John Podhoretz: Compulsive Liar
Earlier today, we noted that several right wing bloggers – including the National Review’s John Podhoretz – were lying about the impact of a 1995 memo written by Jamie Gorelick. Podhoretz and others claimed the memo prevented the Department of Defense from sharing information about Mohammed Atta and other terrorists with the FBI. In fact, the Gorelick memo dealt exclusively with the sharing of information between the FBI and the criminal division of the Justice Department.
Caught in a lie this morning, Podhoretz lied again this afternoon. Responding to ThinkProgress readers, Podhoretz tries to claim his story was — and has always been — that the Gorelick’s memo didn’t prevent the information from being shared but was “important” and “reflective of a mindset of consensus”:
Here’s what I think, and what I have said for more than a week now: The 1981 executive order governing intelligence matters specifically gives military intelligence a right to share information with the FBI. But when the deputy attorney general, in 1995, writes a memo insisting that when it comes to sharing intelligence, it is important to go ‘beyond the letter of the law” — and she is the same person who was the general counsel at the Pentagon before that — said memo indicates a mindset in the government about the dangers and inherent incorrectness about the sharing of intelligence information that was very dangerous. That’s what 9/11 proved in part, and why a lot of us think Gorelick’s “wall” memo was important and reflective of a mindset consensus.
First, that’s not what Podhoretz has been saying for a week. Last Friday Podhoretz said the information wasn’t shared between the DoD and the FBI “solely” because the Gorelick memo raised the “intelligence wall”:
I don’t really understand all of it, but the evidence suggests that the Able Danger information could and should have been shared with the FBI and wasn’t — solely owing to the “raising” of the intelligence wall that was done by Jamie Gorelick herself in 1995.
But the second version of Podhoretz’s claim is equally ridiculous, to the extent it’s even comprehensible. This was a classified Justice Department memo. It’s highly unlikely that it was seen by anyone in the Department of Defense at all, much less the people involved in the Able Danger program.
For good measure Podhoretz throws in an insult to Think Progress readers:
Don’t read anything. Just continue to serve as an e-mail robot. It’s probably the best you guys can do.
E-mail robots, activate! Contact Podhoretz at jpod@sprynet.com and ask him a simple question: Do you stand by your statement that the Gorelick memo prevented the Able Danger information from being shared or not?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Another lie by another con liar. So what else is new?
August 19th, 2005 at 4:02 pmWe aren’t robots over here. You have us confused with the Pod man’s readers.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:09 pmThis all is just a deflection and a classic example of the “Blame Clinton First” NeoCon BS machine. I don’t recall a lot of outrage from the left blaming Bush I for the first WTC bombing in 1993–or am I missing something here? 9/11 has enough blame to go around for BOTH parties. The big question for those in charge now is: “What are you doing to make us safer here?” When I hear China is buying Billions of Dollars of bomb detection equipment for their mass transit system from a Boston firm, I have to ask, “What are we doing to protect our mass transit?” The answer seems to be exclude children with suspect names and sniffing grandma’s shoes and socks. How are we doing on checking the cargo containers or securing our borders? We can’t blame Clinton for the next attack OR the mess we have in Iraq.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:26 pmone of the drawbacks of data mining: It produces thousands of false positives.
Eric Umansky: Thousands of False Positives on Able Danger ?
The NYT’s Philip Shenon, who has done some of the Able Danger reporting, was interviewed Friday on WNYC. There host Mike Pesca raised the false positives question. Here’s what Shenon said:
“I understand from others at the Pentagon that one of the problems here is that Able Danger came up with names not just of Atta and three others, it came up with a tremendous number of names of very decent American citizens.”
That sounds like a whole lot more than the “60″ the Times suggested…Friday (i.e. same day as the radio interview). Are Shenon and Jehl on the same page?
Shenon’s comment matches with my personal experience: As I said in my blog, data mining brings up a lot of false positives -on the hundreds with the relatively low volume of data I worked. Thousands of false positives is very plausible with the gobs of data that Able Danger must have dealt with
.
