• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

SS agent says Cheney was drunk.

H

hipsterdufus

A Secret Service Agent has stated that Cheney was "clearly inebriated" when he shot Whittington in the face. If you look at it, why else would Cheney not allow the sheriff to talk to him the next day? Why would he have a cocktail after the shooting rather than go to the hospital? Just because sheriff Buford T Pussar says there was no wrong-doing doesn't make it so.

Cheney has already admitted to "a beer" (try that with a cop one day.) Maybe he meant one kind of beer. :roll:

With the heart medication that Cheney is on, even one beer could impair him more than the normal Joe sixpack.


http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8184.shtml
 
Hey, hipster. You forgot to say that your source is called The Rant: Commentary from the founder of CapitolHillBlue. Here's what your OpEd piece says:

"According to those who have talked with the agents and others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk...."

So, an unidentified person spoke with another unidentified person? This is the best The Rant can do? :lol:

Move along, folks. Other than a liberal's jealous desperation, there is nothing to see here.
 
Last edited:

If we ar going to use anything for a source and expect everyone to take it serious then I want these sources seen as credible by all you leftist.

http://www.stoptheaclu.org/

http://www.exodus-international.org/

http://www.exodusglobalalliance.org/
 
jamesrage said:
If we ar going to use anything for a source and expect everyone to take it serious then I want these sources seen as credible by all you leftist.

http://www.stoptheaclu.org/

http://www.exodus-international.org/

http://www.exodusglobalalliance.org/
Your first link is an anti ACLU site. I looked through it, but could not find any reference to the issue that is being discussed. This might be good for discussion in another thread, but is irrelevant here.

Your second link is an anti gay site. I also looked through this one, but could find no reference to the issue that is being discussed. Like your first link, this one is also irrelevant to this discussion.

Sorry, but you third link appears to be broken, so I cannot comment on it.

The links you have posted could be used in legimate discussion on their own merit for the appropriate forum or thread, but are just not applicable here. Do you have a link which refutes the accusation made here? It should not be hard to find. I actually found one myself, but I do not intend to do your own footwork for you.

Ball is in your court now.
 
Last edited:


The point I was trying to illistrate with those links is bias,not if they apply to the subject of this thread.
 
It's America people. Feel free to use whatever link you like.

I have suspected all along that Cheney was drunk. His actions after the shooting point to that conclusion. Now we have a story that may confirm this. As Drudge would say - developing.

We'll never have a breathalizer test because he wouldn't let the Sheriffs in to see him until the next day. What hubris and arrogance. This administration thinks that they are above the law on so many counts, this is just one unfortunate example.

The next time you get pulled over by a cop and are asked to take a breathalizer test, use the Cheney defense. Come see me after I sober up....
 
jamesrage said:
The point I was trying to illistrate with those links is bias,not if they apply to the subject of this thread.
Then it is up to you to counter that bias with evidence of your own. Just saying that there is bias without providing your own rebuttal is weak.

You are not a dumb guy, and I know you can do better. I already found a link to a Conservative site, which argues the point he made. You should find it.

BTW, I had posted on this issue before. Cheney WAS drinking, but the jury is still out on whether he was under the influence. The reference I found was that Cheney had a mixed drink hours before the shoot. That by itself would not indicate that Cheney was drunk, but in my honest opinion, having alcohol of any kind on the day of a shoot is dumb.
 
danarhea said:
Then it is up to you to counter that bias with evidence of your own. Just saying that there is bias without providing your own rebuttal is weak.
That is ridiculous. You want hipster's OpEd piece countered with another OpEd? This gets us nowhere. How about hipster start a thread with credible news rather than partisan commentary? And there is no "jury out" on his drinking or anything else for that matter. The case was closed.
 


Wow one beer with lunch,according to this liberal site.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/15/cheney-drinking.
 

According to the link Hipster posted, a secret service agent says Cheney was drunk. According to the article, Cheney's blood alcohol test was impounded. According to the article, public officials are covering up Cheney's alleged drunkenness. I say alleged, because I am not convinced.
Those are serious charges. That is not an opinion. It is an accusation. Surely, there must be something out there that rebuts that accusation. There is something there to be found, and it is up to those who disagree to find it. Merely accusing Hipster of bias wont cut it..... Well, actaully, it will cut it if you can find the proper material to rebut it. Just because Hipster says so doesnt make it so. That is why he provided a link. Same with you and others. Just saying something is so doesnt make it so. Where is your rebuttal evidence? Hint: There is something out there. All you have to do is find it.
 
jamesrage said:
Wow one beer with lunch,according to this liberal site.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/02/15/cheney-drinking.
Actually, a single mixed drink at lunch. Interestingly enough, you didnt have to go to a Conservative site to find it either. You used the Liberals' own web site.

