Wilson: Proponents Of Libby Pardon Are ‘Accessories To An Ongoing Crime’
Wilson: Proponents Of Libby Pardon Are ‘Accessories To An Ongoing Crime’
In a recent interview with “In The Know TV,” a public affairs television show broadcast in the DC area, Joe Wilson — the husband of former CIA undercover agent Valerie Plame — spoke out about the potential pardoning of Scooter Libby.
Wilson argued, “Considering that this is an obstruction of justice case, and considering that the prosecutor has said repeatedly that there remains a cloud over the Vice President, it seems to me that those who are arguing for pardon are in fact accessories to an ongoing crime.” He said that until the cloud over Cheney is lifted, the ultimate crime cannot be said to have been punished.
Wilson also argued that Bush should recuse himself from any involvement with the Libby scandal. “The idea that the President would not recuse himself given the superior-subordinate relationship he had with Mr. Libby — and considering that it would be the first time that you would consider a pardon in a criminal investigation that involves perhaps the Office of the President, certainly the Office of the Vice President — would be totally inappropriate,” he said. Watch it:
When asked his reaction to the fact that the White House has shown so much compassion for the Libby family without offering a public apology to his own family, Wilson said, “I would have thought that their parents would have raised them better.” He added, “I’ve actually learned not to expect anything from this crowd other than bad behavior.”
Bloomberg reports, “A quick pardon for Libby would go against Justice Department guidelines, which recommend that a supplicant wait five years after conviction or release from confinement before seeking a pardon.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Right on, brother-
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 amI believe he is a husband, not a wife.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:25 amPlease Joe, stick to ambassadoring or spending time with your knockout of a wife or growing facial hair or whatever else it is you do, but don’t play a great legal mind.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:25 amWhat was Libby’s crime again?
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:26 am#4 Are you really that stupid? Libby was convicted of lying to investigators, committing perjury, and obstructing justice. All of those actions are crimes. Do you care to dispute that?
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:31 amExpecting any sort of decency from this administration is a waste of time and effort.
A public apology? Surely you jest!? See the sentence above….
Um, lose the facial hair, Joe.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:33 amJoe says it exactly like it is, they are attempting to further obstruct a major crime. One that involves high crimes and misdemeanors.
Pardon would indicate a lawlessness that will destroy this country. We see quite enough spineless congresspersons that seem to equate the impeachment as a threat to themselves. If this is the case, then they are criminals in hiding, and a reason why we have no government to speak of.
we, the people, want true accountability. Anyone that does not has one of a few problems:
1. they believe in paying for their perks, and are thus into bribery
2. fear has turned you into a vegetable that prefers that others make all their decisions for them
3. you are a part of a conspiracy of activity and silence to commit crimes against humanity as a preventative measure for something you don’t understand
feel free to add other reasons why this country has imploded and lost it’s character
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:33 am#5 – VK
It knows, and it doesn’t care.
He’s just an Acerebralist. :D
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:34 amYeah whatever Joe.
There’s a reason there’s 4000 posts about scooter libby here and not 1 giving you the full quotation of Armitage as to how Plame’s name came up….. before Joe wrote his op-ed.
Someone was shopping her name around as a selling point for Joe’s story well before he wrote it. Armitage says who that was. Who was putting her name about in press circles.
And despite 4000 articles about this leak nobody wants to remember who that was. Where the original source of the leak says her name came from.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:35 amEnforce the laws on the books. Libby should spend time in prison for his involvement in the Bush administration’s treasonous acts. He should be joined by other Bush cronies too.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:36 am#8 Zooey, I know it knows and doesn’t care. I know it is lacking a moral compass. But I take what it says at face value and respond to it, to see what it says next. I’m just running rats in the maze to see how they respond to various stimuli.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:36 amNoticing the caption on the video…
I don’t believe Wilson was the “Ambassador to Iraq“, he was the “Ambassador to Niger“.
When will the media stop using trained monkey’s as fact-checkers?
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:37 am#9 And another determined troll attempts to revise history. Allow me to summarize the facts known from the public record. Plame was covert. Her name was leaked by Bush operatives. Whether Armitage leaked it or not has no direct bearing on whether Cheney, Libby, Rove and others engaged in a criminal conspiracy to out a covert agent then cover up the crime.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:39 am#12 You are incorrect. Joe Wilson was acting ambassador to Iraq during the lead up to the first Gulf war. He was never ambassador to Niger. He went to Niger on a one time fact finding mission, not as ambassador.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:42 amdamn i hate stoopid.
to repeat, all that’s necessary:
Libby was convicted of lying to investigators, committing perjury, and obstructing justice. All of those actions are crimes. -VK
armitage etc is irrelavent to libby’s conviction…
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:43 amshut up with stoopid…
Keep speaking out Joe and keep the pressure on these crooks. It is a shame on America what this admin. has done to you and Valerie. You are courageous and deserve not only an apology but JUSTICE. Justice should come in the form of prison sentences for those in the WH who were a party to this crime against you, your wife and the American people ( and the Iraqi people)
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 amI hope more is brought to light with your lawsuit and Cheney is on the stand!
You and Valerie are true partiots, the scumbags that support Libby or a pardon are willing to support this criminal which makes them all criminals. The lack of morals on the right is sickening. If there is a hell, they will ALL rot in it.
Kilo,
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 amWhy was someone shopping V.Plame’s name around as a selling point , before Wilson’s article?
One can now say, according to the Adminisration ,that it’s ok if you lie to a Grand Jury,if you work for the Administration!
The real fact is that chickenshit Cheney is letting Libby take the rap.
Shooter & Scooter used to be real close. Now, not so much…
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 amI don’t believe Wilson was the “Ambassador to Iraq“…
Comment by Mugsy
Yes he was.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:45 amWhat was Libby’s crime again?
Comment by Rock Star — July 2, 2007 @ 10:26 am
Colossal stupidity ………Something you should be serving a life sentence for , obviously.
And you’re as much a “Rock Star” as Chimpy is a great president and tremendous public speaker…..You probably couldn’t play the lottery or radio , much less an instrument.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:46 amI’m not for a pardon, but I also wouldn’t call anyone that is a criminal. They have free speech and are welcome to say what they want.
“it seems to me that those who are arguing for pardon are in fact accessories to an ongoing crime.”
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:46 amWhich is illegal. Punishing people for unpopular speech isn’t the answer.
As the parade with the naked chimp came around the corner, Ambassador Wilson was the first to cry that the Chimperor has no clothes!
To keep the rest of the crowd quiet, the Chimp’s defenders came to the rescue and punished this utterance of truth.
The rest of the sycophantic crowd roared their approval, hoping that the Chimp would throw some scat their direction, showering them with his love.
Trolls live for the day that Bush will thank them personally for their support for his nakedness.
Carry on, you misguided freaks. You are beyond hope and beyond reason and don’t deserve to be called Americans.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:48 amI don’t believe Wilson was the “Ambassador to Iraq“, he was the “Ambassador to Niger“.
Close but I think he was Acting Ambassador to Iraq in 1990. President George Bush called him a “true American hero” for his defiance of Hussein while he sheltered 100s of Americans at the start of the 1st Gulf War.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:48 amThe ongoing crime has been the Iraq war. A completely unnecessary war triggered by lies and deceptions. The misuse of the CIA, FBI, NSA, and the Pentagon to line the pockets of White House cronies is part of this criminal behavior. And to coverup the crimes the DoJ has been gutted.
Farewell, Democracy. Goodbye, Freedom. The USA has become a dictatorship in much the same way that the Republic of Rome fell into an Empire. And now we can see poor Nero fishing off the coast of Maine.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:48 amFrom day 1 : I agree, it is waste of time to expect this Crime Cabal to uphold the Constitution, The Bill of Rights.
We are now entering probably the darkest days this country has ever faced. I’m just waiting for the next Provocative Act to blame Iran. Then the Sheeple all trembling and afraid, will almost plead with Chimpy and his Cohorts in Crime to protect them — all in the name of the continual stripping away of our civil liberties.
There are Dark Days Ahead, my friend.
Unless 9/11 is exposed as a Cover-Up we are going down some Very Dark Roads.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:51 amAs window dressing for the story one would presume.
But what does it matter what his motives were ?
She was covert. He knew this. He put her name out there to reporters well before the op-ed was published or even written.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:51 am#21 Wow. Revealing the identity of a covert agent is allowed free speech? The stupidity of this comment is simply mind-numbing.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:53 amYes, GWB feels so badly for all that Libby and his family are going through and couldn’t give a rat’s patoot about Joe and Valerie Wilson. This sounds like all the compassion that Cheney got when he shot Harry Whittington in the face — (”how horrible it is for Dick to be going through something so awful”).
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:53 amJoe Wilson was a Ambassor to the following Countries,Gabon,Sao Topme, Principe,appointed by none other than Bush 1. Wilson was also the Senior Director of African Affairs on the National Security Council ,appointed by Clinton.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:54 amWilson was well versed, and knowledgable about African Affairs,and stood up to Saddam right before Gulf War !
Eh, Wilson isn’t Plame’s wife.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:55 amJoe Wilson was an acting ambassador to Iraq under GHWB; and he was Ambassador to Gabon and São Tomé and PrÃncipe in 1992-1995.
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:57 amUnder what circumstances would it be possible for me to revise history by encouraging you to read that most pivotal part of it which goes unpublished ?
Projecting much ?
No, it wasn’t. There was a rather large and long investigation into that. Determined otherwise.
So you know, maybe your version of history does need a revision.
Correct. It has no bearing on that.
The only thing it has a bearing on is who gets to complain about Plame’s identity and job being outed.
In that regard, you, everyone you’ve ever met and ever will are one rung above Joe Wilson.
Seriously, would you let Dick Cheney complain about someone shooting someone else in the face as though this wasn’t hypocrisy ?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:00 amThe difference would be that Dick’s did that by accident. He didn’t do it to make a name for himself.
I don’t believe Wilson was the “Ambassador to Iraq“, he was the “Ambassador to Niger“.
When will the media stop using trained monkey’s as fact-checkers?
Comment by Mugsy
Joe Wilson was acting ambassador to Iraq during the lead up to the first Gulf war. He was never ambassador to Niger. He went to Niger on a one time fact finding mission, not as ambassador.
Comment by VerbalKint —
VK is correct that Wilson was acting ambassador to Iraq and that he was never ambassador to Niger. Early in his career (1976-78) he worked as a General Services Officer in Niamey, Niger. He also worked in other African countries like South Africa, Congo, and Togo, and was Ambassador to Gabon and São Tomé and PrÃncipe from 1992-95.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:00 amMaybe Mugsy ought to get a trained monkey to help with his/her fact-checking, as the simian might still do better than Mugshot.
I’m not for a pardon, but I also wouldn’t call anyone that is a criminal. They have free speech and are welcome to say what they want.
“it seems to me that those who are arguing for pardon are in fact accessories to an ongoing crime.â€
Which is illegal. Punishing people for unpopular speech isn’t the answer.
Comment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 10:46 am
Please say you’re kidding.
If not, that’s a completely ridiculous statement, Tundra. Yes, they have free speech — blab away!!
But the speech involved in outing Ms Plame-Wilson was a crime. While whoever revealed her name is perfectly free to do so, according to you — they must also accept the consequence of prison.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:01 am#21 Wow. Revealing the identity of a covert agent is allowed free speech? The stupidity of this comment is simply mind-numbing.
Comment by VerbalKint — July 2, 2007 @ 10:53 am
No, Learn to read. The only thing mind numbing is you. I said. People are allowed to say “Pardon Libby” all they friggin want. Yes that is free speech. I specifically said I didn’t think he should get a pardon.
I also said that anyone saying “Pardon Libby” should not be charged with being an “Accessory to an ongoing crime”
Since you think that merely saying “Pardon Libby” is a crime, what else can we as americans not say for fear of being locked up by you and your police state buddies?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:02 amComment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 11:02 am
Ok, I mis-read your comment as well. Sorry about that.
Proponents of a pardon certainly do have free speech, even it they are total scum bags.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:04 amComment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 11:01 am
Zooey,
Joe Wilson said “it seems to me that those who are arguing for pardon are in fact accessories to an ongoing crime”
An Accessory to a crime is a punishable offense, no?
