Congressman Who Defends Rove’s Refusal To Testify Calls On President Clinton To Testify
Congressman Who Defends Rove’s Refusal To Testify Calls On President Clinton To Testify
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, says it’s perfectly acceptable for Karl Rove and other top White House aides to refuse testifying over the U.S. Attorney scandal.
Smith didn’t show up to last week’s hearing when the Judiciary Committee authorized subpoenas against Rove and others. He called the session “political grandstanding” and said he would not help “provide votes for political subpoenas.”
Smith’s principled aversion to political grandstanding and belief in executive privilege was again on display yesterday, when he wrote a public letter to President Clinton asking him to testify about presidential pardons. An excerpt:
Dear President Clinton,
The House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security will hold a hearing on Thursday, March 29, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in room 2141 of the Rayburn House Office Building on the appropriate use of the presidential pardon authority. I would like to inquire as to your availability to testify at this hearing. […]
You are no stranger to controversial pardons, most notably the pardon of Marc Rich on your last day in office. I can think of no better person than you to speak on this issue. I believe your experience with exercising the pardon authority and defending it from intrusion by Congress would be invaluable to Members of the Subcommittee and I hope you are available to join us for this important hearing.
So, calling on Karl Rove to testify about a scandal involving possible illegal actions after evidence shows Rove and his deputies played a direct role is “political grandstanding.” This letter to Clinton isn’t.
For what it’s worth, President Clinton’s spokesman says Clinton is traveling on Thursday and won’t be available to attend the hearings.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Clinton Obsessive Disorder again rears its ugly head.
Please say tuned for an informative public service announcement:
March 27th, 2007 at 11:04 amWTF is wrong with people from TX??
Can the please leave the union and join Mexico!
March 27th, 2007 at 11:06 amsince the congressman is so interested in the marc rich pardon, i hope he has also sent an invitation to scooter libby — marc rich’s lawyer and instrumental in arranging that pardon.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:09 amLamar Smith is a jerk. I was in his district for a few years after Tom DeLay’s redistricting fiasco split up Austin. Fortunately, the boundaries were recently moved again, so I’m back in Lloyd Doggett’s district again where I actually feel like I’m being well represented (and my Doggett sticker is proudly displayed on my car).
March 27th, 2007 at 11:09 am#2 Crawford, TX…
…should be attacked…
March 27th, 2007 at 11:10 amoh you poor liberals, he is just playing the same politics that your party is playing.
yes, both this and Democrats wanting Karl Rove to testify are political and a political show.
but amazing how you guys cry about this…
what is good for the Democrats, it is good for the Republicans, right?
or no????
March 27th, 2007 at 11:14 amWhat a loser. Is being a hypocrite an absolute requirement to be a Republican? It sure seems that way.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:14 amtripmaster,
don’t worry, Bush Derrangement Syndrome is rampant amongst your party.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:14 amJake,
March 27th, 2007 at 11:15 amJust be glad Texas did not exercise the option given by the US when it joined to split itself into 5 states (with 10 senators). And besides, Texas tried to secede from the Union a while back along with other southern states, but Mr. Lincoln wouldn’t have it.
howsad sez:
Bush Derangement Syndrome is rampant throughout this administration, howsad…it’s why we’re in the position we’re in.
But by all means, keep whistling in the dark…
March 27th, 2007 at 11:19 am“don’t worry, Bush Derrangement Syndrome is rampant amongst your party.”
accountability makes some people so defensive.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:19 amI have a poopy diaper.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:23 ampgw,
you mean the same accountability that the Clinton administration refuse to give a Republican Congress?
please, stop your crying…
TripMaster, if you had a clue to what you hold, Bush Derangement Syndrome is you would have been so dumb as to use it as you did.
A for effort, but F for stupidity. nice try youngen.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:23 amoh you poor liberals, he is just playing the same politics that your party is playing.
yes, both this and Democrats wanting Karl Rove to testify are political and a political show.
but amazing how you guys cry about this…
what is good for the Democrats, it is good for the Republicans, right?
or no????
Comment by howsad
Howsad that you have reversed in your petty mind the order of events. Anyone but a hardheaded neoCON could see that the Rethugs are merely about to get a taste of their medicine.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:24 ambig papa sez:
big papa, attacking Crawford, TX for the misdeeds of this administration is a lot like attacking Universal Studios after seeing U-571.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:24 amSo, it’s O.K. if Clinton refuses to testify?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:25 amAnother example of how “Republicanism” trumps Country, Constitution, Accountability, Honesty, Ethics, and just plain old doing the right thing.
GOPocrites.
“But but but Clinton did X (where x is 1/10,000 th of what Bush has done) so even steven you can’t go there”
March 27th, 2007 at 11:25 amJake,
Clinton has been out of office for 6+ year now, should you “get over it”?
I’ll go ahead and make the following prediction: Bush’s Pardons in January 2009 will make Clinton’s pardons look like child’s play.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:26 amThe GOPer Congressman must resign today in disgrace!
March 27th, 2007 at 11:27 amA mental midget trying to deflect attention from yet another Bush scandal.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:27 amhowsad…..the perfect name for a republican.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:28 amhowsad sez:
The STUPID is strong with this one.
Get back to us when you can hammer out a cogent sentence. Kthx.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:30 am“you mean the same accountability that the Clinton administration refuse to give a Republican Congress?”
i’ll assume that you meant ‘refused’ and that you’re not obsessively living in the past.
“So, it’s O.K. if Clinton refuses to testify?”
i thought you were a good southern baptist. why do you keep pickin’ on a fellow southern baptist?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:30 am“don’t worry, Bush Derrangement Syndrome is rampant amongst your party.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:14 am”
Actually we have LEGAL facts to backup our issues with Bush.
1) Election tampering.
2) Treason - Failure to stop 9/11. AF1 was threatened by coded language “Angel is next”, which means that the threat came from within the government. Bush did not try to stop the attacks. This makes him a part of the crime. And since the attacks by our own government was TREASON he is also part of that.
3) Illegally starting a war. Against the UN Charter, which required a resolution from the UN. Hence, Bush has performed WAR CRIMES.
4) Lying to Congress.
5) Manipulating intelligence data to gain support for a war.
6) Illegal Warrantless Wiretapping. Which he put in motion only 3 weeks after getting into office. Which makes it a CONSPIRACY against the citizens of the US.
7) Torcher. Defying the Geneva Conventions, which we are a signator on and this makes it part of our law.
