Waxman agrees to investigate Clinton White House.
Waxman agrees to investigate Clinton White House.
As part of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s investigation into the Bush White House’s potentially illegal partisan briefings at various government agencies, Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) has agreed to a request by Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) to determine whether Clinton did it too. The Clinton White House was thoroughly investigated both during and after its term. Waxman said he believes most of the documents Davis is seeking are already in the committee’s archives:
“You have asked that the committee make a number of document requests of the National Archives for records of the Clinton administration,” Waxman wrote. “The Clinton administration was subject to vastly more scrutiny by this committee than the Bush administration has been, and many of the records you seek may already be in the committee archives.
“However,” Waxman continued, “I do agree that the committee would benefit from requesting copies of any political briefings that the Office of Political Affairs in the Clinton administration may have given to federal agencies.” [...]
Waxman added that the committee’s “own archives of Clinton-era documents are so broad and voluminous that they should already contain” other documents Davis wanted, if they exist.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Sweet gentle Jesus! Didn’t these people’s mothers teach them that two wrongs don’t make a right?
Can we get some adults to run this place now?
September 11th, 2007 at 11:04 pmWaxman is basically getting sidetracked, just like Conyers, so while they go off on tangents the Bush Regime gets away with murder.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:07 pmWaxman is seriously falling for this? Haven’t we spent enough taxpayer money investigating the Clinton terms?
I’m guessing this is their first strike at investigating the next Clinton term should Hillary win. For a group that couldn’t be bothered to investigate anything Bush has done, it’s very pathetic that they’re insisting on going back to investigate Clinton.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:10 pmAaaahhhh… the old “BUT… MOMMY, MOMMY… CLINTON DID IT TOO” defense.
I thought we’d seen the last of this BS.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:16 pmJesus Christ!
Can someone loan the Democratic Party a set of huevos?
September 11th, 2007 at 11:16 pmWaxman needs to be more IDF and less ACLU.
I can’t believe this! Henry, WHAT are you thinking? Get a grip!
September 11th, 2007 at 11:19 pmGood God! Is this for real?
September 11th, 2007 at 11:20 pmThats just what America needs now. Lets ignore the current clusterfu$#@k administration and investigate Bill Clinton.
Wow.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:22 pmCan someone loan the Democratic Party a set of huevos?
Waxman needs to be more IDF and less ACLU.
Comment by Nick R. Hader
The two parties have ALWAYS work in collusion with each other. They are owned by massive business interests, that fund both sides, and care little for any of the phony distinction between the two parties.
It’s all just a tactic to keep people locked in a feedback loop that keeps emotional attachment to the two parties high, so that people don’t start getting funny ideas about third party candidates.
It’s called divide and conquer.
Why do you think that, Ron Paul, a Libertarian, is running as a Republican. He knows that it’s the only chance that he’ll have.
I think that many people, thanks to the Internet, are finally starting to see the truth regarding this charade.
Too bad they’ll shut down sites like this soon.
Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:22 pmSeems like Waxman isn’t considering endorsing Hillary
September 11th, 2007 at 11:23 pm#3 “Waxman is seriously falling for this?”
Well, of course he’s not, but it’s just like when I send some little dork down to the school office, the one who gives me stuff every day, and he whines, “Well, about the other kid? He always does this, and you never do anything about him. (whiiiine..).” And then I have to say something like, yeah, well, I’ll deal with that, too, but now you need to go take your medicine, Whine Boy. Which is another way of saying what Blue Arkansas is, in another way: Are there any adults in the Republican Party? OK. I thought not.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:23 pmyeah, i think waxman problably knows the charge is bogus in the first place. so he sends the repub on a fishing expedition which comes up empty and makes the guy (and the clinton did it too excuse) look foolish. here’s hoping…
September 11th, 2007 at 11:32 pmBut we never got to the bottom of their Christmas card list! We only had 1,001 witnesses!
September 11th, 2007 at 11:39 pmWell then, if this is regarding the hatch act, lets go back to Bush senior and investigate that.
What Say Henry?
September 11th, 2007 at 11:39 pmWaxman needs to go BACK further and this latest sideshow will go POOF
September 11th, 2007 at 11:40 pm… to determine whether Clinton did it too.
Hint:
Yes
September 11th, 2007 at 11:43 pmClinton did it too.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:44 pmToo bad they’ll shut down sites like this soon.
Naw, there are plenty of conservative sites to troll =)
September 11th, 2007 at 11:45 pm… to determine whether Bush Sr. did it too.
Hint:
YES!!!!
September 11th, 2007 at 11:47 pmDammit Henry, get Bill Clinton’s p*nis under oath, stat!
-Right Wing Wurlitzer
September 11th, 2007 at 11:49 pmdon’t republicans ever tire of being the immature spoiled little brats? ‘Clinton did it too, MOMMY, Clinton did it toooooooo; waa, waa, waaaaaa, my diaper is wet’.
September 12th, 2007 at 12:01 am.
As usual, there’s some backroom dealing going on that will come out months from. How else to explain this freakin’ charade endorsed by Waxman. This makes no sense. And yes, lets gets the p*nis under oath STAT! I predict the nads will claim executive privilege.
September 12th, 2007 at 12:13 amI need to watch this for a while to see how it unfolds — I am having a hard time believing that Waxman will spend much real time on this. If he had quickly put down Davis, it would have been a news story that the msm would have gleefully played ad nauseum; if Waxman tells Davis he will invstigate, he has time to stall.
September 12th, 2007 at 12:56 amHow long did Sen Roberts keep everyone on the hook waiting for the Intelligence committee Phase II?
I don’t think Waxman will spend real time on this either — if it came out that Clinton did it (like Carter did with Marston), and there were no Democrats screaming for Congressional investigations about that, that would be embarrassingly hypocritical, don’t you think?
September 12th, 2007 at 1:07 amWhat is the rest of the world thinking? We can not begin impeachment proceedings over lies that led US into this illegal so called war killing millions, acts of treason, illegal spying,… because we do not have a veto proof senate, and yet we bring up this trite crap?
September 12th, 2007 at 1:10 amP.S. Viola Cella — well, if you never dealt with that, too, but instead covered it up, don’t you think it would be wrong to single out one kid only?
September 12th, 2007 at 1:11 amdon’t republicans ever tire of being the immature spoiled little brats? ‘Clinton did it too, MOMMY, Clinton did it toooooooo; waa, waa, waaaaaa, mydiaper is wet’.
.
Comment by yowzer — September 12, 2007 @ 12:01 am
Careful you might upset David Vitter
September 12th, 2007 at 1:47 amfor any lurkers wondering about the words of an apologist, this administration alone [i.e., not clinton’s or carter’s or reagen’s] embarrassingly snuck a provision in the Patriot Act to get around the senate confirmation. this is embarrassingly unprecedented.
September 12th, 2007 at 1:59 amI say we just take this and run with it. Let’s just go all the way back and start digging up old dirt on the Iran-Contra scandal, the Savings & Loan scandal and all the other corporate and war profiteering of the 80’s. The oil crisis, Watergate and the Vietnam War to finally bring to justice all the crimes perpetuated for profiteering and power grabbing. Heck, why not go back and try Woodrow Wilson for treason since he openly admitted to selling our Democracy to the hands of a few powerful bankers?
Oh, wait, we can’t do any of that because it might be beneficial. Our congress would rather spend it’s time bickering over sex scandals while only paying modest and empty lip service to the enormous fraud they enable at the expense of every American tax payer, every exploited nation and all the millions of lives lost in the continuation of their pissing contest for power and wealth.
The only way we’ll ever end this nightmare is if every American with an ounce of dignity were to refuse to pay their taxes for a year and thus crippled these crooks lucrative embezzlement of our nation’s personal wealth into the coffers of our gilded elite.