Joe Wison is saying if you say “Free Libby” you are a criminal and should be punished.
Hang Libby won’t break my heart any, He is a criminal and found guilty in a court of law. I am not and have never defended him. I am defending the masses who have the right to say “Free Libby” all they want. They can wear it on shirts, they can hang it on flags next to “Free Ollie” or “Free Willy”. Your hero (Joe Wilson) said anyone that argues for a pardon for libby is a criminal and should be punished.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:09 amJoe, better watch your back and check under the hood before you start the ol’ Wilsonmobile!!
Darth is under extreme pressure now and his pacemaker is acting up.
Remember what he did to a FRIEND with his shotgun, and you are NOT on his Christmas Card list!
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:10 amMugsy,
It appears my first response was bounced because it included a quoted curse word. Here’s a cleaner version:
From 1988 to 1991, he was the Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq. He was praised by George H. W. Bush after sheltering more than one hundred Americans at the embassy, despite Saddam Hussein’s threats to execute anyone who refused to hand over foreigners. As a result, in 1990, he also became the last American diplomat to meet with Saddam Hussein.[10] When Hussein sent a note to Wilson (along with other embassy heads in Iraq) threatening to execute anyone sheltering foreigners in Iraq, Wilson publicly repudiated the dictator by appearing at a press conference wearing a homemade noose around his neck and saying “If the choice is to allow American citizens to be taken hostage or to be executed, I will bring my own &^%#$ rope,”
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:10 am#36 Sorry, Tundra, my apologies. You are right (more or less) that calling for a pardon in and of itself is protected speech. My brain had been addled by so many other braindead stupid posts by trolls that I simply misread what you were saying.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:11 amOk, I mis-read your comment as well. Sorry about that.
I should have worked on wording some before I posted it hun :)
Been a rough morning already heh
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:11 amComment by VerbalKint — July 2, 2007 @ 11:11 am
Tis cool, I am simply surprised that I was right once (It doesn’t happen often) heh :)
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:13 am#33 Now you are flat out lying, Kilo. The CIA certified to the grand jury that she was covert when Libby and Rove leaked her name.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:14 amNo, it wasn’t. There was a rather large and long investigation into that. Determined otherwise.
Incorrect, Kilo.
Fitzgerald’s investigation confirmed both that Plame was covert (and the CIA had taken steps to protect her identity), and that numerout Bush adminstration officials, including Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby, told reporters that Valerie Wilson worked for the CIA.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:14 am#64 Kilo is a bald faced liar. No amount of koolaid can defend this scum’s deliberate lies.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:18 amScooter did not intentionally release Valerie’s name. Give the man a break. The bible says to judge not!
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:24 am#46 VK,
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:24 amWhat?! Trolls lying?! I can’t believe it! (sarcasm off)
Joe Wilson’s had some comments about that also.
Perhaps a timeline would be useful to “revise history” on that. And by “revise history” we of course mean remind everyone who Joe Wilson is that TP won’t….
January 28, 2003: State of the Union address.
February 6, 2003: Joe’s LAT op-ed where he warned against invading Iraq… because the WMDs will be used against the troops.
February 28, 2003: Joe tells PBS the same thing.
March 3, 2003: Joe writes an article for The Nation, with no mention of any concerns about lies about WMDs, the SOTU address, Niger, Uranium, nothin.
March 8, 2003: CNN interviews Joe about the IAEA disclosure of the Niger forgeries. Joe says that’s a shock, but that there’s still sufficient evidence of Saddam’s nuclear activities to make the case without it.
March 19, 2003: US invades Iraq without a peep from Joe about false pretenses, fake evidence, lies about WMD, or anything really.
March-May 2003: US does an outstanding job in Iraq of finding none of the WMDs Joe believed were there.
May 2003: Joe starts shopping his story around to reporters before he’s declared the last turkey in the shop to realise WMD claims were bogus.
June 2003: Joe continues shopping his story with another reporters.
June 2003: Armitage has a conversation with Woodward:
July 6, 2003: Another Wilson/Plame dinner with some more reporters. Remember, careful no reporters find out.
July 6, 2003: Wilson writes his famous op-ed. 5 months after the Niger-Uranium State of The Union address and 4 months after the invasion and discovery that there were no WMDs.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:25 amGood for Joe Wilson.
Don’t let the bastards intimidate you…
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:26 amCalling for a pardon from those INVOLVED is a CRIME. Bush, Cheney, Rove, etc. even suggest a pardon is in order is evidence of a crime as they are a party to his obstruction/crime.
The idiot supporters who were not involved can talk about a pardon and it isn’t a crime, just stupidity.
For the idiots who believe that anyone but those in the Bush camp were responsible for outting a NOC, you are just plain dumb and can’t handle the truth, obviously. Im so glad that Libby will rot in jail. I hope he starts to sing once he’s in his orange jumpsuit because they threw him under the bus. Abrahoff is still singing like a bird. They all need to be exposed and led out of the WH in cuffs and jailed for war crimes. Ship them all to the Hague and let them die for their crimes against humanity. What a sickening excuse for leaders the whole cabal is.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:28 amNever again should a Rethug be allowed in the WH. Impeachment proceedings should begin for those lying traitors Roberts ald Alito too. They both lied their way into their judgeships.
Correct. Except I refer to that. I responded to someone claiming this was the source of the leak. It wasn’t. You know this.
And other pissant here calling me a liar is going to need to do a fair bit of that himself to claim it was.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:28 amKilo,
You post is against the lies told by the Bush Regime, not against Joe Wilson as you intended.
Silly boy.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:28 amDaryll,
“The bible says to judge not!”
Then why do you come here and constantly do just that?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 amNo they didn’t. As you know from the fact that they were charged with no such thing and the investigation’s finding otherwise.
Rove you will recall confirmed Plame was CIA to Novak by saying “Yeah I heard that too”, to a reporter that had alread received this info, from Armitage.
Armitage. The leak that shall not be mentioned. While you talk to me about “revising history”. LMAO.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 amScooter did not intentionally release Valerie’s name.
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:24 am
Put down the crack pipe, Daryll. Grand jury and court trial testimony have conclusively demonstrated that Scooter Libby made a sustained and determined attempt to leak Plame’s name and identity to the press while she was still a covert agent with the CIA. No amount of fantasy on your part, and no amount of LYING on Kilo’s part, is going to change the facts in this case.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:38 amKILO = SEIXON
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:40 amThere’s just the one truth. It doesn’t have sides. And unlike you, I don’t give people a free pass because I’m a partisan wingnut.
You could of simply written: “I don’t care about Plame’s identity because I’m biased” with the same result. Silly boy.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:41 amYour hero (Joe Wilson) said anyone that argues for a pardon for libby is a criminal and should be punished.
Comment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 11:09 am
And he is perfectly within his right of free speech to do so, right?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 amYou can support that!
#54 Liar, I think you know that different people can leak the same information. Also, Liar, I think you know that Rove didn’t merely “confirm” the information. That was his initial lie to the grand jury, and he had to change his story to evade prosecution on the same charges that Libby was convicted of. One other thing, liar: it is possible for one person to commit an action without breaking the law (Armitage) and another person to commit the same action in violation of the law (think of insider trading in the stock market, for example). So STFU and crawl back under your slimy rock, liar.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 amis it DENIAL or STUPIDITY that prevents the troolls from
understanding that it was the LYING and the OBSTRUCTION
that prevented the investigation from bringing up the charges of
LEAKING a cia agen’ts name… huh?
kicking sand in the umpire’s eyes…
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:43 am…
Which bastards ? The anti-war protesters back in 2003 ?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:44 amScooter did not intentionally release Valerie’s name. Give the man a break. The bible says to judge not!
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:24 am
Then you’re in bug trouble with the baby Jesus, because all you ever do is judge other people.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:45 am#62 — Oops.
Daryll, you’re in [big] trouble as well.
Heh.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:46 amAnd he is perfectly within his right of free speech to do so, right?
You can support that!
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 11:42 am
Yes he can, I just said he was wrong. I didn’t advocate that he go to jail for it :)
Which I, of course could have advocated he go to jail for it because of my free speech, then he could have said that I should go to jail because I said he should go to jail. Neither of us going to jail even though we have heavily advocated for each others incarceration.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:47 amScooter did not intentionally release Valerie’s name. Give the man a break. The bible says to judge not!
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:24 am
Then you’re in bug trouble with the baby Jesus, because all you ever do is judge other people.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 11:45 am
I do not judge, I witness. Admit it. Do you think that Scooter’s sentence is harsh?
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:48 amKilo,
While I my agree with your timeline, and feel that old Joe there was for the WMD’s before he was against them. It doesn’t change what Libby was charged and found guilty of.
Joe could have been 100% behind the war and still to this day have said that there were weapons. Doesn’t change the fact that Libby was found guilty of “releasing his wife’s identity”
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:50 amGiven Valerie Plame’s domestic spying activities
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:50 amin 1996, she’s no better than Lewis Libby.
I personally know about that because I worked
with her at the time.
Perhaps Valerie Plame should be going to
jail also.
I think both sides should just cool it.
The bible says to judge not!
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:24 am
Where?
Chapter, verse and version, please.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:52 amI do not judge, I witness. Admit it. Do you think that Scooter’s sentence is harsh?
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:48 am>/em>
“She belongs to her ex-husband.†– St Darryl on DRxJ’s wife
I judge, and I judge that you are a liar, St Darryl.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:52 amIt’s an unquestionable truth among Republicans that Joe Wilson is a liar. This charge has been repeated dozens of times by the right wing shock jocks. Last week Michael Medved said that what Wilson did was “far worse than anything Scooter Libby did”.
Here’s a challenge to all of you idiot Republicans who have bought into this lie that Wilson lied: FIND THE EXACT QUOTE THAT YOU THINK CONSTITUTES A LIE.
I can guarantee you that you will not find that quote.
When you can’t find it, please have the decency to admit that Wilson didn’t lie, and have the courage to call your favorite right wing shock jock and ask them to correct this outrageous lie.
Phylo out.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:54 amWell you would assume this isn’t the reason, given that Fitzgerald knew Armitage’s role for the duration of the investigation.
Is it DENIAL or STUPIDITY that has prevented you reading any account of this investigation about who did and didn’t withold information after 3 and a half years ?
But Armitage, who said he testified about his actions to a grand jury three times, was not charged for making the disclosure, a circumstance he attributes to his candor in speaking with investigators about his action. He turned over his computers and never even hired an attorney, Armitage said, because “I did not need an attorney to tell me to tell the truth.”
The confirmation of Armitage’s role has provoked criticism of both him and the special counsel, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, who learned of it shortly after his appointment in 2003.
No criticism here though. It was Fitzmas! all the way. And look how that turned out.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:56 amDo you think that Scooter’s sentence is harsh?
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:48 am
Heya Daryll,
I don’t think it was harsh. I am for firm punishments for crimes. We live in a society where breaking the law is a joke. Complaints of prison overcrowding etc. Either we need to build more jails or get rid of some of the laws, weak hand slap sentences aren’t the answer.
Some people will say what about the person who did this, they only got…..
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:57 amWell theirs was to light, I don’t think weakening a punishment because someone else got a lighter one is right.
I do not judge, I witness. Admit it. Do you think that Scooter’s sentence is harsh?
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:48 am>/em>
“She belongs to her ex-husband.†– St Darryl on DRxJ’s wife
I judge, and I judge that you are a liar, St Darryl.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — July 2, 2007 @ 11:52 am
TerrytheTurtle, I love you, and Jesus loves you, too. Haven’t you ever fabricated information on your resume? Shouldn’t you be fired? We must stop wasting tax dollars on cases like Scooter’s case and go after the real thugs.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:57 amGo Joe! And, as accessories to a crime, we all know what happens to them: they are indicted as “co-conspirators” in the clear “obstruction of justice”. Let’s get on with the indictments as surely the Libby jailing is but the tip of a very necrotic iceberg within this government….aka Cheney’s ’shadow government’.
IMPEACH CHENEY….THEN BUSH!
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:00 pmI do not judge, I witness. Admit it. Do you think that Scooter’s sentence is harsh?
Comment by Daryll
You post judging people all the time, Liar & Hypocrite.
