4/8/2006 - I told you so (1 Viewer)

[danarhea]

I posted about the Bush administration authorizing the leaking of sensitive information more than a month ago. The article I posted was linked to a blog, since the mediawhores were staying silent as usual on this issue. However, pressure from the blogosphere itself has forced this issue out into the open, and once again, the mainstream media was finally forced to run with the ball. Thank God for the blogs, because without them, we would be getting more pablum puke from the mediawhores instead of discussing this issue today.

My original thread is here.

The blog I referenced is here.


Once again, it is time for me to gloat and say..........

I told you so.

 

[KCConservative]

If it were only unlawful, then you might have something.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I posted about the Bush administration authorizing the leaking of sensitive information more than a month ago. The article I posted was linked to a blog, since the mediawhores were staying silent as usual on this issue. However, pressure from the blogosphere itself has forced this issue out into the open, and once again, the mainstream media was finally forced to run with the ball. Thank God for the blogs, because without them, we would be getting more pablum puke from the mediawhores instead of discussing this issue today.

My original thread is here.

The blog I referenced is here.


Once again, it is time for me to gloat and say..........

I told you so.

Umm the NIE presidential summary is Bush's to declassify and dessiminate to the media. Where's the scandal, where's the crime, and where the **** is the story?

 

[jfuh]

If it were only unlawful, then you might have something.

Funny thing you would say that. Getting a blow job isn't a crime neither. But seems enough for impeachement.

 

[disneydude]

I love the continued desperate efforts of the Bush Apologists to cast this as a legal v. illegal debate. Again, you miss the point. This issue is whether Bush knowingly and purposefully mislead the American people (as he has done so many times before - but thats for another thread).
Staying on topic here - Bush stood in front of the American public several times and denounced these leaks and promised to fire anyone involved/take appropriate action all the while he knew full well that he was involved in the leaks.
You Bush apologists can play with words and say he used the term "Classified" and "Sensitive" so because he had "De-Classified" it so that he could leak it, he didn't lie.

OK, well lets stay within the spirit of what he said to the American people. Are you so desperate that you are willing to argue that there was nothing that he did that was intended to mislead the people of this country?

If you say yes....can you do so with a straight face?
At some point, even the most die-hard Bushlover has to be honest with themselves.

 

[Alias]

Funny thing you would say that. Getting a blow job isn't a crime neither. But seems enough for impeachement.

He didn't get impeached for a blow job. He got impeached for breaking his oath by not upholding the laws of the land and lying to a grand jury. Anything else you need to know dude?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I love the continued desperate efforts of the Bush Apologists to cast this as a legal v. illegal debate. Again, you miss the point. This issue is whether Bush knowingly and purposefully mislead the American people (as he has done so many times before - but thats for another thread).
Staying on topic here - Bush stood in front of the American public several times and denounced these leaks and promised to fire anyone involved/take appropriate action all the while he knew full well that he was involved in the leaks.
You Bush apologists can play with words and say he used the term "Classified" and "Sensitive" so because he had "De-Classified" it so that he could leak it, he didn't lie.

OK, well lets stay within the spirit of what he said to the American people. Are you so desperate that you are willing to argue that there was nothing that he did that was intended to mislead the people of this country?

If you say yes....can you do so with a straight face?
At some point, even the most die-hard Bushlover has to be honest with themselves.

You are making up your own facts here, Bush was decrying the leaking of classified information, now if the information has been declassified by the President himself then it is no longer classified is it??? This was the Presidential National Intelligence Estimate summary, it is his information to declassify if he wants, therfor by the very definition this isn't a god damn leak. A leak would mean that the information which was leaked was classified this information was not classified it was declassified. But hay keep making up your own facts.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Funny thing you would say that. Getting a blow job isn't a crime neither. But seems enough for impeachement.

No but perjury to protect his *** during a sexual harrassment law suit is a crime.

 

[disneydude]

this isn't a god damn leak.

Desperation?

 

[danarhea]

You are making up your own facts here, Bush was decrying the leaking of classified information, now if the information has been declassified by the President himself then it is no longer classified is it??? This was the Presidential National Intelligence Estimate summary, it is his information to declassify if he wants, therfor by the very definition this isn't a god damn leak. A leak would mean that the information which was leaked was classified this information was not classified it was declassified. But hay keep making up your own facts.

Looks like Bush learned his lesson well from Bill Clinton, and can now tell us what the meaning of the word "is" is. :rofl

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Looks like Bush learned his lesson well from Bill Clinton, and can now tell us what the meaning of the word "is" is. :rofl

Dana come on now buddy, do you know the difference between classified and declassified information?

The difference is night and day not semantics.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Desperation?

That you are making up your own facts and repeating misinformation? Yes I would say that is a sign of desperation.

 

[mpg]

Funny thing you would say that. Getting a blow job isn't a crime neither. But seems enough for impeachement.

That post is absolutely false.

 

[scottyz]

Whether it's legal or illegal it's still a big blow to the credibility of someone who claimed to be adamantly against leaks of information.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Whether it's legal or illegal it's still a big blow to the credibility of someone who claimed to be adamantly against leaks of information.

By the very definition of the word this isn't a leak, a leak would be somebody going behind the Presidents back without getting it authorized and releasing the NIE summary while it was still classified. This information was the Presidential NIE summary, it was confidential meaning the lowest level of classified information, which means it is up to the Administrations perogative whether or not to declassify the information.

