• 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.

Will Republicans Help to Impeach Bush?

easyt65 said:
You try your best to dismiss my entire post as Republican talkig oints, focussing on the wire taps and Plame while wisely dodging all the other well-documented points.

Well, lets address the 2 you hit upon:

1. Plame. Youdo not deny that the investigation into Plame ruled she was never a 'Covert' operative by definition, so there was never any law broken. the whole 'scandal' was poltical BS. You may call the fact that she posed for magazines and gave interviews in which she talked about working for the CIA, but you don't deny it - and just because you call them talking points doesn't mean it isn't true, which you do not try to say, either. as far as Joe Wilson's books and your demand that I do your homework for you - why is it that every Dem demands that I spoonfeed them in a debate. Do your own research - it can't be that hard because Jow Wilson has onlyput out somethig like 2 books, the books I am referring to. Do your own research! As far as other proof, if you kept up with the investigation and reporting while they were on-going, you would have heard numerous reporters sayin interviews how they all knew Wilson's wife was known among Washington circles to work for the CIA! Several Seanators, including Lieberman, said that he and many congressmen knew as they had been introduced to Plame by Wilson at functions, at which time Wilson introduced Plame as his 'CIA wife'!

After years of investigations and millions of taz payer dollars to determine plame was never covert thus no crime was ever committed, the only result has been to indict libby for not remembering the exact details of his actions and whereabouts on 1 day inquestion several years ago! i guess he should have used the ol' "It depends on what the definition of 'IS' is" defense that got Clinton off (so to speak :rofl )!

You can claim 'talking points', but they are also FACTS!

I agree with you that it does not appear that Plame was covert. What does that have to do with the questions I asked you? I am asking you to provide evidence to substantiate your "talking points" because I would be utterly shocked if you could provide me such information. Putting the burden on me to prove your assertions is a desperate attempt to avoid admitting that you don't have any evidence. LOL

Inregards to Bush's wire taps:
1) Do you have anyidea what the role/job of the Attorney general, who has stated that he has already investigated and found the Dem's claim of illegality to be bogus, is? Do you have any idea what the NSA's agency that has been reviewing this is? You mention checks and balances - yes, and they are being done! The U.S. justice Department, whose job it is to determine this, has decided there is nothing to the Dem's claims.

Well considering that my husband works for the Dept. of Justice, I have a pretty good idea of the role/job of the AG. Thanks for checking with me. To continue to assert that since the AG found no wrongdoing means that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the Constitution and the balance of powers. Why do you think that Congress has to hold hearings on this issue? Just because they want to? NOPE. That's what the Constitution tells them to.

While you try to lecture me on checks and balances and say just because I, the NSA, the AG, and the Justice Department say there is nothing illegal about the wire taps, the truth is that they ARE illegal becaue YOU, Kerry, and Dean say so! (Nice dodge, BTW, not mentioning Clinton's FBI Files, wiretaps, AND illegal search and seisures without warrants!) Your only defense of that entire post outlining the illegal, immoral, hypocritical, and unethical behavior (FACTS) of the Democrats is to label the facts as 'GOP Talking points! :spin: :rofl

Hmmm, you may not be mature enough for me to be having any sort of meaningful discussion with you about this. Buh bye. :2wave:
 
Easyt65, you're the one who needs to do their homework good sir.

easyt65 said:
1. Plame. Youdo not deny that the investigation into Plame ruled she was never a 'Covert' operative by definition, so there was never any law broken.
That is 100% false. Whoever told you that is a liar. Not only was Plame's status classified, but the entire CIA front company that Plame worked for, Brewer Jennings and Associates, was also exposed as a result of the leak. To think that the Republicans would launch a 2-year investigation on members of their own party, if it was so obvious up-front that no crime was committed, not only defies the laws regarding the disclosure of classified information to the wrong people, it defies all reason.

easyt65 said:
why is it that every Dem demands that I spoonfeed them in a debate. Do your own research - it can't be that hard
Maybe that's because you're propogating falsehoods such as Plame "gave interviews in which she talked about working for the CIA." The burden of proof is on the person who made the claim. It is not up to other people to prove what you say is wrong, it's up to YOU to prove what you say is right. That's how a good debate works.