And Scooter’s sentence is way too light for someone who commited treason, obstructed justice and lied to investigators to cover it up.
Are you really that fscking stupid, Daryll?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:02 pm#73 Darryl: on this case, I would tend to agree with you that the indictment and imprisonment of Scooter deals simply with Scotter’s having perjured himself. The larger issue of the intentional outing of a covert operative (treason) is still looming out there. Naturally, Scooter was attempting to sheild Cheney and Bush in his perjury – which now makes the bigger case for the real criminals in this to have definitely been Bush and Cheney. Where is the Special Prosecutor who will now deal with the treasonous outing of an operative? We still have yet to deal with the treason which was committed, despite the fact that a liar is going to jail for lying under oath.
We have two separate (but connected) issues here. One has been dealt with – the other suspiciously has not been…I wonder why???
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:03 pmNeither of us going to jail even though we have heavily advocated for each others incarceration.
Comment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Heh.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:03 pm#75 Just like the majority of the american people who realize that Scooter did, in fact, commit treason as well as perjury, it’s only the perjury charge which has resulted in his prison time.
That’s what I’m trying to make clear here…..the actual treason has yet to be dealt with. That’s the typical Bush Cabal “smokescreen” so that people actually believe that Scooter’s going to prison for treason – he’s not! It’s simply the punishment for lying under oath.
It’s true that the real issue at hand is the original investigation for which Scooter was subpoenaed and lied to cover Cheney’s sorry derriere.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:05 pmDid St. Daryll have the same idea when millions were spent finding out about Monica and Bill? Selective morality does this country a disservice.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:06 pmOnce again, if the Bush Administration had said nothing about Wilson’s NYT editorial none of us would know a thing about Wilson or Plame. The fact that they are still in the headlines speaks to the utter lack of principles or moral compass with the Bushies.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:07 pmI do not judge, I witness. Admit it. Do you think that Scooter’s sentence is harsh?
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:48 am
You do judge, Daryll. You judge every time you condemn someone for behavior you find to be against god.
Call it “witnessing,” if you like, your god knows the difference, and will judge you accordingly.
Scooter Libby’s sentence was very light, he should have gotten at least twice as much prison time as he did.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:07 pmDid St. Daryll have the same idea when millions were spent finding out about Monica and Bill? Selective morality does this country a disservice.
Comment by hellinabucket — July 2, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
hellinabucket, I could care less about Clinton’s lies during that specific case. Here is the point, he committed a sexual act with an intern. In most corporations/firms the CEO/Executive would be fired. Clinton should have been removed.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:09 pmThis is just like the ridiculous and intentional connection in people’s minds created by the administration between 911 and Iraq, folks! We should realize what they’re doing to us at this point….they’re hoping that the people’s need for justice in the Plame case will have been satisfied by the imprisonment of Libby – wrongo!! Imprisoning Scooter does nothing to assuage the treason which has been committed against Valerie Plame. That intentional and flagrant criminal act is yet to be dealt with.
I think Joe Wilson needs to continue to hammer home the fact that the treasonous outing of his wife is still unsresolved….and Scooter’s perjuring himself (on cheney orders??) simply makes the case go further up the food chain at this point.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:09 pmScooter Libby COMITTED PERJURY and OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE to protect
the TRAITORS who outed Valerie Plame and her entire UNDERCOVER OPERATION.
These CONSPIRATORS are supporting Scooters pardon and should be TRIED as well.
The TRAITORS remain unpunished.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:09 pmWe must stop wasting tax dollars on cases like Scooter’s case and go after the real thugs.
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 11:57 am
oh… (against my better judgement)… i just gotta know…
who would daryll think the “real thugs” are?…
you think you’re quite the scheister, don’t you “daryll”?
ugh… i’ve got things to do… sorry if i stirred it up…
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:11 pmif not me, and hardly ever, i might add, someone else…
…
Scooter Libby’s sentence was very light, he should have gotten at least twice as much prison time as he did.
Comment by Zooey
The judge should have ruled for consecutive sentences instead of concurrent for the gravity of the crimes he commited.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:12 pmHe got the max for each conviction, but serving all at the same time, the judge was lax on him, IMHO
Proponents of a pardon certainly do have free speech, even it they are total scum bags.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 11:04 am
Exactly Zooey, who does this Stalinist think he is?!?!?!?!
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:14 pmClinton should have been removed.
Comment by Daryll
Show me in the constitution where it says a President can be removed for having sex………..
And here you are passing judgement again, contrary to your claims.
The irony is hilarious
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:15 pmZooey: And I would have to agree with you that Scooter’s sentence is very light in view of the fact that his perjury was actually an very bold attempt at “obstruction of justice”….it all dovetails into one huge rotting mess! He lies (perjury) in his obstruction of justice (criminal) in order to cover up his boss’s (cheney and bush) dastardly criminal and treasonous outing of a covert operative…..it seems to me that there are several layers to this rotting onion: 1) Scoot’s perjury 2) Scoot’s obstruction of Justice (which is why people believe that his sentence is far too light) 3) Why he felt a need to perjure himself and obstruct justice is at the crux of this treasonous affair: Cheney and Bush telling him to do so….
Let’s get to the heart of the matter and put Bush and Cheny’s feet to the fire. Any wonder why they’re stonewalling about turning over documents to Congress? If they were to do so, we’d find their slimey fingerprints on everything from torture approval (Abu Ghraib), to voting machine tampering, to treasonously outing an operative whose husband was shooting holes in their lies about the run up to the war, to the political firing of DOJ officials, to lying repeatedly to the american people (video tape evidence to prove that), to illegally spying on the citizens in contratempts to the american constitution, to now running a shadow government (coup d-etat?)…
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:15 pmYou can guarantee that can you ?
And how would Sir like to qualify that guarantee after the fact to claim he meant something else ?
For starters, just based on what I just read for that timeline, he’s told many reporters that the Niger forgeries were part of his warning to the CIA when debriefed on return from Niger… a good 7 months before said forgeries were first provided to the US.
Should people go copy/pasting from articles like that or would you like to change your mind beforehand ?
I note that there’s no suggestion anyone here is going to be changing their mind about wilson’s credibility here based on him supporting the war until no WMDs were found, leaking his wife’s ID to reporters himself, lying, etc.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:15 pmAnd no point challenging you to do so either I would guess.
Wayne: Agreed. Apparently, this judge was punishing him simply for his perjury and failed to recognize that there was a second layer which could have been and should have been applied resulting in consecutives counts and consecutive sentences. He didn’t include the obvious reason for the perjury: Obstruction of Justice. And, we all know that although perjury is a disgusting tactic, obstruction of justice generally puts people away for most of their lives.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:18 pmWilson, oh, poor little victim. The Democratic partisan hack who was caught lying about his trip to Nigeria by a bypartisan Senate intelligence committee hearing and British intelligence.
poor little Wilson, who’s wife supported and gave thousands to the Al Gore campaign. Oh, so hurt he is. Poor little baby. I think he needs a hug and a kiss liberals. What do you say?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:19 pmI want the exact quote Kilo. If you can’t provide that quote, admit that you can’t.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:19 pmYou too conservatron: Please provide us with the exact quote that you think constitutes a lie by Joe Wilson.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmKilo: You have absolutely NO argument at all so give it up. This has nothing to do with what Joe Wilson did or didn’t do, said or didn’t say…..Joe Wilson was throwing a monkeywrench into the lying cabal’s fiction, that’s why they decided to go after him. And, like typical mafioso thugs whom they’ve all turned out to be (watch out Sopranos – the Bush Cabal will be the next Fox hit next Fall!)….the mantra is that “if you can’t go after the man, go after his wife or kids”. Which is precisely what these two bit thugs did.
So let’s level the playing field here a bit: Joe Wilson has absolutely nothing to do with anything in this debate.
What is relevent is how the Bush Cabal reacted which is the criminal portion of it all.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmWilson has grown a beard now, so Cheney will hate him even more now.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmFor starters, just based on what I just read for that timeline, he’s told many reporters that the Niger forgeries were part of his warning to the CIA when debriefed on return from Niger… a good 7 months before said forgeries were first provided to the US.
Comment by Kilo — July 2, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Umm, idiot, the existence of the forgeries predated Wilson’s visit to Niger. Among other things, he went there to examine the forgeries. When they were first provided to the U.S. is irrelevant.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmClinton should have been removed.
Comment by Daryll
Show me in the constitution where it says a President can be removed for having sex………..
And here you are passing judgement again, contrary to your claims.
The irony is hilarious
Comment by Wayne — July 2, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Wayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:22 pmHow many times do you idiot trolls need to hear that this has nothing to do with Joe Wilson????? Duh! What a bunch of twisted, brainwashed, lockstep morons! If you want to come here to discuss something relevant, why not begin with discussing the criminal outing of a CIA operative which is the subject of this thread; otherwise, hit the road, fools.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:22 pm#92 And another dumbf*ck shows up. This one doesn’t know the difference between Niger and Nigeria. Probably can’t find the U.S. on a map, either.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:23 pmLet’s freeze out these morons who are attempting to hijack the conversation to Joe Wilson…..obviously, they have nothing credible to say about the criminal activities which occurred against a covert CIA operative so they’d might just as well hang it up. Freeze the trolls out….and we know who they are.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:23 pmTerrytheTurtle, I love you, and Jesus loves you, too. Haven’t you ever fabricated information on your resume? Shouldn’t you be fired?
If you knew me, you wouldn’t. Jesus, I heard he was dead, just like Snake Plissken. Er no, have you? Are you really a Computer Science grad from Oral Roberts? You know “I saw a 300ft tall Jesus, so send me money” seems a poor basis for offering a science program, if you ask me. And finally – yes I probably should be, since I waste time at work talking to you.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:24 pmVerbalkint: hahahaha! I love it! And you are so right about these moron trolls on the thread today. They are totally clueless and spout out nonsense and drivel. How cute (and predictably trite) of them to make their hijacking attempt so transparent though? These trolls are definitely far below some intellectually.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pmAnd, we all know that although perjury is a disgusting tactic, obstruction of justice generally puts people away for most of their lives.
Comment by veritas
If it was a normal citizen, such as you or I, yes, obstruction as well as perjury would put us in jail for a long time.
In this case Liby was the assistant to the Vice (p)Resident, so, just like with the Iran-contra mess, people get off with a bare slap on the wrist. People in power and the rich usually always get off easy while regular joes get the book thrown at them.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pmYou too conservatron: Please provide us with the exact quote that you think constitutes a lie by Joe Wilson.
Comment by Phylo Se Fiser — July 2, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
You want a quote? why don’t you read his full report that he leaked to the New York Times, buddy.
It is full of lies and half-truths!
As someone already pointed out, he claimed to have debunked forged documents that didn’t exist until 7 months after he claimed he debunked them.
why don’t you start there.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pmAnd, we all know that although perjury is a disgusting tactic, obstruction of justice generally puts people away for most of their lives.
Comment by veritas
hmmm….It didn’t put away Clinton, so why are you so much for Libby being put away for life?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:26 pm#
Kilo,
While I my agree with your timeline, and feel that old Joe there was for the WMD’s before he was against them. It doesn’t change what Libby was charged and found guilty of.
Joe could have been 100% behind the war and still to this day have said that there were weapons. Doesn’t change the fact that Libby was found guilty of “releasing his wife’s identityâ€
Comment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 11:50 am
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:27 pmVeritas. Sorry, I’m trying to get these right wing morons to understand that, despite their unquestioning belief, Wilson did not lie. I’m trying to get them to provide us with the exact quote that they think constitutes a lie by Wilson.
It might seem tedious but I think their failure to find such a quote will be a valuable lesson for our friends on the right about the lies they are told by the right wing shock jocks.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:28 pmThe judge should have ruled for consecutive sentences instead of concurrent for the gravity of the crimes he commited.
He got the max for each conviction, but serving all at the same time, the judge was lax on him, IMHO
Comment by Wayne — July 2, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
I understand your frustration Wayne, but someone like Scooter, with no prior record (and rich & white) is not going to get consecutive sentences. But the Judge could have given him more time for each offense to make up for the shortfall.
