David Gregory Unsure Whether Lying Damages Bush’s Credibility With Press
David Gregory Unsure Whether Lying Damages Bush’s Credibility With Press
Days before the election, President Bush told reporters that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney would “remain with him until the end of his presidency, extending a job guarantee to two of the most-vilified members of his administration.”
The day after the election, Bush announced that Rumsfeld was being replaced. Bush admitted that he had talked to Rumsfeld about resigning and was actively searching for his replacement when he promised Rumsfeld would stay on.
Yesterday, NBC’s David Gregory acknowledged that Bush “deliberately misled those reporters.” Russert asked whether that “hurt his credibility with you and the press corps.” Gregory expressed doubt, saying that Bush “laid out his case for why he did it…so I think people see it different ways.” Watch it:
Full transcript below:
MR. GREGORY: Right, well, he deliberately misled those reporters, and he said he did it because he didn’t want to inject politics in the campaign. You have to wonder why–how he could–was there a way to, to get around that question in some fashion so he didn’t have to give that ammunition to people who thought the policy was a failure. And that’s what he did right at the end.
Look, Republicans were worried that the president was talking about the war at all within the last couple weeks of the campaign. He’s saying that he was frustrated, that, you know, that we have to adapt. A lot of people thought, A, that that was too late to realize that, and B, he shouldn’t have been injecting that in the last couple of weeks.
MR. RUSSERT: Does that hurt his credibility with you and the press corps?
MR. GREGORY: Well, I–look, you know, you like to get a straight answer out of the president. He laid out his case for, for why he did it, and there’s no question that would’ve injected politics. So I think people see it different ways.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
88 Responses to “David Gregory Unsure Whether Lying Damages Bush’s Credibility With Press”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Didn't we try to impeach a president for lying? Why is the bar lower for this president than the last one?
Bill lied about sex. Dubya lies about war.
Which is really more harmful to our nation?
November 13th, 2006 at 10:11 amI used to respect David Gregory. What the hell happened to journalism?
November 13th, 2006 at 10:11 amHey, we're so used to it, why isn't the press corpse?
November 13th, 2006 at 10:11 amWhy no, lying through your teeth doesn't hurt credibility......Wait, am I lying when I say this? I am so confused....
/sarcasm off
Seriously, do these people live in imaginary, backwards land where nothing means what it is supposed to mean an more and we the people are just supposed to wait and see if they are going to change their mind and actually tell us what that means? This is completely INSANE!
November 13th, 2006 at 10:14 amYes, some people see a lie as a lie, others see it as a lie.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:15 amdavey -- pretend the lies are about a blowjob. then maybe you and your fellow white house buttboys, er media, might be inclined to do your job.
please, gawd, next time around, a less gullible, cowardly, masochistic white house press corps.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:16 amPresident Bush told reporters that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney would “remain with him until the end of his presidency,
November 13th, 2006 at 10:16 amThe key words are until the end of his presidency
maybe Thief in Charge Bush knows something we don't?
Accountability=Impeachment hearings, phaps?
Just saying.......
I think it's obvious from his tone that David Gregory does agree that the President's credibility has been hurt by declaring his support for Rumsfeld pre-election. Mr. Gregory is reluctant to state this so directly, so he prevaricates. However, I think that this item does deserve to be filed under "Braindead Media." The President has admitted to lying for reasons of pure politics. Of course it should hurt his credibility. Why is the media so reluctant to call it like it is?
November 13th, 2006 at 10:17 amI used to respect David Gregory. What the hell happened to journalism?
Comment by JaneESchneider — November 13, 2006 @ 10:11 am
I have a theory. It's not something you'll want to hear, though.
Reporters have recently been so afraid of reporting the 'bad' side of the Bush Administration because of the solidarity the White House has shown. If a bad word was said or written about Bush, all of a reporters sources inside the White House would clam up immediately. I do have hope that now that the admistration has been knocked down a few rungs, this solidarity is crumbling some.
All it will take now is a few brave reporters who are more concerned about the truth than they are about keeping access to their inside sources.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:19 am#2 "I used to respect David Gregory." I never respected him.
But y'know who I DO respect, Jane??? The New York Jets! That's who! That was a big win yesterday, Jane!