September 12th, 2007 at 2:09 am> if it came out that Clinton did it
Jake do you really really beleive you’re heroes in congress didnt ceaselessly investigate clinton? do you really think that with all the time they spent, they missed something? you think this issue is one that would bear less political fruit than a christmas card list?
oh, and you;re a lawyer, why don’t you give us the california jurisdictions elements of the vaulted “he did it too” defense…
September 12th, 2007 at 3:10 amYea, when the ragheads hit DC you VERY FUNNY leftist are going to have shit all over your faces; but then a shitty face liberal looks no different than a raghead. Then what are all these poor, underprivileged folks without health insurance and welfare going to do? Won’t matter then will it? Maybe the ragheads will have pity and slit your throat really fast or stick a grenade up your great sphincter, YO!!!!
September 12th, 2007 at 3:18 amWe win everytime a terrorist dies.
September 12th, 2007 at 3:28 amOf course Waxman is seriously falling for this. Bush’s generals in Iraq aren’t the only ones putting on dog-and-pony shows.
When Democrats agreed not to seek to impeach Bush and Cheney, what then is the point of oversight hearings?
P – O – L – I – T – I – C – A – L S – H – O – W – M – A – N – S – H – I – P.
How many subpoenas need to be ignored, ‘declined’, “my dog ate it”, before the chairmans of the House and Senate committees take action, find Bush’s lieutenants in inherent contempt and hall their asses to jail?
Democrats are keeping us, the base, at bay, until it’s too late for us to find challengers for their seats in next year’s elections. We deserve everything that they’re shelling out. It’s not as if we haven’t been down this road before. They defend their failures, saying that they don’t have the 60 votes to override Bush’s vetoes. They won’t get the 60 votes until they win over citizens who are eligible to vote, but don’t because they’re unmotivated to get involved because they can’t differentiate between the parties.
Democrats are counting the days until they drive us, the liberal base, out of the party and replace our numbers with moderate Republicans, like Christine Todd Whitman, who have been displaced in the Republican party by the Christian right. Then the Republican party will be ‘fringe’ as will we on the left. The DLC will have successfully redrawn the lines for ‘the middle,’ and the Corporatocracy will be complete.
The only Democratic presidential candidate not DLC-approved is Dennis Kucinich. Even Mike Gravel is a little too cozy with Big Energy and Big Business for liberals to cozy up to. Unfortunately, Kucinich looks too much like a lawn ornament to be taken seriously as having the stature and gravitas the leader of the free world needs.
Until the American people get it together and choose who the candidates will be instead of Big Money pre-selecting whom we can pick among, Big Money is always going to stack the odds against a populist candidates.
September 12th, 2007 at 3:29 amwell let no one say that Waxman is partison (sp)
September 12th, 2007 at 3:52 amhttp://ccoaler.blogspot.com/2007/09/shinzo-abe-seems-to-have-been-fired.html
Shinzo Abe seems to have been fired
September 12th, 2007 at 5:32 amBill should just walk right in the White House and start acting like he’s running shit. Republicans like pretending that he is still in office.
September 12th, 2007 at 5:41 amChimpzo Abe is done. Another warmonger hits the bricks.
Bush wants the Japanese to back in the game of being a military power.
Dumb move, they’ll bomb Pearl Harbor again.
-GSD
September 12th, 2007 at 6:12 amthis is a no win-situation.
September 12th, 2007 at 6:33 amwhen you give in to crybabies, they just cry even louder.
Frankly, I want everyone investigated. All these people are criminals. For decades this country has been run by one crime family after another. Illegal arm sales, drug sales, child abuse, bribery, war profiteering…. There are alot of big names that should be in prison for a long time.
September 12th, 2007 at 6:38 amYes, we need to investigate Clinton now, because God knows, no one’s ever done that before.
September 12th, 2007 at 6:45 amPartisan hackery.
September 12th, 2007 at 6:53 amIs this the ‘Kucinich Condemn United States on Syrian tv’ thread?
Crap, it must be next on the list.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:00 amThey have the documents except the ones in Burgers pants.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:12 amThey have the documents except the ones in Burgers pants.
Comment by Kevin — September 12, 2007 @ 7:12 am
and the millions of pages Cheney has refused to turn over
September 12th, 2007 at 7:18 amand the millions of pages Cheney has refused to turn over
Which are hidden under the piles of now-sealed Hillary Clinton documents.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:23 amThey have the documents except the ones in Burgers pants.
Comment by Kevin — September 12, 2007 @ 7:12 am
and the millions of pages in Cheney’s office, detailing his defrauding of the American people and his treason, and Bush’s anti-American plans to let 9/11 happen
September 12th, 2007 at 7:23 amWhich are hidden under the piles of now-sealed Hillary Clinton documents.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 7:23 am
which are of no relevance to anything, unlike the Bush-Cheney documents detailing the sale of the US to China.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:25 amwhich are of no relevance to anything, unlike the Bush-Cheney documents detailing the sale of the US to China.
If true, then why would ‘ol Hillary seal them up until after the election? If Bush has sold the nation to China, the Clinton’s arranged the transaction; I hear the Lincoln Bedroom is beautiful.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:40 amand Bush’s anti-American plans to let 9/11 happen
I thought Bush planned and perpetrated 911? I cant keep all the left’s conspiracies straight anymore, you guys need to create some sort of clearinghouse.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:43 amSo Waxman now believes this is relevant since Clinton is still President? Waxman needs to be retired from his position. He’s a fool and a buffoon of incredible precedent in falling for this charade and wasting the taxpayers money on such nonsense.
Instead, he should be investigating impeachment charges against Bush. These democrats are spineless morons and buffoons. No wonder everyone is becoming Independent.
Sweep them ALL out in 08! No one has a clue about how to represent the american people.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:50 amThis has nothing to do with Bill Clinton and everything to do with their real nemesis, Hillary. The reichwing is so amazingly afraid of her becoming president because she’ll crack their nuts.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:51 amSqueaky Toy: A clearinghouse the size of the state of Texas couldn’t keep straight all of the corruption of the GOP and the White House; in fact, the recent spate of resignations and scandals is merely the tip of a huge, necrotic iceberg called the GOP – which, incidentally, has become the “third party” in terms of numbers these days. No numbers/no voice. 35% of americans are registered Independents, 37% of americans are registered Democrats so where does this leave your party – GOP – Grand Old Perverts??? Just wondering.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:53 amI hear the Lincoln Bedroom is beautiful.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 7:40 am
Jeff Gannon certainly thought so, especially when Georgie was in bed with him.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:57 amThis has nothing to do with Bill Clinton and everything to do with their real nemesis, Hillary. The reichwing is so amazingly afraid of her becoming president because she’ll crack their nuts.
Comment by razzle — September 12, 2007 @ 7:51 am
what nuts? GOPers don’t have nuts, they ARE nuts.
September 12th, 2007 at 7:59 amKeep in mind that the people who smeared the last elected American President are inept traitors and pedophiles.
As measured by the total number of convictions and forced resignations, the Clinton administration was the cleanest two-term administration since Teddy Roosevelt.
The most corrupt administration in U.S. history (before this one) was the Reagan Administration, which would sometimes rack up more convictions and forced resignations IN A SINGLE DAY than the Clinton administration managed in its entire eight years.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:00 amI was talking about the Lefty Conspiracies…please stay on topic. :-)
If you actually believe that 35% are registered independants and truly dont have a lean left or right, you are more foolish than your post would initially suggest. People say that in an attempt to delude themselves that they are fair and open minded.
The new Dhimmist Fag Loser party is becoming so beholden to the creepshow that is Code Pink, MorOn.org and mainline Kucinich supporters that they have inadvertently begun their own demise, they just arent smart enough to realize it yet.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:03 amWell, of course he’s not, but it’s just like when I send some little dork down to the school office, the one who gives me stuff every day, and he whines, “Well, about the other kid? He always does this, and you never do anything about him. (whiiiine..).†And then I have to say something like, yeah, well, I’ll deal with that, too, but now you need to go take your medicine, Whine Boy. Which is another way of saying what Blue Arkansas is, in another way: Are there any adults in the Republican Party? OK. I thought not.