easyt65 said:
As far as other proof, if you kept up with the investigation and reporting while they were on-going, you would have heard numerous reporters sayin interviews how they all knew Wilson's wife was known among Washington circles to work for the CIA!
Yep, you're right about that. Cooper and Miller both knew about Plame's status before Novak published his article. But if you kept up with the investigation, you would understand that proves absolutely nothing relavent. Somebody STILL leaked Plame's name to the press, and that would be like, the whole point of the investigation!

easyt65 said:
the only result has been to indict libby for not remembering the exact details of his actions and whereabouts on 1 day inquestion several years ago!
Again your ignorance of that whole issue is incriminating. There are 9, count 'em 9, different occasions spanning an entire month where witnesses have testified that they spoke with Libby about Plame's wife working for the CIA. You can read Fitzgerald's entire indictment in .pdf format, it's available on the web if you want to do your homework. :2razz:


easyt65 said:
Inregards to Bush's wire taps:
IMO the only question is whether or not Bush broke the law, and that can only be decided by the court system, which has not happened yet. Innocent until proven guilty.
 
Originally posted by KCConservative:
True. And in case you or Dana haven't heard, there are al-Quida cells in the United States. I'm glad to know Bush and my government are on their tails.
What proof do you have to prove this?
 
Billo_Really said:
What proof do you have to prove this?
Well, it seems like a reasonable possibility, considering they were trained at U.S. flight schools and all. We have a lot of back country, just look at how long the Unabomber hid from the authorities.
 
Originally posted by Binary_Digit:
Well, it seems like a reasonable possibility, considering they were trained at U.S. flight schools and all. We have a lot of back country, just look at how long the Unabomber hid from the authorities.
"Chicken Little" was a childrens story. I want proof if I am to be OK with my civil and Constitutional rights being violated.
 
The investigating attorney HIMSELF announced that Plame's status did not meet thre definition of 'covert' and that no law had been broken....which is primarily the reason all the years and millions of tax payer dollars spent have only Libby's indictment for conflicting information about info that was not illegal either (sparking the debate about an investigation 'causing' another crime to be committed in thre process of the investigation)!

There was no crime - Plame was NOT exposed - one of the posts above even proves my point, citing that several reporters already new about plame working for the CIA before the article came out - LIKE I SAID!

The Democrats have proved that they are out to get the Bush administration for anything, including Jay walking, because of sour grapes over clinton's Impeachment and losing the last 2 elections because the American people have rejected THIS kind of politics as well as their immoral and unethical behavior!

This, just like the Valerie Plame BS, is going to turn out to be another case of Dem Political Spin, another attempt to nail bush with ANYTHING. As far as proving anything more to you, as the President says, I don't have to because the on-going investigation will prove my point for me...just like the Plame attempt's result! And when the results DO come back and show that there was nothing to this except more politically motivated attacks by a defeated party, I expect an "Ok, you were right." I won't hold my breath, though, because you will STILL argue that it was a conspiracy, cover-up, or some garbage, never accepting that your party is busy attacking our soldiers, America, and our president during a time of war JUST to regain power! And if it turns out that Bush knowingly broke any Laws, I will be the 1st one in line to see that he answers for it. as history is with me, though (Only 3 US Presidents ever impeached and all Democrats - what was that Pelosi was saying about a 'Culture of Corruption'. She must have been talking about Slick Willy and the 'Gang of the impeached 3'!), I don't see that happening!

So, see ya/talk to ya after the results of this latest DNC 'witch hunt'! :cool:
 
Binary_Digit said:
Well, it seems like a reasonable possibility, considering they were trained at U.S. flight schools and all. We have a lot of back country, just look at how long the Unabomber hid from the authorities.
Bush was warned about the flight training and ignored it.
 
BD said:
To think that the Republicans would launch a 2-year investigation on members of their own party, if it was so obvious up-front that no crime was committed, not only defies the laws regarding the disclosure of classified information to the wrong people, it defies all reason.

Lets straighten out one misconception: the Repubs didn't order an investigation. The impetus for the investigation came from the CIA. The CIA acknowledged a probable leak of classified information; given that the CIA has no investigatory or supoena powers, they are required by law to report such to the DoJ, who then reviews the situation and decides whether or not to go forward. In this case, there was sufficient evidence of a leak of classified info, so the DoJ had no choice but to investigate. Since the alleged 'leaker' was thought to someone in or around the administration, the independent special prosecutor route was mandated.
 
scottyz said:
Bush was warned about the flight training and ignored it.

