Possible cover-up a focus in Plame case</a>

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">

Fuck it from behind.

high fly

10-24-2005, 03:09 PM

What we must keep in mind is how this all started.There was some ridiculously phony documents obtained by Italian intelligence, handed to the Brits, who gave them to us, regarding a sale of yellowcake uranium to Iraq by Niger, even though Iraq already had 500 tons of the stuff (many of the discrepancies in the documents can be found in James Bamford's excellent A Pretext for War).The CIA investigated and found the story to be bogus. The U.S. ambassador and the State department inrtelligence service investigated and found the story to be bogus. The CIA told the Brits the story was bogus.But in the summer and fall of 2002, as allegations Iraq was "reconstituting" it's nuke program were being shot down, the administration found itself desperately grasping for something, anything to support it's claim. A team led by Douglas Feith (previously fired by the Reagan administration for giving classified information to a foreign government) and his boy Wurmser went digging around in CIA reports (not finished, analyzed intelligence, but reports) and found the bogus story the CIA had already shot down.They told "Whatta" Dick B. Cheney about it, and inquiries from "Whatta" Dick B. Cheney's office led to the Wilson trip. Wilson came back, saying, like everyone else, that the story was bogus.So, with the intel community unanimous in saying the story was bogus, the White House decided to put the bogus allegation in Bush's speech of Oct. 7, 2002.Tenet heard about it and got on the horn to the White House and sent emails to CondoLIES!LIES!LIES!zza Rice, Stephen Hadley, and others, and got the bogus allegation of a uranium deal removed.THEN, with the aluminum tubes story crumbling about them, the White House grasped again at the bogus story, and put it in Bush's Jan. 2003 State of the Union speech, even after more protests from the CIA. CIA protests caused them to sneak in the fudge words putting it on the Brits, and, like with other scandals, the Bush administration went on to try to pass the buck, duck responsibility and refuse to hold those responsible accountable for their actions (such behaviour replacing ehtics as a Republican "core value").That's what this is all about - the Bush administration trying to cover up a blatant lie to the American people, which has contributed to nearly 2,000 of the cream of our youth being killed. 

" ...and they ask me why I drink"

http://64.177.177.182/katylina/highflysig.jpg

Big ups to sex bomb baby Katylina (LHOOQ) for the sig!

Bulldogcakes

10-24-2005, 04:20 PM

quote:There
was some ridiculously phony documents obtained by Italian intelligence,
handed to the Brits, who gave them to us, regarding a sale of
yellowcake uranium to Iraq by Niger, even though Iraq already had 500
tons of the stuff  If they were so "Ridiculous", why did British Intelligence stand by their veracity?  Whatta" Dick B. Cheney  "Whatta" Dick
B. Cheney's 
CondoLIES!LIES!LIES!zza Rice, 
 This
stuff just cheapens your argument. And makes guys like me who may not
usually agree with you but are willing to listen, tune you out. 

http://home.comcast.net/~bob80/RFnetBulldogcakes3.jpg

My site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

"A dog recently saved his owner's life, because he had been trained to dial 911. Unfortunately, operators had trouble finding the address 'woof, woof.'"-Norm MacDonald

TheMojoPin

10-24-2005, 08:14 PM

If they were so "Ridiculous", why did British Intelligence stand by their veracity?So if I declare that the sky will turn purple tomorrow, and still stand by that statement even when it turns out to be completely false, I get to win?Nice.

<center><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
 
Dancing with the women at the bar... << He knows his Claret from his Beaujolais >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."</center>

Bulldogcakes

10-25-2005, 04:45 PM

<a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flash5abc.htm" target="blank">NEWS FLASH NEWS FLASH-Libby's been indicted</a> 
<a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flash5abc.htm" target="blank"></a> quote:
"We have double sourced that the vice president's chief of staff has
been indicted," a reporter for ABCNEWS claimed to a White House press
spokesman this afternoon.
 
 
The White House refused to comment on the claim. The network
said they didn't need comment, they were preparing to run with the
development on this evening's network news broadcast, sources tell the
DRUDGE REPORT. 
 

