You say ‘a leaker’, but if multiple people leak at the same time, they’re ALL leakers who the court documents also show acted in a conspiracy to discredit critics you retarded little boy.

They didn’t leak at the same time, and you know this. All fingers point towards Richard Armitage who was at the State Department, and he leaked it completely independently of Libby, who isn’t even being charged with leaking anything. In fact, Fitzgerald claims that Libby is lying for suggesting that he and Russert even talked about it! Armitage “leaked” the info because it was given to him nonchalantly, and he didn’t know that Plame’s job was supposed to be classified. He was pissed off because Wilson was claiming to the press that the State Department received a briefing on his mission, after they had told the CIA not to send him, which led to him blowing off some steam about the whole ridiculous venture. You’d better start understanding this, instead of the drivel you keep getting served around here that doesn’t reflect the facts.

You mean the FIRST leaker. And you seem to forget the reason much of the information is still not disclosed about the entire investigation is because there’s an ONGOING INVESTIGATION you retarded little child… Just because you have some ‘leaked’ information doesn’t mean you have a full grasp of the situation – that would require both facts and intellect, both of which you are consistently deficient of.

Oh no, more ad hominem from Ryan. That’s all you’ve got, kid. Yes, the FIRST leaker, which is the entire point. When something is out, there is no longer any point of calling someone a “leaker”. If I tell someone a secret, then the secret is already out. It doesn’t matter how many other people tell the secret, because I have already told it.

Your consistent use of ad hominem shows that I am breaching the walls of your fragile mind and you cannot stand facing up to the facts, so I must be smeared at all costs. It gets really tiring, Ryan.

Sorry moron, but the ‘transcript’ is still there – you’re just too stupid to realize exactly how STUPID you look.

Transcript? Eh… Lambert misrepresented my argument from the start, and kept doing so. Of course I look foolish when Lambert keeps misrepresenting what I said. It’s called a strawman, and it is the easiest way to make your opponent look foolish. That said, I did make one mistake, where Lambert also made plenty more. What did he do about this? He started censoring every comment where I pointed out his mistakes. So you never get to see all the comments where I take Lambert head on, because he deleted all of them.

Bahaha, now THAT’s funny. Actually he TRASHED you, but you’re so RETARDED you can’t even process that basic reality. Bringing up IRRELEVANT and WRONG information based on a complete ignorance of statistical theory just showed what a rank amateur idiot you are. Your ‘objections’ remind me of the crap you wrote last week about global warming. It’s just the rantings of a stupid little boy, who thinks he’s smart, but who’s too STUPID to know what an idiot they are.

So I guess that’s why most of the commenters there said I had a point in the end, hm? Ryan, let’s face it, you have absolutely no clue about the subject, and you are just taking Lambert’s dishonest misrepresentations at face value because you seem to have something against me. I’d love to discuss the statistical theory with you, because there’s one thing that is fairly obvious: you are completely oblivious to it and have no foot to stand on in saying the things you do here.

You mean as opposed to the usual straw man non-sequiturs that you post, which always have the general ad hominem complaints about stupid liberals, and calling everyone else ‘kids’ while acting like a childish one yourself. Buy a dictionary and look up ‘hypocrite’ and ‘projection’ – it might help you to deal with the beginnings of some very deep ‘interpersonal’ issues you clearly need to work on little guy.

What strawman? Would you like to point out any strawmen I came with? No, you can’t, because I didn’t. I’m acting childish? This coming from a person who never discusses substance, but always uses ad hominem at every chance he gets. Boy, that sure is rich Ryan. You should look up hypocrit and projection yourself, because that’s exactly what you are doing. The only one acting childish here is the one with heavy usage of words such as “stupid” and “retard”.

I assure you it’s not as tiring is a reading the same old REHASHED LIES AND DEBUNKED MYTHS you posted daily as facts… Your BORING ZZZzzzz, and sound like a stupid little high school nerd. Get a girlfriend, drink some beer, and grow up Nerdtron’s retarded cousin.

I’m so boring that you feel compelled to smear me with words such as “stupid”, “retard”, “nerd”, “hypocrit”, and all sorts of other lovely words.

I think it is rather the case that you don’t want my message to be heard, so you smear me without refuting anything I say. As always. You never seek to refute, you only seek to smear. Which is funny, because you claim Bush did the same thing to Wilson.

As for calling me a nerd and all that lovely tripe, you’re the one guzzling Think Progress talking points and smearing people who are interested in having a real debate. I was out Saturday night having a good time. What were you doing? Obsessing about how much you hate George Bush? LOL.

fly-man,

Sexion here is the link I left at our last meeting. Regardless of Joe Wilson being a liar, the final conclusion was made by the CIA on June 17, 2003 before Joe Wilson, Nick Kristoff and who ever you think was conspiring against the administration challenged that the Niger connection to Iraq was dead in the water. Impune as you may, the bottom line is what he disputed was true.

Eh, Wilson leaked to the media in May and June 2003, before the CIA made this memo on June 17. As I already said, the CIA does not have access to the French intelligence that said that Iraq sought uranium from Niger, thus the CIA cannot be sure that the intelligence is solid enough to stand behind it.

And regardless of all that, this was in June 2003. That doesn’t change what was believed at the end of January 2003. The British still stand behind the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium, due to the French intelligence saying that this is so.

None of this gets Wilson off the hook for lying to the press in May and June 2003. He alleged he debunked the forgeries, and that the White House knew they were lying about uranium. None of that turned out to be true, and he lied about it to help the Kerry campaign win the election.

