7PM ET: CNN Covers Abramoff Email
By on Feb 9th, 2006 at 5:44 pm
7PM ET: CNN Covers Abramoff Email
First published by ThinkProgress yesterday. Tune in.
Transcript:
In our 7:00 p.m. Eastern hour, Jack Abramoff has been doing some emailing, in which he talks about his relationship with President Bush, a relationship the president says simply doesn’t exist. We’re going to look closer at the emails and all angles of this story.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
What’s CNN?
February 9th, 2006 at 5:48 pmgood
February 9th, 2006 at 5:50 pmAs in “lovingly cover with Bush-friendly rhetoric”, I’d imagine. Big whoop.
February 9th, 2006 at 5:51 pmProbably will be a ten second story sandwiched between Bush and how he saved millions of lives in LA (Bull shit!!) and how Reid was caught blowing Abramoff. I hate the media!!
February 9th, 2006 at 5:59 pmYeah I am sure they will treat him with kid gloves as always.
I sent them an e-mail about a half hour ago and told them they were as bad as Fox. With the news about Libby and Abramoff they were still talking about these stupid cartoons that the muslims are still whining over.
Let’s keep CNN on track.
Archon
February 9th, 2006 at 6:05 pmWho watches CNN these days?
The fact that the left is believing liars and felons here shows their desperation.
Abramoff is a liar who is trying to sink Bush.
Josh Marshall is also a liar, if his stories on Bush’s photos with Abramoff were so true, then why doesn’t he just release the ID to the picture.
He hasn’t done so, which suggests that he made up the stories about scrubbing photos
February 9th, 2006 at 6:10 pm#5 – whining? are you serious?
i know – its hard to wrap your mind around actually caring what others think of your faith…but keep in mind , to them God is everything. If it was known that desecrating something so important to them would instigate something..why would any newspaper publish(or republish) something so terrible?
February 9th, 2006 at 6:15 pmGary,
February 9th, 2006 at 6:16 pmThe photos are here:
http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com
Go back into your cave or they will be embedded in every thread on TP.
Gary,
When are you going to follow up on your promise? You call Abramoff a liar, yet you made a promise that clearly you were lying when you posted this.
“I am so convinced that I am right that if ANY indictments are issued regarding this matter… I will place the barrel of flare gun up my ass and pull the trigger…
February 9th, 2006 at 6:16 pmPosted by: Gary Ruppert on October 15, 2005 at 6:38 PM | PERMALINK“
Oh gary, just remember shit floats ok?
February 9th, 2006 at 6:17 pmActually your comments Gary show the desperation of the right.
No matter how they lie, cheat, and steal you will still defend this pack of idiots that are calling themselves Republicans.
It is sad that you will be left on the burning ship long after the rats that got you on it have abandoned it.
But by all means hang on until you drown.
Archon
February 9th, 2006 at 6:19 pm#6-GR,
“Abramoff is a liar who is trying to sink Bush.
Yes, I’m sure he was trying to sink him with the hundreds of thousands of dollars that he contributed and helped raise for bush’s campaigns. And I’m sure that it was all part of his evil plot to “trick” republican lawmakers into accepting his bri…uh, gifts, so that he could later expose them on it. I believe that the word you are looking for is “entrapment”.
What I can say about you, GR, is that you definitely jump through whatever hoops necessary to support your boy, no matter what level of deception or treason required. Thank God you were not around in the late 1700’s, otherwise we would still be an oppressed british colony. But it sounds to me like you would like that. Coward.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:21 pm#7 Catalyst,
I can understand their outrage but I can’t forgive their violent reactions to the cartoons. Violence should never be considered an acceptable way to handle disputes. It should ALWAYS be a last resort.
And why did they attack the embassies? It’s not like the embassies published the cartoons. I know from what I’ve read that Islam is supposed to be a religion of peace. If they were so upset about its portrayal or its holy people being ridiculed, then why react with violence? Doesn’t that tend to negate the idea that their religion is one of peace?