ABCNEWS claimed to the White House that it had double sourced how an
indictment against vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis Libby was
set.
 

<img border="0" src="http://home.comcast.net/%7Ebob80/RFnetBulldogcakes3.jpg" />

<a href="http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html" target="blank">My site Bully Baby</a>
"A dog recently saved his owner's life, because he had been trained to
dial 911. Unfortunately, operators had trouble finding the address
'woof, woof.'"-Norm MacDonald <a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flash5abc.htm" target="blank"></a>



This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 10-25-05 @ 8:47 PM

Bulldogcakes

10-25-2005, 04:55 PM

A brief history of indictments in recent administrations:
_
The only sitting Cabinet member in recent history to be indicted while
in office was Raymond J. Donovan, President Reagan's labor secretary.
In September 1984, Donovan was indicted along with several others,
accused of grand larceny in his co-ownership of a construction firm.
After going on unpaid leave in October, Donovan resigned in March 1985.
In 1987, a jury acquitted Donovan and his co-defendants.
_
In October 2005, David H. Safavian, the top procurement official for
President Bush, resigned. Three days later, he was arrested and
indicted on five felony counts connected to criminal investigation of
lobbyist Jack Abramoff. At the time the indictment covered, from May
2002 to January 2004, Safavian had been serving as the chief of staff
at the General Services Administration. Case pending.
_ In
November 1996, Henry G. Cisneros resigned from his position as
President Clinton's housing secretary. In December 1997, he was
indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, obstruction and lying to the FBI.
Cisneros pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in 1999 and was fined $10,000.
_
In December 1994, Mike Espy resigned from his position as Clinton's
agriculture secretary. In August 1997, Espy was indicted on 39
corruption counts in allegations that he had received financial gifts
from Tyson Foods Inc., one of the companies his department regulated.
In December 1998 Espy was acquitted on all counts.
_ In May 1993,
White House travel office chief Billy R. Dale and his entire staff were
fired by the Clinton administration. Dale was indicted in December 1994
on two counts of embezzlement and conversion after a grand jury said he
pocketed up to $68,000 from media organizations traveling with the
president. Dale was acquitted of all charges in November 1995.
_
In November 1986, John M. Poindexter resigned from his post as national
security adviser to President Reagan. In March 1988, Poindexter and
three others were indicted in relation to the Iran-Contra affair.
Poindexter was charged with two additional counts of obstructing
Congress and two counts of making false statements. He was convicted in
1990, but the charges were overturned the following year.
_ In
1983, Thomas C. Reed resigned from the Reagan administration after
working as a presidential assistant under National Security Adviser
William P. Clark. In August 1984, he was indicted on four counts
related to alleged illegal stock trading. He was acquitted in 1985.
_
In April 1973, President Nixon forced White House chief of staff H.R.
Haldeman, domestic affairs counsel John Ehrlichman and five other staff
members to resign. In March 1974, they were indicted in connection with
the Watergate cover-up. Along with several others found guilty, both
Haldeman and Ehrlichman were convicted in 1975 and sentenced to 18
months in prison.
 Alot of these, spanning many
presidencies and involving both parties. Also very interesting that
most are acquitted, most famously with Ray Donovan yelling "Where do I
go to get my good name back?!" 

http://home.comcast.net/~bob80/RFnetBulldogcakes3.jpg

My site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

"A dog recently saved his owner's life, because he had been trained to dial 911. Unfortunately, operators had trouble finding the address 'woof, woof.'"-Norm MacDonald