Comment by Viola Cella — September 11, 2007 @ 11:23 pm
Sounds like whiney kids grow up to be whiney teachers.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:05 amI thought Bush planned and perpetrated 911? I cant keep all the left’s conspiracies straight anymore, you guys need to create some sort of clearinghouse.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 7:43 am
well, perhaps you’re right, Bush planned and perpetrated 9/11. I know he let it happen, because it couldn’t have happened otherwise, not with the safeguards in place that we pay $400 billion a year for. But maybe you are right, after all. I’m glad your happy with your fake cowboy, real traitor moron-in-chief.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:05 amI think Waxman was just telling Davis that if Davis wanted to skip the next ten committee meetings and sit in the archives looking for Clinton dirt, that might be more enjoyable for all. I doubt that Davis will find anything to rival what we’ve seen in this administration, so the comparison might end up being useful. I think Waxman is saying, “Clinton did it too? Prove it.” I have no trouble criticizing the politicization of the Federal Bureaucracy. Cronyism is bad policy regardless of the party in charge.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:06 amJeff Gannon certainly thought so, especially when Georgie was in bed with him.
Impressive skillz. Shecky Green has nothing on you.
Salute!
September 12th, 2007 at 8:06 am>They have the documents except the ones in Burgers pants.
>Comment by Kevin
kevin i saw your linked to a site called “fairtax.org”… do you advocate a low, flat tax like Bin Laden does?
>Which are hidden under the piles of now-sealed Hillary Clinton documents.
And shes disregarding what subpeana or court order required to produce them?
Once she ignores as many subpeanas as bush has, we’ll talk, ok new name old face troll?
September 12th, 2007 at 8:09 amhe new Dhimmist Fag Loser party is becoming so beholden to the creepshow that is Code Pink, MorOn.org and mainline Kucinich supporters that they have inadvertently begun their own demise, they just arent smart enough to realize it yet.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:03 am
Thanks for ‘06, coward, and your service on your knees to the most corrupt administration in history.
Enjoy the death and burial of your 25%ers.
and keep chugging that kooaid, you just make it easier to rid the land of GOP scum.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:09 amAs measured by the total number of convictions and forced resignations, the Clinton administration was the cleanest two-term administration since Teddy Roosevelt.
The most corrupt administration in U.S. history (before this one) was the Reagan Administration, which would sometimes rack up more convictions and forced resignations IN A SINGLE DAY than the Clinton administration managed in its entire eight years.
Comment by Perry Logan — September 12, 2007 @ 8:00 am
don’t libs ever tire of being the immature spoiled little brats? ‘Regan did it too, MOMMY, Regan did it toooooooo; waa, waa, waaaaaa, my diaper is wet’.
Comment by yowzer — September 12, 2007 @ 12:01 am
And the circle is closed.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:10 amthis is really a godsend to democrats – they should have thought of it themselves….impeach Clinton!!! …and this time weelwee weelwee mean it!! Then Americans will see how tough they weelwee are and republicans might even give them a lollipop – its meets all of the democratic leadership’s key objectives.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:10 am.
>so beholden to the creepshow that is Code Pink
riiight… a bunch of pacifists lesbians is a “creepshow”, but war profiteers who make more money the more death there is in the world are “patriots”, right?
September 12th, 2007 at 8:10 amwell, perhaps you’re right, Bush planned and perpetrated 9/11.
Not me bud, you and yours.
Im just asking that the left create a conspiracy clearinghouse where you can gather in a sort of borderline hysterical herd and decide which outrageous claim will take precedence over another; its good for America.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:11 amSounds like whiney kids grow up to be whiney teachers.
Comment by r — September 12, 2007 @ 8:05 am
sounds like whiney kids not growing up, and becoming GOP stooges and crybabies, as well as draft-dodging cowards. fits you to a T.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:11 amI know he let it happen, because it couldn’t have happened otherwise,…
Comment by ronjazz — September 12, 2007 @ 8:05 am
Try and refute this, you anti-troofers.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:13 amoutrageous claim will take precedence over another; its good for America.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:11 am
anything but the Bush crime syndicate is good for America. nice of you to excuse wholesale treason by your plastic heroes. shows the usual proto-Nazi “party over country” sickness of the right.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:13 amWaxman should not fall for this ploy that is clearly intended to take the pressure off Bush, the GOP and the neocons. If, after impeaching Bush/Cheney and bringing all the hoodlums to justice, he wants to investigate Clinton, then have at it. For now he must keep the committee’s collective eyes on the ball and not be distracted from the matter at hand.
I love what Waxman is doing now and I hope that he keeps the pressure on.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:14 amTry and refute this, you anti-troofers.
Comment by r — September 12, 2007 @ 8:13 am
You can refute it, I’m sure. We’re waiting.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:14 amSqueaky, the government is refusing to release Hillary’s papers until after the election, not her. All documents from the White House go through a thorough review process before being made available to the public.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:15 amYour bogeywoman has nothing to do with it.
I love what Waxman is doing now and I hope that he keeps the pressure on.
Comment by nofltwlt — September 12, 2007 @ 8:14 am
he will keep the pressure on. he’s just yessing them to death, and they’re quite stupid enough to fall for it. the last bit, “if they exist” was his kidney-punch to the rightwing knuckleheads.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:16 amriiight… a bunch of pacifists lesbians is a “creepshowâ€, but war profiteers who make more money the more death there is in the world are “patriotsâ€, right?
Curious how the Code Pink Creepers managed to get into the hearings not once but twice, and the second time they were in full regalia even though they were ejected the day before. Which DFL staffer opened the back door? Beholden.
As to war profiteering, head on over to Feinstein’s office and demand to know why she steered defense contracts to her husband’s companies. Express your outrage, man!
September 12th, 2007 at 8:17 am>Im just asking that the left create a conspiracy clearinghouse where you >can gather in a sort of borderline hysterical herd
Heres one… a poorly financed, global web of dysfunctional fanatical religious zealots with no tanks, no fighter planes, no nukes, no heavy weaponry, no ships , no armor, no secure method of communication faster than a donkey, and no assistance from any nation is able to put aside their enormous intra-religious differences and idealogies long enough to be a viable threat to our nation.
oh wait.. thats YOUR conspiracy.. sorry….
oh, and look at some of these leftwing retards from the reagan administration who beleive in OUR conspiracies..
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/
September 12th, 2007 at 8:19 amExpress your outrage, man!
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:17 amyes, american citizens should be kept out of hearings, because GOPers don’t like them. Now, let’s see, Feinstein or Cheney raping the American taxpayer? Hmmm, I wonder.
You’re a f*cking joke.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:20 amI know he let it happen, because it couldn’t have happened otherwise,…
Comment by ronjazz — September 12, 2007 @ 8:05 am
Try and refute this, you anti-troofers.
Comment by r — September 12, 2007 @ 8:13 am
I almost miss these gems sometimes, the surety of dementia which is eroding the common sense of the left.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:21 amYou’re a f*cking joke.
Comment by ronjazz — September 12, 2007 @ 8:20 am
And finally we enter the normal realm of the liberal debater.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:22 amI almost miss these gems sometimes, the surety of dementia which is eroding the common sense of the left.
Comment by Japaner — September 12, 2007 @ 8:21 am
“Heres one… a poorly financed, global web of dysfunctional fanatical religious zealots with no tanks, no fighter planes, no nukes, no heavy weaponry, no ships , no armor, no secure method of communication faster than a donkey, and no assistance from any nation is able to put aside their enormous intra-religious differences and idealogies long enough to be a viable threat to our nation.
oh wait.. thats YOUR conspiracy.. sorry….”
try that on for size, you lazy fool. Cowardice is the hallmark of the right.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:24 amAnd finally we enter the normal realm of the liberal debater.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:22 am
yes, the true statement. Sorry to use that, but lies are yours. We don’t need them.