If they have a problem, then solve it the non-violent way. Write a letter or just don’t read that paper.
Anyway, to get back on topic:
It will be nice if CNN doesn’t act like everybody knows all the details ahead of time so they can gloss over the whole thing. They need to make sure their viewers are up to speed. Otherwise they’ll just be able to claim there is nothing to the pictures because they might look foolish if they had to admit that they didn’t do a good job of covering the story before this.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:24 pmJosh Marshall is also a liar, if his stories on Bush’s photos with Abramoff were so true, then why doesn’t he just release the ID to the picture.
He hasn’t done so, which suggests that he made up the stories about scrubbing photos.
So I guess the owner of Reflections Photography was lying, too, eh?
February 9th, 2006 at 6:24 pmGary, have you bought that flare gun yet? Don’t forget to load it first, we wouldn’t want you misrepresenting the intention of your promise like a typical partisan ;)
February 9th, 2006 at 6:24 pmThe photos are here:
http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com
Nice try. Jack Abramoff doesn’t have a mullet. That’s not Jack Abramoff
February 9th, 2006 at 6:26 pmYet another story reported first by a blogger that CNN will take credit for breaking.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:27 pmGreat logic Gary. Everybody lies but Bush. Yeah, we are buying it.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:30 pmNow Your President has already admitted to having his picture taken with the boy and you continue to deny it. Whether those are the pix or not is a moot point he has admitted there are pictures.
Wow, now that is the epitomy of ignorance.
Get a clue dude.
Archon
February 9th, 2006 at 6:30 pmGary,
February 9th, 2006 at 6:31 pmHow often do you get a haircut? Or do you mean that he is not carrying a fish?
Gary,
February 9th, 2006 at 6:34 pmHow often do you get a haircut? Or do you mean that he is shaking hands with a fish?
Gary demostrates the partisan brain in action with his haircut and silly partisan comments. Here’s what the doctor says about Gary’s incapacitated condition – poor thing. And I forgive you Gary, you’re a victim of your defective brain pumpkin.
You can’t help it that you’ve become a drug addict – it’s a side effect of having the partisan susceptible brain.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:39 pmLooks like Harry Reid is mixed up in this Abramoff deal. And in big trouble.
DEAN: It is possible that some of Jack Abramoff’s clients may have decided on their own to give Democrats some money. The key is . . .
WALLACE: I’m sorry. Did you say that you’re sure that Abramoff didn’t direct them to give that money?
DEAN: No, what I said was that it is possible that some Democrats got money from someone he [represented]. What I’m saying is that Abramoff may not have directed some of this money to Democrats.
WALLACE: In fact, he did. We have evidence of that.
DEAN: But the point is not one Democrat either knew it or acted on it. Nobody got anything out of the Democrats from Jack Abramoff. No Democrat delivered anything and there’s no accusation and no investigation that any Democrat ever delivered anything to Jack Abramoff. And that’s not true of the Republicans.
WALLACE: So if we find – and we have to wrap this up – so if we find that there were some Democrats who wrote letters on behalf of some of the Indian tribes that Abramoff represented, then what do you say, sir?
DEAN: That’s a big problem. And those Democrats are in trouble. And they should be in trouble
February 9th, 2006 at 6:46 pmJust curious — off the subject…
Is there a law that would keep former President Clinton from running as a V.P. to Hillary? Clinton-Clinton-08!!! Good times.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:51 pmCNN and NBC are like ugly girlfriends.
Ted Kennedy is sending this out:
Reports are coming out of Washington today that Scooter Libby testified in court that Vice President Cheney and other “superiors” authorized him to release classified information to make the case for war and defend the administration from criticism of its actions.
Senator Kennedy summed it up earlier this afternoon: “These charges, if true, represent a new low in the already sordid case of partisan interests being placed above national security. The Vice President’s vindictiveness in defending the misguided war in Iraq is obvious. If he used classified information to defend it, he should be prepared to take full responsibility.”