November 13th, 2006 at 10:19 amWhen the administration aka corporate govt controls the media.. Who needs credibility? Report the truth, and end up unemployed.
Even this website is "controlled", ever notice no bad press on Israel? Despite the fact they are the ones with a huge responsibility to world peace, and want nothing to do with peace? Our own is afraid to put their foot down and stop the crap going on over there.
Sad that TP only stands up for what's right when it doesn't concern Jews.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:21 amBush admitted lying, but said in effect that it was for our own good. I'm sure he has never done that before, and if he does, I'm sure it will also be for the right reasons.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:22 amthe only thing Pony Blow has said that i agree with is that david gregory shows off in the press room and then tames himself in front of any other camera. what a tool.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:27 amTranslation: Bush has no credibility with the general press to lose. We just don't want to lose whatever access we might have in order to try to stay somewhat attached to the flow of events.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:29 amDavid Gregory is one of the reporters who has consistently taken the Bush administration to task. Now that he expresses an opinion that many disagree with, he's hung out to dry.
Grow up!
November 13th, 2006 at 10:29 amGregory is right. When you lie as much as Bush does, your credibility is already fairly well shot.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:29 amyeah, funny we impeach bill for lying and for some reason the press and others don't try to understand his reasons for lying. however, if bush lies, and then lies and then lies again and then lies and admits he lies, we do nothing. clinton lies about a personal matter that hurts him, his family and monica. Bush lies about war and 100,000's of thousands of people die....wow. Did i forget to go to class one day and miss that lesson in logic/morals/common sense?
November 13th, 2006 at 10:30 amWhat happened to journalism? The Bush administration changed all the rules and did things their way, such as freezing out reporters who wouldn't say nice things about them by not giving them press credentials (like Maureen Dowd). So what you have left are a bunch of pandering sycophants who like being in with the in crowd, except for Helen Thomas who manages to hang in there and score a few hits. It truly does seem like a Through the Looking Glass nation, to have everyone pile on Clinton because of a BJ with one overly willing consensual adult but give Bush a pass on a war that has killed more than 2,800 Americans and a hurricane that killed hundreds more and displaced thousands. It blows my mind.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:33 amThe above comment on Israel and TP nails it. The Jews control everything, including TP: The Internet, Outer Space, The Media, Global Warming, Disneyland, Oprah, the Weiss Haus with its occupants all crypto-Jews.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:39 amAs compared with other White House reporters, Gregory has been fairly tough with Bush - I saw his wishy-washy response yesterday and while I was disappointed in him, maybe he feels that piling on may not be the way for him to go at this time.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:42 amOn the other hand, since when did Presidential lies receive a pass from the press? Bush has repeated disrespected the press corps, mocked them, and lied to them, but while I am not going to judge Gergory too harshly right now, I am sorely disappointed in the media as a whole in lowering the honesty bar for GWB again.
Bush has no credibility, that's certain - but those in the media will have to get accustomed to reporting it. That will be a new approach for them, but the Bushies are out of power now and exposing them to sunlight shouldn't be so threatening to reporters any more.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:45 amGood thing David Gregory just speaks to us and not for us.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:46 amNudnick, I think you'l find that comes over with more impact in the original German.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:48 amWhat Gregory is saying is that it's ok for Bush to lie if telling the truth would have an effect on politics.
This isn't a lie related to statecraft or policy, it's for political advantage. And that's ok with the press.
Richard Nixon must be turning over in his grave.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:48 amThe fact that polls show many folks would like impeachment are good news for democrats eager to make changes. With that threat hanging over his haed, Bush might be more responsive to change.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:50 amIOKIYAR.
Lying for personal gain is ok because Republicans are bent on retaining power and they really need to lie for that. So, it's ok for now but just for Republicans.
Lying is also ok with some reporters because this is the President of the United States and he is really important and things are going really bad for him. He needs to lie to the press so he can get his message out, even if it's all made up stuff.
For the followers who hold these deceivers in high esteem. We understand. Bush is only lying for your own good, I'm sure. You’re too stupid to understand all the real "secret" reasons Bush needs to lie to you anyway. It’s probably classified. Asking questions is wrong. George Bush will protect you. Lying is just fine, and hey, who needs to see the truth.
This is what it’s like to be a cult member.