You’re still a f*cking joke. Live with it.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:25 amIf they are so beholden to Code Pink, why exactly arent dems refusing to bring any more war funding to the table to like Code Pink once? Letting them in the gallery is a token gesture…
>As to war profiteering, head on over to Feinstein’s
> office and demand to know why she
>steered defense contracts to her husband’s companies.
Ok big guy, how much money did Feinsteins husband make on the deal?
You support genocide and nitpick murder…. funny.
Hahahahah, as soon as she’s indicted for it like Cunningham I will. Or as soon as she lies about her financial interest in an enormous company with multibillion dollar no bid iraq contracts, like dick cheney did, I will.
Are dems clean? No.. are they cleaner than the republican filth masquerading as leadership these days? Yes.
So Toy, do you support a low flat tax like Bin Laden does?
September 12th, 2007 at 8:25 amYou should feel important squeak, normally ronjazz gets personal in the first two posts; you made it far longer, he must like you.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:27 amLet’s revisit Iran/Contra and Watergate
September 12th, 2007 at 8:27 amYou should feel important squeak, normally ronjazz gets personal in the first two posts; you made it far longer, he must like you.
Comment by Japaner — September 12, 2007 @ 8:27 am
as I said, lies are the only thing the right has, and there’s the proof.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:29 amYou’re a f*cking joke.
Comment by ronjazz — September 12, 2007 @ 8:20 am
You’re still a f*cking joke. Live with it.
Comment by ronjazz — September 12, 2007 @ 8:25 am
I was wondering how ronjazz was going to top that first bon mot. Another sterling argument from the left.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:31 amOh yeah. Investigating Bill Clinton — AGAIN — makes a lot of sense. This sets a precedent that, allowed to proceed to its logical conclusion, means that anytime we wish to investigate possible corruption in the White House (no matter who is president), we must first re-investigate all prior presidents to ensure that “nobody else also did this”. If any other president violated any constitutional law or ethical rule and got away with it, then it must be OK.
The Repubs made a career of investigating the Clintons. After years of trolling for misconduct, they managed to impeach Clinton on far less than the current administration is suspected of doing.
Is America really ready for our next president to be allowed to do whatever he/she wishes with a “Bush did it too” defense? I think not.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:32 amSo Toy, do you support a low flat tax like Bin Laden does?
Odd that you mention Bin Laden. Well you are a lib so maybe not so odd.
Bin Laden berates the dems, John Kerry actually answers him on a news show and Castro endorses Hillary. Meanwhile Kucinich heads to Syria to publicly excoriate Bush and the United States.
This is all America needs to know about the modern DFL.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:34 amI was wondering how ronjazz was going to top that first bon mot. Another sterling argument from the left.
Comment by r — September 12, 2007 @ 8:31 am
and another irrelevancy from the irrelevant. you have nothing, except “Hillary Clinton might have done it”. The miserable failure of your Miserable Failure on 9/11 will follow you and your party down the gutter into the storm drain, and history will record the shame of the right wing, just like Nazi Germany all over again. You earned it, losers.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:36 amThis is all America needs to know about the modern DFL.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:34 am
while Bush and Cheney allow successful attacks on US soil. yes, i can see the equivalence.
You are hopeless.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:37 am>>So Toy, do you support a low flat tax like Bin Laden does?
>Odd that you mention Bin Laden. Well you are a lib so maybe not so odd.
> (rest of non-answer snipped)
wow, for a second there, I thought you were going to answer my question.
Total cost of the Iraqi war…. 1 Trillion
Amount of Money Missing from Iraq once Bush’s fratboy goon Bremer was done with it: 9 Billion
Watching Rightards twist and turn trying to avoid admitting they agree with Bin Laden about something: PRICELESS
September 12th, 2007 at 8:37 am>>So Toy, do you support a low flat tax like Bin Laden does?
>Odd that you mention Bin Laden.
> (rest of non-answer snipped)
wow, for a second there, I thought you were going to answer my question.
Total cost of the Iraqi war…. 1 Trillion
Amount of Money Missing from Iraq once Bush’s fratboy goon Bremer was done with it: 9 Billion
Watching Rightards twist and turn trying to avoid admitting they agree with Bin Laden about something: PRICELESS
September 12th, 2007 at 8:38 amyou have nothing, except “Hillary Clinton might have done itâ€.
Comment by ronjazz — September 12, 2007 @ 8:36 am
Not a quote from me, by the way.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:38 amNot a quote from me, by the way.
Comment by r — September 12, 2007 @ 8:38 am
no, but the only position you losers can adopt.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:40 am#66 – “Im just asking that the left create a conspiracy clearinghouse” Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:11 am
Well, the right has Drudge, RedState and FauxNews to give them their conspiracy theories to spout. Where do YOU go for your conpiracy theories, ST?
September 12th, 2007 at 8:40 amI was wondering how ronjazz was going to top that first bon mot. Another sterling argument from the left.
It will get even more insightful and cogent.
Soon ron will accuse one of us of being on Cheney’s payroll or driving over poor people with our SUV.
Its simaltaneously comical AND sad.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:41 amI can’t wait when the trolls howl about something Hillary does and we get to respond “Bush did it too” or “Bush did it first”. That said, I’m pretty sick of the sleaze on both sides in Washington and just want someone in charge to behave ethically for a change. But, you remember, that Bush was going to “restore integrity” to the White House. Clearly his first and biggest lie.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:44 am#96 – “But, you remember, that Bush was going to “restore integrity†to the White House. Clearly his first and biggest lie.” Comment by Menehune — September 12, 2007 @ 8:44 am
I thought he said “I’m-a gonna restore honrisms and dignitude-ery to the White House! Now, wantch me hit this-here golfball with my shiny new golfin’ stick!!” ;-)
Of course, I’m joking. But not by much! Pres. Bush isn’t stupid, but with the way he talks, it does make one wonder. . .
September 12th, 2007 at 8:48 amIts simaltaneously comical AND sad.
Comment by Japaner — September 12, 2007 @ 8:41 am
What’s sad is that this is all you have. There is no cogent, intelligent defense of this administration’s greed, corruption, lies and outright treason, so you’re stuck on my writing style! How much more irrelevant can you get? Why don’t you talk about Clinton’s blowjob again? I can understand your reluctance to address the Bush cabal’s repeated failures in foreign and domestic policy, their inability to govern, and their outright theft, but you are reduced to discussing me? Thanks for ‘08, in advance.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:49 am>Clearly his first and biggest lie.
Its not that he has no integrity, its simply that his intergrity is claiming executive privledge and choosing not to appear. :)
September 12th, 2007 at 8:50 amWhere do YOU go for your conpiracy theories, ST?
Apparently I need to go no further than this very site. Hopping around at KOS I found reference to “Think Progress” and while here I managed to bump into ronjazz and his rabid stylings.
“Think Hysterical” is more like it.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:52 am“Think Hysterical†is more like it.
Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:52 am
Only you lazy-ass chickenhawk rightwing cowards can sit still for the treason of the White House. No wonder bush can’t win his wars, with the kind of support he’s getting from the likes of you. Hot air from your keyboard doesn’t do much against Al Qaeda, kiddies.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:57 amOf course, I’m joking. But not by much! Pres. Bush isn’t stupid, but with the way he talks, it does make one wonder. . .
Sure, because we should “wonder” about a person’s intelligence based on the way they speak.
Stephen Hawking must be a total dolt, after all he needs to machine to do his speaking for him.
September 12th, 2007 at 8:58 amJapaner, that’s one of the most idiotic comparisons I’ve ever seen!
September 12th, 2007 at 9:03 amFor one to argue that good verbal skills don’t signify a higher education is ridiculous. It’s perfectly reasonalbe to question a person’s intelligence when he/she is a poor speaker.
Or are you really suggesting Bush is like a man whose brilliant mind is trapped in a crippled, wheelchair bound body?
Are you really suggesting Bush is as smart as Stephen Hawking?
now we’re going to investigate a former administration that’s already been investigated?
how long can Republicants hold on to this anti-Clinton madness?
why do Republicants want to protect corrupt officials in their ranks?