A National Journal reporter named Murray Waas wrote the story. We’ve put together a post on his article at the campaign’s journal:
http://www.tedkennedy.com/waas
These reports are particularly troubling in light of recent revelations about the President’s domestic wire-tapping program. If it turns out that the Vice President authorized the peddling of highly-classified national defense information to serve a political purpose, what does this mean for the intelligence the Bush Administration has gathered about U.S. citizens through their secret and warrantless eavesdropping? And what does this say about their commitment to national security?
February 9th, 2006 at 6:54 pmHarry Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff. He collected nearly $68,000 in donations from Abramoff’s firm, lobbying partners and clients. Abramoff’s records show his lobbying partners billed for nearly two dozen phone contacts or meetings with Reid’s office in 2001 alone. Harry Reid intervened on government matters at least five times in ways helpful to Abramoff’s tribal clients, once opposing legislation on the Senate floor and four times sending letters pressing the Bush administration on tribal issues. Reid collected donations around the time of each action. Republican scandal indeed…
February 9th, 2006 at 6:54 pmI, for one, will be happy to buy Mr. Ruppert the flare gun of his choice. Of course, if you want to take up a collection…
February 9th, 2006 at 6:55 pmWhat’s up with Reid taking money from Abramoff??? That asshole Abramoff shoving money in his face like that.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:56 pmCNN is going to cover all angles of the email story? We’ll see.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:56 pmWe’re going to look closer at the emails and all angles of this story.
Yes, we will be relentless in our efforts to make excuses for our Corporate Puppet.
February 9th, 2006 at 6:58 pmThese are all great troll misdriections.
Harry Reid received money from Abramoff clients. Until those clients are indicted, you have nothing to stand on.
Here, from CP Krunts quotes:
DEAN: No, what I said was that it is possible that some Democrats got money from someone he [represented].
Big fvcking deal.
Eron’s clients were the people of California, should they all be indicted because Eron screwed them. The troll logic is illogical.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:01 pmHarry Reid intervened on government matters at least five times in ways helpful to his tribal constituents.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:02 pmThat’s all we really have up to today.
Reid didn’t take one dime from Abramoff. He received his money from Abramoff clients. Empty arguement. Try again.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:03 pm#26-Antagonist,
February 9th, 2006 at 7:03 pmI believe that I speak for everyone here that any elected officials who are caught up in the abramoff web should be punished to the full extent of the available vehicles, regardless of party affiliation. Do you agree?
Abramoff giving money to Democrats is like Pat Robertson converting to Islam.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:04 pmDEAN: That’s a big problem. And those Democrats are in trouble. And they should be in trouble
Sounds like your problem is with Howie, not the trolls S. Boy.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:04 pm#36-Krunt,
February 9th, 2006 at 7:05 pmI believe that I speak for everyone here that any elected officials who are caught up in the abramoff web should be punished to the full extent of the available vehicles, regardless of party affiliation. Do you agree?
Perhaps, but I don’t necessarily agree with guilt by association and I don’t think your reasonable opinion is shared by everyone here.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:10 pmCan I remind the trolls that Republicans effectively castrated the ethics committee when they took power?
K Street Project, anyone?
I’m confused by the trolls’ argument. Are they saying anyone who took money from clients of Abramoff’s firm is corrupt? Is actual evidence of bribery immaterial to this scandal?
So far we have one man convicted of bribing public officials. Karl Rove is going to try and convince us that the only person he bribed is Harry Reid.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:10 pmThe fact is that Dirty Harry Reid has his hands all over this Abramoff scandal.
The facts are pretty hard to dispute. Reid worked with Abramoff and his clients to advance Abramoff’s agenda.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:13 pmC.P. Krunt,
February 9th, 2006 at 7:13 pmTo put it words that Repugs can understand – Dean believes that Democrats should be subject to the law, Gonzo believes that Repugs are above the law. Is there something wrong with this picture?
Gosh, Gary I just love you to death but really you need your meds soon. Okay?
February 9th, 2006 at 7:15 pmGary, have you bought that flare gun yet?