This is what it’s like to be a Republican.
No difference.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:58 amIs the Presdient saying he didn't want politics to affect the election? WAHT????
November 13th, 2006 at 11:00 amAs a small point of order: the impeachment of Clinton was not just for lying, but for lying under oath. [That it was the culmination of six years of a GOP attempt to effectively undo two presidential elections does not change the fact that they did have real ammunition.]
I have to say that I don't see what the fuss is about here. What Bush did was clearly part of his electorial philosophy, namely that there is nothing that is out of bounds for a GOP campaign. It's not that this is a good thiing, it's just that it's not anything new. Maybe I'm too cynical, but if the GOP had somehow managed to pull it out, I don't think Rumsfeld would be gone. So I'm not sure this really qualifies as a big lie.
Certainly not compared with what has gone before.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:08 ami guess it doesnt hurt his credibility if your bank account & world view is invested in his credibility.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:09 amYou gotta have credibility in order to lose credibility.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:10 amBush 101: You gotta have credibility in order to lose credibility. Bush doesn't have any.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:11 amGeorge Bush's current lies does not damage his credibility with the press, because George Bush does not have ANY credibility. If George Bush said it was raining outside, I would send someone trustworthy to check.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:12 amDavid Gregory is a spineless wimp to have tried to talk around this issue. This isn't a matter for nuances but for straight forward speech
What will we tell the children?
November 13th, 2006 at 11:13 amWhen Bill Clinton was President, the media presumed that pretty much everything he said was false. When Al Gore and John Kerry were running for President, the media widely portrayed them as liars, even resorting to making up stories to "prove" the point.
But, according to Gregory, when it comes to lying, as long as you have a reason that makes sense to you, IOKIYAR. Where's the liberal media bias in that?
November 13th, 2006 at 11:17 amWhat does the word, "credibility" mean?
"The quality or power of inspiring belief," right?
If you catch someone in a lie, and it doesn't damage his credibility in your eyes, then you're evidently unduly credulous.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:22 am#10, Exley, sorry, missed the game (figures, they only win when I'm not watching.)
November 13th, 2006 at 11:23 amWhy, yes, linda at #6, next time around there will be a less gullible, cowardly, masochistic white house press corps. Because next time around the president will be a Democrat again, and the press will once again be fearless in its skepticism.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:28 amBush didn't want to "politicize" the election?
What about calling Dems all sorts of ugly things which implied they were traitors and would hand the terrists victory and if they too Congress the Merkin people would be at greater risk and be attacked! And whatever negative things came into his lizard brain?
But, he must not have had his hidden earpiece in place for that session. He usually just would answer around the topic or answer his own question.
Sorry--saying that Rummy or any cabinet member serves at the pleasure of the president (however bad the occupant of the office may be) is not political; it is factual. Could such a statement have led to bloviating on the cable shows? Sure, but, hey, if he can't stand the heat, get out of the office.
Now there's an idea.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:29 am#36, Jane...Then maybe you shouldn't watch them anymore...You're bad luck! (Unfortunately I didn't get to see the game either....They don't regularly show the Jets where I live...I have to rely on ESPN highlights)
November 13th, 2006 at 11:32 amIt's pretty obvious to me that what Gregory means is that there was no credibility for Bush to lose. Let's all move on.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:32 amHow hard would it have been for him to say 'I'm not going to discuss that right before an election'?
That would have been an honest answer, and it certainly would have been parsed in the media, but it would not be been a straight-up lie.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:34 amC'mon, between choosing Bush's lying or losing the affable nickname "Stretch", what is he going to choose? Keep in mind this is the press corps that thought Bush looking for WMDs under the podium was hilarious but couldn't quite figure out Colbert's shot at the goofball press corps.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:37 am[...] Watch Video [...]
November 13th, 2006 at 11:39 amLegal difference between Clinton lie and Bush lie: under oath to a grand jury vs. at a press interview.
Why Bush's lie doesn't damage his credibility: we all knew he was a liar anyway. A lie isn't deceptive if you're expected to lie.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:39 amAt this late stage, we expect nothing more than lies and complete incompetence from Bush and his administration and those who's job it is in the press to cover them.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:41 amIf you take Russert's question as an ethical one--then (I guess) there is enough here to get outraged about.