Using Data Mining to Find Terrorists: False positives
Those limitations are not only the musings of yours truly, but have also been raised by data mining experts such as Herb Edelstein , an internationally recognized expert in data mining, data warehousing and CRM, consulting to both computer vendors and users. A popular speaker and teacher, he is also a co-founder of The Data Warehousing Institute
Data Mining In Depth: TIAin’t
False positives. Given the difficulty of developing good signatures and the small number of terrorists relative to the population of the United States, there are likely to be an enormous number of innocent people identified as potential terrorists (false positives). The more you try to avoid false positives, the more likely you are to miss many true positives. Unlike a direct mail campaign where the cost of a false positive is only a few dollars at worst, the costs in identifying terrorists - in dollars, time and wasted opportunity - are staggering. Suppose we had a collection of algorithms that has a false positive rate of only 0.1 percent - extraordinarily good for a problem of this complexity. That would mean 220,000 false positives! There are not enough investigators to investigate every false positive. Even if there were, the dollar cost would be in the billions, as would the cost of the resulting lawsuits. More importantly, the resources and amount of calendar time expended in these mostly useless investigations would likely leave many true terrorists free. Even if we concentrated only on non-citizens, we would still have more than 20,000 false positives to be vetted.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:37 pmI think it’s spelled Podheretz. Not Podhertz.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:42 pmThanks, fixed.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:50 pmThe barriers to communication between Governmental departments were probably a mistake, whether Able Danger pans out as a real scandal or not. The reasoning behind the wall was possibly morally sound (protect citizens from the potential abuse of government data collection prowess) but then, the obvious tradeoff became making harder for the government to anticipate dangers.
Personally, I think Gorelick should have recused herself from service on the 9/11 panel. Her job in the Clinton Administration was too entangled in the questions of what went wrong, when. Even if her policies had no negative impact (or should I say, especially if they had no negative impact) then the best thing would have been to let someone with no vested interest come to that conclusion.
As an aside, spam isn’t nice. Encouraging spam is less nice.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:51 pmThis isn’t spam. It’s encouraging people to send Podhoretz a personal email. If he didn’t want people contact him, he wouldn’t link his email address to his posts…
August 19th, 2005 at 4:53 pmDeployed in the U.S.A.: The Creeping Militarization of the Home Front
by Gene Healy
Gene Healy is senior editor at the Cato Institute
Deploying troops on the home front is very different from waging war abroad. Soldiers are trained to kill, whereas civilian peace officers are trained to respect constitutional rights and to use force only as a last resort. That fundamental distinction explains why Americans have long resisted the use of standing armies to keep the domestic peace.
Unfortunately, plans are afoot to change that time-honored policy. There have already been temporary troop deployments in the airports and on the Canadian and Mexican borders and calls to make border militarization permanent. The Pentagon has also shown a disturbing interest in high-tech surveillance of American citizens. And key figures in the Bush administration and Congress have considered weakening the Posse Comitatus Act, the federal statute that limits the government’s ability to use the military for domestic police work.
The historical record of military involvement in domestic affairs cautions against a more active military presence in the American homeland. If Congress weakens the legal barriers to using soldiers as cops, substantial collateral damage to civilian life and liberty will likely ensue.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:57 pmhttp://cato-subscriptions.org/ ct.html?rtr=on&s=77z,dub9,949,l629,1t18,9zdt,1kws
#3, right on!
August 19th, 2005 at 4:58 pmWhen the first WTC bombing occurred weeks after the first Bush, did Clinton claim — “it’s all Bush’s fault?” No. The mastermind was captured and sentenced.
This latest distortion by Podheretz is just more of the sale old, same old. Blame Clinton. Blame Gorelick. Blame anyone but the Republicans. This Able Danger business is an example.
By the way, did I just hear that Weldon who first announced this Able Danger story is going to run for Gov. of New York?
I am sick of the distortions and fabrications - no outright lies - by the Republicans who stand to gain personally.
Have you ever seen Podheretz in an interview — he is a vile and mean-spirited man, with a predisposition toward skewing the truth to meet his extreme views.
Spam is what the Pod produces. E-mails to the Pod are a response to his spam.