I predict TP will be having a thread when Scooter gets out of prison after having completed half of his sentence — time off for good behavior.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:28 pmWayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Sorry to jump in Wayne, but I gotta~
Yes Daryll, Clinton was WAY out of bounds for his activities — IT WAS A PERSONAL ISSUE BETWEEN BILL & HILLARY. NO ONE ELSE.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmWayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?
Comment by Daryll
Sure I do, but having an affair is not criminal
Cheating on a spouse is pretty crappy
But extra-marital affairs are not criminal, that is between Clinton, his wife and the other woman and was not really the business of anyone else.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:33 pmNo it doesn’t. But given the fact I’ve never disputed what he was convicted of I’m not sure why you’re saying this to me instead of someone in this thread that has already shown they don’t know what this was.
….and you’d still give him a pass on that.
Still hail his name as the one man standing up to the Bush Administration’s lies about WMDs.
Like you’ve been doing for 4 years.
That’s not a fact. He wasn’t found guilty of that. FFS already.
Why not say Bush was convicted of the leak ?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:34 pmIf you are going to claim someone was convicted of something they weren’t why opt for boy named scooter nobody cares about ?
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
Welllllllll.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:35 pmAs a shareholder in this corporation (The U.S). I feel I have a say when my CEO has sexual relations with another person in the company who’s career they have control over.
Daryll,
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:35 pmWe told you nice, but now we’re going to have to squeeze your head!
I still haven’t seen a quote yet, conservatron or Kilo.
I have read Joe Wilson’s op-ed and his response to the SIC report. There are no lies or half truths in either of them. You simply don’t know what you’re talking about.
Let’s go. I want the quote!
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:35 pmAs someone already pointed out, he claimed to have debunked forged documents that didn’t exist until 7 months after he claimed he debunked them.
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
So now we have one liar repeating a lie posted here by another liar, while carefully avoiding all requests for proof.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:37 pmWilson went to Niger in March 2002.
The forgeries first surfaced in October 2002.
Have you got anything right in this thread yet retard ?
LMAO. You wrote that on purpose too. LOL
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:38 pmI still haven’t seen a quote yet, conservatron or Kilo.
I have read Joe Wilson’s op-ed and his response to the SIC report. There are no lies or half truths in either of them. You simply don’t know what you’re talking about.
Let’s go. I want the quote!
Comment by Phylo Se Fiser — July 2, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Hmmmm….already provided son. Now you need to get your head out of your ass son, because like all Liberals, you look like a wacked out left wing moonbat.
the fact is that no matter how many quotes, how many facts are showing to left wing puppets like you, you will always back up Liar Joe Wilson and his wife. Both well placed in the Democratic political machine.
your game is silly and if this is the best you got, you better go play in the sandbox next door kid. Hillary, Wilson and Obama are there waiting for you. Don’t forget to bring your sandbox toys, ok?
I laugh at left wing puppets like you kid. No matter the evidence, you keep on raming your head against the wall.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:41 pmNotice how the trolls have turned this into a Clinton thing?
That’s their job, & they do it well.
That doesn’t mean we should respond to them.
Remember when your Mom told you not to talk to certain people?
She was referring to Trolls.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:43 pm….and you’d still give him a pass on that.
When did I say that?
Still hail his name as the one man standing up to the Bush Administration’s lies about WMDs.
Like you’ve been doing for 4 years.
Feel free to link any post anywhere where I have shown the slightest bit of concern for that chowderhead. I have simply said that this jackass has nothing to do with what “Scooter” was convicted of.
That’s not a fact. He wasn’t found guilty of that.
Noted, he was found guilty of perjury. Which still has 0 to do with Plame/Wilson or anyone else. Scooter LIED and got his hand slapped. Regardless if Wilson did or did not. Regardless if Plame went over there and mugged school children for milk money, Scooter was convicted of his crime.
You are the one defending Scooter. I am not defending Old Joe or his wife at all. You are dragging them into his crime and trying to put them on trial because Scooter lied.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:43 pmComment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 12:41 pm
No you did not provide a quote. You repeated the lies of another troll. That would not be considered proof anywhere but in neocon lanf!
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:44 pmConservatron, you’re lying now. No one has provided the quote yet. Tell me where I can find it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:44 pmComment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
Good post. You’re a pretty level headed dude for a conservative.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:47 pmConservatron, you’re lying now. No one has provided the quote yet. Tell me where I can find it.
Comment by Phylo Se Fiser — July 2, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
Oh wow….incredible….read what I posted son. The quotes are there, the evidence is there. You are one poor partisan hack Phylo. Don’t get desperate now that you have been shown to be a liar and a Democratic party puppet. Party before country, right Phylo? sad, truly sad.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:47 pmConservatron, how about making it easy, tell me what number comment it is that I can find this supposed quote. Or at least the time it was posted.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:49 pmConservatron, you’re lying now. No one has provided the quote yet. Tell me where I can find it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:50 pmComment by Phylo Se Fiser — July 2, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
Conservatron, I too want you to put up or shut up. And I also want to see proof from Kilo that the forgeries didn’t exist when Wilson made his trip. So far Kilo, who has proven himself to be a determined liar, has falsely equated the existence of the forgeries with their possession by the U.S. That specious claim seems to constitute his sole proof, but it is proof of nothing.
I have to admit, Conservatron, it really takes chutzpah to lie about what is written right here in this thread. It is downright pathological.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:51 pmDaryll at 11:24: “Scooter did not intentionally release Valerie’s name. Give the man a break. The bible says to judge not!”
Daryll one hour later: “Wayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?”
See why it’s useless to argue with crazy people?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:52 pmWayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Sorry to jump in Wayne, but I gotta~
Yes Daryll, Clinton was WAY out of bounds for his activities — IT WAS A PERSONAL ISSUE BETWEEN BILL & HILLARY. NO ONE ELSE.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
1) It would have been personal if he wouldn’t have been President.
2)It would have been personal if he didn’t get blow jobs while getting paid a salary that comes from taxpayers!
3) If it is personal, why is that the left loves, and adores to claim that Bush’s personal life BEFORE he was President is relevant today? care to explain the hypocrisy?
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:52 pm#129 I find it interesting that Conservatron has time to write this post while carefully avoiding all requests that he back up his repeated lies on this thread. But this behavior is typical of the intellectual chickensh*ts that back Bush. Tell a lie, and when challenged, just move on to the next lie.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:56 pmI have to admit, Conservatron, it really takes chutzpah to lie about what is written right here in this thread. It is downright pathological.
Comment by VerbalKint — July 2, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
so, read 110 and 128, it is all there buddy. Nice to see that you can’t read and comprehend. You too phylo, learn how to read and comprehend. Tells you exactly where Wilson lied, quotes and everything.
Thanks for reaffirming the facts that Liberals love their lies, but hate the facts that prove them wrong.
Poor you, puppets of the Democratic party.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:56 pmIt’s really sad to see how bad the politics of hate from the Republicans has gotten. I never understood the concept of putting a political party above ones country, but this seems to be the current state of the Republican party.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:58 pm#129 I find it interesting that Conservatron has time to write this post while carefully avoiding all requests that he back up his repeated lies on this thread. But this behavior is typical of the intellectual chickensh*ts that back Bush. Tell a lie, and when challenged, just move on to the next lie.
Comment by VerbalKint — July 2, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
Oh, projecting much son? The only chickenshit here is you son, who refuses to address the facts, 128 and 110. REad them and don’t cry hard when your world falls apart, ok?
Both joe wilson and valarie plame lied. Everyone with an IQ over 80 knows this. I am sorry that you are such a puppet that you have been blinded. Please, son, for you own good. Slowly, very slowly put down the Democratic party Kool-Aid and back away slowly.
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmJoe Wilson was a SPY BOSS.
There is NO WAY he would have exposed his wife, a COVERT AGENT, shown so by the TRIAL.
Armitage, Libby and Rove were ALL shown in the trial as having discussed Plame at the request of Dck Cheney…
Wilson is a SPY BOSS, and the Bush CRIMINALS screwed their OWN SPY, sabotaging National Security.
Go, Joe and Valerie!! You are PATRIOTS.
Bush and his CRIMALS are TRAITORS who deserve to be in PRISON…
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmI love eating choad!!
MMmmmm Choad loads are yummy!!
July 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmConservation, maybe I missed it. 110 and 128 don’t prove that Wilson lied. I want the facts but I haven’t found where Wilson has lied. A court found that Libby did but I can’t find where Wilson did.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:00 pmIf only Valerie was a REAL secret agent hehehe what a Fraud
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:00 pmAll that’s left for administration apologists like Kilo is evidently to obfuscate the entire issue with questions about Wilson’s character and timelines regarding forged documents.
Let’s just cut through the obfuscation. The bottom line is that a CIA asset was ruined by this administration, probably on orders from Dick Cheney, for political purposes. What purposes? Obviouly to discredit an expert who was shining a light on their lies used to fool us into a shooting war. Laws were broken, not the least of which was the Intelligence Identities Act.
FITZGERALD (5/25/07): “[I]t was clear from very early in the investigation that Ms. Wilson qualified under the relevant statute (Title 50, United States Code, Section 421) as a covert agent whose identity had been disclosed by public officials, including Mr. Libby, to the press.”
According to the British press, associates of Brewster Jennings may have been murdered in various cities around the world. People in this administration are guilty of treason and should be behind bars. Kilo, take your obfuscation over to someplace like NRO or Free Republic. The morons at these sites will be much more receptive.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:00 pmI looked at comments 110 and 128 and found nothing like a quote or evidence that Wilson lied. Honestly, what are you talking about?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:01 pmI looked at comments 110 and 128 and found nothing like a quote or evidence that Wilson lied. Honestly, what are you talking about?
Comment by Phylo Se Fiser — July 2, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
ok phylo….reading-comprehension not your strength, eh? stop with your silly games, ok?
as I said, you need to go play in the sanbox with the other kids. They are waiting for you. evidence provided and as a typical Liberal, when evidence is provided that proves you wrong, you Liberals always ignore it.
thanks for playing, but you lose son.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 pmGeorge W. ISLAMOTerrorist, the Saudi OIL WHOREBAG
To be fair now liberal Children , you must say the same about Jimmy ” Billy Bear and Peanuts ” Carter and Bill ” The Blowjob ” Clinton . But thin Who said that there was anything Fair about Liberals
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 pmFDR: “If only Valerie was a REAL secret agent hehehe what a Fraud”
Again, I quote the republican federal prosecutor:
FITZGERALD (5/25/07): “[I]t was clear from very early in the investigation that Ms. Wilson qualified under the relevant statute (Title 50, United States Code, Section 421) as a covert agent whose identity had been disclosed by public officials, including Mr. Libby, to the press.â€
What is it about that statement that people don’t get?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 pmWayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?
Comment by Daryll
Sure I do, but having an affair is not criminal
Cheating on a spouse is pretty crappy
But extra-marital affairs are not criminal, that is between Clinton, his wife and the other woman and was not really the business of anyone else.
Comment by Wayne — July 2, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
What about fraternization
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:04 pmComment #140 perfectly illustrates the pathological dishonesty of Conservatron.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:05 pmThis is comment 128 on my screen:
Daryll at 11:24: “Scooter did not intentionally release Valerie’s name. Give the man a break. The bible says to judge not!â€
Daryll one hour later: “Wayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?â€
See why it’s useless to argue with crazy people?
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 2, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
This is comment 110 on my screen:
Wayne, It may not be in the Constitution, but don’t you think that Clinton was out of bounds for committing this act?
Comment by Daryll — July 2, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Sorry to jump in Wayne, but I gotta~
Yes Daryll, Clinton was WAY out of bounds for his activities — IT WAS A PERSONAL ISSUE BETWEEN BILL & HILLARY. NO ONE ELSE.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
Are you sure these are the comments you’re referring to?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:06 pmDidn’t the CIA launch a seperate investigation when Plames cover was blown? I believe they did. Was that just to throw people off the track or did the CIA actually believe that a crime had been committed.
Care to comment Conservatron, or is your mouth too full of choad.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:06 pmVerbalKint sure Libby Lied , that is Funnt , also it is funny that you guys never said a Peep when Bill The Blowjob Clinton Lied to a GRAND JURY , what did Bill Get ? I’ll Tell you Nothing . the laws of this land only apply to Conservatives . That is wrong and so are you People .
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:06 pmWelllllllll.