I could go on….. But I this should clearly define the difference between Bush and Clinton.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:30 amoh you poor liberals, ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
March 27th, 2007 at 11:31 amSorry but it isn’t us poor liberals being convicted in droves and being forced to leave office. Why do you conservatives love felons so much? Your love affair with Newt and Delay and the hundreds of others baffles me.
If I was Clinton, I’d write back about how I’d be more than happy to testify…as soon as all the White House aides get done.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:31 amRobert:
The topic of the thread IS Clinton, you did see that, right?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:33 amyou poor liberals….stopy crying kids.
you Dumbocrats are as stupid as they come.
if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
look atyour Dumbocrats going crazy because your god Clinton has been called to testify about his misdeeds during his administration.
As I said in another post, the SS had the same devotion to Hitler that you Dumbocrats have towards your god Clinton.
your poor children of the Clinton’s look how you do their will….
March 27th, 2007 at 11:33 ampgw:
Even Southern Baptists aren’t perfect ; )
March 27th, 2007 at 11:34 amSo, it’s O.K. if Clinton refuses to testify?
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 11:25 am
Huh?
Clinton hasn’t done anything wrong. They are asking for his help.
Karl Rove, however, is under suspiction for wrong doing and should be held accountable.
See the difference?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:35 amIs the state of Texas the equivalant to the Gelapagos islands?
It seems to me that the state of Texas has more than its share of creatures that somehow missed a few steps in the evolutionary process.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:35 amckerst,
you may want to look into the legal problems of the Clinton White House, you will find that the Clinton White House as of today has the largest number of indicted and convicted members of any prior or current administration.
i know, history is not a liberal’s forte, but I thought I try.
RemoveBush,
you are the typical deranged Bush hater, keep on dreaming kid. If you had such a clear cut case as you claim, Democrats would have already impeached Bush, right?
so keep on dreaming son.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:36 amJay Randall:
Now, why do you think he should resign? 1) He supports Executive Privilege or 2) He wants a former President (no longer covered under Executive Privilege) to testify?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:36 amThis is just like Westmoreland asking Plame if she were a Democrat or Republican and also (after the fact) saying that Gore attending Boxer’s Committee was somehow against the Rules.
Maybe we should stop levelling the charge of politics against politicians. Its silly and everybody does it in everything they do.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:36 amIf I was Clinton, I’d write back about how I’d be more than happy to testify…as soon as all the White House aides get done.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — March 27, 2007 @ 11:31 am
Touche!
March 27th, 2007 at 11:37 am“Even Southern Baptists aren’t perfect ; )”
so you’re a southern baptist too?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:37 amJake,
I meant that you and the Bush Excusing, no accountability GOP should really get over the “Clinton did it too” pathetic excuse meme. It really is becoming a national joke.
howsad,
Are you a parody?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:39 amyou mean the same accountability that the Clinton administration refuse(SIC) to give a Republican Congress?
please, stop your crying…
TripMaster, if you had a clue to what you hold, Bush Derangement Syndrome is you would have been so dumb as to use it as you did.
A for effort, but F for stupidity. nice try youngen.
Comment by howsad —
Says the troll who can’t even write a coherent sentence. F for effort, F- for idiocy.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:41 amBTW, I can’t stop doing something I haven’t even been doing (crying). Don’t project your own sad-self on others.
Shawn,
Plame is a Democrat. It is well known that she wrote a check, using the CIA’s covert company name, for $1,000 for the Al Gore campaign.
and yes, this is political grandstanding as much as Democrats wanting Rove to testify.
I just think it is funny how obssesed Democrats are with Karl Rove, he is such a boogey man for them.
BOO! Democrats, Karl Rove is going to get you. Don’t turn off your lights, rove might just be around the netxt corner. careful now, careful. Behave well or the Boogeyman, Karl rove will get you tonight. hahahahahahahaha!!!
poor paranoid, delusional libbies, fun to play with their simple minds.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:41 amwhat a punk-ass, is this guy Jean Schmidt’s boy-toy???
is there no bottom to Texas’s moral barrel????
March 27th, 2007 at 11:42 am“RemoveBush,
you are the typical deranged Bush hater, keep on dreaming kid. If you had such a clear cut case as you claim, Democrats would have already impeached Bush, right?
so keep on dreaming son.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:36 am”
Umm…. NO!
Articles of Impeachment have been written….. Conyers did it during the 109th Congress. I don’t know what they are waiting for, but the items I described are FACT. The only ones that might be arguable are items #1.
The rest are 100% FACTS!! SON!!!
I’m not your SON! I’m probably older than you, you little twit!
Care to dispute the FACTS, or are you gonna just run and showt words with your lying lips like a 2 year old?
Dispute the evidence with FACTS. I have all the evidence to support what I claim, do you have evidence to support your stance?
Back up your words!
March 27th, 2007 at 11:43 amI just think it is funny how obssesed Democrats are with Karl Rove, he is such a boogey(SIC) man for them.
Blather by howsad
Says the sad-sack who still can’t get over Clinton, some six years since he left office.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:44 am#12 - Finally we hear the truth from this sad person!
March 27th, 2007 at 11:44 amhowsad can’t accept how hopelessly screwed the gopers are.
denial is a powerful defense mechanism.
definite “manson family values” type, this poor, deranged, angry thing called howsad…
March 27th, 2007 at 11:45 amPlame is a Democrat. It is well known that she wrote a check, using the CIA’s covert company name, for $1,000 for the Al Gore campaign.
Comment by howsad
Prove it
March 27th, 2007 at 11:45 amPlease provide a reliable source with your link.
Back up your statements, Lamer Troll.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:33 am
Do I hear the tears of a clown?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:46 amA few of the Bush crew members
http://www.citizensforethics.org/execcorruption/
March 27th, 2007 at 11:47 amRequesting an active, paid, civil servant to testify before congress and requesting a private citizen to testify are two complete different things.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:47 amBut accountability is just something the GOP talks about but doesn’t really care about. “Bringing Honor and Integrity tot he White House” - bwa ha ha ha ha.
removebush….
articles of impeachment have been written? hahahaha!!!
and do you think this impeaches a President, writing the articles? any buffoon in Congress can write articles of impeachment son, it takes the majority of Congress voting on it to impeach the President.