Oedipus & Podhoretz
His father fought Stalinists. But for Post edit-page chief John Podhoretz, sitcoms are the battleground of freedom.
Funny article on the Pod.
http://www.newyorkmetro.com/ nymetro/ news/ media/ features/ 1968/
August 19th, 2005 at 4:58 pmThere seems to be a pandemic of cognitive disassociation by the reichwing talking heads of opinion around this country. As a group, they are more and more often denying statements that they have made, some in mere minutes of making the original statement. “I didn’t say that;” “I was taken out of context;” “My words have been misrepresented;” are becoming a common chorus and are representative of a growing mental instability.
In this day of internet access to primary resource material, including audio/video clips as well as textual comments, it is particularly striking to me that those in that realm feel so comfortable denying their own previous experiential existence. We certainly would not accept this from our own children, why are we having to put up with it from those in the MSM?
August 19th, 2005 at 4:59 pmPersonally, I think Gorelick should have recused herself from service on the 9/11 panel. Her job in the Clinton Administration was too entangled in the questions of what went wrong, when. Even if her policies had no negative impact (or should I say, especially if they had no negative impact) then the best thing would have been to let someone with no vested interest come to that conclusion.
But it’s different when Republicans investigate themselves, right?
August 19th, 2005 at 5:00 pmSpam is one of those things you know when you see it. Unsolicited email pitching something that I have no use for from people I do not know is spam. When the same message comes from multiple senders, it’s spam.
And when the point is to irritate, rather than persuade (which I assume is the itch that most of the spamzombies scratched when they hit “send”) it’s spam with a side order of vegemite.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:06 pmSpam is trying to sell something. Usually something that isn’t worth spit, like what NRO and the Pod man do. We are just asking him to stop. I am asking you to stop. You are making an ass out of yourself. But, whatever. It’s your face.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:10 pmHere’s your definition. But like I said, you were spamming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_%28electronic%29
August 19th, 2005 at 5:11 pmIt’s a beautiful thing, how technology can mirror sociology. I’m sure all those reichwingers have spam filters that can take all the unsolicited harrasment that spamzombies produce and file it to NULL. This mirrors the ability the human animal has evolved, where the ranting of the unhinged is recognized and, after the initial unpleasantness of the spittle and the shouting, to just tune it out the stimulus. “Poor bastard. Let’s move on.”
The great thing is, the spittle producers tend to reinforce one another, and wind up congregating in areas that turn out to be the social equivalent of NULL for the better adjusted.
Thanks for providing a useful social service, Judd.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:22 pmjust sent my e-mail to podhoretz. it was easy and fun!
August 19th, 2005 at 5:25 pmPodhoretz is a dirty pig! I loathe him.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:34 pmThanks for providing a useful social service, Judd.
A useful social service is taking NRO and the Pod man and filing them to NULL.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:42 pmI think we have a few disillusioned reich wingers here who have yet to be fully weaned from the reich wing teet.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:44 pmEnough about the spam already! Whether I or anyone else agrees or not, you made your point. Move on. Progress.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:46 pmyea I’m not going to e-mail him. But I won’t feel bad for him if he chooses to get a different e-mail address. He probably already has a bunch. Most of us do between work, home computer, & hotmail.
I was kind of pleased this afternoon when I was lurking over at redstate and they AREN’T giving alot of credence to the Able Danger stuff or this new one. Sure, pleanty of them would like to hang Clinton with EVERYTHING (including their ex-spouses, bounced checks or shitty lives) but there were several that were saying no. I was surprised. Maybe their regulars took off for a long weekend.
Hey, enjoy yourself all. Be cool.
August 19th, 2005 at 6:00 pmAfter asking him about him standing on his words how about asking him, “If your words and statements are untruthful (i.e., lies) will he resign?”
Why Not?
August 19th, 2005 at 6:01 pmI e-mailed him.
August 19th, 2005 at 6:01 pm#23,
They know all too well what can happen when you hang your hopes on something that is fake but accurate. Dan Rather, anyone? In this case, fake and inaccurate.