Yerdaddy

10-26-2005, 10:37 AM

<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/latimests/focusofprosecutorincialeakinquiryappearstoshifttor ove;_ylt=AkfICgMfeg.Ny7hJacPI8ftg.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA 3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-" target="_blank">We may be learning more about the question of the Italian documents soon.</a>As anticipation built in Washington about potential indictments — and what it would mean for a Bush administration beset by low approval ratings, the Iraq war and a controversial Supreme Court nomination — a related problem was brewing in Italy over how the Niger allegations made their way into the intelligence stream. Italian parliamentary officials announced that the head of Italy's military secret service, the SISMI intelligence agency, would be questioned next month about allegations that his agency gave the disputed documents to the United States and Britain, an Associated Press report said. A spokeswoman said Nicolo Pollari, the agency's director, asked to be questioned after reports this week in Italy's La Repubblica newspaper claiming that SISMI sent the CIA and U.S. and British officials information that it knew was forged. The newspaper reported that Pollari met at the White House on Sept. 9, 2002, with then-deputy national security advisor Stephen J. Hadley. The Niger claims surfaced shortly thereafter. A spokesman for Hadley, now the national security advisor, confirmed that the meeting took place but declined to say what was discussed. Hadley played a prominent role in the controversy over Bush's claims in his State of the Union address. He took responsibility for inserting into the speech the famous 16 words that laid out the allegations. 

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">

Fuck it from behind.

CaptClown

10-26-2005, 10:42 AM

quote:  <blockquote /> So if I declare that the sky will turn purple tomorrow, and still stand by that statement even when it turns out to be completely false, I get to win?Nice. Be careful because some one will post a pic of the sky at sunrise or sunset and claim it is purple.

Director of the C.Y.A. Society.
Field Marshal of the K.I.S.S. Army
Poison Clan rocks the world

A.J.

10-26-2005, 11:15 PM

quote: <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/latimests/focusofprosecutorincialeakinquiryappearstoshifttor ove;_ylt=AkfICgMfeg.Ny7hJacPI8ftg.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA 3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-" target="_blank">We may be learning more about the question of the Italian documents soon.</a> quote: As anticipation built in Washington about potential indictments — and what it would mean for a Bush administration beset by low approval ratings, the Iraq war and a controversial Supreme Court nomination — a related problem was brewing in Italy over how the Niger allegations made their way into the intelligence stream.  Italian parliamentary officials announced that the head of Italy's military secret service, the SISMI intelligence agency, would be questioned next month about allegations that his agency gave the disputed documents to the United States and Britain, an Associated Press report said. A spokeswoman said Nicolo Pollari, the agency's director, asked to be questioned after reports this week in Italy's La Repubblica newspaper claiming that SISMI sent the CIA and U.S. and British officials information that it knew was forged. The newspaper reported that Pollari met at the White House on Sept. 9, 2002, with then-deputy national security advisor Stephen J. Hadley. The Niger claims surfaced shortly thereafter. A spokesman for Hadley, now the national security advisor, confirmed that the meeting took place but declined to say what was discussed. Hadley played a prominent role in the controversy over Bush's claims in his State of the Union address. He took responsibility for inserting into the speech the famous 16 words that laid out the allegations.  <img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5" border="0" /> Fuck it from behind. The next thing the Italians will be telling us is that there is some sort of "organized crime" syndicate called "La Cosa Nostra". LIARS! 

<img src=http://img40.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/AJinDC-Sig.jpg>

A Skidmark/canofsoup15 production.

Red Sox Nation

high fly

10-27-2005, 04:09 PM

Last I heard, "Hot" Karl Rove was throwing "Scooter" Libby under the bus...  

" ...and they ask me why I drink"

http://64.177.177.182/katylina/highflysig.jpg

Big ups to sex bomb baby Katylina (LHOOQ) for the sig!

Se7en

10-27-2005, 08:16 PM

The NYT is reporting that <a href="http://nytimes.com/2005/10/28/politics/28leak.html?ei=5094&en=f4b9e5edc0a35fdf&hp=&ex=1130472000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print" target="_blank">Libby will be indicted,</a> but Rove will not, for now (he'll remain under investigation).  Well, I suppose that'll disappoint quite a few liberals, if their boogeyman winds up free and clear, at least for now, although with Rove under investigation he won't be able to fully perform his duties.If I were to make a prediction, I'd say that whatever indictment comes down will not be for leaking Plame's name.  It'll be for perjury or obstruction of justice, which will of course prove the point that in regards to Wilson's claims of the administration leaking the name, NO CRIME was actually committed.  The Times complete heel turn on Judith Miller, after calling her a hero for weeks, finally is beginning to make sense.  She was actuall PROTECTING someone in the Bush administration, rather than eagerly helping to tear them down.