Son, if you think a majority of Congress will vote to impeach the President you are dreaming….hahaha!! plus impeachment means indicment, it doesn’t remove the President from power. You would still have to have a trial. You poor libbies, so hateful, so full of venom, so full of stupidity and idiocy.
keep on dreaming and it is obvious you have ZERO clue to how congress works, but i am sure it is good to dream for any and all delusional whacked out left wing kooks.
here are my facts, you are a left wing kook, delusional and hysterical. Your facts are jokes and pathetic dreams from left wing kooks. there, I win, you lose, go home and cry to mommy.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:49 am“Plame is a Democrat. It is well known that she wrote a check, using the CIA’s covert company name, for $1,000 for the Al Gore campaign.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:41 am”
The Bush supporters just keep showing HOW STUPID THEY ARE!!!!!!
You do realize that she listed her COVER company????? She did not write a check that had the CIA address!!! Her cover company was Brewster Jennings….. Why would she write a check under anything else????? That shows that she was following her training by stating her job was with Brewster Jennings…..
You people are not just that bright are you?????
March 27th, 2007 at 11:50 amunbelievable:
You think there was nothing wrong with Marc Rich and his wife “buying” a Presidential pardon?
pgy:
Yes. ALL have fallen short of the glory of God.
Robert:
I’ll stick to the THREAD TOPIC, thank you very much. Perhaps you should (re-)read the topic if you are unsure of why we are discussing it:
http://thinkprogress.org/ 2007/ 03/ 27/ lamar-clinton/ #comments
March 27th, 2007 at 11:50 amAre you a parody?
Comment by Robert — March 27, 2007 @ 11:39 am
I’m starting to wonder if Howsad is actually Ann Coulter.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:50 amBooHooHoo, Plame is a Democrat. When has that become a crime? Along with donations from a covert company. That’s covert son, they don’t advertise they are the CIA. So if it was a republican agent we’d have a problem? Wilson had worked for both republican and democratic administrations. What does that make him? A double agent?
howsad twists in the wind and has less to stand on than Bush’s offical Military records.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:50 amhowsad:
Not sure if they will believe this source, but you can also look up Plame’s campaign constributions directly on the web now:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ ac2/ wp-dyn/ A40012-2003Oct3?language=printer
March 27th, 2007 at 11:53 am“Yes. ALL have fallen short of the glory of God.”
i guess so. last week, you said you were a catholic.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:53 amPersonally I find the sort of deranged behavior exhibited by koolaid drinkers like howsad to be rather disturbing. This person is the ultimate follower, the kind of person who would have followed Hitler to the very end.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:55 ampgw:
Perhaps that was the fake Jake?
March 27th, 2007 at 11:56 amAll I want to know is this, how in the heck do people like this get elected. Just one look at him tho and you know he is a dipsh*t.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:56 amhellinabucket,
you idiot, why would a covert agent, who was so covert and no one supposedly knew that she worked at the CIA, expect of course the Cubans and the USSR, oh and don’t forget anyone that followed her to work, would write a check using the name of a covert company to Al Gore, thus making the company public?
THINK MCFLY! THINK! use the rats running your squeaky wheel for something.
and Bush’s military record? much better than Clinton running to the USSR and marching against the Vietnam War.
do tell, where is Clinton’s military record?
tick, tock, tick, tock……I take it you believe Clinton should have never send any American soldier into war or battle since he never served, right? I mean the rat not only didn’nt serve he ran away like a coward.
do tell oh ill-informed one.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:57 amJust read the comment by howsad…he sure as heck is sad. Sad that republicans are supposed to run wild, destroy the county, start unprovoked wars and nothing is to be done about it. BUT just let someone try to hold that accountable and butts like howsad complain…sad sad sad a true sadsack.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:58 amhowsad - you go crying to mommy - that’s the right wing way.
stop trying to drag everyone into your UTTERLY IRRELEVANT pseudo-arguments.
you’re like the dickhead loud-talker at the movies who won’t shut up.
ps - republican’t SUCK - they lost BIG last fall, and they’re going to lose EVEN BIGGER in 08 and you know it!!!!
March 27th, 2007 at 11:58 am“why would a covert agent, who was so covert and no one supposedly knew that she worked at the CIA, expect of course the Cubans and the USSR, oh and don’t forget anyone that followed her to work, would write a check using the name of a covert company to Al Gore, thus making the company public?
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:57 am”
BECAUSE YOU MINDLESS BLATHERING IMBISILE!!!! It was her covert company!!!!
Rather than listing the CIA, which would have BLOWN her cover…… What did she do???? She used the company that was her cover…..
Boy imagine that….. So I guess all the spys out there don’t have business cards and checks from companies that don’t exist and pass those off all the time?????
MORON!!!!
March 27th, 2007 at 12:01 pmdoesn’t seem that way.
“TripMaster Monkey:
As I told you before, there are more possibilities —
for instance, it could be BOTH poisonous
disingenuousness and terminal stupidity.
pgw:
Did you so note every time some liberal here called
the Attorney General †Speedy Gonzales� I didn’t
think so. Since I have admitted to that, yes, I did
vote for JFK and, being Catholic myself, I’ve got
plenty of funny Catholic jokes.
Comment by Jake — March 19, 2007 @ 1:18 pm”
“CONservative:
Southern Baptist here too — we are going to have to
agree to disagree that Bush is anywhere close to a
KING though (for instance, we know, worse case
scenario, his term ends January 20, 2009 ; )
Comment by Jake — March 26, 2007 @ 4:33 pm”
March 27th, 2007 at 12:01 pmCaption Contest: If you think I look like a dipshit you should see the rest of my family!
IF YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR
Howsad that these pukes are still lying about lying.
Howsad that they think protecting Rove is protecting America.
Howsad that politicizing the Justice Dept. is being defended at all.
Howsad that even Republican attorneys aren’t Republican enough.
Howsad that Gonzales is still using the Libby defense, CRS.
(CRS = Can’t Remember Shit)
Howsad that Gonzales uses ‘integrity’ to explain lies.
Howsad that they have to use the 5th to avoid telling the truth.
Howsad that we still have Bushlickers defending something they know is wrong.
Howsad that you even have to read this post.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:02 pmVerbalkint,
don’t worry, I find that liberals like you who drink the left wing Kool Aid to be complete morons that don’t realize that theya re the actual mindless followers of the left.
what you spew has been spewed by countless liberals long before you opened your mouth.
sad, truly sad and quite pathetic that you would think you, as a liberal, hold an original thought.
put down the Kool Aid kid and walk away slowly…..put it down! c’mon now, I know you can do it, I know you are addicted to it, but you can do it Verbalkint.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:03 pmhowsad:
They don’t even realize that Rep. Smith is being COMPLETELY CONSISTENT: 1) He supports Executive Privilege and 2) He wants a former President (no longer covered under Executive Privilege) to testify — kinda funny, don’t you think?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:03 pmwould write a check using the name of a covert company to Al Gore, thus making the company public?