If you take the question as a factual one--Gregory is probably spot on.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:43 am"he did it because he didn’t want to inject politics in the campaign."
oh my god no we can't have politics in an election campaign
November 13th, 2006 at 11:43 amhe did it because he didn’t want to inject politics in the campaign.
No! No! No politics in the campaign!!!!!!!
November 13th, 2006 at 11:44 amOK between Gregory & Russert, it looks like we've got 2 nails trying to find a post so they can claim not to be the stupidest morons on TV.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:44 amDavid Gregory works for the G.E. war machine...nuff said?
November 13th, 2006 at 11:46 amIt's Gregory's cynicism talking - he knows that plenty of Americans (the 31%'ers) don't care whether Dubbie lies or not - hell, they want him to lie...
November 13th, 2006 at 11:55 amWhenever the president speaks, he's either wrong or lying.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:00 pmdear david,
i totally agree with you that it's okay for the president to lie to avoid "injecting politics" into a political campaign. the fact that the injection would have been harmful to the president is beside the point. bush stood on prinicple - the seperation of politics and political campaigns was preserved (if you ignore every other thing the president said to the press during the campaign).
-jethro
November 13th, 2006 at 12:06 pmThis is one of the 3 spears of the devil's fork.
One is the right wing hatemonger false prophet crowd. Another is the greedy faceless multi-national spirit-crushing crowd. And finally the 3rd is this complacent, star-struck, brain-dead, rubber-stamping, lying media. This media, who this guy represents, is the most surprising and infuriating evil of all. Because he is supposed to be looking out for us from the get-go. But they've all been compromised. They've all sold out long ago, the bastards.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:13 pmIt's hilarious to hear Josh Bolton say Bush didn't reveal his plan because 1) it would unfairly politicize the decision and 2) it would undermine Rummy's ability to wage the war and thus endanger our troops.
When has this administration been afraid to politicize any issue in any sphere? And how much worse could things have gotten for our troops in Iraq if Bush had told people a week earlier that he was bouncing Rumsfeld?
If he was serious, and not lying through his teeth, he's deluded beyond belief.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:20 pmNudniq is right on about his comment on Israel. He is dead wrong to blame the Jews. The Isreali hard right clearly does not represent the 100% Jewish position on anything. That said, the American public needs to learn two things.
Israel is not a democracy, but a theocracy.
There is a significant percentage of the population, including in the Israeli armed services, that would welcome some sort of raprochement, leading perhaps to peace, with the caged Palestinians.
Will that happen? God knows, but I sure haven't forgotten the Liberty. Neither should all of you.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:21 pmOh this lie, this is the lie that matters. The guy's been lying his entire presidency. Anything he says, you can assume the opposite is true. But this is the lie?
And another funny thing, I saw this quote today:
"The president correctly decided that this decision does not belong in the political realm. And a decision as important as your secretary of defense should not be made based on some partisan political advantage. It would send a terrible signal to our troops, to our allies, even to our enemies," Bolten said.
Everything this administration has done has been for political advantage so again, not only this a lie but the level of disingenuousness makes one speechless.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:24 pmIt's ridiculous for Bush to claim he didn't want to politicize the election. Not because it would be a bad thing and he is a bad man but rather because that is what elections are about. He didn't plan on losing the election or getting rid of rumsfeld whom he had just claimed would be with him til the end. What a tapdance that was! The question is; if he knew his party would lose congress and firing rummy would've saved the day would he have done it in advance of the elections? I think he would've. For him to claim that he planned on doing it after the election is beyond ridiculous! Don't urinate on me and tell me it's raining.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:26 pmWhenever the president speaks, he’s either wrong or lying.
---- Publicus
Or he is lying about being wrong and lying about the lies, to cover for the lie he lied about when he told the other lie.
This is why I dislike liars so much. And yes, I disliked it when Clinton lied too.
There should be a list of the lies Bush has been caught at so far somewhere on the web.
As I said before, a lie is a lie no matter the excuse.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:31 pmonce credibility is lost, it is almost impossible to gain it back =P
Well. since the defense contractors who own NBC (cough*G.E.*cough) can't profit from the president lying about a BJ the way they can profit from a president lying about a war, you know which way the outrace faucet is always going to flow on that subject
November 13th, 2006 at 12:33 pmGW's commitment to his lies are Costanza-like.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:36 pmWhy are these so called 'Journalists' [cough hack cough] so slow to see a lie?