Bush personally was warned about the flight training?

Not saying that he wasn't. Have read about the FBI being made aware of the flight training, but the so-called 'walls' between agencies prevented the info from being exploited. But haven't read of Bush personally being made aware. Did I miss something?
 
scottyz said:
Bush was warned about the flight training and ignored it.

Al Qaeda bombed the Kobar towers, killing US troops, then promised more - Clinton did NOTHING!

Al Qaeda bombed the USS Cole, killing US Troops, then promised more - Clinton AGAIN did NOTHING!

Al Qaeda bombed 2 African Embassies, killing US personnel - Clinton AGAIN did NOTHING!

Able Danger warned Clinton about Osama and Al Qaeda - Clinton sent sandy Berger last year to steal and shred classified documents which showed how Able danger had warned him and what he failed to do as President!

Clinton made it possible for his Arkansas buddy to sell the Chinese the missile technology that finally made it possible for them to reach the US with their missiles in exchange for millions in campaign contribution tracked directly back to the Chinese military!

Clinton not only wire tapped Americans without warrants, but he also ordered the illegal entry into private homes and businesses as well as search and seisure of those locations without warrants!

Clinton had FBI files on every GOP Senator and cogressman as well as other opponents that he kept illegallyin the White House....

I could go on, but why bother?!

It's like a convicted (3 Impeachments in U.S. history, and ALL Democrats) pyromaniac/arsonist standing in the middle of a house he just set on fire demanding that the guy who just lit a match outside (to light a cigarette) be arrested for 'endangering us all' with his match! :rofl
 
easyt65 said:
The investigating attorney HIMSELF announced that Plame's status did not meet thre definition of 'covert' and that no law had been broken....
Are you daft? Aps already schooled you on that point. If you're gonna debate, at least read your opponent's entire argument. Again for your benefit, here's what Fitzgerald (special prosecutor, not investigating attorney) said at a press conference:

"In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.
FITZGERALD: The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security."


Here's where special prosecutor Fitzgerald specifically calls it a criminal investigation:

"I recognize that there's been very little information about this criminal investigation, but for a very good reason."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html

I think you should apologize to Aps for disregarding the knowledge she tried to give you.

easyt65 said:
There was no crime - Plame was NOT exposed - one of the posts above even proves my point, citing that several reporters already new about plame working for the CIA before the article came out - LIKE I SAID!
Three different reporters knew about classified information they weren't supposed to know, yet nobody told them that information. I'm speechless.
 
oldreliable67 said:
Bush personally was warned about the flight training?

Not saying that he wasn't. Have read about the FBI being made aware of the flight training, but the so-called 'walls' between agencies prevented the info from being exploited. But haven't read of Bush personally being made aware. Did I miss something?

Also,
1. do you have any idea how many tips/warning the U.s./President gets each day about threats? There is NO WAY we can give max effort to research each and every one. Besides, possible terrorists in flight schools - read the next point -

2. At that time, NO one could conceive that terrorists would fly a hijacked aircraft into buildings. The airlines' policy in hijacking up until that time, for example, was to do anything the hijackers said and to negotiate with them on the ground/in the air, expecting them to want to fly somewhere else/divert the flight. Hind sight sure is 20/20, though, isn't it?! (Kerry said AFTER the fact that we should have seen this coming - Good call 'Nostradamus'!)

Also, thanks to the democrats for putting up the firewalls so the FBI and CIA could not share info, done to protect clinton from being investigated for receiving those contributions from the CHINESE MILITARY, there were pieces out there that could have possibly been pieced together but could not/did not happen!
 
Binary_Digit said:
Are you daft? Aps already schooled you on that point. If you're gonna debate, at least read your opponent's entire argument. Again for your benefit, here's what Fitzgerald (special prosecutor, not investigating attorney) said at a press conference:

"In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.
FITZGERALD: The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security."


Here's where special prosecutor Fitzgerald specifically calls it a criminal investigation:

"I recognize that there's been very little information about this criminal investigation, but for a very good reason."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html

I think you should apologize to Aps for disregarding the knowledge she tried to give you.