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:57 am
It’s not even noon yet, and we already have a solid contender for stupidest comment of the day.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:04 pmHeh heh heh…nice catch, pgw.
Hoisted on his own petard…again. His petard-hole must be getting sore. ^_^
March 27th, 2007 at 12:04 pmhowsad, indeed: you idiot, why would a covert agent, who was so covert and no one supposedly knew that she worked at the CIA, expect of course the Cubans and the USSR, oh and don’t forget anyone that followed her to work, would write a check using the name of a covert company to Al Gore, thus making the company public?
It’s a cover name, therefore it is the public name. The whole idea of a covert company is that it is the public face, with no indication at all that it was a CIA front - right up until the moment Plame was outed. Why is this so freakin’ difficult for wingnuts to comprehend?
She made a political contribution and had to list her employer. Would you have liked her to list “CIA”? Are you truly that stupid?
If you have problems with the fact that some CIA employees actually work at the CIA while maintaining the appearance of working somewhere else, I suggest you take it up with the CIA. Plame is hardly the only such covert employee.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:04 pmclinton should’ve set himself up as a princeling in the Air Nat’l Guard and used his uniform to get people to buy him drinks and women to sleep with him while he was awol in another state helping one of his Dad’s creepy old buddies get re-elected - that’s how real commanders in chief do it!!
March 27th, 2007 at 12:06 pmSorry, pgw. That was the fake Jake — I would never admit to being BOTH poisonous disingenuous and terminally stupid either!!!
March 27th, 2007 at 12:06 pmRemoveBush….
hahahahaha!!! and anyone with a small brain would know that once she wrote that check and gave it to the Al Gore campaign the company’s name was made public and once the address of the company was checked, and its physical buildings and offices were checked, guess where it would have led to?
get a clue kid, get a clue!
oh wait, Plame was so covert that the Cubans and the USSR knew who she was….my bad libbies.
anyway, what the hell do you mindless drones care about the CIA, you left wing ‘tards have attacked the CIA for decades, you little ones should be glad that a supposed covert agent was uncovered, right?
oh, how fun it is too see how you little ones drink the left wing Kool Aid.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:06 pmPlame was so covert that Patrick Fitzgerald actually prosecuted someone because she was covert and that someone gave up her cover….
do tell, who did Patrick Fitzgerald prosecute for this crime?
tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock…….
March 27th, 2007 at 12:07 pmKinda ironic, though, that I am the one trying to stick to the THREAD TOPIC here ; )
March 27th, 2007 at 12:07 pmIt’s a cover name, therefore it is the public name… Are you truly that stupid?
Comment by gummitch — March 27, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
The answer is yes. Howsad’s confusion over the meanings of covert and public in this situation indicates extreme, breathtaking stupidity.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:07 pmJake,
as I have always said, liberals are good for two things, to pity them or to point at them and laugh at their immense stupidity.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:08 pmHere’s the THREAD TOPIC again:
Congressman Who Defends Rove’s Refusal To Testify Calls On President Clinton To Testify
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, says it’s perfectly acceptable for Karl Rove and other top White House aides to refuse testifying over the U.S. Attorney scandal.
Smith didn’t show up to last week’s hearing when the Judiciary Committee authorized subpoenas against Rove and others. He called the session “political grandstanding†and said he would not help “provide votes for political subpoenas.â€
Smith’s principled aversion to political grandstanding and belief in executive privilege was again on display yesterday, when he wrote a public letter to President Clinton asking him to testify about presidential pardons. An excerpt:
So, calling on Karl Rove to testify about a scandal involving possible illegal actions after evidence shows Rove and his deputies played a direct role is “political grandstanding.†This letter to Clinton isn’t.
For what it’s worth, President Clinton’s spokesman says Clinton is traveling on Thursday and won’t be available to attend the hearings.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:09 pmcan we give texASS to mexico?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:10 pmPlame was such a covert agent that anyone that followed her to work every morning would have known that she wors for the CIA.
she was so covert that it was public knowledge that Cuba and the USSR knew who she was….
better yet, she was so covert and secret that she did a whole Vanity Fair photo op whiel supposedly still covert….
you poor, poor, poor brainwashed left wing kooks…..put down the Kool Aid, you guys will start sounding educated and smart for a change.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:10 pmComment by VerbalKint #7
I dunno Verbal…
…after reading some of the posts on the Tony Snow thread…
…(glad I didn’t see YOUR moniker among them)…
…but there’s some pretty clear HYPOCRISY going on…
…over there…
…and it ain’t from the right wing inbreds…
…Only Juan C…
…(and one or two others)…
…held tight…
March 27th, 2007 at 12:10 pmOkay, Jake, back on-topic: Lamar Smith is just another flaming Republican hypocrite pandering to those like you and howpathetic suffering from COD.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:12 pm“Plame was so covert that Patrick Fitzgerald actually prosecuted someone because she was covert and that someone gave up her cover….
do tell, who did Patrick Fitzgerald prosecute for this crime?
tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock…….
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 12:07 pm”
Not that this will sink into that one cell brain of yours…… But here goes…..
Fitzgerald had to stop the investigation because the WH, Rove, and mainly Libby was obstructing justice. He had to stop the main investigation and focus only on the obstruction.
As he stated…. “it was like being an umpire and having dirt thown in your eyes”.
So in order to get to ANY facts, he had to pursue another route!!!
Your definately are not a very smart individual!!! About as smart as a pounded thumb.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:13 pmsadsack, you must win every argument in your own head. It just doesn’t translate well out in the real world. You are such a doink. It’s already been shown that Plame thru her COVERT COMPANY. There is no crime there, only your obsession to blindly attack anything that goes against Dubya.
I believe I have told you already, sack of shit, that I’m not here to defend Clinton. Didn’t vote for him and he’s not the problem now. So you half assed ramblings of a braindead Bushlicker falls helplessly to the ground.
As for Bush’s military record. It’s a shame. He was snorting coke and sleeping in piss soaked beds while working on one of Daddy’s friends campaign instead of serving the country. You do realize, bile breath, that there is a standing $10,000 reward for anyone with postive proof Bush was at the military base as he said he was. That’s $10,000 for anyone and no takers so shut your pie hole on comparing Bush with anyone other than his own fruadulent record.