Now you have some meat in your argument. It will now be up to Hipster to debate this and somehow prove that Cheney drank more than a single mixed drink that day, and prove that what Cheney drank did not impair his shooting ability and judgment. Good job. Like I already said, you are not a dumb guy.

Hipster - The ball is in your court now.
 

So what, I hope they all get shot, hunting trapped birds, who the hell cares? No one there was forced to go hunting, and no one has made a law that says you can't drink while doing it! This is just pure bull***, and everyone who has hunted knows it! The fun of going hunting is the drinking, and the interaction with other drunk idiots, this is just ridiculous!:roll:
 
danarhea said:
Actually, a single mixed drink at lunch. Interestingly enough, you didnt have to go to a Conservative site to find it either. You used the Liberals' own web site.
The information the liberal site uses alledgly comes from Fox News.


The liberal site I use says he had a beer at lunch,the liberal site he uses alledges that a secret service agent is allegeding that Cheney is a drunk.

I been drunk enough times to know that one beer does not impare you if you are a hard core drunk and that one mixed drink is the equavilent to one beer..If he drank the beer or mixed drink slowly then he definately was not impared.Texas has six point,the Budweiser cans have the Texas state on their beer cans instead of hte AB logo.
 

Actually, they stole that logo from the Lone Star brewery.
 

Here is how the story on Cheney's alleged drunkenness got into Capitol Blue's hands. They have broken several important stories over the past few years, they've also been wrong too.

I can't prove that Cheney was drunk yet. Why? Because he didn't let the sheriff in to see him until the next day. He didn't take a breathalizer test. He didn't go to the hospital with his friend.

Everything in my gut tells me that this delay was perpetrated to hide the fact that Cheney got drunk and shot two guys. Remember he has 2 DUI's already and is on medication that heightens the effect of alcohol.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8187.shtml
 
Enjoy all the OpEd pieces. Enjoy speculating. Enjoy discussing what is "in your gut." Enjoy dragging out another dead liberal scandal. Knock yourselves out. The Sheriff's Department said the case is closed. End of story.
 
Having not been there, I don't know for sure what happened no more than any of you other yahoos.

But I am SURE of a couple of things.

1. If he was drunk, we will never find out about it.

2. Any SS who states Cheney was drunk will be looking for a new job. I suspect their taxes will be closely scrutinized and a world of hurt awaits them. Anyone who crosses this administration is in for a bad time.

3. Cheney could be pi ss drunk and the Pope could be telling us about it and STILL some folks in here will attack the messenger.

Was he drunk? Who knows? I don't doubt it. It kinda adds up when you put 2 and 2 together. But unless we're positive, which we are not, it's a mute point now.
 
Captain America said:
2. Any SS who states Cheney was drunk will be looking for a new job.
.

Excellent point.
 
Very very interesting. I just don't see Cheney as a big drinker; however, I found it strange that after returning to the Armstrong ranch, he fixed himself a mixed drink. Katharine Armstrong adamantly denied that there was any drinking, even at lunch, and even Cheney admitted to having a beer. To me, she was "protesting too much." There could be something to this story.

Some people are willing to lose their jobs to bring out the truth. I would be one of them.
 
When your entire story is based on the proverbial 'unidentified sources', and is an op-ed on an obvious biased site, (just look at the neutral titles to the rest of the articles!!), no one in their right mind is going to give it credence.
It smacks of bullshit, and if something looks like bullshit, and smells like bullshit, you shouldn't need to eat it to discover it is bullshit.
 

It amuses when reporters use unidentified sources.How can a unidentified source be seen as having credibility if all the info is based on what a individual allegedly saw and we do not know if this individual is nor can we vaerify if what he said was true?I would think a SS agent would be fired( as one poster already pointed out) for revealing certian information about the individual whom they are supposed to be protecting.
 
So we are to believe for a second that Secret Service agents would allow the VP let alone other people to be around him in the procession of guns while they are drunk and that one would admit to this knowing that he would be fired on the spot if not arrested for dereliction of duty.

By the way even the cite you proved asked "who is this Thompson guy" who reports this without one named source.

Just how desperate are you guys going to get?
 
danarhea said:
Actually, a single mixed drink at lunch. Interestingly enough, you didnt have to go to a Conservative site to find it either. You used the Liberals' own web site.

Actually a beer and you think for a second the Secret Service would allow ANYONE who is drunk to be in the pocession of a gun around the VP? Use your head man.
 
Stinger said:
Actually a beer and you think for a second the Secret Service would allow ANYONE who is drunk to be in the pocession of a gun around the VP? Use your head man.

How naive. Do you think ANYONE in this country tells Mr. Go F Yourself and his posse what to do, including the SS? Cheney was kicked out of college for drinking and has 2 DUI convictions. Do you think it's so far-fetched, so out of the realm of possibility,that he might have been drunk at the time of the shooting?
 
Last edited:

How idiotic to believe the SS would allow anything of the sort to happen.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…