February 9th, 2006 at 7:15 pm#38 If you really believe that, why go after Reid now?
Seems to me you have plenty to criticize with DeLay, Cunningham, and Ney. Plus you have not mentioned who decided to change the ethics rules to allow an indicted member to server as majority leader.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:16 pmOh, so Reid is the mastermind behind it all! Who knew!
February 9th, 2006 at 7:17 pm#40 Gary, thank God the Republicans never did that. Right?
Or if they did, I’m sure they didn’t go as far as Reid. Right?
February 9th, 2006 at 7:18 pm#38-Krunt,
I have found “reasonable opinion” to be the rule, rather than the exception, but that is my observation.
I agree whole-heartedly that guilt by association is as unfair as it is shallow in its reasoning. I would like to see it go away but unfortunately it is a tool that is used so frequently in the political and pundit realm that I suspect that it won’t any time soon.
Our goal, as conscientious americans, should be to expose and disavow corruption in our government. Whether you are republican, democrat, or independent should be irrelevant. In fact, if I were republican I would be up in arms about all this stuff and I would be calling for resignations.
Just out of curiousity, why do you believe that such is not happening right now?
February 9th, 2006 at 7:19 pmYes, the Republican leaders who organized the K Street Project (and relaxed the ethics rules) are innocent victims in all this. It was the sinister Harry Reid who orchestrated Abramoff’s lobbying scams.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:20 pmUntil Abramoff’s clients are indicted, it is not “Howie’s” problem. Come back when Abrafmoff’s clients are indicted and we will worry about it. Otherwise, you are just trolling with Hannity talking points.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:28 pmNow you are lying. Reid only received money from Abramoff clients, not Abramoff.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:28 pmThen you would be wrong, again, because you don’t know us, don’t want to know us and don’t want to debate facts, just a bunch of hearsay.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:31 pm#2: Why is foiling a plot to take out an LA building bullshit again?
February 9th, 2006 at 7:31 pmOff topic but… I keep seeing these commercials for a congressional bill for settling asbestos claims. I know that when cheney was in charge of haliburton they aquired a company with a huge asbastos liability. I also remember that when bush signed the bankruptcy bill he mentioned something about dealing with asbestos claims. Would anyone out there know if the current asbestos bill is a serious attempt to settle this issue, or an attempt to further insure halliburtons profitablity?
February 9th, 2006 at 7:32 pmBecause the US had nothing to do with it, it was an unnamed Southeast Asian country that foiled it.
Because it was not foiled with warrantless wiretaps.
Because once again, Bush stood in front of an audience that couldn’t stand up to his lies.
Because it is 4 years old.
Because Bush is full of shit.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:34 pm52: Because the timing. They already revealed that they had foiled the plot in 2003 I think. Most rational people see this as an attempt to conflate illegal domestic wiretapping with a foiled terror plot. As I understand an unnamed foriegn gov’t uncovered this plot, not the incompetents at the white house.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:38 pm#52 From what I understand, the plot was in its early planning stage, involved using shoe bombs, which we already knew about and had already hardened our airports against. It does not come anywhere near the foiled millennium bomber or Holland Tunnel plots, for example.
But if he really foiled a plot, good for him. If we are still vulnerable to shoe bombs, bad for us.
Think about it. What would it actually take to use shoe bombs to blow open the cockpit door? And if they did, would they be able to take control of the plane without damaging the controls and crashing? Seems pretty far fetched, as opposed to simply setting off a shoe bomb in the lavatory.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:39 pm#52-Chase,
Goodness gracious, Spudge sure did give you the smackdown in #52. You did deserve it though. Sorry pal.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:41 pmUh, smackdown in #54, sorry about the typo.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:42 pmSorry Spudge I didn’t see your comment when I posted mine. I wasn’t trying to copy you.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:42 pmWell, I see CNN has their usual hard-hitting, “take no prisoners” style Quickvote poll: “Does Conan O’Brien resemble the President of Finland?”