Three different reporters knew about classified information they weren't supposed to know, yet nobody told them that information. I'm speechless.

I don't owe him an apology becasue, in the argument used against me, the point was brought up that several reporters already knew plame worked for the CIA before the story ever came out. If it was classified/a secret, as one of those reporters said later, "It had to be one of the worst kept secrets in Washington!"
 
Here ya go, for all those who need to be spoon-fed the truth:

Plame's Identity was NO secret! Worked for the CIA - yes, covert Agent - No! Although classified 'secret', to be a crime, the name had to be leaked intentionally/on purpose with intent, which is why Kerry is NOT doing time for exposing the REAL covert CIA agent during the Bolton inquisition.

Agent? Si; Secret? No!

Moreover, as Novak himself notes, Plame’s “covert” status “was not much of a secret.” The incidentals were not secret: Her name appears in Joseph Wilson’s “Who’s Who in America” entry. Moreover, when she donation $1,000 to Al Gore, she did so under her married name, also listing a private CIA front group as her “employer.”

More importantly, though, her CIA employment itself was no secret. Wilson himself disclosed that his wife let her cover slip around him early in their dating life. Presumably Ms. Plame has dated others, whom she also informed of her dreadfully well-guarded, super-duper-secret status in exchange for, say, an evening at the Ice Capades. Although she has a desk job investigating those who sell WMDs to terrorists (and is not a field “operative” as some misunderstood Novak to imply), she had knowledge of genuine field agents in hostile lands. Thus, her loose-lipped dating-and-mating habits could have endangered those within her orbit. Her blatant disregard of CIA secrecy undermined her own job. It seems she, not Bob Novak, was the graver danger to national security.

For that matter, Novak was not even the only prominent conservative columnist to know of Plame’s employment. Cliff May of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies has written that by early July, when Wilson first threw his tantrums about his Niger expedition, May had heard of Plame’s status “from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhanded manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of.” Novak seems right on target when he writes, “It was well known around Washington that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.” Had Novak not reported her employment, this ticking time bomb was still waiting to go off.

This hardly excuses the blasé attitude of two senior administration officials toward the identity of covert CIA analysts. Regardless of her own attitude toward her covert status and the fact that she is a desk jockey rather than a field guerrilla, the CIA certifies that it will uphold its part of the bargain to maintain the anonymity of its undercover officers. Leaking any covert CIA agent’s name to the press should be intolerable, and the perpetrators, if found, should be punished. In fact everyone from President Bush to Attorney General Ashcroft shares this consensus.

Since the story broke, Wilson has played it for all its worth, publicly demanding the arrest of Karl Rove (though he could produce no proof that Rove was one of Novak’s unnamed sources and later withdrew his comment). Leaning upon his own infallibility, Wilson has insisted the Bush administration is lying about yellowcake, hardly a move that will inspire confidence in a wartime leader (and, as noted above, entirely unwarranted). The mass media has also proven pliable, demanding George Bush “do more” in his investigation.Yet it seems there is precious little Bush can do to find the leaks (which he is eager to do, after the embarrassment they have caused him).


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10694
 
aps said:
Hmmm, you may not be mature enough for me to be having any sort of meaningful discussion with you about this. Buh bye. :2wave:

There ya go, aps. When the debate gets a little tough, go after your opponents maturity. That'll show him.
 
oldreliable67 said:
Bush personally was warned about the flight training?

Not saying that he wasn't. Have read about the FBI being made aware of the flight training, but the so-called 'walls' between agencies prevented the info from being exploited. But haven't read of Bush personally being made aware. Did I miss something?
I'm sure Bush would never admit he read the memo and decided to ignore it. No career politician would.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/11/911.investigation/
 
KCConservative said:
There ya go, aps. When the debate gets a little tough, go after your opponents maturity. That'll show him.

Why thank you, KC. You are too kind. I especially appreciate the compliment coming from someone who is just unbelievably dipolmatic on this message board when dealing with liberals. You have yourself a wonderful day, my fine friend. :2wave:
 
aps said:
Why thank you, KC. You are too kind. I especially appreciate the compliment coming from someone who is just unbelievably dipolmatic on this message board when dealing with liberals. You have yourself a wonderful day, my fine friend. :2wave:
I knew you'd understand. Ciao.
 