Se7en

10-28-2005, 06:15 AM

So that NYT story appears correct, as Libby will be indicted, but Rove will not.  Rove will 'remain under investigation'.Mark my words:  Rove will never be indicted.  If Fitzgerald doesn't have anything on him now, he's not going to come up with enough in the future.  So everyone hoping for Rove's demise, you're going to have to live with the disappointment.

Doctor Manhattan

10-28-2005, 06:26 AM

People were actually expecting Cheney to be included as well, You've got to have a rock solid case before you go up that high (But, the Vice President's chief of staff is pretty high up if you ask me.)<a href="http://www.xmradio.com/programming/channel_page.jsp?ch=202" target="_blank"><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=skw" border="0" /></a>

This message was edited by SKW on 10-28-05 @ 10:27 AM

HBox

10-28-2005, 07:06 AM

quote:It'll be for perjury or
obstruction of justice, which will of course prove the point that in
regards to Wilson's claims of the administration leaking the name, NO
CRIME was actually committed. Just
because they don't have enough evidence to indict on a crime that is
notoriously hard to prove doesn't mean that no crime occurred. I'm sure
they weren't lying to the grand jury just for shits and
giggles.The Times complete heel
turn on Judith Miller, after calling her a hero for weeks, finally is
beginning to make sense.  She was actuall PROTECTING someone in the
Bush administration, rather than eagerly helping to tear them down.When
the Times was defending Miller it was painfully obvious to everyone
that she was protecting someone in the Bush
administration. 


<img border="0" src="http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/7449/georgesig0mm.jpg" />

This message was edited by HBox on 10-28-05 @ 11:10 AM

Se7en

10-28-2005, 07:59 AM

It's okay, I know that the liberal reaction to this is going to be "Well.....well.....they're STILL GUILTY!!! Even if, you know......there's no evidence that the administration actually leaked the name intentionally or that in doing so a crime has been committed....."  It must be a rather disappointing day in the Wilson household.  Man, two years of effort, and they still couldn't put away Rove.

Furtherman

10-28-2005, 08:44 AM

All legality aside, Plame was outed because her husband called Bush on his lie.  You don't out someone of the same team, or you are not on the same team.  Bush's administration is on their own team... which is hardly America's.And don't throw around the word "liberal" to describe anyone who disagrees with the current administration, because that is far from true and becoming more apparent every day. <img src="http://www.chaoticconcepts.com/randomizer/random.php?uid=7" border="0" />

This message was edited by Furtherman on 10-28-05 @ 12:46 PM

Doctor Manhattan

10-28-2005, 08:53 AM

quote: And don't throw around the word "liberal" to describe anyone who disagrees with the current administration, because that is far from true and becoming more apparent every day. Thank you! I am far from Liberal and I can't stand bush. I want to spit in his fucking face. He stinks!And to be fair. The administration didn't leak Valerie Plame's identity, the just were just talking about former ambassador (and White House critic) Joseph Wilson's wife. How were they supposed to know that he only had one wife? Some detective put the pieces together and came up with her name. 

<a href="http://www.xmradio.com/programming/channel_page.jsp?ch=202" target="_blank"><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=skw" border=0></a>

HBox

10-28-2005, 09:05 AM

It's okay, I know that the
liberal reaction to this is going to be "Well.....well.....they're
STILL GUILTY!!! Even if, you know......there's no evidence that the
administration actually leaked the name intentionally or that in doing
so a crime has been committed....." Actually,
YOU were the one who said something concrete. YOU said that this PROVES
no crime occured. I said this doesn't prove that at all. I mean, really, you're a lawyer and should know that. 


http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/7449/georgesig0mm.jpg

Yerdaddy

10-31-2005, 03:29 AM

Libby was indicted. What more proof do you need of a man's innocence?<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5" border="0" /> Fuck it from behind.