/Sarcastic slashy
February 9th, 2006 at 7:43 pmspudge boy rocks!
February 9th, 2006 at 7:46 pmOptimist,
Chase has partisan brain, a ‘rational’ and ‘logical’ response won’t register on the poor thing. It’s OK Chase, I forgive you for not having the courage to admit you were wrong.
February 9th, 2006 at 7:53 pm#61,
I agree!!
February 9th, 2006 at 7:59 pmSpudge is great!
#62-RightPunch,
I agree with your assessment. It is unfortunate that many, and I’ve seen this in both parties, treat their party affiliation like loyalty to a sports team – win at all costs and support your team regardless of circumstances. It’s a sad state of affairs and definitely does not speak well of the intelligence of the “cheerleaders”.
This is why I am a registered “none of the above”, or NOTA.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:09 pmBowdler,
We can always go with great minds think alike. You were probably typing when I hit Post, so you didn’t see it.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:13 pmHey TrueBlue!
February 9th, 2006 at 8:14 pmCheck this out:
Council on Foreign Relations
Terrorism Questions and Answers
The War on Terrorism in 2002
Since many of the largest al-Qaeda networks are located in Southeast Asia, why the hell are we in the Middle East?
I am going to hunt down the Southeast Asian Country and the Suspect. I heard in the report on NPR that it was a torrorist group with the initials JI, for ‘Jihadist Islam’ or something like that. JI is not AQ (Al Qaida), so why did Bush tie them together other than to decive.
Anybody else wanna help?
February 9th, 2006 at 8:25 pmAbramoff is a liar who is trying to sink Bush.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 9, 2006 @ 6:10 pm
Oh Mr. Ruppert, you never cease to amaze me with your seemingly endless capacity to contradict yourself, and deny facts.
Why is it illegal for Jack Abramoff to give money to someone? He gave the legal limit, and he did it without strings.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 3, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
BREAKING NEWS: Abramoff To Plead Guilty Today
You typed the above upong learning Abramoff would pled guilty of bribery. Pray tell, at what point between then and now did you have an epiphany and decided Abramoff is not the upstanding citizen you so forcefully defended for so long?
February 9th, 2006 at 8:25 pmGregor,
He also promised to shoot a flare gun up his ass, Gary seems to make lots of promises with his mouth, that his ass can’t cash. Poor thing.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:27 pmabromhoff is revealing his ties to bush, irving libby revealed that cheney authorized the plame leak, and brownie is stating that he will reveal the inner workings of the white house during Katrina, unless bush promises legal defense. The problem with dealing having morally corrupt peers is that they will flip when the going gets rough. The vacuuity of their souls is obvious.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:32 pmNot to mention that this sentence comes right before the one I pointed out in my last post. This would be another reason for not being in Iraq. See, their base was in Afghanastan, but not anymore.
Before any trolls say, “Yeah, because Iraq is like flypaper” Give me a frickin’ break. The biggest problem with republicans is they think the enemy is dumb. That is one of the first things that you learn in the military is to “Never under estimate your enemy. Al Zwahiri is a doctor. These guys aren’t idiots. They moved. They are not there anymore. If we are really fighting terrorism, then let’s do it. There is another say “Shit or get off the pot” and right now, the US is sitting on the pot in the war on terror.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:32 pm“Before any trolls say, “Yeah, because Iraq is like flypaper†Give me a frickin’ break. The biggest problem with republicans is they think the enemy is dumb. Spudge_Boy”
Maybe this is one of those cases where they can only ’see themselves’ in others ;)
February 9th, 2006 at 8:36 pmHi Spudge!
February 9th, 2006 at 8:38 pmJust downloading some stuff on my brand spankin’ new computer!
Belated shout out!
RightPunch,
I hope someone is there to take pictures, if Gary ever keeps his promise :-))
February 9th, 2006 at 8:38 pmAssociated Press
February 8, 2006
Brown May Testify on White House, Katrina
This is good stuff. Michael Brown is blackmailing the White House to keep him from ratting them out.