September 12th, 2007 at 9:03 am>Stephen Hawking must be a total dolt, after all he needs to machine to do >his speaking for him.
what physical impairment does bush have that prevents him from speaking properly?
does fetal alchohol syndrome count? babs looks like a mean, lonely drunk…
September 12th, 2007 at 9:04 amWho was it who said, regarding Clinton, there’s no law forbidding Congress from impeaching a former President?
September 12th, 2007 at 9:07 amI say let the Republics have their “Clinton did it” moment. They will only end up looking like fools.
If Clinton had been politicizing the White House, we certainly would have known about it. After spending 50 million dollars, all Ken Starr could come up with was a blow job in the White House. If there had been anything Clinton was doing in the White House that was in any way hinky, Ken Starr would have announced it to the world.
Just as long as it doesn’t distract his committee from investigating the Bush White house, I’m all for investigating Clinton. Contrasting Clinton to Bush is not something that the Rethugs should want to do right now, though, because Bush is going to come out looking really bad.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:08 amStephen Hawking must be a total dolt, after all he needs to machine to do his speaking for him.
Comment by Japaner
Stephen Hawking could run rings around Bush even talking through a machine. Your comparison is the typical straw-man argument. It makes no sense at all to compare someone who can’t say a complete intelligible sentence to someone who speaks through a machine because of a physical disability.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:12 amWho was it who said, regarding Clinton, there’s no law forbidding Congress from impeaching a former President?
Comment by Wilco
Sorry Wilco, they’ve been there and done that and it didn’t work the first time. So what would make you think it work the second time.
It really galls you that Clinton is one of our most beloved President’s doesn’t it. Especially knowing that Bush is one of our most hated Presidents.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:13 amsimple: blind application of the law is the most patriotic act. How dare some pretend libs here deny equal scrutiny….and just ‘know’ it’s better to have their party in charge.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:14 am#102 – “Sure, because we should “wonder†about a person’s intelligence based on the way they speak.” Comment by Japaner — September 12, 2007 @ 8:58 am
It all depends on the words that actually come out of the mouth (or machine). (As you would know if you righties didn’t go out of your way to twist things, but no surprise there.)
Here’s some real gems from Pres. Bush:
“I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn’t here.” -at the President’s Economic Forum in Waco, Texas, Aug. 13, 2002
“You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.” -Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001
“Tribal sovereignty means that; it’s sovereign. I mean, you’re a — you’ve been given sovereignty, and you’re viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.” –Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004
“You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.” –interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006
“I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.” –Greater Nashua, N.H., Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 27, 2000
“Do you have blacks, too?” –to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001
“Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream.” –LaCrosse, Wis., Oct. 18, 2000
“Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?” –Florence, South Carolina, Jan. 11, 2000
“There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on (pause)shame on you. Fool me (longer pause) you can’t get fooled again.” –Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
“Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren’t able to practice their love with women all across this country.” –Poplar Bluff, Mo., Sept. 6, 2004
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” –Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004
Best Quotes Ever, From Pres. Bush!
“The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.” –Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001
“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” –Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002
This is the best example that the Republican love of “six-months” can produce some change, somewhere. . .
September 12th, 2007 at 9:18 ambilbo, you know what happens when you assume? You make an ass out of yourself (not me).
September 12th, 2007 at 9:27 amIt’s a simple question, that’s all. Nothing behind it. But you see evil in shadows.
Someone in 2001 or 2002 kinda suggested the Reps could impeach Clinton even though he was no longer in office, so Dems said great, then we can finally impeach Nixon.
I was just trying to remember who that was who started it.
It’s perfectly reasonalbe to question a person’s intelligence when he/she is a poor speaker.
Would it be “reasonalbe” to suggest the same for a poor speller?
You must be disappointed with Ted Kennedy after his bumbling, stumbling introduction of Barack “Osama”.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:29 ampablo, do you know what the law is?
September 12th, 2007 at 9:31 amIt’s the Hatch act.
The defacto statute of limitations?
Term of office.
The penalty for violation of the Hatch Act is only to be fired.
No fine, no prison sentence, no probation.
How can someone be fired who isn’t even in office?
So what is the point of spending taxpayer money and Congressional time to investigate a former President (out of office 6 + years) for a violation that could only end up in a reprimand, maybe?
Here is a real gem from President Clinton:
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
September 12th, 2007 at 9:33 am“reasonalbe” is clever
September 12th, 2007 at 9:35 ambut yes, it would be to suggest the possibility of lesser intelligence, especially when it’s someone elected president of the united states of america. The President should be better educated, be a better speaker, a better speller, etc, than the common man.
That’s not much to ask.
But yes, it’s possible he’s brilliant, but only in his own thoughts. That his genius gets garbled when he tries to verbalize it. Sure.
Margot, Clinton was not an honest man.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:37 amBut again, why should we spend our money and our representatives’ time to investigate him for something there is no evidence of and for which there is no punishment?
It makes no sense at all to compare someone who can’t say a complete intelligible sentence to someone who speaks through a machine because of a physical disability.
And of course it never occurred to you that Bush may have some sort of impairment that precludes him from being an effective public speaker, whether it be physical, psychological or both?
No, you just chalk it up to stupidity and then proceed to attack the man as the biggest dunce who ever lived; intellectual shallowness from people who take every opportunity to insult and name-call ala ronjazz.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:40 am>Would it be “reasonalbe†to suggest the same for a poor speller?
If they were typing on a blog on the oh so masterbatory internet, no, not really….typing hastily does not equivocate to not being able to think faster than you speak.
Besides, there is a difference between a poor speller and a poor typer. I doubt if he went back and looked at the word he wouldn’t know it was misspelled.. unlike one of your old vice presidents who had ample time to spell “potato” correctly and failed.
>You must be disappointed with Ted Kennedy after his bumbling,
> stumbling introduction of Barack “Osamaâ€.
When did Ted Kennedy become the leader of the free world? In one of your meth addled nightmares? hahaha
September 12th, 2007 at 9:42 amOh yeah.. and. “Osama/Obama”.. i get it…. I’ll bet if you were a democrat you’d constantly be comparing Bush to a womans public hair
Did the National Archives ever get back all the documents that Clinton’s National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, stole back in 2003?
I think not. So the “smoking gun” is probably gone for good anyways.
It’s always good to have friends around to handle the “dirty work” for you…
September 12th, 2007 at 9:43 am>Here is a real gem from President Clinton:
>”i did not have sex with that woman”
here is real gem from President Bush : “we know without a doubt that saddam hussien has WMD
September 12th, 2007 at 9:44 amIm with you, wilco.
Clinton was a hooha and its useless to do anything about his behavior at this point.
But what else is new, pols spending my money on stupid useless things happens every day.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:45 am#113 – “Would it be “reasonalbe†to suggest the same for a poor speller? ” Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 9:29 am
Wow, you’re really stretching, aren’t you? How about we look at some of the “gems” you gave us to gauge your intelligence:
“I cant keep all the left’s conspiracies straight…” Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 7:43 am
Why the correct apostrophe in one word, but not the other?
“Im just asking…” “its good for America.” Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 8:11 am
Why no apostrophe at all here? Does your spell-check not check contractions?
When you complain about the splinter in others eyes, don’t ignore the beam in your own!
Now that I’ve given you a case of the ‘red-ass’ from this ‘whuppin’, you might want to recuperate.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:48 am#120 – “It’s always good to have friends around to handle the “dirty work†for you…” Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 12, 2007 @ 9:43 am
Looks like you’re talking from experience there, OB! What about all the e-mails that the current resident of the White House “mysteriously” lost?
How. . . . . convenient. Illegal as all hell, but incredibly convenient.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:51 am>And of course it never occurred
> to you that Bush may have some
>sort of impairment that precludes
> him from being an effective public speaker,
> whether it be physical, psychological or both?