You see there is some classified information that can't even be declassified by the President that is called secret and top secret for example the name of an undercover CIA agent would be considered top secret, the NIE summary is confidential and it is left for the administration to decide if should be dessiminated to the public.

Are you saying that you don't want to know anything about what our government does? I want important information to be declassified if it won't hurt National Security.

 

[disneydude]

By the very definition of the word this isn't a leak .

Trajan:
I don't know if the fact that you feel the need to respond to every single person is noble or pathetic. I tend to think the latter.
Just a little advice. George Bush is a big boy. He doesn't need you to apologize to every single person on this board. Especially when you are spewing out more ridiculous information that even his advisors are.
Nice try though. If you keep trying hard enough, maybe you can convince yourself.

 

[KCConservative]

Funny thing you would say that. Getting a blow job isn't a crime neither. But seems enough for impeachement.

Would you kindly show the evidence that Clinton was impeached for having received oral sex? I know you won't, but I'm still asking.

 

[jfuh]

That post is absolutely false.

Oh? HOw is it false? Isn't that how the whole thing started to begin with? It's what lead to him having to define what the word is means.

 

[jfuh]

Would you kindly show the evidence that Clinton was impeached for having received oral sex? I know you won't, but I'm still asking.

Show me where I said Clinton. Come on KC you're good at it, so show me where I said clinton.

 

[Schweddy]

Oh? HOw is it false? Isn't that how the whole thing started to begin with? It's what lead to him having to define what the word is means.

How soon we all forget - *sigh*.

It was a sexual harassment case with Paula Jones and another lady in Arkansas. It had everything to do with what he did or didn't do *previously* while Governor. They asked Clinton if he had sex with Monica [his intern] to determine if he had a history of adultery [with interns] (which could confirm if he had a problem with harassment) - he said no - under oath.

Star proved he was lieing. That is what got him impeached.

As for the topic:
It is entrirely semantics - it's hard to "leak" publically available documents.

 

[jfuh]

How soon we all forget - *sigh*.

It was a sexual harassment case with Paula Jones and another lady in Arkansas. It had everything to do with what he did or didn't do *previously* while Governor. They asked Clinton if he had sex with Monica [his intern] to determine if he had a history of adultery [with interns] (which could confirm if he had a problem with harassment) - he said no - under oath.

Star proved he was lieing. That is what got him impeached.

As for the topic:
It is entrirely semantics - it's hard to "leak" publically available documents.

Sounds perfectly legitimate, unless we forget of course what the purpose of the "leak" as you put it was for. This was only an attempt by this administration to quash the opposition by discrediting them. Is this how a democracy and free society functions? It's pathetic. WHat's even more pathetic is that there are still quacks that feel this president has done nothing wrong and that it's only partisan bickering over what Bush inc has done.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Sounds perfectly legitimate, unless we forget of course what the purpose of the "leak" as you put it was for. This was only an attempt by this administration to quash the opposition by discrediting them. Is this how a democracy and free society functions? It's pathetic. WHat's even more pathetic is that there are still quacks that feel this president has done nothing wrong and that it's only partisan bickering over what Bush inc has done.

In this instance what did the President do wrong? I mean you made the claim. I want to know exactly what the hell is wrong with giving declassified information to the NYTs??? I for one want information like the NIE summary to be made public it sounds like you people want everything our government knows about potential threats to this nation to be kept from us . . . good call. :roll:

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Trajan:
I don't know if the fact that you feel the need to respond to every single person is noble or pathetic. I tend to think the latter.
Just a little advice. George Bush is a big boy. He doesn't need you to apologize to every single person on this board. Especially when you are spewing out more ridiculous information that even his advisors are.
Nice try though. If you keep trying hard enough, maybe you can convince yourself.

Who's apologizing? I'm just clarifying the misinformation and propoganda that you put out here on a daily basis. I have not put out one un-factual piece of information throughout this entire subject. You levvied yed another false accusation, so, now what ridiculous information have I spewed? You're the one who has stated that this has to do with the Vallery Plame, you're the one who has totally misrepresented the facts, and it is you sir that is the lier!!! Not me!!!

Now you made the ****ing accusation that I'm lying now back that **** up or shut the **** up!!!!!!!!!!!!

Better yet why don't you post something of relavance instead of trolling all over this board and reposting the same Michael Moore, Al-Franken, Moveon horseshit that you do every day. You have not had one original thought go through your head this entire time, you have not made one valid argument ever, and you never have a point other than to attack the messenger with ad-hominems.

But you won't come with the facts you'll just reply with the same: "you're a Bush apologist," bullshit that you've posted 20 times already with out bringing anything worthwhile or relevant to the debate. Why don't you post a fact or two? Maybe even an opinion other than I'm a Bush apologist because I bring the facts and you just bring bullshit and lies.

 

[KCConservative]

Show me where I said Clinton. Come on KC you're good at it, so show me where I said clinton.

Oh Good Lord! Is there anyone else who you guys claim to have been impeached for oral sex? Give is a break.

 

[mpg]

Oh? HOw is it false? Isn't that how the whole thing started to begin with? It's what lead to him having to define what the word is means.

Do I need to google "articles of impeachment" and post a link? You know perfectly well that he wasn't impeached for a bj, and that wasn't even what started it. It started before that. The first part of your post might be false too. A bj can be illegal. Adultery is a misdemeanor in many states and a felony in some states. I'm not sure about The District of Columbia.