Watch the trolls say he is a scumbag, when they were defending him to the end after Katrina hit. They said it was not his or the Bush administartion’s fault and blamed it on state and local authorities, as they still do.
Yeah, Mary Landreiu, you know her, the one who said “Now is not the time for asking questions” during the catastrophe and then followed it up with running over and hugging George W. Bush after his latest State of the Union address.
Michael Brown will do one of to things, he will force the Bush administartion defend him for his incompetence or he will rat them out. That IS blackmail.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:45 pm#76, Spudge,
February 9th, 2006 at 8:52 pmDon’t you just love how they turn on each other when the pressure’s on?
They’d do anything to avoid personal responsibility!
They’re still scumbags, but it does make for
“good watching”!
It would be good watching if you could ignore the damage that they are doing to this country.
February 9th, 2006 at 8:57 pmGregor,
Gary won’t keep his promise – partisans always lie readily and with great ease. He has no integrity, dignity or morality – in otherwords he’s a rightwing christian republican partisan ;)
February 9th, 2006 at 9:05 pmIn case anyone is interested, there’s a good chance that I tracked down the secret identity of our goddess mighty aphrodite. She posted a bunch of stuff today, and I though I recognized its general style and composition. And it turns out she wrote ‘almost’ the identical things that one of the well known extremist rightwing trolls was famous for writing during the Kerry campaign.
Here’s the poor fellow who seems to be behind our silly whacked out goddess. The queen behind the thrown one might say ;)
http://townhall.meetup.com/143/member/2210128/photos/
February 9th, 2006 at 9:11 pmShooting yourself in the ass with a flare gun is a tough promise to keep. I assume Gregor would be satisfied with an appology. I don’t think Gregor should hold his breath though. Unless gary keeps his promise in Gregors presence, then breath holding would be recommended.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:14 pmBlah Blah Blah
Same old crap from the right wing trolls no matter where you go.
Look progressives, stop referring to Reid’s constitiuents as Abromoff’s clients or you are playing right into the hands of the right as they re-frame the argument.
Reid received money from his constitiuents PERIOD! Whether said constituents had a relationship with any one else in none of Reid’s business. That is like saying just because I give money to my senator and I have a relationship with a criminial therefore my senator is a criminal.
Stop allowing the right wing idiots to re-frame the argument. Reid accepted money from his constituents just like every other politician does. End of non-story.
Archon
February 9th, 2006 at 9:15 pmIt would be good watching if you could ignore the damage that they are doing to this country.
Comment by Bowdler
February 9th, 2006 at 9:20 pmYou’re right. The destruction they are exacting is terrible.
I should have said their stupidity is kinda entertaining…
RightPunch,
I love the “Featured Comments” for the Meetup Group, VoCal, that person belongs to.
In other words “Nobody wants to hear our bullshit.”
February 9th, 2006 at 9:26 pmTalking Points does a good job of disecting how Reid didn’t play ball with the ‘Abramoff related’ lobbying firm, despite the AP story’s rather misleading article. Not surprising that the republicans would try to push this into a bi-partisan scandal. This one appears to be pure republican bribery all of the way, and that’s a desperate situation coming into an election year. I’m sure they’re hoping to swiftboat with articles like this, instead of facing their own corruption in a mature and responsible fashion. Poor Republican partisans, they have so much passion, and so little integrity.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:27 pmSpudge,
It’s true that no one wants to hear their crap, that’s why they have to come to places like this to get their voices heard. Poor things are ranting little boys, lost in the world. I pity them.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:28 pm85: I remember someone posting here, a few months ago, that in 2004 the exit polls in Florida differed from the tally by something like 17%. And that the UNs standard for vote fraud was something like 5%. I am afraid that this will happen in 2006, maybe more widespread. Maybe it is time to have UN observers at our polling places.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:43 pmBush made them keep out in 2004.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:12 pm#87 that was probably me, Bowdler, that’s one of my obsessions. Here’s an update for you over at Buzzflash
The thing you won’t like about Miller’s commentary is that with the machinery still in place and with the Help America Vote Act (Orwell rolls over again in his grave), it will all happen again in 2006. IMHO, it will take blood on the streets for you Americans to get your country back from the proto-fascists trying to complete their coup.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:04 pm#6 Gary,
You were totally popped about your inconsistent statements on Abramoff, a month ago you said he was innocent, now you say he is a criminal, which is it?