Binary_Digit said:
Are you daft? Aps already schooled you on that point. If you're gonna debate, at least read your opponent's entire argument. Again for your benefit, here's what Fitzgerald (special prosecutor, not investigating attorney) said at a press conference:

"In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community. Valerie Wilson's friends, neighbors, college classmates had no idea she had another life.
FITZGERALD: The fact that she was a CIA officer was not well- known, for her protection or for the benefit of all us. It's important that a CIA officer's identity be protected, that it be protected not just for the officer, but for the nation's security."


Here's where special prosecutor Fitzgerald specifically calls it a criminal investigation:

"I recognize that there's been very little information about this criminal investigation, but for a very good reason."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html

I think you should apologize to Aps for disregarding the knowledge she tried to give you.


Three different reporters knew about classified information they weren't supposed to know, yet nobody told them that information. I'm speechless.

Aww, Binary, you are cute to demand that easy apologize to me. Thank you. *bats eyelashes* BTW, easy, I am a woman, hence the words "tough chick" under my name.

Binary, I am speechless to. There is easy spouting off how Fitzgerald said that no crime had been committed and that Valerie Plame was not covert. Holy $hit! He has never said such things. Therefore, it is clear that easy doesn't have a full grasp of what happened in that case. How can anyone read the indictment and his press conference and think that either of those 2 things were said? Those are the only 2 times he has provided us with any part of his investigation.

easy's allegations regarding her being known as a CIA agent prior to the outting are baseless, as are his other allegations. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
 
easyt65 said:
Here ya go, for all those who need to be spoon-fed the truth:

Plame's Identity was NO secret! Worked for the CIA - yes, covert Agent - No! Although classified 'secret', to be a crime, the name had to be leaked intentionally/on purpose with intent, which is why Kerry is NOT doing time for exposing the REAL covert CIA agent during the Bolton inquisition.

Agent? Si; Secret? No!

Moreover, as Novak himself notes, Plame’s “covert” status “was not much of a secret.” The incidentals were not secret: Her name appears in Joseph Wilson’s “Who’s Who in America” entry. Moreover, when she donation $1,000 to Al Gore, she did so under her married name, also listing a private CIA front group as her “employer.”

More importantly, though, her CIA employment itself was no secret. Wilson himself disclosed that his wife let her cover slip around him early in their dating life. Presumably Ms. Plame has dated others, whom she also informed of her dreadfully well-guarded, super-duper-secret status in exchange for, say, an evening at the Ice Capades. Although she has a desk job investigating those who sell WMDs to terrorists (and is not a field “operative” as some misunderstood Novak to imply), she had knowledge of genuine field agents in hostile lands. Thus, her loose-lipped dating-and-mating habits could have endangered those within her orbit. Her blatant disregard of CIA secrecy undermined her own job. It seems she, not Bob Novak, was the graver danger to national security.

For that matter, Novak was not even the only prominent conservative columnist to know of Plame’s employment. Cliff May of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies has written that by early July, when Wilson first threw his tantrums about his Niger expedition, May had heard of Plame’s status “from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhanded manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of.” Novak seems right on target when he writes, “It was well known around Washington that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA.” Had Novak not reported her employment, this ticking time bomb was still waiting to go off.

This hardly excuses the blasé attitude of two senior administration officials toward the identity of covert CIA analysts. Regardless of her own attitude toward her covert status and the fact that she is a desk jockey rather than a field guerrilla, the CIA certifies that it will uphold its part of the bargain to maintain the anonymity of its undercover officers. Leaking any covert CIA agent’s name to the press should be intolerable, and the perpetrators, if found, should be punished. In fact everyone from President Bush to Attorney General Ashcroft shares this consensus.

Since the story broke, Wilson has played it for all its worth, publicly demanding the arrest of Karl Rove (though he could produce no proof that Rove was one of Novak’s unnamed sources and later withdrew his comment). Leaning upon his own infallibility, Wilson has insisted the Bush administration is lying about yellowcake, hardly a move that will inspire confidence in a wartime leader (and, as noted above, entirely unwarranted). The mass media has also proven pliable, demanding George Bush “do more” in his investigation.Yet it seems there is precious little Bush can do to find the leaks (which he is eager to do, after the embarrassment they have caused him).