As a shareholder in this corporation (The U.S). I feel I have a say when my CEO has sexual relations with another person in the company who’s career they have control over.
Comment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Doesn’t that go against your libertarian standards?
Monica was no victim.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:07 pm#142 The BEST you have to respond to the TREASON of the Bush administration is “Carter and Clinton”???
Carter and Clinton are NO LONGER PRESIDENT.
TRAITOR Bush the Saudi OIL WHOREBAG ISLAMOTerrorist IS.
And HIS administration has LIED us into an ILLEGAL WAR, exposed CIA COVERT SPIES for REVENGE.
And Osama is STILL FREE 6 years SINCE Bush became “president”.
Sorry, Sparky, “Clinton and Carter” doesn’t excuse the TREASON from Bush or his other WAR CRIMINALS.
The Wilsons are PATRIOTS.
The Bushes are Saudi OIL WHOREBAG ISLAMOTerrorist TRAITORSll
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:09 pmMonica was no victim.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
boy, i’ll say… silly little tart…
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:09 pm#147 How do you I never “said a peep” when Clinton lied to a grand jury? As for your claim that laws only apply to conservatives, with this one bizarre lie you have shot your credibility forever here. So maybe you should just troll somewhere else.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:11 pmConservatron, we are still waiting for you to provide justification for your repeated lies.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:11 pm1) It would have been personal if he wouldn’t have been President.
It’s still personal.
2)It would have been personal if he didn’t get blow jobs while getting paid a salary that comes from taxpayers!
Jealous? BTW, are you commenting from work today?
3) If it is personal, why is that the left loves, and adores to claim that Bush’s personal life BEFORE he was President is relevant today? care to explain the hypocrisy?
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
Clinton’s life before his presidency was relevant as well. I see no hypocrisy.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:12 pmboy, i’ll say… silly little tart…
Comment by katy — July 2, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
Nail on head, katy. :D
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:13 pmParty before country, right Phylo? sad, truly sad.
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
Pot meet kettle.
Oh….that’s right, you claim no affiliation whatsoever, religious or political.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:15 pmLying hypocrite.
1) It would have been personal if he wouldn’t have been President.
It’s still personal.
2)It would have been personal if he didn’t get blow jobs while getting paid a salary that comes from taxpayers!
Jealous? BTW, are you commenting from work today?
3) If it is personal, why is that the left loves, and adores to claim that Bush’s personal life BEFORE he was President is relevant today? care to explain the hypocrisy?
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
Clinton’s life before his presidency was relevant as well. I see no hypocrisy.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
so what you are saying that a President’s personal life before he is President is relevant, but once he becomes President, his personal life is not relevant anymore?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:19 pmNo, that’s something you lied about.
I was the one who called you on your bullshit.
Remember ? Here’s a link to jog your memory.
BTW the definition of a “specious claim” isn’t “a claim you check before making it”.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:20 pmWhich is how my statement that the Niger trip predated the Niger forgery differed from yours, that it didn’t.
1) It would have been personal if he wouldn’t have been President.
It’s still personal.
2)It would have been personal if he didn’t get blow jobs while getting paid a salary that comes from taxpayers!
Jealous? BTW, are you commenting from work today?
3) If it is personal, why is that the left loves, and adores to claim that Bush’s personal life BEFORE he was President is relevant today? care to explain the hypocrisy?
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
Clinton’s life before his presidency was relevant as well. I see no hypocrisy.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
and are you also saying that if a person uses company time to post on here, he is wasting company money, but if the President gets a blow job from Monica while getting paid with taxpayer money, he is not wasting taxpayer money?
Zooey, you are quite the mental light weight kid, just like every Liberal.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:22 pmNah, I wan’t an exact quote from you:
“That’s not Joe Wilson lying”
Then we can all agree that everyone else caught lying less than this, including every Bush Administration official, isn’t lying also.
March, 2002 – CIA’s CPA tasks Wilson to go to Niger
October, 2002 – Italian reporter purchases Niger forgery and provides it to US embassy.
March 2002-2003 – The one year period that passed between Wilson going to Niger and the first time he ever spoke about Niger intel doubts, after they were raised by the press, not by him.
March 8, 2003 – CNN –
SAN MIGUEL: How could this happen? It is the perception that documents like these are vetted … How do you think this managed to slip by?
WILSON: Well, this particular case is outrageous. … We know a lot about the uranium business in Niger, and for something like this to go unchallenged by U.S. — the U.S. government is just simply stupid.
This CNN one above is just to point out what Joe Wilson had to say about those forgeries when their existance was first made public. That anyone who saw them should have checked them and known.
Now let’s move on to Joe changing his story to claim he was that person and did….
May 3, 2003 – Wilson and Plame meet with Nicholas Kristof and discuss his trip to Niger.
May 6, 2003 – Nicholas Kristof, NYT –
“I’m told by a person involved … a former U.S. ambassador to Africa was dispatched to Niger. In February 2002, according to someone present at the meetings, that envoy reported to the C.I.A. and State Department that the information was unequivocally wrong and that the documents had been forged. The envoy reported, for example, that a Niger minister whose signature was on one of the documents had in fact been out of office for more than a decade.”
June 12, 2003 – WaPo –
“After returning to the United States, the envoy reported to the CIA that the uranium-purchase story was false, the sources said. Among the envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because the “dates were wrong and the names were wrong,” the former U.S. government official said.”
June 14, 2003 – Joe’s address some anti-war conference
“Let me just start out by saying … I just want to assure you that that American ambassador who has been cited in reports in the New York Times and in the Washington Post, and now in the Guardian over in London, who actually went over to Niger on behalf of the government — not of the CIA but of the government — and came back in February of 2002 and told the government that there was nothing to this story,” (bonus lie for you there)
“But I can assure you that that retired American ambassador to Africa, as Nick Kristof called him in his article, is also pissed off, and has every intention of ensuring that this story has legs.”
June 29, 2003 – Independant –
“The retired US ambassador said it was all but impossible that British intelligence had not received his report – drawn up by the CIA – which revealed that documents, purporting to show a deal between Iraq and the West African state of Niger, were forgeries.”
These are all statements about what Wilson said to the CIA about the Niger forgeries, at his debriefing, on his return from Niger, 7 months before the Niger forgeries existed, which he never saw.
Say it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:22 pmStill no quote from Kilo of Conservatron proving that Wilson lied.
I told you fools you wouldn’t be able to find it.
It’s fun proving these morons wrong.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:23 pmToo bad Justice Department guidelines are not binding on the President.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:26 pmStill no quote from Kilo of Conservatron proving that Wilson lied.
I told you fools you wouldn’t be able to find it.
It’s fun proving these morons wrong.
Comment by Phylo Se Fiser — July 2, 2007 @ 1:23 pm
Found them and posted them, little phylo. That your subpar intelligence and your below 80 IQ doesn’t recognize it is something else. By the way, stop masturbating to pictures of Valarie Plame and Joe Wilson kid. You will stain Plame’s dress.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:26 pmYes folks, this is current conservative values on display. To the troll called “FDR,” the lies Clinton told trying to cover up a personal sexual affair are equivalent to the lies the Bush adminsitration told to get 4,000 American soldiers killed and kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis under false pretenses.
There are two possible explanations: either “FDR” is a sociopath with no real sense of right and wrong, or he is astoundingly dumb.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:27 pmThe ironic thing is, Darryl, if the Democrats had been willing to dump the Clintons in 98, Gore would have had an incumbency advantage going into 2000.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:30 pmKilo, you’re a moron.
The IAEA revealed that the documents were obvious forgeries on March 7th of 2003. All of the stuff you have above is Wilson talking about the forgeries AFTER that date. It was public knowledge at that point!
I swear Republicans have a genetic defect when it comes to facts and the truth. Unbelievable!
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:31 pm#159 Once again Kilo, a very determined liar, attempts to equate “existence” with “Italian reporter purchases Niger forgery and provides it to US embassy.”
It just isn’t selling here, Kilo. Give it up.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:31 pmKilo, your ongoing quest to throw doubt into peoples’ minds about Joe Wilson’s character are irrelevant. What IS relevant is that this administration broke federal law by outing a covert CIA agent and should be subject to federal indictment for treason. What IS relevant is that one of Dick Cheney’s underlings fell on his sword for his masters and obstructed the investigation which would have shown who started the thing and why. Your ongoing attempts to change the subject are simply a pathetic attempt to muddy the waters.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:32 pmso what you are saying that a President’s personal life before he is President is relevant, but once he becomes President, his personal life is not relevant anymore?
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
It is relevant, if it affects his job performance. Otherwise, it’s between him and his wife.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:32 pmAnd if I regard those issues, and would encourage you to also, regard them as unrelated, would this still be obfuscation ?
Or just people discussing a different topic you idot ?
Lot of that goes on. You might want to figure out how to identify it at some point.
Was there a point to you posting confirmation of something nobody has disputed ?
What else have you got there Irrelevent Man ? An MP3 of the 18 minutes of erased Watergate Tape to throw in my face ? Oh no!
Nah why don’t you fuck off instead and find a discussion you can understand idiot.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:32 pmKilo, your timeline just shows the purchasing of the “forged docs” but it neglects to show the knowledge of their existence which was some time before that.
What is the lie that you and others are so outraged about?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:32 pm#162 And Conservatron lies once again about what has been posted in this thread. Does he never tire of the lying? I know I do.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:33 pmand are you also saying that if a person uses company time to post on here, he is wasting company money, but if the President gets a blow job from Monica while getting paid with taxpayer money, he is not wasting taxpayer money?
Zooey, you are quite the mental light weight kid, just like every Liberal.
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
He would be wasting taxpayer money — just like you’re wasting your employers time and money.
You’re just pissed because I caught you stealing from your employer. How very “conservative” of you.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:34 pmConservatron, I have looked for your quotes and cannot find them. Please just copy and paste them so we can all see them. Otherwise I’m going to have to conclude that you are totally insane. 110 and 128 were totally irrelevant to this conversation. there was nothing in them about Wilson. Nor were they posted by you.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:35 pmSome of these trolls must be paid to lie. Their determination to do so even when the irrefutable proof exists right in front of everyone is incredible. Their souls must be full of rot to do so. By the way, what was the pay, guys? 30 silver pieces?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:36 pmso what you are saying that a President’s personal life before he is President is relevant, but once he becomes President, his personal life is not relevant anymore?
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
It is relevant, if it affects his job performance. Otherwise, it’s between him and his wife.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
So, it is between him and his wife how Clinton wasted taxpayer money by getting blow jobs from Monica instead of working, right?
I guess it is between him and his wife the fact that he was too busy getting blow jobs and not trying to destroy Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, who in 1996 had called America a paper tiger and declared war on us, right?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:36 pmand are you also saying that if a person uses company time to post on here, he is wasting company money, but if the President gets a blow job from Monica while getting paid with taxpayer money, he is not wasting taxpayer money?
Zooey, you are quite the mental light weight kid, just like every Liberal.
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
He would be wasting taxpayer money — just like you’re wasting your employers time and money.
You’re just pissed because I caught you stealing from your employer. How very “conservative†of you.
Comment by Zooey — July 2, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
1) who said I was pist?
2) who said I am not at home?
3) If I am working, who said I don’t run my own business.
nice of you, “compassionate” Liberal to stereotype people and assume things that you have ZERO way of knowing.
sad, sad Zoey my mental midget.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:39 pmNot that there is any point in making this argument to the strange, fallen excuse for a human being called “Conservatron,” but the record shows that Clinton spent a lot more time and energy trying to kill bin Laden than Bush ever did, before or after 9-11.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:40 pmI would have posted sooner but I read that Darryl said “Judge not … and I was laughing so hard I couldn’t see straight.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:41 pmI think what Darryl meant was judge not republicans, but feel free to be judge, jury and executioner if the subject is Bill Clinton.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 pmWhat prior date would that be ?
What prior source was there which referred to the contentsof the forgeries presented to the US embassy ?
I can’t even imagine under what circumstances the US could be referring to the contents of an unsolicited forged document. What other source other than the document itself could inform the US of it’s false contents ?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:44 pmIf that were true, everyone shredding their credibility on the forgery wouldn’t have been needed.
So, it is between him and his wife how Clinton wasted taxpayer money by getting blow jobs from Monica instead of working, right?