This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 10-31-05 @ 7:32 AM

Bulldogcakes

10-31-2005, 04:34 PM

Has anyone else noticed that for the whole point of the
investigation (Did someone illegally leak a covert CIA ops name) no one
was charged or indicted? All he came up with was Libby's
inconsistencies. And if the guy was really lying, dont you
think he'd have his story down pat? The fact he said different things
leads me to believe he was trying to to tell the truth, and had a
faulty memory. Perjury infers intent to lie. I dont think he can prove
that. Ask any defense lawyer, no witness tells the exact same story all
the time. Unless they're lying.   
Plus, Bush will pardon him at the end of his term anyway.   

http://home.comcast.net/~bob80/RFnetBulldogcakes3.jpg

My site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)

"A dog recently saved his owner's life, because he had been trained to dial 911. Unfortunately, operators had trouble finding the address 'woof, woof.'"-Norm MacDonald

WRESTLINGFAN

11-03-2005, 04:48 PM

Im glad they didnt indict this scooter <img title="scooter" height="260" alt="scooter" src="http://lchs.lewi.k12.wv.us/usr/Jposey/images/basehof/rizzuto.jpg" width="186" border="0" />

O and A... PARTY ROCK!!!!!

A.J.

11-03-2005, 11:07 PM

Or this one.<img height="299" src="http://www.serienoldies.de/images2/muppets_scooter.gif" width="296" border="0" />

<img src=http://img40.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/AJinDC-Sig.jpg>

A Skidmark/canofsoup15 production.

Red Sox Nation

Yerdaddy

11-04-2005, 08:57 AM

Maybe we should actually read <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801086.html" target="_blank">the indictment?</a>b. In connection with his role as a senior government official with responsibilities for national security matters, LIBBY held security clearances entitling him to access to classified information. As a person with such clearances, LIBBY was obligated by applicable laws and regulations, including Title 18, United States Code, Section 793, and Executive Order 12958 (as modified by Executive Order 13292), not to disclose classified information to persons not authorized to receive such information, and otherwise to exercise proper care to safeguard classified information against unauthorized disclosure. On or about January 23, 2001, LIBBY executed a written "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," stating in part that "I understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information, special confidence and trust shall be placed in me by the United States Government," and that "I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation."d. The responsibilities of certain CIA employees required that their association with the CIA be kept secret; as a result, the fact that these individuals were employed by the CIA was classified. Disclosure of the fact that such individuals were employed by the CIA had the potential to damage the national security in ways that ranged from preventing the future use of those individuals in a covert capacity, to compromising intelligence-gathering methods and operations, and endangering the safety of CIA employees and those who dealt with them.f. Joseph Wilson was married to Valerie Plame Wilson ("Valerie Wilson"). At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson's affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community.[QUOTE]3. On May 6, 2003, the New York Times published a column by Nicholas Kristof which disputed the accuracy of the "sixteen words" in the State of the Union address. The column reported that, following a request from the Vice President's office for an investigation of allegations that Iraq sought to buy uranium from Niger, an unnamed former ambassador was sent on a trip to Niger in 2002 to investigate the allegations. According to the column, the ambassador reported back to the CIA and State Department in early 2002 that the allegations were unequivocally wrong and based on forged documents.4. On or about May 29, 2003, in the White House, LIBBY asked an Under Secretary of State ("Under Secretary") for information concerning the unnamed ambassador's travel to Niger to investigate claims about Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium yellowcake. The Under Secretary thereafter directed the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research to prepare a report concerning the ambassador and his trip. The Under Secretary provided LIBBY with interim oral reports in late May and early June 2003, and advised LIBBY that Wilson was the former ambassador who took the trip.5. On or about June 9, 2003, a number of classified documents from the CIA were faxed to the Office of the Vice President to the personal attention of LIBBY and another person in the Office of the Vice President. The faxed documents, which were marked as classified, discussed, among other things, Wilson and his trip to Niger, but did not mention Wilson by name. After receiving these documents, LIBBY and one or more other persons in the Office of the Vice President handwrot

