4/8/2006 - I told you so

[KCConservative]

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.

Ssshhhhhh. Don't spoil his fun. :lol:

 

[disneydude]

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!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dude: You are becoming unhinged. Take a deep breath and remember you are not responsible for your President's misgivings.

As far as responding to your specifics. I have never misrepresented facts and I have never called you a liar.
I have never stated that this has to do with Valerie Plame.

You are just angrily grasping for straws because your man is going down in flames. Your desperate spin to try to cast this as a Bush did nothing illegal issue is not going to cut it. Even if you respond to every single poster no one is going to buy your spin.

Again...listen clearly.... no one is saying that Bush broke the law. But again, you can twist his words and play semantics but America ain't buying it. Your president stood up in front of the America people and acted all high and mighty about these leaks and pretended to have nothing to do with any of it. Now that he's got his hand caught in the cookie jar you are all desperately spinning out of control trying to diffuse the situation. Its strangely reminiscent of a time when another President tried to do the same thing. I can't wait for Bush/Cheney/McClellan's version of "It all depends on what the meaning of the word is is". If they do as poorly as you as controlling the spin, they are in for some rough times.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Dude: You are becoming unhinged. Take a deep breath and remember you are not responsible for your President's misgivings.

As far as responding to your specifics. I have never misrepresented facts and I have never called you a liar.
I have never stated that this has to do with Valerie Plame.

You are just angrily grasping for straws because your man is going down in flames. Your desperate spin to try to cast this as a Bush did nothing illegal issue is not going to cut it. Even if you respond to every single poster no one is going to buy your spin.

Again...listen clearly.... no one is saying that Bush broke the law. But again, you can twist his words and play semantics but America ain't buying it. Your president stood up in front of the America people and acted all high and mighty about these leaks and pretended to have nothing to do with any of it. Now that he's got his hand caught in the cookie jar you are all desperately spinning out of control trying to diffuse the situation. Its strangely reminiscent of a time when another President tried to do the same thing. I can't wait for Bush/Cheney/McClellan's version of "It all depends on what the meaning of the word is is". If they do as poorly as you as controlling the spin, they are in for some rough times.

This is what you said:

Especially when you are spewing out more ridiculous information that even his advisors are.

Now back that **** up or shut the **** up!!!

Again all you're doing is misrepresenting the facts and spinning this. Do you even know what a leak is? It's obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Why is it a problem for you that the President released the NIE presidential summary? It was his perogative to do so and by the very definition of the word it wasn't a leak, if it was a leak please explain to me how it was a leak? If it was declassified information then how was it a leak? Just answer that very simple question.

The president came out against leaking classified information to the media, he didn't leak classified information to the media what he did was release declassified information to the media which is exactly how the media gets all its information about intelligence programs and reports.

Are you seriously going to sit here and tell me that the President is not only not allowed to declassify information but shouldn't declassify information that he thinks the American people have an interest in knowing?

Tell me what the scandal is with that because I would really like to know.

You don't have a crime, you don't have a scandal, and as near as I can tell is all you have is spin, rhetoric, no facts, and no point. You heard the buzz words: "libby," "leak," "classified," and got a boner without having any idea what the actual facts were.

All you do is talk and talk and talk until people think that you're actually saying something. Well guess what? You aren't saying anything of relavance, you never have and probably never will.

 

[KCConservative]

All you [disney] do is talk and talk and talk until people think that you're actually saying something.

Hey, don't lump me into that circle of fools. I'm right with you on this, Trajan.

 

[hipsterdufus]

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.

Are you surprised? We've sensed this to be the case from day one. I like Fitzgerald's reply to a request from Libby for all documents, when he stated that the absences of a conspiciricy is not supported by the documents you are requesting. In other words - don't go there Scooter.

People that have a problem with Plame's covert status fail to mention that the entire Bruster Jennings Brass Plate cover was exposed. What happened to those agents in the field the day Novak published Bruster Jennings' name?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Are you surprised? We've sensed this to be the case from day one. I like Fitzgerald's reply to a request from Libby for all documents, when he stated that the absences of a conspiciricy is not supported by the documents you are requesting. In other words - don't go there Scooter.

People that have a problem with Plame's covert status fail to mention that the entire Bruster Jennings Brass Plate cover was exposed. What happened to those agents in the field the day Novak published Bruster Jennings' name?

To bad Libby's testimony has absolutely nothing to do with the name of Ms. Plane being outted so quit conflating the issue, besides that woman outted herself, Wilson would introduce her as my wife the CIA agent, everyone on the hill knew the story and she was never covert.

 

[Stinger]

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

You STILL are spouting that lie?

 

[Stinger]

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.

ss

But that is the way Washington works isn't it and the information was released in general several day later before it ever hit print. He may dislike leaks especialy unoffical and ESPECIALY of classified information, but he knows sometimes that's the best way to get your message out in the real world.

 

[Stinger]

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.

No, proving you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Stinger]

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

OK

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



Well who were claiming got impeached for a blow job then. And since we all know you couldn't possibly have been talking about anyone but Clinton your post is dishonest. Why do you think you can get away with this sophomoric post around here?

 

[beyondtherim55008@yahoo.c]

Thank God for the blogs, because without them, we would be getting more pablum puke from the mediawhores instead of discussing this issue today.

Agreed. Thank God.

 

[KCConservative]

OK

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



Well who were claiming got impeached for a blow job then. And since we all know you couldn't possibly have been talking about anyone but Clinton your post is dishonest. Why do you think you can get away with this sophomoric post around here?