I guess it is between him and his wife the fact that he was too busy getting blow jobs and not trying to destroy Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, who in 1996 had called America a paper tiger and declared war on us, right?
For Monica to interfere with Clinton’s activities in the White House presumes Clinton was actually interested in doing anything meaningful in his last 6 years.
I have to commend him for that, though. After his domestic ideals crashed and burned in the Democratic Congress of 93-94, he gave them up.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:47 pmIf you think that’s relevent then why avoid reading those details ?
The orginal source of the leak.
When Fitzgerald discovered who this was and how it happened.
What obstruction that source engaged in.
You say this is the information you want. Well I’m the only person here who has referred anyone to this information, and on the basis that everyone should read it.
If you single me out for that and call that “muddying the waters” and “obfuscation” on my part then clearly you are lying about wanting to know this information. Clearly you don’t want it known. There is no other explanation for such a contradictory response from you.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:52 pmKilo, why do you lie? Are you paid to lie? If so, then who pays you?
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:54 pmLibby DENIED delay of sentence pending appeal!!!
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/02/appeals-court-refuses-to-delay-libbys-prison-term/#comments
God Bless America!!!
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:56 pmAre you paid to lie?
Of course it is.
If so, then who pays you?
Rove.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:02 pmWow you really have got nothing eh.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:05 pmOut of the two of us only you’ve lied here.
Want another link to that ?
Because I’m not going to get tired of making you look stupid bitch. LMAO.
Kilo, here is the information I was referring to:
October 15, 2001:
US intelligence agencies receive reports from the Italian intelligence service SISMI of a supposed agreement between Iraq and Niger for the sale of yellowcake uranium. The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research considers the report “highly suspect” because the French control Niger’s uranium industry. The CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the Department of Energy consider a uranium deal “possible.”
October 18, 2001:
The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research issues a report stating that there is no corroborative evidence that there was any agreement on uranium transfer between Iraq and Niger, or that any uranium was actually transferred.
February 5, 2002:
The CIA’s Directorate of Operations “the clandestine branch that employed Valerie Wilson”issues a second report including “verbatim text” of an agreement for the sale of 500 tons of uranium yellowcake per year that was supposedly signed July 5-6, 2000.
February 12, 2002:
The Defense Intelligence Agency writes a report concluding that “Iraq is probably searching abroad for natural uranium to assist in its nuclear weapons program.” Vice President Cheney reads this report and asks for the CIA’s analysis.
February 19, 2002 :
Joseph Wilson meets with officials from CIA and the State Department. According to a State Department intelligence analyst’s notes, the meeting was apparently convened by Valerie Wilson. She later testifies that she left the meeting after introducing her husband.
February 26, 2002:
Wilson arrives in Niger. After meeting with the former Nigerien Prime Minister, the former Minister of Mines and Energy, and other business contacts, Wilson concludes that “it was highly unlikely that anything was going on.”
This is what I was referring to. Now, where is the lie from Joe Wilson. And if there is one, is it bigger than what has come out of the Vice President’s office?
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:13 pmBubble Boy can’t even chew with his mouth closed.
Why would anyone expect him to uphold the rule of law?
(Oh, and Bubble Boy’s Daddy thought very highly of Mr. Wilson. Bushist fascists rely on forgetting Wilson’s Gulf War heroism. Inconvenient truths. Tsk, tsk.)
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:20 pm‘In 1990, during the first Gulf War, he was the acting U.S. Ambassador in Iraq and the last American diplomat to confront Saddam Hussein before Desert Storm. President George H.W. Bush called Wilson “a true American hero” for his efforts to free more than 100 American hostages in Iraq.’
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:27 pmI guess it is between him and his wife the fact that he was too busy getting blow jobs and not trying to destroy Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, who in 1996 had called America a paper tiger and declared war on us, right?
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
I’m sure you can provide some sort of proof of that.
I won’t hold my breath.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:29 pmConservatives need to make up their minds — are they for amnesty or against it? Because if they’re against amnesty, then buh-buh Scooter, thanks for playing.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:30 pmConservatives need to make up their minds — are they for amnesty or against it? Because if they’re against amnesty, then buh-buh Scooter, thanks for playing.
Bush is pro-amnesty, and the only man who is the decider on whether Scooter goes to jail or not.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:31 pmThanks for the perspective No Blood for Hubris.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:31 pm1) who said I was pist?
2) who said I am not at home?
3) If I am working, who said I don’t run my own business.
nice of you, “compassionate†Liberal to stereotype people and assume things that you have ZERO way of knowing.
sad, sad Zoey my mental midget.
Comment by Conservatron — July 2, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Just as you have no way of knowing anything about the things you post on this blog, moron.
Typical Neo-Con Acerebralist.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:31 pmm12, how wise do you think it would be for Bush to pardon Libby? Is Libby worthy of being pardoned? Why or why not?
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:36 pmm12, how wise do you think it would be for Bush to pardon Libby? Is Libby worthy of being pardoned? Why or why not?
Wise, how? Politically, it would probably work in Bush’s benefit.
Is Libby worthy of a pardon? Probably not.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:44 pmKilo,
Remember this? You haven’t answered my question in bold below. How about now? We are all tired of talking to a cardboard dummy of your own creation.
You said:
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:48 pm1. It’s not my party
2. It’s not my ideology
3. It’s your credibility not mine, and
4. The 4th of July means nothing to me.
Comment by Kilo — July 1, 2007 @ 12:11 pm
OK Trollie, then tell me what your party & ideology are. Or don’t you have the guts to commit your self.
Comment by Merlin — July 1, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
Comment by Merlin — July 2, 2007 @ 2:48 pm
He doesn’t live in the US.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:57 pmKilo, there doesn’t seem to be any point to your postings. Do you think there was an injustice here with Libby’s sentence? Do you think the administration DIDN’T commit the crime of outing a covert CIA agent? Do you think that if they did, they had good reasons to do it? I don’t know why the subject of Wilson’s character or the timeline of forged documents is relevant. To me, you’re simply trying to make a fairly understandable situation needlessly complex. That is the definition of obfuscation and it is why I say you’re simply muddying up the water.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:57 pmm12, please expound on how a pardon would benifit Bush politically.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:00 pmComment by Merlin — July 2, 2007 @ 2:48 pm
He doesn’t live in the US.
Comment by Mr. President — July 2, 2007 @ 2:57 pm
Are you Kilo? I prefer an answer from him. If not, thanks for the info anyway, but that does not answer what I asked.
He still has an ideology where ever he lives. Frankly, either he doesn’t know what his ideology is, or he hasn’t the courage to be open about who he is.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:05 pmI’ll say it. Your conclusion is not based upon your evidence.
According to your evidence, the forgeries were purchased in October 2002 by an Italian reporter. They were, therefore, in existence before October 2002.
You don’t provide any evidence to show when the forgeries were produced, nor where they were before October 2002.
And yet you conclude that Wilson never saw them.
Your conclusion is not supported by facts in evidence.
Indeed, the evidence you supplied gives credence to the theory that Mr. Wilson saw the forgeries long before the Italian reporter bought them.
I’d say “nice try,” but you weren’t even close.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:10 pm*crickets chirping*
Our resident bible thumper can’t even come up with his own quote. Could it be that Daryll is misquoting the bible? God will get him for that!
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:12 pmm12, please expound on how a pardon would benifit Bush politically.
Well, your bunch will hate him regardless. But some members of the base might be pleased that he is fighting back against Nancy Pelosi’s ‘requests’.
Well, she thinks they are demands.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:25 pmJustice Department guidelines also say that the applicant should admit to their crime and show remorse. Libby has done neither. And I agree that Bush should recurse himself because it would be a total conflict of interest for him to pardon Libby. I suspect that Bush is as involved with Libby’s crime as Cheney is.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:41 pmmy bunch? Do I walk with the Brady’s? How will selling to his base help a President politically? Keep in mind that he has been consistently in the low 30’s for the last 2 years. Keeping the base happy will only ignite the 60 to 70 percenters. So again, how will this help him?
I voted for Bush the first time around so trying to mentally herd me into one group or another is a mistake on your part.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:42 pm“Wise, how? Politically, it would probably work in Bush’s benefit.
Is Libby worthy of a pardon? Probably not.
Comment by m12 ”
Exactly how is pardoning Libby going to help Bush? His faithful 26% isn’t going to change their mind and the remainder of us have been on to George Bush for quite some time. All it will do is to reinforce the belief of the other 74% percent of us that Bush is a criminal and not worthy of our support.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:46 pmAnd once again the ambassador is right.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:59 pmI guess it is between him and his wife the fact that he was too busy getting blow jobs and not trying to destroy Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, who in 1996 had called America a paper tiger and declared war on us, right?
Comment by Conservatron
How long do you think a blow job lasts, anyway? I’m willing to believe you’re only guessing, but still, do you think it goes on for months?
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:01 pmI post this in the ‘Think Fast” thread, it actually belongs here:
Here is the timeline that describes sequence of events leading up to the fiasco that lead us to the fiasco in Iraq. It shows that the agreement surfaced in Feb 2001 and this lead to Wilson’s trip to Niger:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/ timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq&general_topic_areas=africaUraniumClaim
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:06 pmOops – split link. Here is the right one:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq&general_topic_areas=africaUraniumClaim
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:08 pmHow long do you think a blow job lasts
Way to many variables for a solid answer on that one.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:08 pmHey Walt! Why not use tinyurl or the link codes (which avoid the mess you’ve made of the HTML.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:10 pmHow long do you think a blow job lasts
Way to many variables for a solid answer on that one.
Comment by Tundra — July 2, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What the fukc kind of discussion is this!!!!!?!?!?!??!?!
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:15 pmThis is too easy.
Joe Wilson, Politics of Truth:
Apart from being the conduit of a message from a colleague in her office asking if I would be willing to have a conversation about Niger’s uranium industry, Valerie had had nothing to do with the matter.
Senate Select Committee On Intelligence:
Some CPD officials could not recall how the office decided to contact the former
ambassador, however, interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his
wife, a CPD employee, suggested his name for the trip. The CPD reports officer told Committee
staff that the former ambassador’s wife “offered up his name” and a memorandum to the Deputy
Chief of the CPD on February 12, 2002, from the former ambassador’s wife says, “my husband
has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to
mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.”
snip
On February 19, 2002, CPD hosted a meeting with the former ambassador,
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:16 pmintelligence analysts from both the CIA and INR, and several individuals from the DO’s Africa
and CPD divisions. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the merits of the former
ambassador traveling to Niger. An INR analyst’s notes indicate that the meeting was “apparently
convened by [the former ambassador's] wife who had the idea to dispatch [him] to use his
contacts to sort out the Iraq-Niger uranium issue.”
What the fukc kind of discussion is this!!!!!?!?!?!??!?!
Comment by Mr. President — July 2, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
Use the Google. :D
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:18 pmOr this one:
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence:
When the former ambassador spoke to Committee staff, his description of his findings
differed from the DO intelligence report and his account of information provided to him by the
CIA differed from the CIA officials’ accounts in some respects. First, the former ambassador
described his findings to Committee staff as more directly related to Iraq and, specifically, as
refuting both the possibility that Niger could have sold uranium to Iraq and that Iraq approached
Niger to purchase uranium. The intelligence report described how the structure of Niger’s
uranium mines would make it difficult, if not impossible, for Niger to sell uranium to rouge
nations, and noted that Nigerien officials denied knowledge of any deals to sell uranium to any
rogue states, but did not refute the possibility that Iraq had approached Niger to purchase
uranium. Second, the former ambassador said that he discussed with his CIA contacts which
names and signatures should have appeared on any documentation of a legitimate uranium
transaction. In fact, the intelligence report made no mention of the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium
deal or signatures that should have appeared on any documentation of such a deal. The only
mention of Iraq in the report pertained to the meeting between the Iraqi delegation and former
Prime Minister Mayaki. Third, the former ambassador noted that his CIA contacts told him there
were documents pertaining to the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium transaction and that the source of
the information was the H B intelligence service. The DO reports officer told Committee staff
that he did not provide the former ambassador with any information about the source or details of
-the original reporting as it would have required sharing classified information and, noted that
there were no “documents” circulating in the IC at the time of the former ambassador’s trip, only
intelligence reports from | | ^ | intelligence regarding an alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal.