August 19th, 2005 at 6:03 pmYea, Dan Rather’s documents might have been fake but what they said was the gospel truth. Funny how that never seemed to get pointed out.
August 19th, 2005 at 6:20 pmThis whole thing is nothing but an attempt to place the fault for the 9/11 intelligence failures before George W. Bush became President. Bush supporters desperately want to blame President Clinton and his administration for everything that Bush and his cronies have wrecked.
August 19th, 2005 at 6:33 pmI’ve emailed Jpod in the past over his blatant PlameGate lies. I’ve emailed him when he blatantly flip flopped. Do email this serial liar, but don’t expect the courtesy of a reply from him. I guess he’s too scared to address his own shadow.
August 19th, 2005 at 6:37 pmYou liberal morons…Clinton is TOAST.
We had 8 terrorist attacks in each of Slick WIllie’s 8 years in office and each was treated as a police action. Clinton never took OBL seriously, so he let him go off to plan 9/11.
Nice, it must be easy to call everyone else liars when Clinton raises teh bar once again for lying liberals.
This is FAR from over.
August 19th, 2005 at 6:59 pmSure,…it’s Clinton’s fault. Forget the Bush-bin Laden connection. Forget the warnings given to Condy about imminent attacks on the US. Forget the fact that Bush refused to appoint a commission to investigate the attacks of 9/11, and forget all the information that has emerged that totally refutes the official report by the Kean group. It’s all Clinton’s fault….yeah, right
For Heaven’s sake, sheeple…at least READ the information that’s out there. Not the conspiracy pages…the FACTS that we now know. Just open your eyes to the hoax for a few minutes…. please.
Plenty of documented info here. Just click the 9/11 link on the menu and read. Then comment. Not before:
CLICK HERE
August 19th, 2005 at 7:13 pmin the very spirited competition of the most idiotic right-winger in punditland, i’ve always felt that the pod is right up there with the better known krauthammer, malkin, and coulter as the most apallingly stupid and obnoxious member of the species.
that said, i’ve enjoyed emailing the little idiot because his invective in response is always so amusingly third-rate! (so, pgl, he does answer some of his emails).
this is, after all, a man who went long on bush with a book just as the market was starting to short the shallow little man in the oval office. what a lying piece of shit.
August 19th, 2005 at 7:13 pmbut i do have to credit thom crowley for being right up there as one of the stupidest commenters in right-wing robot land! They graduate new sheep from propaganda u at an amazingly fast pace.
August 19th, 2005 at 7:14 pm[…] John Podhertz apparently doesn’t know when to quit. Filed under: Politics […]
August 19th, 2005 at 7:15 pmThom, Monica, whatever,
What happened to “when you go after a king you must kill him or you make him stronger” stuff you guys were spouting after the “police” fired cruise missiles at Osama. Or that “dead or alive” stuff? And how come Commander Koo-Koo Bananas cancelled funding for the Intel group targeting Osama that Clinton set up? And what happened to that Anthrax thingy? Is Bush down on the “ranch” praying Osama will die of old age? What was that “forget Tora Bora send the Special Forces to Qatar” thing? You need directions to the nearest Army recruiting center? I hear they need more gung ho, yes sir, I’d die to prove George junior right types. Try the blue section of the phone book, or maybe Google, that’s G-O-O-G-L-E-.-C-O-M. Got it?
August 19th, 2005 at 7:21 pmIsn’t it spelled PodWHOREzt?
Anyway, I wonder if these courtiers and jokers hadn’t better read up on the French Revolution, a rerun of which we seem headed straight toward.
August 19th, 2005 at 7:24 pmWhy isn’t the “heroic” Thom Crowley fighting for freedom in Iraq? Oh, yeah, he’s another cowardly lyin. IOKIYAR. And he has such splendid role models in Chickenhawk Cheney and aWol Bush.
August 19th, 2005 at 7:24 pmDear Howard,
I object. Nobody is dumber than Michelle Malkin, and I shall type to the death to defend her title.