Jeesh your an ass. Tick, Tick, Tick. That’s the clock thats running out on this administration.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:13 pmSounds like the gang of Pedis are trying to brain storm how best to spin their inevitable flood of pardons. So of course they want to pick the brain of the Master.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:13 pmFYI, I don’t read anything written in all bold or all caps. Just saying.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:13 pm“That was the fake Jake”
it really doesn’t look that way if you go back and look at the threads:
http://thinkprogress.org/ 2007/ 03/ 19/ white-house-hopes-gonzales-stays/
http://thinkprogress.org/ 2007/ 03/ 26/ gonzales-aide-sampson-to-invoke-fifth-amendment/ #comments
March 27th, 2007 at 12:13 pmA for effort, but F for stupidity. nice try youngen.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:23 am
F for effort, but F for stupidity. nice try youngen.
Obviously.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:15 pmI was kind of hoping Clinton would testify. Been a long time since the Big Dog reminded little weasels like Lamar Smith why they could never get him.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:15 pmAlso, now that Bill Clinton and Poppy Bush have formed a travelling road show, Bill could have brought Poppy along to explain Cap Weinberger and all the other pardons he issued to cover his sorry ass the last time a Bush president decided to ignore the Constitution. It could have been such a timely reminder.
Hey big pappa, many negative and borderline comments about Tony Snow were scrubbed clean.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:15 pmThe topic of the thread IS Clinton, you did see that, right?
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 11:33 am
Actually Jake, the thread is about the charge from Smith et al that the Gonzo business is grandstanding whereas Smith’s calling Clinton to testify about presidential pardons is a much better example of grandstanding. I know, I know, you can’t see how Gonzo or Bush have done anything wrong but from my vantage point, the firing of eight prosecutors is very suspicious.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:16 pmThe Republic Party is certainly running on empty these days. I wonder if, when the current nightmare is over on January 20, 2009, they will start saying “Bush did it”?? Or would that be partisan politics?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:16 pmDid you so note every time some liberal here called
the Attorney General †Speedy Gonzales� I didn’t
think so. Since I have admitted to that, yes, I did
vote for JFK and, being Catholic myself, I’ve got
plenty of funny Catholic jokes.
Comment by Jake — March 19, 2007 @ 1:18 pmâ€
“CONservative:
Southern Baptist here too — we are going to have to
agree to disagree that Bush is anywhere close to a
KING though (for instance, we know, worse case
scenario, his term ends January 20, 2009 ; )
Comment by Jake — March 26, 2007 @ 4:33 pmâ€
Comment by pgw
Nice catch on Liar Jake, pgw.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:16 pmWonderful dialog going on here. Insults flying back and forth like monkeys flinging their own feces. It’s like watching an argument between 8 year olds about which superhero is better, batman or spiderman.
Meanwhile, many more Iraqis are dead. More American service members are dead. More billions of dollars are being pilfered from the treasury (through debt to our children and grand children and great grandchildren) by war profiteers and heinous characters. And a potential “Gulf of Tonkin” incident is unfolding right before our very eyes threatening to ignite the unnecessary tinderbox that is the Iran situation.
But I guess we don’t talk about the difficult and serious subjects with civility and compassion anymore. Instead we engage in an online version of Desperate Housewives seeing who can hold their plastic badges of morality above the others. Badges dripping with the blood of innocents murdered for our greed and arrogance and reeking of the stench of torture and oppression.
Welcome to the new Amerika where it is more important to know whether a gold-digging media whore is still dead or the flavor of the month trailer trash slut is still flashing her coochy all over town or going for another stint in rehab. I guess we all have adopted the matriarch of trailer trash, Barbara Bush’s, approach in not wanting to bother our beautiful minds with the reality of the hundreds of thousands of innocent lives that we have brutally extinguished, instead opting for the more cerebral ponderings such as whether or not Heather Mills leg will fly off during her televised dance competition.
How fast we have gone from a promising society pursuing enlightenment to the dim bulbs of the galaxy.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:17 pmAnyone (NOT on the “Ignore List”) want to actually, you know, discuss the topic?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:17 pmClinton should testify along with George H. Bush, Sr. Let’s get daddy’s testimony about Iran Contra and see how it relates to this issue.
In fact maybe we should dig up Reagan and prop him up too. He can’t remember any less than he did the last time he testified.
How about we get Nancy Reagan to testify. Since Ronnie obviously didn’t have a clue she probably knows who was really holding down the fort.
I’m sure Clinton would be happy to testify alongside these others. And Scooter Libby as Marc Rich’s attorney of course.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:19 pmpgw:
I just ignore the fake Jake — no need to let him / her get you riled up either.
Jim:
Yes, back on topic — federal investigators looking at both George H.W. Bush and Clinton’s pardons determined there was nothing that either could have been charged with — I will agree with you that Clinton should have testified though. I think bothering 83 year olds with the issue is a bit of a stretch.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:21 pm#85
…obviously you do…
March 27th, 2007 at 12:21 pmComment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:33 am
March 27th, 2007 at 12:23 pmyour poor children of the Bush Reich, look how you do their will….
Anyone (NOT on the “Ignore Listâ€) want to actually, you know, discuss the topic?
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
Go ahead, Jake… make my day.
or wait!
Are you feelin’ lucky, punk?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:23 pmJake, Doesn’t Executive Privilege only relate to communications between the president and another. Not between two or more members of his staff. This won’t fly and all Bush is doing is stalling. Notice the groundswell of support from the Republicans. As the next election draws closer they will move farther away from Dubya.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:23 pmI wonder if the 33% are as infantile as the party they support?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:23 pmAnyone (NOT on the “Ignore Listâ€) want to actually, you know, discuss the topic?
Comment by Jake
Why would anyone wish to discuss anything with a proven liar Jake?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:23 pmSeems you have more in common with the Liar in Chief Bush than we previously thought.
Not one word from you is to be trusted.
kickthebucket,
I am laughing at your huge stupidity and Kool Aid drinking….of course you don’t care for Clinton…hahaha!! so said all liberals that voted for him and salivate when his image appears on television.
I see you have grabbed on to the whacked out, delusional conspiracy theories about Bush and run with them as if they were fact. Typical of a delusional loser.