Meeting notes and other correspondence show that details of the reporting were discussed at the
February 19, 2002 meeting, but none of the meeting participants recall telling the former
ambassador the source of the report I ^ ^ ^ ^ H H
(U) The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a
Washington Post article (”CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium
Bid,” June 12, 2003) which said, “among the Envoy’s conclusions was that the documents may
have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong.’” Committee staff
asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the “dates were wrong
and the names were wrong” when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of
what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have
“misspoken” to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were “forged.” He also
said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were
not correct and may have thought he had seen the names himself. The former ambassador
reiterated that he had been able to collect the names of the government officials which should
have been on the documents.
Joe admits to the Senate committee he made it up
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:25 pmHey Walt! Why not use tinyurl or the link codes (which avoid the mess you’ve made of the HTML.
Comment by gummitch — July 2, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
Two reasons – one, I just copied the prior post without realizing that the clipboard copy was not really same as the source; two I was in too much of a hurry to check what I was sending since it posted correctly in the other thread.
In addition to all that, the document referenced in February 2001 was the forged one that Wilson discredited.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:28 pmBush SOTU:
“The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .â€
Joe Wilson:
“It did not take long to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place.”
Sought doesn’t mean a transaction took place
“The next day, I reminded a friend at the State Department of my trip and suggested that if the president had been referring to Niger, then his conclusion was not borne out by the facts as I understood them.”
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence:
The intelligence report based on the former ambassador’s trip was disseminated on
March 8, 2002. The report did not identify the former ambassador by name or as a former
ambassador, but described him as “a contact with excellent access who does not have an
established reporting record.” The report also indicted that the “subsources of the following
information knew their remarks could reach the U.S. government and may have intended to
influence as well as inform.” DO officials told Committee staff that this type of description was
routine and was done in order to protect the former ambassador as the source of the information,
which they had told him they would do. DO officials also said they alerted WINPAC analysts
when the report was being disseminated because they knew the “high priority of the issue.” The
report was widely distributed in routine channels.
The intelligence report indicated that former Nigerien Prime Minister Ibrahim
Mayaki was unaware of any contracts that had been signed between Niger and any rogue states
for the sale of yellowcake while he was Prime Minister (1997-1999) or Foreign Minister (1996-
1997). Mayaki said that if there had been any such contract during his tenure, he would have
been aware of it. Mayaki said, however, that in June 1999, | ^ ^ ^ H ^ H | ^ m ^ | ^ |
businessman, approached him and insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss
“expanding commercial relations” between Niger and Iraq. The intelligence report said that
Mayaki interpreted “expanding commercial relations” to mean that the delegation wanted to
discuss uranium yellowcake sales. The intelligence report also said that “although the meeting
took place, Mayaki let the matter drop due to the UN sanctions on Iraq.”
Wilson reported that Mayaki told him Iraqis were in his opinion seeking discussions on buying yellowcake.
This is shooting fish in a barrel
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:36 pmIt’s an unquestionable truth among Republicans that Joe Wilson is a liar. This charge has been repeated dozens of times by the right wing shock jocks. Last week Michael Medved said that what Wilson did was “far worse than anything Scooter Libby didâ€.
Here’s a challenge to all of you idiot Republicans who have bought into this lie that Wilson lied: FIND THE EXACT QUOTE THAT YOU THINK CONSTITUTES A LIE.
I can guarantee you that you will not find that quote.
When you can’t find it, please have the decency to admit that Wilson didn’t lie, and have the courage to call your favorite right wing shock jock and ask them to correct this outrageous lie.
Phylo out.
Comment by Phylo Se Fiser — July 2, 2007 @ 11:54 am
***********************************************************
Satisfied now.
Wilson said his wife had nothing to do with his going. Witnesses say she suggested he go.
Wilson said he debunked forged documents. Witnesses say he was never shown the documents and Wilson has to do a climb down.
Wilson said there was no evidence Iraq sought uranium in Niger. In the report he made to the CIA he (Wilson) documents a Nigerien official (Mayaki) telling him that he had been contacted by Iraqis who Mayaki assumed wanted to discuss yellowcake.
What more do you need?
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:42 pmJune 14, 2003 – Joe’s address some anti-war conference
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:45 pm“Let me just start out by saying … I just want to assure you that that American ambassador who has been cited in reports in the New York Times and in the Washington Post, and now in the Guardian over in London, who actually went over to Niger on behalf of the government — not of the CIA but of the government — and came back in February of 2002 and told the government that there was nothing to this story,†(bonus lie for you there)
Kilo
How is this a lie? You have consistantly proved yourself to be confused on the information surrounding the Wilson/Plame affair and I wish you could become informed, since you seem to be sincere in your desire to know the facts. Armitage is not important to the bigger story. Try starting from scratch and read Wilson’s book and then see if you can prove he lied about anything. You won’t be able to. I haven’t been able to, and I’ve spent more time then you trying to get to the bottom of the whole story of “Treasongate”.
Campesino: Republicans say Bush didn’t lie us into a war. Witness say otherwise.
Republicans say Bush and Cheney didn’t approve of a policy of torture. Witnesses say that actually they did.
Republicans say the Bush administration hasn’t broken any laws. Witnesses say that they have broken laws.
There you go. How do you like that kind of argument. Satisfied?
How about this: Republicans say that Valerie Plame wasn’t covert. The republican prosecutor on the case, Patrick Fitzgerald says otherwise:
FITZGERALD (5/25/07): “[I]t was clear from very early in the investigation that Ms. Wilson qualified under the relevant statute (Title 50, United States Code, Section 421) as a covert agent whose identity had been disclosed by public officials, including Mr. Libby, to the press.”
See how it works? I named my witness and gave a citation.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:58 pmSenate Select Committee on Intelligence:
Funny, I can’t seem to find these words in the Report by the Senate Committee on Intelligence.
Could you please provide a LINK to what you have “pasted”??
If I remember correctly, these seem like the RANTINGS of two or three right-wing senators who made their OWN COMMENTS, and were NOT in the OFFICIAL Senate report???
Thanks!!
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:05 pmWhat poor misguided Campasino is quoting is a discredited, minority position written by three republicans on the committee. The minority position was never supported by the facts, but the committee was required by Senate rules to put it into the record anyway. It has served its purpose – to provide a way for tool-like morons to spout off on things they know nothing about and act like they’ve got documentation. This is one of the ways right-wing propaganda works on its more than willing tools like Campasino.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:11 pmWhat poor misguided Campasino is quoting is a discredited, minority position written by three republicans on the committee.
EXACTLY!!
And the WORDS used in his “paste” come from an article from a website called globalsecurity.org.
These are NOT the words from the Senate report.
Campesino is another Bush ISLAMOTerrorist LIAR!!
BUSTED!!
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:15 pmNope. Comes from an MIT website:
http://web.mit.edu/simsong/www/iraqreport2-textunder.pdf
Nice try. Thanks for playing!
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:24 pm#222.
Yes, the TEXT UNDER the Senate Intelligence report. You are RIGHT, it WAS on MIT’s web site, as well as that of Global Security.
But it ALSO is NOT the REPORT; it is the MINORITY POSITION, and as Col. Jack said, NOT supported by FACTS.
You said it WAS the Senate Intelligence Report. NOT TRUE, just addendum…
Thanks for playing, LIAR!!
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:30 pmCampesino, it also comes from the minority view and not the official standing of the paper in which you paste from.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:31 pmWhat poor misguided Campasino is quoting is a discredited, minority position written by three republicans on the committee. The minority position was never supported by the facts, but the committee was required by Senate rules to put it into the record anyway. It has served its purpose – to provide a way for tool-like morons to spout off on things they know nothing about and act like they’ve got documentation. This is one of the ways right-wing propaganda works on its more than willing tools like Campasino.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 2, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
************************************************************
Sorry, but everything quoted is in the main body of the report approved by all committee members of both parties.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:32 pmCampesino, it also comes from the minority view and not the official standing of the paper in which you paste from.
Comment by hellinabucket
Yup. Campesino is one BUSTED ISLAMOTerrorist LIAR!
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:33 pmCampasino: “Sorry, but everything quoted is in the main body of the report approved by all committee members of both parties.”
That’s just not true. You may have heard or read in right-wing media that it is, but it isn’t true.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:39 pmCampasino: “Sorry, but everything quoted is in the main body of the report approved by all committee members of both parties.â€
That’s just not true. You may have heard or read in right-wing media that it is, but it isn’t true.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 2, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
************************************************************
Go READ it. Minority views begin at page 441 in the report. They come from both Republicans and Democrats. What’s in the main body was agreed to by both parties. None of the Democratic opinions casts any doubt on the things I’ve quoted here.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:47 pmStars on the DC Mall for lost Intelligence Community contacts who were American…
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:47 pmThat’s just not true. You may have heard or read in right-wing media that it is, but it isn’t true.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 2, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
**********************************************************
I’ve been reading the report – not right wing media.
I’ve not seen you cite a single source to back your position.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:48 pmThe minority report was written by three republicans; Roberts, Hatch and Bond. If you really are reading the actual Senate report as you say you are, you will notice that it is attached to the appendix. It is not endorsed by the committee. Now, if you get your information from National Review or Free Republic, I understand your confusion. They have not made the minority report’s status clear.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:05 pmAlso, look here:
http://wid.ap.org/documents/libbytrial/jan23/DX71.pdf
This is a declassified copy (Tab 4) of the CIA report on Wilson’s trip that says exactly the same thing about the Iraqi contact with Mayakia. That’s not filtered by anyone on the SSCI and shows Wilson lied in his op-ed.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:05 pmOh, Campasino, since you ARE reading the report and you want to be believed, maybe you could provide us all with the url you are currently using to read it. That should clear things up real well. I’m waiting.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:06 pmThe minority report was written by three republicans; Roberts, Hatch and Bond. If you really are reading the actual Senate report as you say you are, you will notice that it is attached to the appendix. It is not endorsed by the committee. Now, if you get your information from National Review or Free Republic, I understand your confusion. They have not made the minority report’s status clear.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 2, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
**********************************************************
Show me the page numbers or name the appendix that shows the Republican minority view. I’m not quoting from any minority report or appendix. You can’t do it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:08 pmOh, Campasino, since you ARE reading the report and you want to be believed, maybe you could provide us all with the url you are currently using to read it. That should clear things up real well. I’m waiting.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 2, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
***********************************************************
Once again:
http://web.mit.edu/simsong/www/iraqreport2-textunder.pdf
It’s obvious from your comments that you haven’t bothered to look at it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 pmAnd here’s a version at the Government Printing Office site:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/iraq.html
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:21 pmCampasino: “It’s obvious from your comments that you haven’t bothered to look at it.”
Of course I’ve read the 9-11 Senate committee report. It’s just as I posted. The “additional views” are in the appendix to the actual report. This particular one was written by 3 republicans, is not consistent with the findings of the general committee and represents their own views. Yes, there are other “additional views.” The ones by democrats almost all list relevant public statements by the Bush administration which were mendacious. The committee itself decided that Wilson had done nothing wrong and had not misrepresented his mission. The “additional view” by the three repubs contradicts the committee findings.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:32 pmBut, the larger issue here is that Wilson was someone who questioned the administration’s pretext for invading Iraq. Campasino, does the fact that there were no WMD’s tell you anything at all? Doesn’t it imply that Wilson was right in questioning them? Were they reconstituting a nuclear weapons program at the time? NO. Were there any connections between the Saddam Hussein regime and the attack on 9-11? NO. Now, you and your right wing friends have been straining to impune Joe Wilson’s credibility and character — but, he was right, wasn’t he? Iraq was not a threat to the U.S., right? I’m at a loss to understand just what it is people like you are still arguing about. We all know what happened.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:40 pmI’ve mentioned many times that I was in a family for more than 26 years who joined Organized Crime only it wasn’t any ordinary Crime System. What Joe Wilson said is the truth, however he should have added that we haven’t seen anything yet with regard to what else is involved in this “Ongoing Crime”. Frankly, although many facets have surfaced, I still doubt if anyone will actually believe what it truly is. Please expect to be totally shocked! Also expect to understand why everything has been the way it has for so long. There are usually simple reasons to explain why everything has been so insane for so long. I don’t beleive I’m the only Citizem who shakes their head when hearing the latest, do you? I do know about massive Cocaine shipments though as the family was ladunering Drug and Gun Running money straight into Property using Mortgage Fraud for those involved. By the way, the Gun Running part is already in the news with Drummond and Chitquita, but now many know about the DRUG part. Coming across the Texas Border from Mexico are huge shipments with some destine for Chicago, the weekly shipment is $100 Million and here in Chicago it’s split up with Florida and New York. There are other shipments destine for other parts of the county other than Chicago equally as large if not larger! All shipments are protected by corruption which offers safe passage all the way to their destinations. I would think that it should be easy to figure out who is behind this?