OT- If John Ashcroft (former AG) hadn’t FINALLY been forced into recusing himself, due to a “Conflict of Interest” with his close ties to a potential subject of investigation, Karl Rove, there would not have even been an investigation into the leak, or they wouldn’t have “found” anything to investigate after all. Karl Rove was his campaign manager for the Senate race that he lost to a man who was killed in a small plane crash, right before the election. The same thing that happened to Paul Wellstone right before the next election.

Hitler violated no laws when he gassed millions of Jews – it was LEGAL to do so. It’s an EXTREME version of this argument you have. Determining what laws were broken is hopefully what Fitzgerald is doing currently. It doesn’t change the fact that what the administration did – try to destroy the career and lives of critics – was WRONG. A MORAL RELATIVIST like yourself being more concerned with LEGALITY than MORALITY is exactly what I expect out of a FASCIST RETARD. Why don’t you ask some of your fellow older Norwegians about how it was dealing with german Reichwingers during that period – I’m sure they’ll tell you it’s much like a conversation with you.

That explains why you make such stupid comments – no brain.

You say ‘a leaker’, but if multiple people leak at the same time, they’re ALL leakers who the court documents also show acted in a conspiracy to discredit critics you retarded little boy.

“In fact, Fitzgerald’s court documents have argued that he needs to keep the identity of the leaker a secret to protect them, because they face no criminal charges because they violated no law. Have you been paying attention? Stupidone”

You mean the FIRST leaker. And you seem to forget the reason much of the information is still not disclosed about the entire investigation is because there’s an ONGOING INVESTIGATION you retarded little child… Just because you have some ‘leaked’ information doesn’t mean you have a full grasp of the situation – that would require both facts and intellect, both of which you are consistently deficient of.

“As for Tim Lambert, he misrepresented my argument from the start, and kept lying until the cows came home. I made a mistake, and I rectified it. Stupidone”

Sorry moron, but the ‘transcript’ is still there – you’re just too stupid to realize exactly how STUPID you look.

“In the end, Lambert has nothing to say about the biggest point I came with other than ignoring it. Stupidone”

Bahaha, now THAT’s funny. Actually he TRASHED you, but you’re so RETARDED you can’t even process that basic reality. Bringing up IRRELEVANT and WRONG information based on a complete ignorance of statistical theory just showed what a rank amateur idiot you are. Your ‘objections’ remind me of the crap you wrote last week about global warming. It’s just the rantings of a stupid little boy, who thinks he’s smart, but who’s too STUPID to know what an idiot they are.

“Next time, come with an argument and less of your usual ad hominem BS. Stupidone”

You mean as opposed to the usual straw man non-sequiturs that you post, which always have the general ad hominem complaints about stupid liberals, and calling everyone else ‘kids’ while acting like a childish one yourself. Buy a dictionary and look up ‘hypocrite’ and ‘projection’ – it might help you to deal with the beginnings of some very deep ‘interpersonal’ issues you clearly need to work on little guy.

” I mean, how many times are you going to play the “OMG you’re just so dumb that I don’t even want to bother responding to what you said” gig? Doesn’t it get tiring after the 1000th time? Stupidone”

I assure you it’s not as tiring is a reading the same old REHASHED LIES AND DEBUNKED MYTHS you posted daily as facts… Your BORING ZZZzzzz, and sound like a stupid little high school nerd. Get a girlfriend, drink some beer, and grow up Nerdtron’s retarded cousin.

I remember when conservatives were against big government. Now they want it big, secret, and vindictive.

All I know is, George Bush has done more damage to this country than Bin Laden has. I’m all for arresting them both.

Special knowledge? Everyone who has a brain knows that someone other than Libby is the leaker. In fact, Fitzgerald’s court documents have argued that he needs to keep the identity of the leaker a secret to protect them, because they face no criminal charges because they violated no law. Have you been paying attention?

As for Tim Lambert, he misrepresented my argument from the start, and kept lying until the cows came home. I made a mistake, and I rectified it. In the end, Lambert has nothing to say about the biggest point I came with other than ignoring it. Lambert has invested too much of his own dignity in defending the Lancet study that he has compromised any chance of speaking about the topic neutrally. I have shown that the study is whacked, and if I got a hold of data from UNDP, I could show so conclusively.

Next time, come with an argument and less of your usual ad hominem BS. I mean, how many times are you going to play the “OMG you’re just so dumb that I don’t even want to bother responding to what you said” gig? Doesn’t it get tiring after the 1000th time?

You’re the queen of nonsequiturs aren’t you? You seem to have so much ’special’ knowledge on all of the topics you discuss, why aren’t you working on Libby’s defense?

Your ‘arguments’ are too stupid to even rebut – they’re just nonsense like every load of crap you dump on the internet.

I saw that interchange you had with Tim Lambert on Statistics recently – for someone that ‘claims’ to be a student, you’re embarrassingly stupid.

Hypocrisy? Yes, only when you are ignorant of the facts. Keep it up boys and girls, you are doing just fine.

When the hell you going to learn just to pass over their remarks and let them ramble on until their fingers, brains and assholes get tired.

When you get a brain, come back, but don’t bother until then.

do you know how stupid you sound when you defend a criminal like McCarthy because she is a Democrat?

Do you know how stupid you sound when you say that I sound stupid for defending somebody that I have not defended.

Asshole.

You are treasonous scum.

the left is full of leakers who wish doom on America

Do you know just how stupid you sound when you say shit like this?