August 19th, 2005 at 7:25 pmMy balls smell like Michelle Malkin…
:0
August 19th, 2005 at 7:27 pmJPod is just feeling sad that he go voted off the island
http://blogs.salon.com/0002874/2005/08/17.html
August 19th, 2005 at 8:25 pm#10 Bill WELD is thinking of running for NY Gov, not WELDEN. Easy mistake to make.
Bill Weld is in trouble already with the conservatives because he backs a charity for gays.
August 19th, 2005 at 9:00 pmHe sent me a link to his explanation.
I wrote back:
What am I supposed to take from that?
Words matter. I loathe anyone — at least anyone who speaks — who says they don’t.
If your trade is as a word dealer, you don’t disparage your product. I’m reminded of the “only 16 words” in Bush’s speech, as if the words, in a speech, you know, a “thing made of words,” don’t really matter. Your excuse, I’m sorry to say, is as risible as the winger excuse for those 16 words.
The adverb you should have used was “perhaps.” Your decision to go with “only” is not mitigated by calling something “hyperbolic” that is, in fact, incorrect (e.g., “He’s a big pederast.” “No he’s not.” “Well, I’m just being hyperbolic here. I apologize.”), nor is it alleviated by your other “11,999″ words (hyperbolic? or hypertrophied?) that, if they said what you claim they said, should have given you pause before you suddenly forgot, purportedly, what you were up to.
Now, if you were actually engaged in self-correction, you would have examined why you made the mistake you did. Such an examination is lacking. Without that examination, you’re doomed to repeat it. Without that examination, you’ve admitted only a mistake, but neither responsibility or guilt, both of which would require that you take steps to change your behavior. But that thickheaded insistence on keeping on is probably your intention, yeah?
This is not an invitation to a dialogue. You can write back, but I’ll have what you write deleted, unread.
August 19th, 2005 at 9:12 pm#41 Thanks. I checked further and you are correct.
August 19th, 2005 at 9:52 pmPoderhatz has created an interesting paradox . . . for himself.
The Gorelick memo was, as you say, a CLASSIFIED memo. You add that it is unlikely that the DoD would be aware of the memo.
But you miss an important point: if someone at the DoD was aware of the memo or its contents, then whoever TOLD the DoD about the memo, *violated* the memo. Right? So how *could* the memo have created “a mindset not to share information”?
In other words…
If (as Poderhatz claims) the memo “created a mindset not to share information”, then how could the DoD be aware of the classified Deputy AG-to-FBI memo (or its contents) in the first place?
(It reminds me of this: “If you ordered that Santiago was not to be touched, and your orders are always followed or people die, then why did he need to be transferred off the base?”)
Or am I missing something?
August 19th, 2005 at 9:54 pmPoderhatz says “Don’t read anything. Just continue to serve as an e-mail robot. It’s probably the best you guys can do”, and yet it is the righties who are impatient with those pesky little “details” that reveal the truth. Just this week Newt Gingrich advised Republicans to avoid debating details with Liberals, and offered some slogan engineering as a substitute for a close examination of the facts. E-bots, indeed. Well… Mr. Poderhatz is getting an email from each this robot tonight.
August 19th, 2005 at 10:45 pmTechnically, 1 week, 3 hours and 8 minutes IS “more than a week.” So perhaps he changed his opinion immediately after he posted last Friday’s story?
August 19th, 2005 at 11:05 pmI don’t think Podhoretz lied. I think that he just didn’t know what the hell he was talking about, and when he first heard this story, he wrongly linked it to the Gorelick thing. I’ll admit that I kind of made that mistake…for about five seconds, and then I remembered that the Gorelick thing didn’t involve the Defense Department. So I think that Pod and the others made that same initial mistake, and now they’re too embarrassed to admit it.
These people are desperate for any facts which can back their case, and they refuse to show weakness by backing down now. They know that we’ll just see this as our opprotunity to continue attack, and they’re sure that we’re in the last throes of our liberalism. If they can just hold out for a few weeks longer, we’ll finally give up our political insurgency, and they can, at last, get out of their propaganda-mindset and once again see reality for what it really is.
August 19th, 2005 at 11:23 pmREgarding Bill Weld.