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:03 pmAdding to my above comment….
If you add up the drug shipments for a year, you’ll be astounded with how huge this is. Plus you’ll be equally shocked to learn about the links to other areas including the Canadian Drug system with it’s links to the MOB. But worse….., who in our Political and Military systems have involvement in this. Add up the yearly sales just for Chicago and it’s over 5 billion per year and to think that there are other shipments elsewhere is mindblowing. By the way, I witnessed this myself as if you want to have the job of driving the Drug Truck from Texas, known to the Drug people (and the family) as “The Pepper Truck”, all you have to do is attend a huge Christian Church and talk to a head Admin Minister for a job. In a week or so, you’ll be the next driver! I can’t make this us as I saw it for myself while attending a Men’s meeting on Sunday Morning when a new person joined our group and was looking for work! More about the Church…., some of the property it sits on was once owned by Organized Crime (also known within the family too), plus the founding Minister was once Clintons Spiritual Advisor. Coincidence maybe? I know a lot more as I was in a family for more than 26 years who was part of this! Believe me, there is a huge mountain of stuff just waiting to surface and guess who is involved?
My close friend lost a long time friend as he was murdered in one of their elimination systems. She and some of her family will testify in court that what happened to him was actually murder.
Other criminal facets involved in this are Huge MOB Gang Stalking. It’s a very old criminal behavior with history but today it’s consider somewhat new to Law Enforcement. My life and my friends life have been overwhelmed from this criminal behavior for years and we aren’t the only ones. As more of this surfaces, people won’t believe how out of control everthing is however, you may start to realize why what’s been coming out of Washington has been so insane.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:24 pmOf course I’ve read the 9-11 Senate committee report. It’s just as I posted. The “additional views†are in the appendix to the actual report. This particular one was written by 3 republicans, is not consistent with the findings of the general committee and represents their own views. Yes, there are other “additional views.†The ones by democrats almost all list relevant public statements by the Bush administration which were mendacious. The committee itself decided that Wilson had done nothing wrong and had not misrepresented his mission. The “additional view†by the three repubs contradicts the committee findings.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 2, 2007 @ 6:32 pm
***********************************************************
Obviously you haven’t as what I have linked to has absolutely nothing to do with 9-11. That’s a totally separate report.
Please show me a citation where the committe itself said Wilson had done nothng wrong. You can’t do it.
You have yet to link to a single piece of documentation that has contradicted anything I’ve said – because you can’t
All you can do is wave your hands and say I’m mistaken – because you have no evidence to contradict me.
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:25 pmBut, the larger issue here is that Wilson was someone who questioned the administration’s pretext for invading Iraq. Campasino, does the fact that there were no WMD’s tell you anything at all? Doesn’t it imply that Wilson was right in questioning them?
***********************************************************
He didn’t question them. Look at this op-ed he wrote on Feb 6, 2002 the week after the SOTU speech:
http://www.politicsoftruth.com/editorials/big_cat.html
There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself if the United States comes after him.
And he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that.
Hussein and Aziz both told me directly that Iraq reserved the right to use every weapon in its arsenal if invaded, just as it had against Iran and later the Kurds.
The fact that thousands of men, women and children had died in these attacks fazed them not one bit. In fact, Aziz could barely be bothered to stop puffing on his Cuban cigar as he made these comments, of so little importance was the use of chemicals to kill people.
It is probably too late to change Hussein’s assessment, and that will make any ensuing battle for Iraq that much more dangerous for our troops and for the Iraqis who find themselves in the battlefield.
***********************************************************
In the week after Bush said his 16 words in the SOTU Joe Wilson is here officially on record that he believes Hussein has WMD and will use them. Wilson’s concern is the danger our troops would face from them if we invade.
So you are proven 100% wrong out of Wilson’s own mouth – he DIDN’T question that Iraq had WMD. This link is to Joe Wilson’s own website so don’t give me any guff about sources.
You and your friends need to understand that Wilson is an opportunistic liar who though he could score political points and get on board the Kerrey campaign
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:38 pmEr…. yeah. Because that’s when he first started talking about them. After they were already public knowledge.
Did you fail to notice that the first time he was asked about them in response to the IAEA he had nothing to say other than this shouldn’t diminish the evidence of Saddam’s WMD program used in justifying the war ?
Just like he had nothing to say about dodgy WMD evidence used to justify the war until it was public knowledge that the US had found none in Iraq, after the invasion.
And in both cases he made came to these conclusions after a good portion of the non-CIA-affiliated world had, well after the fact.
Try paying attention.
Yeah. And you cunts are great with them. Hence me having to explain shit I already posted again and again and again.
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:15 pmIt’s not a lie. It’s Joe Wilson confirming he was the source in a bunch of stories where the source was lying.
Yeah. Because who leaked her ID isn’t important to the bigger story…. of who leaked her ID.
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:21 pmGot nothing to do with the fact that reporters knew her name because Joe Wilson was using her identity as window dressing for his Niger story to the point where people were stating “he’s telling everybody”.
Nah. There’ll be another reason no doubt.
I posted no conclusion.
What I asked was for someone to state was their own conclusion: That Joe Wilson lie.
To state that he didn’t lie about his assessment of forged documents when repeatedly telling reporters that he made assessments about who signed them and that he warned about these forgeries, right up until he published his op-ed when he stated he never saw the document and referred only to what the press had claimed about their content.
Nor do I need to. Joe Wilson, in his own words tells you that he never saw them. This is the only location that needs to be determined when it comes to his claims of having made an assessment of them as forgeries based on their content and signatures.
The facts in evidence supporting Joe Wilson never seeing these documents before publishing his op-ed is Joe Wilson stating that is the case.
LOL. And you pretend to be studying for the bar exam as a lawyer.
So he lied when he stated that wasn’t the case then. I’ll take your word for it.
I hope not. I don’t not what you’re “close to” but I fear there may be dangerous fumes involved. A gas leak would be my guess.
Seriously, could you and I now have a conversation about Wayne Gretzky where you state my claims about him playing hockey are unsupported by the evidence ?
Because, you know, what fkn evidence do you think exists about Joe Wilson doing anything, ever, where his NYT op-ed isn’t at the top of the list ?
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 pmYou know, the only reason anyone knows his name. Made the news a while back, kind of a big deal about yellowcake uranium. Check it out sometime.
I posted that to the original thread but it didn’t appear.
Actually no I don’t have one. In terms of politics I can’t think of lamer than looking to some dead guy to define what you think about issues today.
If you wanted an indication, politicalcompass says I’m an economic centrist -1 and a social leftist -2.
I don’t belong to any political party, nor have I voted at the last 2 elections. I won’t be voting at this one either because I really can’t be bothered. I supported the government for their economic policy and that’s pretty much all in place now so it makes little difference to me.
You know how the Democrat party compares to Republicans in terms of economic policy and management of public deficits ?
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:54 pmWell it’s the other way around in Australia. And “our Bush” paying off “our Clinton’s” record defecits back into surplus is a big reason our economic growth has led much of the world for the past decade. Which is why interest rates and employment have all improved.
Sorry, I don’t know why I referred to Australian politics there. This guy assures me that I live in Norway… based on something he’s never willing to share…
KILO = SEIXON
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:57 pmComment by troll alert — July 2, 2007 @ 11:40 am
And what medical grounds would you be claiming for not posting what I asked you to ?
You guaranteed Joe Wilson had never lied.
I told you that he obviously had and gave you the opportunity to revise that claim. I gave you the quotes which show Joe Wilson was lying that you asked for.
Now lie and tell me that he wasn’t.
Tell me nobody in the Bush administration caught lying, repeatedly, in regard to something as important as WMD intel is a liar because Joe Wilson isn’t.
You’d need to be one cowardly piece of shit to challenge people and demand something in caps then disappear when asked for a simple statement in return.
July 2nd, 2007 at 9:06 pmhellinabucket, I could care less about Clinton’s lies during that specific case. Here is the point, he committed a sexual act with an intern. In most corporations/firms the CEO/Executive would be fired. Clinton should have been removed.
Comment by Daryll
St. Daryll,
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:09 amI hate to blow your little bubble, but what do you think gay hooker Jeff Gannon/James Guckert was doing during his various visits, including overnights, at the WH even when there was no press conference scheduled?
So, it is between him and his wife how Clinton wasted taxpayer money by getting blow jobs from Monica instead of working, right?
I guess it is between him and his wife the fact that he was too busy getting blow jobs and not trying to destroy Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, who in 1996 had called America a paper tiger and declared war on us, right?
Comment by Conservatron aka HowSad, EPA, Harry Truman, and at least half a dozen other names
The same can be said about George Bush and his many documented visits from gay hooker Jeff Gannon/James Guckert. You know nearly six years have passed since 9/11, and Bin Laden still hasn’t been caught, has he? Moreover, your hero Dumbya was too busy vacationing in August 2001 to pay any attention to reports like “Bin Laden determined to attack in the US” and warnings from some FBI agents about the uncanny number of Arabs enrolling in US flight schools, only wanting to learn to fly–not to take off and especially not to land. Since you have also posted as “Bill Clinton,” you ought to look past his tenure in office. But then neo-CON trolls like you always blame the Dems.
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:18 amKILO = SEIXON
Comment by troll alert — July 2, 2007 @ 11:40 am
Comment by Kilo — July 2, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
Kilo, you know it’s true, don’t you, Seixon.
July 3rd, 2007 at 2:28 amMr Wilson and the rest of you seem to have forgot the name of Richard Armitage who was the real source of the leak.
July 3rd, 2007 at 9:07 am#32. I am so sorry I didn’t get here earlier and this will GET BURIED.
Dick Cheney’s shooting was NO ACCIDENT.
The guy is on medication that clearly says on it – DO NOT USE WHILE OPERATING MACHINERY.
A gun is MACHINERY.
Cheney clearly was “out of it” and wheeled around and shot, as he was startled. He should not have had a gun in the FIRST instance.
But he, the lying lily livered, liar that he is, had all that covered up LONG before any of us knew what transpired. He is also noted for discrepancies in his story about WHEN he went to the bunker during 9/11.
We are dealing with wholesale crook$ and liar$ here, who fake in milllion$ off the war machine. Bu$h’s money is in a blind tru$t since pre-presidential days, not so Cheney, who is still making money off his Halliburton $tock, despite the fact that many expose$ about their shoddy work in Iraq has come out.
He has not one, but two, walk-in Mosler $afe$, that he claim$ hold completely classified record$, and are exempt from being examined by CONgre$$ under BOTH legislative AND executive privilege.
I have seen copies of his notes on the NYT’s article written by Joseph Wilson. Pictures of it have circulated on the internet.
What we do not know, is exactly and I mean exactly what transpires in the White House dining room between Cheney and puppet boy. But I’ll bet someday we will know.
As for the pardon — NO ONE GAINS BY THIS “Pardon”, which is a commutation and not covered by the Constitution, and it has pissed off everyone. The military contractors, Big Biz gain nothing. The INTEL community is outraged. Only the cabal gets anything out of this which is a certain knowledge that if you stick with us, we’ll keep you out of jail and pay yer fines. POOR YOU! WE must continue to cover each other’s backs! Truly, truly sickening. And shame on CONgress. They seem to be awaiting the poll result$, rather than doing the right thing.
And all this is only one-quarter or so of my rant.
This man has run America into the ground. And you think his biggest problem might be hypocracy …? Wait. WATCH. All this stuff will eventually come out into the light. Truth has a “funny” way of doing that.
July 4th, 2007 at 2:02 am