Ah and what impairment would that be? I guess fetal alcohol syndrome IS an impairment, huh? Dude.. say what you what.. its painfully obvious this is is thinking EXACTLY what hes saying…which is usually nonsense and gross ironic oversimplifications.
> Did the National Archives ever get back all the documents that Clinton’s >National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, stole back in 2003?
I dont know. Since they weren’t originals, merely copies, did they need them? Obesses about trivilaities much?
Where is bush’s proof he wasnt a deserter? Maybe you can find it for us Bigtwat? Theres a reward you know.. you could cash in.. oh sorry, a receipt for a trip to the military dentist doesnt count…
You ever find those links to exact numbers as to how much money Abrahoff himself gave to democrats?
Oh, and I’m taking a survey of rightwing reichtards, so I though I’d ask you too. Do you agree with Bin Laden that taxes in the country are too high, and that there should be a low, flat tax instead?
September 12th, 2007 at 9:52 amIf they were typing on a blog on the oh so masterbatory internet, no, not really….typing hastily does not equivocate to not being able to think faster than you speak.
Besides, there is a difference between a poor speller and a poor typer.
Ok, Ill accept that perhaps you were typing fast and missplaced a few letters. In return you should take the time to scrutinize the above sentence or yours and find the spelling error, not the typing error, the spelling error.
And I hate to break it to you but Kennedy DID call Barack “Osama”.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:54 amSweet Mother of Pearl. What the hell were the Publicans doing the last five years of Clinton’s presidency? The Clinton White House was investigated to a fair-thee-well. Waxman should tell this idiot to sit down and shut up or go back to Virginia and play with himself or something. What a waste of time and resources!
September 12th, 2007 at 9:54 amCD:
“well let no one say that Waxman is partison (sp)”
Unless, as pointed out above, Waxman doesn’t really intend to investigate whether Clinton did it too.
September 12th, 2007 at 9:54 amBigfoot
September 12th, 2007 at 9:55 amThe day Bush finds all his National Guard Records, and his Masters Thesis from Harvard, Hillary and Burger will hand over what you “Light in the Loafers” Regressive Right Wing Popinjays, are whining about today!
Blue Girl:
Maybe there were too many things Clinton did wrong to investigate them all?
September 12th, 2007 at 9:55 am>What about all the e-mails that
> the current resident of the
> White House “mysteriously†lost?
Lost in violation of the law, no less. It doesnt matter to Bigtwat, Bush could lose 10 billion emails and it would all be ok in Bigtwats mind… sandy berger taking copies of less than a dozen documents AFTER clinton was long gone
justifies anything republicans conceal from now to eternity.
Bigtwat is a redneck, hes not an educated man, he doesnt understand that people spending time doing research in places with books can sometimes get extremely disorganized and either lose or walk off with individual pieces of paper by mistake. In any case, intentional or not..the Archives said they were COPIES, no originals were lost…
September 12th, 2007 at 10:00 amHey Japaner, you still here? Are mocha and jazz related, they have the hysterical delivery?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:01 am>Maybe there were too many things Clinton
> did wrong to investigate them all?
Then why did they waste their time with trivia like Christmas cards lists?
Jake Jake Jake… you’re a “lawyer”, maybe you can explain what would happen to a case you brough if you based it purely on speculation like the type your engaging in above?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:02 am#126 – “In return you should take the time to scrutinize the above sentence or yours and find the spelling error, not the typing error, the spelling error.” Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 9:54 am
Can YOU spot the spelling error in the above sentence? Let me give you a hint: or should I?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:02 am>Are mocha and jazz related
Not that I know of. He’s a good guy, I don’t agree with everything he says, and I like to think of myself more as venemous than hysterical, but with the cliff Bush is driving the world off, I don’t blame anyone who is hysterical..
September 12th, 2007 at 10:03 am“of” not “or”
September 12th, 2007 at 10:04 amsometimes get extremely disorganized and either lose or walk off with individual pieces of paper by mistake.
Disorganized = stuffed down your pants and into your socks, then later removed from said clothing and hidden under a construction trailer.
That is some SERIOUS disorganization.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:06 amhe doesnt understand that people spending time doing research in places with books can sometimes get extremely disorganized and either lose or walk off with individual pieces of paper by mistake. In any case, intentional or not..the Archives said they were COPIES, no originals were lost…
Comment by the
Mocha Messiah — September 12, 2007 @ 10:00 am
And hide them under a construction trailer next door. Simple mistake.
Good one.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:06 am>the spelling error.
why dont you, genius? remind of your educational pedigree again?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:06 amWho said this about Bush very early in his Presidency?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:08 am“Logically unsound, confused, unprincipled, and unwise to the extreme!”
#126 – Just in case nobody else catches it, the word “equivocate” should have been “equate”.
I will give you points on catching that.
Since you attacked me for my typing mistake, would you care to address why you are inconsistent in using an apostrophe in your contractions?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:09 am>And hide them under a construction trailer next door.
berger admitted this?
and you’re claiming they wern’t copies? thats the crux of everthing, actually..
September 12th, 2007 at 10:11 amJake your a lawyer can you please explain the legal procedure that would occur if you filed a lawsuit based purely on speculation?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:12 am>#126 – Just in case nobody else catches it, the word “equivocate†should ?>have been “equateâ€.
nope. its a word. not sure if masterbatory is, but it sure sounds enough like one to make it useful in communication..
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/equivocate
September 12th, 2007 at 10:14 am>Disorganized = stuffed down your pants and into your socks,
This was either proven or admitted where?
Besides, they wern’t originals. Period. Nothing was lost. Berger may be an idiot, but frankly, if you think he concealed some deep dark secret about Clinton you’re deluding yourself. You think a few copies of documents equal millions of dissapeared emails?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:16 amCan YOU spot the spelling error in the above sentence? Let me give you a hint: or should I?
It helps to have context; Im not the one claiming someone is a dunce because they arent a good public speaker.
If you took the time, you might understand before jumping in with your ‘gotcha’ attempt.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:16 amMy Dear departed Mother managed to raise Twelve kids without a “Nanny” and going Nutz used to tell us when we were being Cry babies “The More You Cry the Less You Piss .Now go Outside and Play” :>)
September 12th, 2007 at 10:18 amnope. its a word. not sure if masterbatory is, but it sure sounds enough like one to make it useful in communication..
So you took the time to find a reference to “equivocate” but failed to research your spelling error, not typing error, spelling error.
What are you, stupid?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:19 am>What are you, stupid?
what is it then genius? potatoe? oh wait, thats one of your vice presidents boo boo.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:20 amJake….is grandpa not awake for you answer the legal question?
I’ll give you a hint…. When faced with a case based purely on speculation, the defense would file either a regular summary judgement motion, or
a summary judgement motion based on no evidence.
Since you’re a lawyer, maybe you can tell me which motion could be done more quickly? This is lawyer 101 stuff man, If you’ve ever truly litigated you should know this…
Are you going to answer, or am I going to have to change names again to get you to stumble/google through an answer?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:27 amOh, and I’m taking a survey of rightwing reichtards, so I though I’d ask you too. Do you agree with Bin Laden that taxes in the country are too high, and that there should be a low, flat tax instead?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:28 amSince you attacked me for my typing mistake, would you care to address why you are inconsistent in using an apostrophe in your contractions?
Im not attacking you, Im pointing out that I could claim you are stupid for your spelling errors as you would claim Bush is stupid for his disjointed speech.
In fact, I never once accused you of anything, I have been talking to wilco and mocha. Wilco made the original “reasonalbe” mistake and mocha misspelled ‘masterbatory”.
Uh oh, looks like someone is posting under various aliases; youre accusing me of attacking you for mistakes others made.
Whoops.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:31 am>mocha misspelled ‘masterbatoryâ€.
oh no a mistake in a rarely used exceedingly obscure word… want to try that one out on the spelling bee and see how many people get it right?
does that mean dan quayle is a bigger moron for misspelling potatoe?
remind me of your educational pedigree again?
and remind me of whether you agree with Osama that taxes are too high in this country too?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:37 amSo squeaky you think that poor verbal skills can in no way be any indication whatsoever of the level of one’s intelligence?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:41 amI haven’t once suggested it’s proof positive, but it is a possible indication.