high fly

11-14-2005, 02:55 PM

WHEW!When the charge was lying about a consentual sex affair to a panel investigating sexual assault, the phrase we heard so often from the right-wing-tight-asses was about "Respecting the rule of law."Somehow along the way, this particular "core value" of theirs fell by the wayside (along with smaller government, less governmental interference into our private lives, balanced budget...)Here we have the intentional leaking of information classified SECRET in time of war, and all they do is make excuses.And here's a little different take I'd like to throw out for consideration.Was Wilson REALLY the target?Think about it. The CIA and State Dept. had already investigated the rumor of an attempted uranium purchase from Niger by Iraq and found it to be bogus. The Feith/Wurmser team found the rejected investigations and resurrected it and Wilson was sent to Niger and he came back and also told them he could find nothing to support the story.Eventually Wilson went public saying the White House intentionally aired a bogus allegation.How does revealing Plame's identity rebut what Wilson said?It doesn't!So let's look at the possibility that Plame was the target all along, and not her husband. We know she was working WMD proliferation issues at the CIA. We also know that with her identity being revealed, those she worked with and the cases they were on were disrupted, as well as past WMD proliferation operations were exposed and/or had to be shut down, covered up, or whatever.So here we have a White House, being exposed as making bogus WMD claims and being embarrassed daily at none of the massive underground WMD labs being found, no WMD-armed UAVs being found, no mobile WMD labs turning up, etc. And so what they do with Plame is to take an action that shuts down CIA operations regarding WMD at a time when they viewed the CIA as being hostile to the White House. 

" ...and they ask me why I drink"

http://64.177.177.182/katylina/highflysig.jpg

Big ups to sex bomb baby Katylina (LHOOQ) for the sig!

curtoid

04-06-2006, 10:53 AM

Scooter Libby: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/06/AR2006040600333.html" target="_self">BUSH AUTHORIZED LEAK</a>AP: <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/bush_administration" target="_self">MORE</a>

This message was edited by curtoid on 4-6-06 @ 2:55 PM

Recyclerz

08-31-2006, 08:18 AM

Well, I guess it's time to eat some crow, a few forkfuls anyway.  With the recent (almost) confirmation that Richard Armitage was Bob Novak's other source for the "outing" of Valerie Plame I have to admit I see the matter in a somewhat different light.  Rather than "smoking gun" evidence of a diabolical plan from Cheney and Rove to smash whistleblowers challenging the Administration's line of bullshit for taking over Iraq, it now seems to me that it was just highly placed members of the Administration (Armitage - one of the "good" ones - and Rove) being cavalier & reckless with important information that was spun by a sympathetic outsider (Novak) in an attempt to smash a whistleblower challenging the Administration's line of bullshit for taking over Iraq,  Still inexcuseable but many levels down on the evil scale.So (stares at ground, kicks dirt with toe)  -  I'm sorry. All other criticisms of the W administration still stand.  <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />

This message was edited by Recyclerz on 8-31-06 @ 12:19 PM

A.J.

08-31-2006, 08:29 AM

i find it hard to believe that someone as intelligent and experienced as Armitage could have been such a gossipy blabbermouth with such classified information.

Bulldogcakes

08-31-2006, 02:55 PM

Recyclerz wrote: Well, I guess it's time to eat some crow, a few forkfuls anyway. With the recent (almost) confirmation that Richard Armitage was Bob Novak's other source for the "outing" of Valerie Plame I have to admit I see the matter in a somewhat different light. Rather than "smoking gun" evidence of a diabolical plan from Cheney and Rove to smash whistleblowers challenging the Administration's line of bullshit for taking over Iraq, it now seems to me that it was just highly placed members of the Administration (Armitage - one of the "good" ones - and Rove) being cavalier & reckless with important information that was spun by a sympathetic outsider (Novak) in an attempt to smash a whistleblower challenging the Administration's line of bullshit for taking over Iraq, Still inexcuseable but many levels down on the evil scale.So (stares at ground, kicks dirt with toe) - I'm sorry. All other criticisms of the W administration still stand. <img border="0" src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" />

   You sir, are a good man. But I knew that already.

narc

09-01-2006, 10:21 PM

<hr color="cococo" align="left">A.J. wrote: i find it hard to believe that someone as intelligent and experienced as Armitage could have been such a gossipy blabbermouth with such classified information.<hr color="cococo" align="left">
intelligent experienced people do retarded things all the time. And I can't believe more people aren't talking about this. I want KOP to say he and his conspiracy theorist ass are eating it.