It must suck for you to wake up each morning and find out that you are still you.
careful kickthebucket, don’t take off your tin foil hat….Karl Rove will get you!
hahaha!! fun to play with your simple mind.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:23 pmif flake-o’s and howsads are all they have left, Righty is in a Big Old World of Hurt.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:24 pmComment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 11:33 am
The topic of the thread IS Republican stupidity, you did see that, right? I gues he still doesn’t get it.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:24 pmYikes:
I would love to discuss that as well — did you see my point above that Rep. Smith is being completely consistent? Assuming he is, that goes a long ways to answer the question of whether he is grandstanding, don’t you?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:24 pmThe only reason for the hearing on presidential pardons is because Bush, if he last long enough, will pardon every single one of his criminal cabal. Everyone knows this so the repugs are GRANDSTANDING to try take some heat off. Unfortunately for them, once Administration Warming comes with a lame duck president for more than a few months, all the diversions and spin won’t reduce the temperature.
Thanks for playing Jake.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:25 pmi’m not riled up at all, just amused.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:25 pmThere must be something wrong with the air/water in Texas. Republicans from that state are delusional morons.
Give Texas back to Mexico!
March 27th, 2007 at 12:25 pmremovebush…
do you believe the crap that you post on these threads? tell me you are just playing dumb and that you are actually a smart individual…
who the hell comes up with the twisted crap that Fitzgerald couldn’t prosecute anyone about Plame when it is well known that it was Richard Armitage, as he admitted to it that gave her name away and the fact that she worked in the CIA, which anyone that followed her to work would also know and which Cuba and the USSR also knew.
so much vile, hate and venom from you and kickthebucket boy….
March 27th, 2007 at 12:27 pmTuber,
I find it pretty damn offensive of you to equate everyone here with Howsad and label them 8 year olds. You’ve jumped to quite a few wrong conclusions in your post, which is drenched in self-righteousness.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:27 pmIt is at least possible that Rep. Smith is NOT grandstanding if 1) he supports Executive Privilege and 2) he wants a former President (no longer covered under Executive Privilege) to testify, right?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:28 pmI would love to discuss that as well — did you see my point above that Rep. Smith is being completely consistent? Assuming he is, that goes a long ways to answer the question of whether he is grandstanding, don’t you?
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
No. It doesn’t matter what Smith has done in the past. Today, he is grandstanding as he was told to do.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:29 pmPlease stop engaging Howsad and Jake. They are dumb as post, totally ill-informed, and clearly in the throes of Bush cultism dementia. Why waste time on mentally disturbed people?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:29 pmComment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:36 am
You are the typical deranged Bush lover, keep on dreaming kid. There is such a clear cut case Bush will be gone, soon.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:30 pmAnd those convictions will win the award for most crooks convicted.
Start crying now.
howsad, your stupidity is NOT even worth the letters I have to type.
If you can have a debate, then fine… Until then, in the words of Cheney “Go F^ck yourslef”.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:30 pmP.S. as for the “only reason” to have these hearings, you would have to ask the DEMOCRATS, who scheduled the hearings. Elections have consequences, right?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:30 pmPlease stop engaging Howsad and Jake. They are dumb as post, totally ill-informed, and clearly in the throes of Bush cultism dementia. Why waste time on mentally disturbed people?
Comment by Devil’s Advocate — March 27, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
Because helping mentally disturbed people is an act of kindness that reflects on society as a whole.
Anyway, I’m off to work.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:31 pmYou think there was nothing wrong with Marc Rich and his wife “buying†a Presidential pardon?
I am against 99% of Presidential pardons since Thomas Jefferson left office. Back then, there’s a reason why they had that authority. Today, like everything else, there’s no longer the need. Information is available at the click of a mouse…
Yes. ALL have fallen short of the glory of God.
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 11:50 am
Seriously - until you can prove said god, stop pretending to know what it does and doesn’t expect from you, and that it gives you some right to use those suppositions to judge others. It’s annoying to those of us who live in reality.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:31 pmVerbalkint,
oh poor you, crying like a two year old…
March 27th, 2007 at 12:31 pmPlease stop engaging Howsad and Jake.
Comment by Devil’s Advocate — March 27, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
These two are really quite different. Ignoring Howsad is a good idea, although I am plently guilty of not doing it. Ignoring Jake is a bad idea. He is a Rove-trained talking point disseminator who should be rebutted at every turn.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:31 pmDevil’s Advocate:
If you don’t want to discuss this THREAD TOPIC, there are plenty of other threads you can participate in. Bye bye!
March 27th, 2007 at 12:32 pm[at this point in the game, howsad’s going to the the tried-and-true Righty tactic of punching someone, then accusing them of being violent when they hit back. What a miserable pussy.]
March 27th, 2007 at 12:32 pm“Why waste time on mentally disturbed people?”
great. you’ve just offended all the southern baptist catholics.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:32 pmremovebush….
debate with a delusional, left wing kool aid drinker like yourself? why waste my time, it is like trying to explain rocket science to a baby…
much more fun to see how crazy you left wing kooks get….
March 27th, 2007 at 12:33 pmpoor paranoid, delusional libbies, fun to play with their simple minds.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:41 am
Hey moron, that’s you playing with yourself again.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:33 pmSo confused.
Thanks howsad for trying to discuss. You win, your’e right. Even though I never did vote for Clinton by being on this thread I must be defending him. You have proven your points so well and provided so many facts to support your side.
It’s now glaring how wrong I am to disprove of an administration that didn’t have a worthy cause for diving into Iraq. It’s all so clear to me know that Executive Privilege can morph into whatever this President wants it to. I should have been more scared of “TERROR” instead of using my past military experience when thinking about what the logistics would be in doing what we were told needed to be done.
Please direct me now to the websites that put forth the information that you posess so I can spread the word and make all the unbelievers see the light.
Please hurry though because I may just falter. I’m not as strong as GW.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:34 pmunbelievable:
At least we agree Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich was wrong — as for “annoying to those of us who live in reality” I certainly did not intend that as I was answering someone else’s question above.