November 13th, 2006 at 12:37 pmHenry: "Bush admitted lying, but said in effect that it was for our own good. I’m sure he has never done that before, and if he does, I’m sure it will also be for the right reasons."
Henry must be kidding. Please, Henry, be kidding.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:40 pmCrapture, how cynical you are! ô¿ô
November 13th, 2006 at 12:41 pmAnd the 322 club
November 13th, 2006 at 12:46 pmDAVID GREGORY IS ONE OF THE BEST JOURNALISTS VIS A VIS GETTING IN THE FACE OF LIARS (TONY SNOW)
I happen to agree with him on this one. This is a dumb issue. What's he gonna say, 'yeah, we're thinkin over whether rummy stays, and also you know, the under secretary of this-that, and cheney, yeah it's all on the table..." stupid. yes, i agree it would have been better to say some type of 'no comment' ('now before the elections'/whatever), but really i don't care.
Now if we want to talk about lies that were told regarding getting us into war, lies told with regard to keeping us in war, lies told regarding suspending habeus corpus, lies told with regard to the 'strategery' for the war (ie "stay the course"??), lies told regarding torture, lies told regarding global warming, lies told regarding social security,... I'M ALL EARS!!!!!!!!!!
November 13th, 2006 at 12:46 pmBush has a long history of lying to the press so why does this lie become an issue?
So what rock have Russert and Gregory been hiding under for the last six years? Perhaps, if they would bother to fact check once in a while the admission of a lie would not have come as such a shock.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:47 pmTerrytheTurtle, it was a joke.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:47 pmBush is not a King he needs to drop that Noble lie crap. Noble lies are not for our own good -- Noble lies are pursuants of hidden agendas.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:53 pmI have a link somewhere of these 1000 lies...,,,brb
November 13th, 2006 at 12:55 pmThe Media interviewing the media,hmmmm. Thank God David Gregory's opinion matters, I wouldn't have been able to garner the true ramifications of when lying is ok by the most powerful man in the world.
November 13th, 2006 at 1:07 pmAh hell, I can't find it, must be on one of the puters.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/CaughtonFilm.html
This is pretty good still though!
November 13th, 2006 at 1:10 pmWTF?!? Does lying damage a person's credibility? If that doesn't, what the hell does?? If you no longer have any particular reason to be confident that someone is telling you the truth, it means you cannot trust them -- and if you cannot trust them, they no longer have credibility because the very definition of the word credibility is "trustworthiness".
Since Bush was apparently aware in the week preceding the election that Rumsfeld was going to be ousted, why did he deliberately lie to the American people? The only possible answer is party politics, but this is not even remotely sufficient justification. It might have been a little different if he had originally intended to keep Rumsfeld on and then changed his mind after the election -- say, if he interpreted the election results as a criticism of the situation in Iraq. If Bush lied for purely political reasons, there's no reason to assume that he won't do it again -- or even that he hasn't done it before.
November 13th, 2006 at 1:11 pmpolitics? washington is politics, um,um gregory. all of this is about politics. we wouldn't be in iraq if it wasn't for f. up policies(corporate, israel), world domination, oil, wtf? bushyboy and rummdumm look even more stupid now than before election. and frankly it didn't matter, we sent the message.
November 13th, 2006 at 1:14 pmThat's the "liberal media" for you. For lying to his own staff about an embarassing sexual affair, the dean of pundits, David Broder, thinks Clinton should have resigned and stepped down.
Bush lies to the press and the American people about his staff -- whatever.
November 13th, 2006 at 1:51 pmFirst Bush lies before the election about the status of Rumsfeld. Then he lies after the election by telling us he didn't want to inject politics.
Who could ever believe this last lie? This man and his team would do anything possible to effect the election in their favor. They told lies about opposition candidates, call voters to try to confuse them, and pulled any other dirty tricks that they could conceive. What another outright lie to tell us that he didn't want to inject politics into the electtion. Since when has Bush ever taken the higher road?
And worst of all, we've got David Gregory, Chris Wallace and others accepting those lies without calling into question the liars who are telling those lies.