Yerdaddy

03-07-2007, 09:36 PM

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/09/29/LI2005092901976.html" target="_blank">Libby's guilty.</a> Finally some accountability for the adminstration. But he'll probably get pardoned because Bush believes he and his friends are above the law - on a mission from God? And conservatives generally agree with him.<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030602365.html" target="_blank">This is an interesting artilce</a> about the jorors' views of what went on inside the White House. There was a former Washington Post journalist on the jury who talked about what happened in the jury room. (I guess Libby's defense attorney hasn't heard about the whole liberal media thing.) "We're not saying that we didn't think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of," said the juror, Denis Collins. "But it seemed like he was . . . the fall guy."Lets keep this <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/03/07/GR2007030700384.html" target="_blank">Fact vs Fiction</a> page handy so we don't have to hear the same old lies about this case again and again.

A.J.

03-08-2007, 01:00 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/09/29/LI2005092901976.html" target="_blank">Libby's guilty.</a> Finally some accountability for the adminstration. But he'll probably get pardoned because Bush believes he and his friends are above the law - on a mission from God? Even the Blues Brothers went to prison.

high fly

03-08-2007, 06:23 PM

Let's not forget that at the heart of the affair is the Bush administration's insistence on lying to the American people about a bogus uranium purchase deal between Iraq and Niger. After 9/11, the U.S. received third-hand copies of a bunch of documents alleging a secret deal between Iraq and Niger for 500 tons of yellowcake uranium. The documents, chock-a-block full of the most ridiculous inconsistencies were quickly labeled as bogus. Later on, the White House, unhappy the intel on Iraqian WMD programs didn't fit their preconceptions, sent over a team led by Doug Feith to comb through CIA reports and they found the bogus documents. Feith told Cheney and Cheney's office asked the CIA to look into it again and Ambassador Joe Wilson was dispatched and he too, said the story was bogus and discovered our ambassador there had investigated and also had reported the story as bogus. Wilson's report went to the White House. Desperate to have something, anything to make the case that Saddam had "reconstituted" their nuke program, the White House sought to put the uranium purchase in Bush's Oct. 7, 2002 request to Congress for authority to use force in his "negotiations" with Saddam. The CIA told them no, this was all ridiculous and the allegation was stricken from Bush's speech. After all, they had the aluminum tubes story to make the phony case for a "reconstituted" nuke program. The aluminum tubes story fell apart, and they were left with squadoosh to support the nuke story, so they tried to revive the Niger uranium purchase claim, and the CIA did it's damnedest to get it taken from Bush's January 2003 State of the Union speech. They contacted a number of Bush administration officials trying to get it deleted, including National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, her deputy Stephen Hadley and chief speechwriter Michael Gerson. But remember, this is the lie-at-all-costs Bush administration, so Bush uttered the "16 words" making what all knew was a big fat lie. The IAEA looked into it, and when the administration finally let them examine the documents the CIA and INR had already determined to be bogus, the IAEA, using Google and an encyclopedia also determined the documents were bogus. A cascade of Bush administration lies followed. They said they didn't have the bogus documents at the time of the Bush State of the Union speech, then they said they had them then, but after the British White Paper was produced in late September 2002, another big fat one. Then they lied some more with Bush repeatedly saying the CIA vetted and approved the inclusion of the allegation in his speech. Rice lied, sending the buck back down the chain of command, claiming that no one at her level was aware of CIA objections to the obviously phony allegation, even though she herself had received emails from DCI Tenet telling her it was a bogus claim. Then Wilson came out and said the story was the big fat lie it was, but the administration, truth-averse as it is, let it be known that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, as if that suddenly made the uranium claim true. Wilson's wife filed a claim that she'd been outed illegally, CIA attorneys agreed, so did the Justice Department attorneys, and a special prosecutor was hired as the avalanche of lies from the Bush administration continued. Revealing Plame's identity caused a CIA operation working on Iranian WMD to be shut down, and how many conservatives bothered by that? The Nixonian coverup swung into action and that's how we got to where we are today. This is all about a coverup of facts and the administration's attempt to lie to the American people despite knowing full well they were lying like hell. <br /