February 9th, 2006 at 11:32 pmYeah, you all are going to trust a convicted felon here?
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 8, 2006 @ 4:02 pm
Why is it illegal for Jack Abramoff to give money to someone? He gave the legal limit, and he did it without strings.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:43 pmComment by Gary Ruppert — January 3, 2006 @ 12:58 pm
#
Abramoff is a liar who is trying to sink Bush.
Josh Marshall is also a liar, if his stories on Bush’s photos with Abramoff were so true, then why doesn’t he just release the ID to the picture.
He hasn’t done so, which suggests that he made up the stories about scrubbing photos
Comment by Gary Ruppert — February 9, 2006 @ 6:10 pm
#
#5 – whining? are you serious?
abramoff was a college republican just like rover, they knew each other quite well, I guess next you’ll deny that Bush Knows Rove
February 10th, 2006 at 12:25 amI am so convinced that I am right that if ANY indictments are issued regarding this matter… I will place the barrel of flare gun up my ass and pull the trigger…
Posted by: Gary Ruppert on October 15, 2005 at 6:38 PM
this should be quite interesting to see
February 10th, 2006 at 12:26 amYou can be convinced and be wrong
February 10th, 2006 at 12:27 amThe Bush trolls are out in force tonight to try to spin this revelation away, but they will fail to bury it > lol.
February 10th, 2006 at 12:29 am#23,36-CPK. OOOOOHHHHHHHH!!!!! You are a total falsehood spreader!!! For shame!!!!! Silly- Billy! Dean was talking about the RW attempts to drag Democrats into the Abramoff “Blame Trough”. When asked why he thought this, his reply was that they are scared, and that they should be scared. Shame on you, Liar Mouth!!! Lying to demonstrate innocence is oxymoronic behavior. Sheesh. DO OVER!!!
February 10th, 2006 at 2:45 amBono is Brian Peppers!
February 10th, 2006 at 8:15 amAbramoff is a liar who is trying to sink Bush.
Josh Marshall is also a liar, if his stories on Bush’s photos with Abramoff were so true, then why doesn’t he just release the ID to the picture.
He hasn’t done so, which suggests that he made up the stories about scrubbing photos
Comment by Gary Ruppert #6
Scary Pookbutt,
…is lying to himself, so that he doesn’t have to face the fact that that pitiful, stupid face he looks at in the mirror each morning…
…is responsible for betraying his country by supporting
murderous, profiteering, racists hellbent on stealing as much money for their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren…
…at the expense of Scary’s OWN inbred progeny…
…he’s lying because he doesn’t know how to say he’s sorry, and he made a mistake voting Republiscum…
February 10th, 2006 at 11:57 amScrubbing photos? Too rich, man. A conspiracy maybe? Wow, Gary Ruppert is one paraniod theorist.
Why would he hate Bush after giving him so much money? Why indeed……hmmmmmm. Almost always, the obvious answer is the logical answer. For the dullminded, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck… I figure that is probably something you understand. Did you learn anything in school?
February 10th, 2006 at 12:05 pmMr. Ruppert,
Would you please explain on what basis you call Joshua Micah Marshall a liar? I would like to know. Do you have specific examples you could link to or even tell us about?
February 10th, 2006 at 12:09 pmWayne,
Ruppert is an empty shell. There’s no active brain centers capable of answering a rational question. Just forgive him for his partisan slavery – that’s the only appropriate response to the partisan lost souls.
February 10th, 2006 at 7:12 pmKds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 10:17 pmAsian Asian Schoolgirl Asian Porn Stars
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 11th, 2008 at 8:23 am