Certainly you know by now that once jfuh is backed into a corner and he is shown his hypocray, he won't answer or return to the thread. It's a pattern.

 

[jfuh]

OK

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



Well who were claiming got impeached for a blow job then. And since we all know you couldn't possibly have been talking about anyone but Clinton your post is dishonest. Why do you think you can get away with this sophomoric post around here?

Get away with? Lol, you would be one talking now wouldn't you?
If we want to talk about dishonesty, I've made several points already. However you and your neo-con junkies are to arrogant and stubborn to deal with the fact that you're president is a coward and a liar. So what's the point.
Let's just sit back and watch how this unfolds.

 

[jfuh]

Certainly you know by now that once jfuh is backed into a corner and he is shown his hypocray, he won't answer or return to the thread. It's a pattern.

Awww I must've really struck a personal cord with you a while back for you to hold such a grudge against me. You seem to enjoy following me around.
Care to talk of the topic here and how you're president is a lieing dishonest cheat?

 

[Alias]

It's common sense. That's why he doesn't get it. A president takes an oath to uphold the laws of the land and when that president lies to a grand jury, he has broken his oath which is an impeachable offense.

 

[jfuh]

It's common sense. That's why he doesn't get it. A president takes an oath to uphold the laws of the land and when that president lies to a grand jury, he has broken his oath which is an impeachable offense.

Ahhh I see, uphold the laws of the land. I guess that means wire tapping on us
Not giving a damn about the ppl's of NO
going on vacation when credible intel tells of an attack
torturing enemy combatants even though the geneva convention states otherwise
and giving info to the press and hiding behind technicalities.
You're right.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

See: .......................

“Our fundamental condition for cooperating with Germany was a free hand to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine and the Arab world. I asked Hitler for an explicit undertaking to allow us to solve the Jewish problem in a manner befitting our national and racial aspirations and according to the scientific methods innovated by Germany in the handling of its Jews. The answer I got was: 'The Jews are yours.'”
- Former Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini in his post-WWII memoirs. [1]
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16533

 

[aquapub]

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.

4 Problems with this argument:


1) The media's coverage of Bush has been so adoring until the honorable conspiracy theorists dominating the blogosphere twisted the evil corporate media's arm and MADE them FINALLY do some adversarial reporting on Bush? :rofl Sure, whatever you have to tell yourself. You using more baseless, exceptionally distorted characterizations of things is no basis for you to be patting yourself on the back. Get over yourself.

2) What sensitive, classified info was leaked to Woodward? None listed. You'd think such a charge (if real) would accompany SOME KIND of examples.

3) A partisan Democrat writes a letter and that somehow proves everything you said is right? This conspiracy theory gets dragged into "mainstream" coverage for a moment and that somehow proves everything you said is right? Jumping the gun a bit, hey?

Where is that unreasonably high standard of proof (which couldn't even be met in a court of law) that liberals hold Republicans to anytime they are trying to do anything to defend this country? Seems odd how drastically your standards drop to nothing when you want to prove something that suits you.

4) Even if Woodward got his hands on some classified intel, it doesn't mean it is wrong. Certain reporters (once they've earned a major amount of trust)have always been allowed to see a little more of what's going on than the ones who can't remain objective or keep their mouths shut. This wouldn't be uncommon, and Woodward is DEFINITELY one of those reporters who has earned that trust (both sides agree on that).

 

[aquapub]

Ahhh I see, uphold the laws of the land. I guess that means wire tapping on us

Your civil liberty to not be murdered trumps your civil liberty to not have your international phone calls from Al Queda be heard. Bush was forced to decide between them, he made the right choice. This argument is a loser for liberals. Get over it.

How bout we ditch the petty, off-topic bickering and get back to something closer to the absurd gloating about conspiracy theories that started this thread.

 

[KCConservative]

Ahhh I see, uphold the laws of the land. I guess that means wire tapping on us
Not giving a damn about the ppl's of NO
going on vacation when credible intel tells of an attack
torturing enemy combatants even though the geneva convention states otherwise
and giving info to the press and hiding behind technicalities.
You're right.

Tell us about the time you were wiretapped.

Show us the quote of someone saying in this administration saying they didn't "give a darn about the people of NO".

Tell us what you know of the president's vacation itineraries, his capabilities to govern while in Texas and Camp David.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

See: .......................

oops wrong thread.

 

[Alias]

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

I suppose you figure if you say it often enough, people will believe it. Obviously you have.

 

[KCConservative]

I suppose you figure if you say it often enough, people will believe it. Obviously you have.

Alias, I know you are new here, so let me bring you up to speed. jfuh has even been shown the actual impeachment articles and he still tries to perpetuate this lie. A true liberal lost cause.

 

[jfuh]

Your civil liberty to not be murdered trumps your civil liberty to not have your international phone calls from Al Queda be heard. Bush was forced to decide between them, he made the right choice. This argument is a loser for liberals. Get over it.

How bout we ditch the petty, off-topic bickering and get back to something closer to the absurd gloating about conspiracy theories that started this thread.

Can't answer the opposition argument without :spin: I see.
The point is not that he wiretaps alone. But that he authorized these wiretaps illegally. Without FISA. The 1978 law far out trumps any newer litigation because of it's specificity.
What you think that the USSR posed any less of a threat then Al Qaeda today? Just extremist rhetoric from the extreeme right.

 

[KCConservative]

Tell us about the time you were wiretapped, jfuh. I've not ever known anyone that was. Then again, I don't know any terrorists.

By the way, everyone misses you over in the "missing Link" thread. You left a lot of unanswered questions.