Do you refute that?
In any case, poor spelling goes more toward lack of experience seeing certain words…. poor spelling and poor mental functioning (leading to poor speech are not equivalent)..
September 12th, 2007 at 10:43 amSpelling errors are spelling errors. Admit you are as “dumb” as Bush.
I will not answer your tax question because you stated you were polling “rightwing reichtards” and that doesnt accurately describe me.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:44 am>Uh oh, looks like someone is posting under various aliases
Democratic Soldier, are you me?
Nah.. its weird he thought you were attacking his post and not mine, but their coming in such a rapid blur so I can see confusion arising. The only various aliases I post under have something to do with sweet yet obscene mocha messiahs….unless I’m trying to get jake to answer some question he doesnt want to answer
September 12th, 2007 at 10:46 am>Spelling errors are spelling errors. Admit you are as “dumb†as Bush.
So you’re saying that every child that has ever come in 2nd or 3rd place in a spelling bee is as dumb as bush too? You know you come in 2nd or 3rd by mispelling a word right? According to your logic, the person who came in 2nd place is as poor a speller as a kid who lost on the first round, right?
Correct?
Spelling errors are spelling errors. Terrorists are terrorists. Your ass@nine logic, thats why we’re in a country that had nothing to do with 9-11 now. Becuase your hero thinks like you do: “brown people are brown people.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:50 am>I will not answer your tax question
Ok, now I’m polling people who post on thinkprogress comments.
Bin Laden thinks taxes are too high in this country. Do you agree?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:51 amI agree with Bin Laden; taxes are too high!
September 12th, 2007 at 10:55 amand your educational pedigree is from where? why dont you answer that one also…
September 12th, 2007 at 10:56 amOh my gosh, isn’t that a rightwing talking point?
September 12th, 2007 at 10:56 ammighty aphrodite must be pulling her hair out right now!
Maybe there were too many things Clinton did wrong to investigate them all?
Comment by Jake D. — September 12, 2007 @ 9:55 am
Oh, come now. You really think that the Repubs said, “wow — there are just SO many things Clinton is doing wrong there just isn’t time to investigate them all!”? Remember they were so anxious to “get” Clinton for something that they had Ken Starr investigating him before he even committed the transgression that resulting in his impeachment. You can bet that if Clinton was breaking laws right and left, they would have pounced on every one of them like a starving dog on a bone.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:57 amBut I’m going to wait until he announces his plan on how to lower taxes before I give him my vote.
September 12th, 2007 at 10:57 am>But I’m going to wait until he (Bin Laden) announces his plan on how to >lower taxes before I give him my vote.
Right.. I’m a little concerned that his tax breaks proposals may not have enough ecnonomic incentive for small business owners.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:01 amWilco, do you agree with Bin Laden that hollywood is giving us a warped distored view of the world as well?
I’m really glad to see he and Bill O’Reilly
September 12th, 2007 at 11:03 amcan at least agree on something…
And doesnt a 2.5 percent flat tax seem a little high Wilco?
I’m a little concerned Laden won’t do enough to slit the throat of taxes.
What do you think?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:05 amSenator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign announced last night that it would return about $850,000 to about 260 donors who had been recruited or tapped by Norman Hsu, the disgraced Clinton campaign fund-raiser who recently fled arrest and is now under investigation for his fund-raising practices.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:09 amAccording to your logic, the person who came in 2nd place is as poor a speller as a kid who lost on the first round, right?
Correct?
According to your logic, the person who doesnt speak well in public is stupid while your own mistakes can be glossed-over as “not as bad as the other guy”, right?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:12 amCorrect?
>Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential
> campaign announced last night that it
> would return about $850,000
In other news, Cunningham and Ney are still in Jail. Carol Lam, who was investigating thier contacts with high level whitehouse officials, is still fired…
September 12th, 2007 at 11:14 ammore news at troll’o clock…
“Laden won’t do enough to slit the throat of taxes.”
Wow. Just wow.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:15 amAnd I’d be more supportive at 2.25%
>Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential
> campaign announced last night that it
> would return about $850,000
In other news, Cunningham and Ney are still in Jail. Carol Lam, who was investigating thier contacts with high level whitehouse officials, is still fired…
more news at troll’o clock…
Comment by the Nutty Crunch Christ — September 12, 2007 @ 11:14 am
don’t libs ever tire of being the immature spoiled little brats? ‘Repubs did it too, MOMMY, Repubs did it toooooooo; waa, waa, waaaaaa, my diaper is wet’.
Comment by yowzer — September 12, 2007 @ 12:01 am
Same day, different whiner.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:18 amHow can Clinton even be compared to Cunningham or Ney?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:21 amShe says she had no idea of his charges or his fugitive status.
I don’t see this as a story except for the right to drool over.
And Clinton is doing the right thing, even going above and beyond, returning money Hsu raised from legit donors. I’d say that’s even admirable.
>According to your logic, the person who doesnt speak well
> in public is stupid while your own mistakes can be
>glossed-over as “not as bad as the other guyâ€, right?
Right because all mistakes are not equally indicitave of poor intelligence.
Otherwise, by your logic, the kid who places 2nd in a national spelling bee is equivalent to the one who spells the first word wrong in the local competition.
Because you think all mistakes are equally indicitave of cognitive flaws, right? Wrong…
Mispelling one word simply means you dont know every word in the english dictionary. This is something even people who place 2nd in national spelling bees are guilty of. If they wern’t, they would have won first place because they never mispelled a word.
On the other hand, being inarticulate means you either have 1) a mental defect or brain damage , 2) you are poorly educated, or 3) you have some physical impairment like stuttering.
Anyone who falls into the first two categories has no business having his finger on the button. There is no evidence bush falls into the 3rd category. I rest my case.
And why dont you answer my questions before asking your own your own?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:22 am>Same day, different whiner.
Oh the Irony… how many times has the dead horse lo mein Hsu been flogged?
Same day, same whiners.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:23 amBut I’m going to wait until he announces his plan on how to lower taxes before I give him my vote.
You might not have a choice.
Clinton/Bin Laden ‘08
September 12th, 2007 at 11:25 amNutty, there is a point. How can the left lambast the right for their “Clinton did it” excuse, and then turn around and say the right did “x” in response to an allegation against the left?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:25 amIt’s a valid criticism.
#152 – “In fact, I never once accused you of anything, I have been talking to wilco and mocha. Wilco made the original “reasonalbe†mistake and mocha misspelled ‘masterbatoryâ€. ” Comment by Squeaky Toy — September 12, 2007 @ 10:31 am
Really? I could have sworn that in Post #113 that you were responding to me. I guess I was wrong!
Now, that is something that you won’t hear any right-whiner admit! ;-)
September 12th, 2007 at 11:26 am#176 – “Clinton/Bin Laden ‘08″ Comment by Faro — September 12, 2007 @ 11:25 am
Now why on earth would Pres. Bush’s & VPres. Cheney’s best friend in the world, bin Laden, sign up with Sen. Clinton?
Oh, I get it! You’re trying to spin the truth!
Good troll! Now, go swig some more kool-aide. . . ..
September 12th, 2007 at 11:28 amFaro, nice tired attack on Clinton. Ooo! Democrats love terrorists! Just look at all the birthday cards they send Bin Laden every year! And all the Christmas cards he sends them. You know, they have a conference call once a week to discuss strategy.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:31 amYours is one of the most ridiculous, scurrilous claims the right makes and undermines your credibility as a reasonable (check it, Sparky) person.