Weld privately contacted the head of the Conservative party in New York, a nut job named Michael Long. Weld then announces that he will run for governor. (Spitzer should clock him though on Spitzer’s merits)
Weld is doing the old Ridge, Schwarzaneggar, Pataki, Whitman, Rowland, Collins, Snowe, Chafee, Romney, trick. The conservatives publically call him too liberal but privately back him because he’s actually one of them, the media calls him moderate or liberal just because he says he’s pro choice and pro gay rights. At the same time Weld and every other person on this list supports ultra right wing policies on economic issues and other social issues and then appoint RW judges who will strike down laws protecting women’s right to choose and gay rights.
Have any of you caught on yet?
August 20th, 2005 at 12:23 amSeems I recall Gorelick’s memo being investigated by the 9/11 commission. The conclusion reached by all the panel members was: A - It was a clarification of existing procedures and B - It made the sharing of info easier between the affected agencies. To me, or any other reasonable person, it would seem the wall was lowered, not raised. Can someone explain why the issue has arisen again, with the exact same, debunked, claims that it’s all Bill Clinton’s fault? Can’t anything be settled and put to rest?
August 20th, 2005 at 2:26 amI don’t know who’s lying on the right anymore. The guy with the latest “Hilary Hater’s Guide” was on Franken and Franken and Conason exposed the misinformation and shoddy work. Pitiful book. He didn’t even have names correct and described people who he had never seen based on what he was told by Lord knows which Hillary hater.
He was writing propaganda for that wingnut easy money no doubt, but I got the feeling that he wasn’t lying so much as we just buying into the lies and propaganda the right has built up over the last 25 years. It is layered on them. I am not saying anyone intended it, but the right is now literally under a form of information control which places them in a cultic mindset. They have been trained to only trust the likes of Rush, FOX and Savage and anyone who tells them liberals are their problem. Millions live in a bubble. It’s a huge national security problem.
Kind of like the way Wallace ran the bigots around in the 60s, tell them someone else is screwing them till they buy it. The right isn’t crazy, and they don’t all lie, they just don’t see reality and will defend the cult and leader at all costs.
When you are trained to believe God is on your side, you will do anything, rationalize anything.
So be kind, Podhoretz has carried water for a madman, he can rationalize anything.
August 20th, 2005 at 2:36 amCan’t anything be settled and put to rest?
These feces flinging, rouge-butted monkeys who have hijacked conservatism and the GOP can be put to rest. That will settle it.
August 20th, 2005 at 4:56 am[…] Responding to emails from Think Progress readers, the National Review’s John Podhoretz finally admitted what he’s been saying about Jamie Gorelick’s 1995 memo isn’t true. He still, however, doesn’t understand the scope of his error. And, in typical Podhoretz fashion, spends a lot more time insulting the people who pointed out his mistake than apologizing: OKAY, THE CRAZIES GOT ME OVER AN ADVERB [JPod] Evidently, among the 12,000 or so words I have written on the Able Danger matter on this website, I wrote a sentence in which I used the word “solely” — to wit, “I don’t really understand all of it, but the evidence suggests that the Able Danger information could and should have been shared with the FBI and wasn’t — solely owing to the ‘raising’ of the intelligence wall that was done by Jamie Gorelick herself in 1995.” That was hyperbolic, as it certainly was not “solely” the result of the raising of the “wall.” But the sentence as written was conditional, as I said at its beginning that I didn’t understand all of it, and that the evidence “suggested” something. That’s hardly a definitive statement of anything, though Leftoid robots doubtless can’t understand this because they only act on binary statements. […]
August 20th, 2005 at 10:00 amI sent Podhoretz an email this morning and he responded with:
“Tell you what. You read every post I’ve written about Able Danger, including the ones where I turned very skeptical very fast, and then you e-mail me back and tell me you think I’m a dishonest liar.”
So I read them and responded to him with among other things:
“Remember, this is an apology to the staff, not to the
commissioners..”
Why no apology to the commissioners? It’s obvious Weldon is a whackjob yet you’ve been smearing Gorelick, the whole commission and Clinton’s anti terrorism efforts by association based on his and Shaffer’s claims.