November 13th, 2006 at 3:13 pmJust Some Dude, Please don't confuse "Israel" and "the Jews". They have nothing to do with each other.
November 13th, 2006 at 3:28 pmBecause Jews get, deservedly, a lot of sympathy due to their suffering the Zionists have found Judaism to be a convenient cover for their activities.
Look. I agree with your comments. But these guys aren't eager to be honest about the situation in the WH pressroom because they run the risk of having their access cut off. I think David would rather remain in the room at this point.
I'm not saying it's right. It's WRONG, but it's the reality. For some reason, the word "liar" is not in the press' lexicon.
November 13th, 2006 at 4:00 pmAll it will take now is a few brave reporters who are more concerned about the truth than they are about keeping access to their inside sources.
Comment by bobcat_grad
I don't disagree, but that's the very problem. Why do they want to protect their access to people who are not going to tell them the truth? If you're a reporter and you manage to hook up with an inside source who always tells you the truth even when it contradicts the "official line", you do what you can to protect that source. But the majority of these reporters have been lied to by these inside sources. They should go ahead, ask the tough questions. Why should they care if they lose access to someone who just uses them to support a failure of an administration?
November 13th, 2006 at 5:57 pmLet me answer this one for you, yes, it does matter. Bush is by definition a liar. He has lied over and over and over. And it does not help that he is a stupid bungler who seems hell-bent on squandering the health, wealth and security of our nation.
November 13th, 2006 at 5:58 pmNormally you guys are on the ball, but this time....
Look, aside from Helen Thomas, David Gregory has been one of the ONLY White House press corps members to actually stand out and ask the tough, scary questions. Believe it or not, he's actually on our side -- the side of average Americans (as opposed to the military-industrial complex). He's sharp, articulate and gutsy, and consistently does a superb job.
And so what if he pointed out the obvious fact that Bush's lying is just a-okay with the "shoot a colored for Jay-zuz" set. That 30-odd percent would support him even if he said we needed to invade Canada.
November 13th, 2006 at 6:00 pmI'm sorry but people think of Gregory as being tough on WH simply because holds them somewhat responsible for the ridiculous premises that underlie most of their campaigns and issues. More than anything, I think it's a result of people's bar being lowered as far as what they expect of the mainstream corporate press. If we truly had an attack dog press regardless as to which party is in power, and not owned by gigantic for profit corporations like they are, a press whose job is to inform the public free of ideological bias (including being blindly pro-corporate and capitalist) Gregory would be pretty moderate. As it is, he occasionally confronts the WH press secretary when they say things that are beyond delusional. I'll take it but don't think he's the second coming of IF Stone or will challenge Bush or the right wing on things like trade, healthcare or anything else. Someone like that will won’t last long within the corporate press and will be squeezed out.
November 13th, 2006 at 6:51 pmThe Cable Infotainment Channels Are not News Channels
In the same manner that Kyl, Brownback and Graham lied to the Supreme Court and attempted to lie to three federal appeals courts, it was accepted that Republicans see nothing wrong with lieing.
Kyl's explanation was that the dumbass voters don't understand how the Senate works. McCain was head cheerleader in the recent campaign and foound no fault with Party Members that lie.
NBC lost any jounalistic integrity many years ago.
November 13th, 2006 at 7:30 pmBush could take a bucket of piss and dump in on David's head, and David would still praise him.
November 13th, 2006 at 8:52 pmBorat makes more sense than Tim Russert
November 13th, 2006 at 10:11 pmIf lying doesn't hurt your credibility, you don't have any.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:38 pmWhat credibility? Honestly, if this is where Bush lost credibility for you, you ain't been paying attention. So, I would have to agree; this lie, about the ten millionth hasn't done anything to damage Bush's non-existent credibility.
November 14th, 2006 at 5:01 pmI don't think he has had any credibility to speak of for quite some time. I AM glad to see that the softball questions are stopping, which was evident in the "concession" speech Bush gave on 11/8. God, did he look uncomfortable, and man, did that comfort me. Although I WISH for impeachment, I think I could take even more comfort in letting him writhe in torment until the end of his term. Then we can deliver him to the Hague :)
November 15th, 2006 at 6:33 am