If anyone NOT on the “Ignore List” (or those who simply change their names in a futile attempt to circumvent the “Ignore List”) wants to discuss the topic, or anything else, please let me know.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:32 am>It’s a valid criticism.
true my friend, but its the logic thier using. so im playing thier game, and showing them where their train of logic crashes into itself and bursts into flames.
the problem these guys have is one of not understanding magnitude.
clinton made a mistake by getting a blowjob, ergo bush gets to make a mistake, say, invading a country to get rid of non-existent WMD’s.
One mistake is not equivalent to another.
Making the mistake of speeding and getting a ticket is not the equivalent of starting a nuclear war by mistake. In the rightards mind, this is equivalent.
So basically, if I dont know every word in the english dictionary, that is the equivalent of me being someone who can’t put a sentence toghether properly. At least in the mind of these retards…
September 12th, 2007 at 11:33 amYou might not have a choice.
Clinton/Bin Laden ‘08
Comment by Faro — September 12, 2007 @ 11:25 am
How many bin Ladens did the Clintons fly out of the country right after the Al Qaeda attacks? You can count them with the fingers on one head.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:34 am>If anyone NOT on the “Ignore List†(or those who simply change their >names in a futile attempt to circumvent the “Ignore Listâ€)
I’ve done it twice before successfully you imbecile. It was pretty funny watching you stammer and stutter your way through your lack of any clue about an ethics exam, till you suddent had the revelation of exactly what it was and when it started…. Someone not on jakes nontradmarked list, please ask this idiot which of the motions i mentioned could be filed quicker.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:35 am>Clinton/Bin Laden ‘08
Uhmmm… anti-abortion, anti-tax, pro flat tax, anti-russian,…..anti hollywood… sounds like Thompson/Bin Laden 08 to me……
TObey, can you please post the transcript of Laden’s last rant again, so I can dig up some more rightard talking points laden was espousing?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:38 amObviously, anyone NOT on the “Ignore List” who asks which motions could be filed quicker would be attempting to circumvent the “Ignore Listâ€. Anyone else?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:40 amOn the other hand, being inarticulate means you either have 1) a mental defect or brain damage , 2) you are poorly educated, or 3) you have some physical impairment like stuttering.
Or you are just uncomfortable when speaking in public which causes you to screw up: Wayne Gretzky suffers from this malady.
Does your educational pedigree makes you the expert on this?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:43 am>Obviously, anyone NOT on the “Ignore Listâ€
> who asks which motions could be filed quicker
>would be attempting to circumvent the “Ignore Listâ€.
How could they be trying to circumvent a list they arent on genius?
By continually posting these things you are indirectly replying to me.
So instead of fillibustering why not just answer a simple question and impress everyone not on the “list” with your stanford trained legal knowledge?
whahahaha.
A little embarassed by you plagarized war record you cut word for word from the internets?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:43 amUhmmm… anti-abortion, anti-tax, pro flat tax, anti-russian,…..anti hollywood… sounds like Thompson/Bin Laden 08 to me……
Uhmmm…anti-American…sounds like Clinton/Bin Laden ‘08 to me.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:46 am>Or you are just uncomfortable when speaking in public
hahahahaah, yeah, right.. you saying george “bring it on” bush is meek, shy, and unsure of himself is a joke. the guy is cocky, arrogant, and sure of himself. now you’re desparately clinging to the “bush is just shy” argument as a deparate attempt to apologize for his idiocy.
please give me some examples of gretsky butchering the english language like bush does? I doubt you will, as you dodge every other question I ask you…
September 12th, 2007 at 11:47 amTrolls should be happy, Clinton is preventing the Bush admin from being held accountable for their misbehaviors.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:48 amYours is one of the most ridiculous, scurrilous claims the right makes and undermines your credibility as a reasonable
Libs have no sense of humor. Jaysus, relax.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:51 am>Uhmmm… anti-abortion, anti-tax, pro flat tax, anti-russian,…..anti >hollywood… sounds like Thompson/Bin Laden 08 to me……
>
>Uhmmm…anti-American…sounds like Clinton/Bin Laden ‘08 to me.
being anti-abortion, anti-tax, pro flat tax, anti-russian is anti ameircan?
Who decides which one of the “anti’s” is more important?
Timothy McVeigh was anti-american too. You know he was a registered republican, right?
so what your saying is that disagreeing with the president is equal to disagreeing with america?
Keep saying dems are anti-american all you want.
Are we the ones who want to keep sending our soldiers to die so that Iraq can have the right to democratically transform into a mirror image of Iran?
How many american soldiers is it worth for the IRaqis to have a constitution where “no law will contract islam”?
Let me guess,, “as many as it takes” right?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:52 amGoodnight you righttards.. I have class.. well I have no class,… but I do have school tonight.. so I’m off to bed….. rightards ..go back to your world of wankery where bush is just shy and Bin Laden doesnt agree with you about anything
September 12th, 2007 at 11:55 amjust because you never admit he does…
please give me some examples of gretsky butchering the english language like bush does? I doubt you will, as you dodge every other question I ask you…
You must be under the assumption that your questions are worth answering.
Anyhoo, Gretzky doesnt make public speaking appearances because he freezes, locks-up, stumbles and bumbles and mangles the language; he admits it in his book.
I attended a fundraiser for Starkey (hearing aids) at which Gretzky appears in a video message precisely because he doesnt like to speak in public, again he apologizes to the crowd in his video speech.
September 12th, 2007 at 11:59 amGoodnight you righttards.. I have class.. well I have no class,… but I do have school tonight
Third-grade night school? Huh.
September 12th, 2007 at 12:01 pmAnyone else?
September 12th, 2007 at 12:58 pmI love the line “Waxman said he believes most of the documents Davis is seeking are already in the committee’s archives:”. Are you sure? Maybe they where in the white house shredder room with other Clinton documents, gee how did these files get here?
Of course they might have gotten shoved down Sandy Bergers pants and left at a construction site. I’m sure Bill’s cronies white-washed everything they could get their evil hands on.
ROTFL
September 12th, 2007 at 1:27 pmNo, Jake D Fake, nobody wants your stupid oppinion, we all know you are a known liar, so bugger off.
September 12th, 2007 at 1:33 pmViola Cella, CD, or Blue Girl:
You still around? Do any of you think it’s a BAD idea for Waxman to agree to investigate the Clinton White House? Best case scenario for you guys, we clear up once and for all whether he did the same thing . . .
September 12th, 2007 at 1:47 pmJake, you’re all for wasting taxpayer money for this?
September 12th, 2007 at 2:03 pmThere is no evidence Clinton did any such thing. It’s a fishing expedition.
So if Congress investigates something Bush might’ve done, they should also investigate whether Clinton did it?
Well, we should check on Bush Sr. too. And Reagan, as well, right?
I mean, we do want to clear up once and for all whether they did the same thing…
Right?
So please explain why investigate Clinton, and not every president before him too.
For the record, I have no problem investigating every President. If they ALL did it, and no one raised a fuss then, why now? If anyone else wants to discuss, please let me know.
September 12th, 2007 at 2:15 pmSo should we investigate every president for every non-crime there is no evidence they ever committed?
September 12th, 2007 at 2:25 pmAgain, no evidence.
Again, can’t prosecute anyone, because Hatch Act violations have one sentence: You’re fired!
Statute of limitations is up too.
So should previous admins be investigated for jaywalking?
How about littering?
Again, there is no evidence Clinton did this!
It’s a complete waste of taxpayer money.
Republicans should be ashamed of themselves.
No I don’t like the idea of Waxman investigating either of the Clintons.
September 12th, 2007 at 3:08 pm“Good for thee, but not for me”?
September 12th, 2007 at 4:53 pmWHAT AN INCREDIBLE WASTE OF TAXPAYER’S MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CAN WE PLEASE KEEP IT IN THIS CENTURY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 12th, 2007 at 9:54 pmWell, Beverly S. Hill, it is certainly relevant if Bill Clinton did the exact same thing and was never investigated by Congress for it then, why should Congress investigate George Bush now?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:15 pmHow about Rosie Odonnel for pres. she pretty much represents exactly what i see written on here
September 13th, 2007 at 12:12 am