Yikes:
I’ll be here after your work too : )
March 27th, 2007 at 12:34 pmComment by Tuber #93
Tuber,
I agree wholeheartedly with most of what you posted…
…but “POLITICS” in THIS country is more like a “SPORT”…
…than a matter to be taken seriously…
…(which was MY point about the Tony Snow thread)…
…the attitude of many posters- Liberal Progressive and the Conned’self-serving alike…
…seems to be…
…despite the fact that our government is being “occupied” by corrupt, murderous TRAITORS…
…we can still be CIVIL about it…
…while American soldiers, Iraqis and Afghan citizens are dying daily…
…we homebound Americans and DUHmericans seem to maintain some lofty perch above the fray…
…much like the imperial Roman citizenry when watching “gladiators”…
…but the POLITICAL wheels move slowly, as do those of justice and Karma…
…we are NOT children and therefore must NOT expect instant gratification…
…but we CAN at least remain loyal to our values and beliefs…
…I was taken aback at comments on the Snow thread about how “skilled” he was at his deception…
…as if this was a commendable trait…
…but THAT coupled with the fact that for months many Liberal-Progressives have been denigrating the democrats for being…
…too civil…
…go figure…
March 27th, 2007 at 12:35 pmpgw:
I told you I am not Catholic.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:35 pmOne last time to respond to howsad……
OK bozo…. Here is my proof on one of the items I listed…. Where is yours to counter?
Fox News Sunday, 23 Sept 2001, Tony Snow: “Sept. 11 there was a report that there was a coded message that said, “We’re going to strike Air Force One†that was using specific coded language and made the threat credible. Is that true?
• Condoleezza Rice: “That is true…. I will tell you that it was plenty of evidence from our point of view to have special measures taken at that moment to make sure the
president was safe.â€
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wpsrv/ nation/ specials/ attacked/ transcripts/ foxtext092301.html
Sept. 13, 2001, White House briefing:
• Reporter: “Can you confirm the substance of that threat that was telephoned in…that Air Force One is next and using code words?â€
• Ari Fleisher (Press secretary): “Yes, I can. That’s correct.â€
• At Sept. 26th briefing, asked again about this, Fleisher said “I’m not going to comment on any particular threats coming toward the White House.â€
• This matter needs further investigation, for such person(s) with top-secret information may still be a threat to the President and others…
• Tarpley discusses a large body of evidence and concludes:
“The official version of 9/11 says that the attacks came out of a distant cave in Afghanistan. But it makes more sense to explore networks and agencies which have means, motive, and opportunity, as well as a track record of advocating and promoting large-scale violence.â€
March 27th, 2007 at 12:36 pm#111,
I’m sorry that it offends but I ask that you read through the comments and see if you come to a different conclusion. Look through the last 30 or so threads and tell me if you see something different than I.
As far as being “self-righteous”, you give me far too much credit. I don’t pretend to have the answers, that is why I seek intelligent discussions with conscientious participants. Do you really feel that the current form of “discussion” is fruitful?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:38 pmWe need to impeach Cheney and then Old Bush for war crimes. We will a Rep. Nancy Pelosi as our President. We need a woman to take over as you men do not know what you are doing.
GO NANCY GO!!!!!!
March 27th, 2007 at 12:38 pmDevil’s Advocate,
you got it boy, that is why I don’t debate left wing kooks that roam thinkprogress.com….I just show you left wing kooks how delusional and mentally disturb you little ones are.
all that comes out of your mouth is ,”Bush evil….blah, blah, blah….Karl Rove will steal my children at night….blah, blah, blah….I love and support muslim extremist they are less dangerous than Bush….blah, blah, blah, blah….Clinton is my god, how dare you insult him…….blah, blah, blah, blah….Democrats are perfect…..blah, blah, blah…..”
the sad part is that it is the same talk whether you come here, dailykos, huffingtonpost, talking to my liberal friends or co-workers, you little ones all sound the same and use exactlly the same talking points. No originality, no open mindness, no capibility of thinking on your own without having the likes of thinkprogres.org telling you how and what to think.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:38 pmI mean the rat not only didn’nt serve he ran away like a coward.
do tell oh ill-informed one.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 11:57 am
Gee I believe it was YOUR RAT that was AWOL.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:38 pmhowsad is a loyal Wiener Savage listener as has been proven by is word for word matching rants in the past,howsad
March 27th, 2007 at 12:39 pmactually, you did say you were catholic.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:40 pmSorry, pgw. That was the fake Jake — I would never admit to being BOTH poisonous disingenuous and terminally stupid either!!!
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
How convenient you Jaking LIAR!
March 27th, 2007 at 12:41 pmFor the record, I was wondering if Mrs. Paul McCartney’s leg was going to fly off too ; )
March 27th, 2007 at 12:42 pmThat was the fake Jake, pgw. There have been plenty of other examples of him / her posting rediculous items as well.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:43 pmJake,
as I have always said, liberals are good for two things, to pity them or to point at them and laugh at their immense stupidity.
Comment by howsad — March 27, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
Look folks - Dumb and Dumber teaming up. So cute.
toosad - why don’t you get jaked.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:44 pmUnless you think I admitted to being BOTH poisonous disingenuous and terminally stupid too?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:44 pmTP - Please consider a login process for you comments.
Anonymity + Internet + Ignorance + Audience = Right Wing Trolls craving attention.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:45 pmI’m sorry that it offends but I ask that you read through the comments and see if you come to a different conclusion.
Are you suggesting that I posted my comment without already doing this? Jumping to conclusions again.
I seek intelligent discussions with conscientious participants. Do you really feel that the current form of “discussion†is fruitful?
There is an organic dynamic to these threads that isn’t going to conform to your narrow view of what this site is about. To achieve your goal would require getting rid of the trolls. Simply ignoring them isn’t going to work. Please read my comment #24 in the Gonzo-Fitz thread above.
When I want an intelligent discussion with conscientious participants, I join with my friends and colleagues, which I often do. When I come here, it is to battle the trolls.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:46 pmGrandstanding for the War On Freedom is not a choice, it’s an occupation.
Jake, I hope KKKarl is paying you more than minimum wage.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:48 pmIs that what Alberto makes? Just wondering, hope he gets that raise from congress soon. That way, he can have his integrity & $6.25/hr, too!
so the fake Jake had the same reaction last week as you did yesterday to being called out on referring to gonzales as “speedy”? that’s amazing. that’s some coincidence, huh?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:48 pmhowsad has a little wiener.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:49 pmAwww, just as soon as I try to go over to the howsad way of thinking he ignores my request.
Once again oh wise one. Please provide the paths to greater knowledge of Dickiness and Bushability.
Can’t hold out much longer, Kool aid still in system. Fighting but growing tired. please help.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:50 pmThe photo at the top of this thread is priceless! This guy has Howdy Doody’s looks. From his utterances, he has Dilly Dally’s brains.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:51 pmFor the record, I do not get paid to post here — I am retired — I am also not a Catholic and would never refer to any Hispanic as “Speedy Gonzales” or any other racially-inappropriate label, regardless of what the fake Jake(s) post. If there’s anything else you want me to deny, let me know.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:54 pmYes, back on topic — federal investigators looking at both George H.W. Bush and Clinton’s pardons determined there was nothing that either could have been charged with — I will agree with you that Clinton should have testified though. I think bothering 83 year olds with the issue is a bit of a stretch.