Your evasions notwithstanding suggestions, innuendo, and rumor mongering are your stock in trade.
Dishonest liar is redundunt. Shill with little regard for the truth would be more appropriate.
Now John doesn’t want to be my new best friend. I get so confused sometimes. Mom always says I should be nice to the other kids but Dad says I should stand up to bullies. It’s hard to know where to draw the line. Was I too harsh?
August 20th, 2005 at 1:07 pmPodrhretz as well as his supports should read Kristen Breitweiser chilling account on Able Danger posted on the Huffington Post.She is in the Know.This piece will quite the blame Clinton crowd.
August 20th, 2005 at 2:02 pmThe FBI knew about Atta anyway. Agent John O’Neill raised all the red flags about the coming catastrophe of 9/11, but Louis “Ruby Ridge” Freeh and his top deputy ignored him. Why? Because Agent O’Neill was having an affair which didn’t set well with the pious Freeh. In fact, I believe Mr. Freeh is a member of Opus Dei, the extremely right wing sect of the Catholic Church. Also, Freeh hated Bill Clinton’s guts.
August 20th, 2005 at 3:48 pm[…] That being the case, you could almost predict what would happen once Weldon opened his mouth about his mythical chart—i.e. such comic moments as his apparently bogus claim that he gave his one and only copy of the chart to Stephen Hadley at the NSC (Hadley: “No comment”), or the hearsay evidence from an alleged “whistleblower” that would be hyped to the skies by the conservative media, but never substantiated (can you say “Bill Burkett”?) And of course, let’s not forget the relentless, repetitive sliming of Jamie Gorelick and the 9/11 Commission—which still hasn’t stopped, even though the entire story has pretty much fallen apart. […]
August 22nd, 2005 at 11:02 pmWeldon as Vice Chair of the Armed Services used US Taxpayer money to bribe military personnel to invent a chart.
It’s pretty damn obvious he did .. my question is, when do we get to roast him alive?
August 31st, 2005 at 1:53 amWhat’s that smell?
There are some great attempts at damage control sprinkled in here with the rest of the comedy.
How many DNC happy meals can you all eat over and over? Don’t you get tired of the Sandy Berger served with a super-sized side of French lies?
So, why would Sandy Berger thieve and destroy Top Secret Classified documents related to islamic terror before they were to be viewed by the 9/11 commission(smokejumpers)?
Berger helping Bush cover-up the world domination plan?
Could ‘marginalia’ have anything to do with it? What was written in the margins of this “after action report” passed around the different branches by Clark? WTF needed to be ‘disappeared’ by Sandy Scissorhands Bergler?
That smell is coming from all you poor sheep! You aware that your W psychosis has turned the corner and gone gangrenous? The only thing that changes during your W groundhog day sickness is the growing stench of your festering wound AND the growing list of failed attempts at political poo-poo.
Operation:’Able damage control’ on condition DELTA yet?
If not, you better wake up all the support staff and get to work! All the old Waco smoke-jumpers are just as ineffective as they were when they tried to cover-up what happened at Waco. Did they not read Hillary’s memos titled “how to succeed with your cover-up”? You can probably request a copy with helpful illustrations of Vincent Foster for a ‘complete picture’ of how to succeed with your cover-up if you’re having trouble.
Also, here is a tip!
Leave all those maggots on you alone as they will help you with your gangrene. ; )
September 10th, 2005 at 11:47 amLife Covarage…
notifying:reestablishing manifesting.Hattizes.bake Life Covarage http://www.tucsonwildlife.org/# majored:Term Insurance http://www.onterminsurance.com/# …
January 16th, 2007 at 2:39 amProm Dresses Emo Fashion Prom Dress
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
July 2nd, 2008 at 3:09 pmJobs Welding Jobs Tug Job
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
July 2nd, 2008 at 3:56 pmGay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
July 6th, 2008 at 4:28 pmWeather Forecast Air Supply Cloud
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
July 8th, 2008 at 3:54 pmdod security training
Intriguing idea, but I don’t know if I believe you one hundred percent.
July 9th, 2008 at 1:58 pm