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
Clinton should testify, with one day notice, but Daddy shouldn’t even be asked because he’s old. Everytime you manage to outdo your hypocricy.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:55 pmWe should all ignore every Jake.
Do you think I also wear lacy underpants, just because the fake Jake posted that too?
March 27th, 2007 at 12:58 pmJake sez:
Jake, don’t try denying posting the following:
…because we all know it was you. It’s easy enough to differentiate your writing style from the ‘fake’ Jake. Denying the authenticity of the posts pgw dredged up only confirms your status as a pathological liar and a mendacious little troll.
Once again, Shakey, your credibility account is seriously overdrawn.
TP admins, I’d like to take this opportunity to yet again make the case for user registration here at Think Progress. Not only will it dissuade trollish behaviour by stopping namejacking, but it will also deny lying trolls like Jake the shelter of a ‘well, that wasn’t me…I was namejacked’ excuse every time he’s caught in a lie.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:58 pm#144-Verbalkint,
Hmmm, I see. Intelligent conversation is seeking validation from like minds, but discussing the politics and actions of our nation, well, that’s just a mud wrestling match. Let me give it a shot.
Jake, you are a stupid poopy head and you don’t love your country as much as I do. Oh, and god likes me more than you, neener neener.
Gosh, I don’t feel any better but I do have this incredible urge to find out what Lindsay Lohan is up to.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:58 pmExecutive Privilege is not extended to every type of communication between every person in the White House. Only the communication that is with the President.
What would be the response if Clinton said he would only agree to a behind the door discussion that no transcripts were to be taken or no deal.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:59 pmFor the lurkers, I think Congress forcing ANY 83-year-olds to testify should be done with extreme caution — with the death of Gerald R. Ford on December 26, 2006, Bush is currently the oldest living former president — let’s have some common decency here.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:00 pm“It’s easy enough to differentiate your writing style from the ‘fake’ Jake.”
exactly.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:00 pm129. Comment by big papa — March 27, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Excellent post, sir.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:01 pmUnless you think I admitted to being BOTH poisonous disingenuous and terminally stupid too?
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
BINGO. At last, self-realization.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:04 pmActually, for the record, a distinction has been recognized by the courts between two aspects of executive privilege — the presidential communications privilege and the deliberative process privilege. The former has a constitutional basis in the separation of powers doctrine, relates to “direct decisionmaking by the President,†and concerns “quintessential and non-delegable powers,â€125 whereas the latter “is primarily a common law privilege†applicable “to decisionmaking of executive officials generally.†The former applies to entire documents (including factual material) and “covers final and post-decisional materials as well as pre-deliberative ones.†The latter covers predecisional and deliberative materials, not “purely factual [material], unless the material is so inextricably intertwined with the deliberative sections of documents that its disclosure would inevitably reveal the government’s deliberations.â€
http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL31351.pdf
March 27th, 2007 at 1:07 pmlet’s have some common decency here.
Comment by Jake — March 27, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
Pricelss.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:08 pmFine, pgw — if you think I have acheived “self-realization” of something the FAKE Jake posted too, I will add you to the Ignore List as well. Have a nice life.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:09 pmIs it just me or does that pic of Smith look just like Alfred E Newman? With a bit of DeLay and Dubya thrown in for good measure.
Must be WAAAY too much inbreeding going on in Texas!!
March 27th, 2007 at 1:09 pmthis is how you disgusting, whacked out, looeny tune liberals deal with people that have a different opinion than you….
go read how “open minded” and “tolerant” you whackos are….
sad, sad…
http://headrush.typepad.com/ creating_passionate_users/ 2007/ 03/ as_i_type_this_.html
March 27th, 2007 at 1:09 pmCan the please leave the union and join Mexico!
Comment by JakeSux
Yeah, but without texans, please.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:09 pmJake sez:
Looks like we just found yet another way to make The List â„¢…exposing Jake as the lying sack of sh!t he is.
Well done, pgw, and welcome to The List â„¢.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:12 pmI thought you just had to have the maturity of a 12 year old to be a Republican. I guess you have to look like one too.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:12 pm“BINGO. At last, self-realization.
Comment by shane”
wasn’t me. that was fake pgw, or, if you read carefully as it appears on the screen, “shane”. you seem riled up.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:15 pmbig papa. Thanks.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:17 pmThanks for the link Jake but did you read the summary. the last parragraph speaks of a compromise. The Bush administration isn’t willing to do so.
Howsad thanks for the link also but it wasn’t the neocon nirvana I was hoping for. Don’t let me down. I keep finding sites that want to discuss the facts and you know that facts have a liberal bias.
Please show me the path to Rovana.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:21 pm#154 Tuber, that is a strange mischaracterization of what I said.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:23 pmIgnore the lying little turd called JAKE.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:24 pmI think Tuber has a point.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:24 pmThe whole Jake-bashing is getting tiresome, dont you think?
Yeah, but without texans, please.
Comment by Juan C
Ok, Carl Lewis can stay.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:25 pm#171-Verbalkint,
I have to admit to pushing the envelope on that one a bit. But I hope that you were able to take it in the humorous light in which it was intended.
I do feel the point is valid. In my opinion, of course.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:28 pmHey Leftists it looks like your Americans don’t like your leader!
Fifty percent of Adults would not vote for Clinton
By Kelly McCormack
March 27, 2007
Half of voting-age Americans say they would not vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) if she became the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, according to a Harris Interactive poll released Tuesday.
More than one in five Democrats that participated in the survey said they would not vote for Clinton. Overall, 36 percent say they would vote for the former first lady and 11 percent are unsure of their top choice.
Forty-eight percent of Independent voters also said that they would choose another candidate over Clinton, the poll, which surveyed 2,223 potential voters, states.
Fifty-six percent of men said that they would not vote for Clinton, while 45 percent of women said that she would not be their pick. In addition, 69 percent of those 62 and older said that they would not vote for Clinton.
Nearly half of the respondents said that they dislike Clinton’s political opinions and Clinton as a person. Fifty-two percent of people also said that “she does not appear to connect with people on a personal level.â€
March 27th, 2007 at 1:35 pmpgw sez:
Uh oh…what happens now?
Does shane get added to