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10694

Now, we are going to disagree on a lot of things, but I will grant you this. While Bush is up to his eyeballs in this, he only stepped into the shoes Clinton provided him. As you say, Clinton initiated most of this. While I am known as one of the biggest Bush bashers on this board, the Dems dont own me either. For your Clinton bashing, I support you. It DOES take 2 political parties to tango, and both partys' hands are filthy.
 
KCConservative said:
There ya go, aps. When the debate gets a little tough, go after your opponents maturity. That'll show him.


Ya mean like this?


KCConservative said:
Okay, that's it. Out with it, Ted. You're 11, aren't you?


I knew you'd understand. Ciao. :lol:
 
BWG said:
Ya mean like this?





I knew you'd understand. Ciao. :lol:
He's a ery mature 11 year old, don't you think?
 
This is a moot point, our current president has the best spin masters in the history of the United States. There will be a long and treacherous legal battle that will end long after Bush steps out of office. Since both the house and senate is Republican, the chances are even smaller. The Democrats have no solid strategy for 2006 midterm elections, and I don't see one that will come to them. Do not be fooled by the low approval ratings of Bush and Republicans in general, those of Democrats are even lower.
 
BWG said:
Ya mean like this?

I knew you'd understand. Ciao. :lol:

LMAO! BWG, you're hilarious! Thank you for pointing out that KC is the definition of a hypocrite. :lol:


Originally Posted by easyt65
- The U.S. Attorney general has already come forward and announced that he has not only reviewed the wire tappings and discerned that there was nothing illegal about it, he has also said that his department and the NSA have continued to monitor the program for any such inappropriate behavior, which there has been none. So, the Attorney General has asked the Democrats who are calling for this investigation - WHY? The investigation has already been done, and the only outcomes of the new DNC-driven investigation is spin, face-time, mud-slinging at the GOP, and wasted tax payer dollars.

Hey, when the President says that his actions are legal, then we should all accept that, right? Look who else said their actions were legal, but the Supreme Court unanimously said, "I don't think so."

Thirty-five years ago, President Richard Nixon claimed constitutional authority to wiretap Americans' phone calls to protect national security without asking a judge -- the same assertion that President Bush is making today in the name of fighting terrorism.

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously against Nixon, saying the Constitution granted the powers he was claiming to judges, not presidents. If the current court eventually reconsiders that 1972 ruling, it may affect the fate of Bush's decision to authorize the National Security Agency to wiretap calls between Americans and alleged al Qaeda suspects in foreign countries. . . .

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/01/08/MNGHGGK8OC1.DTL

If it was determined that Bush acted illegally, I don't believe he will be impeached; however, if he goes out of office in shame like Nixon did, it will have made the 2004 presidential election all worth it to me.
 
Here's where special prosecutor Fitzgerald specifically calls it a criminal investigation:

I never once denied that Fitzgerald called it a Criminal INVESTIGATION, but my dear, there is quite a difference in 'investigation' and 'crime', which he never said happened.

For this whole thing to have been a crime:
1) Plame had to fit the definition of a 'Covert' agent, which she does NOT...and
2) It has to be proved that the 'leak' was intentional, designed to bring about harm to the individual....which has not and will not be proved!

And I notice that all the Libs screaming for me to spoon-feed them have not even acknowledged the post above that does just that. Of course, I did not expect them to, unless to deny it and pass it off as GOP spin/talking points! LOL!

Which brings me back to another topic you keep avoiding:

During the Bolton hearings, John 'F*ing' Kerry and several other democratic Senators, while grilling Bolton, used the real name of a REAL undercover/Covert CIA operative who was, at the time, embedded in his assignment. Bolton quickly caught the initial 'slip' and answered/corrected the Senators by using the operative's code name. Kerry, however, continued to use the operative's real name several more times. Although Bolton tried to get the idea of what a mistake the Senator was making across to Kerry, Kerry was just too dense...or too focused on derailing Bolton's appointment to catch on.

The CIA was sent scrambling to get their operative out of the assignment/location he was in, the cover now blown and his life at risk. The CIA acknowledged this later but almost nothing was made of the issue. While Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame were sipping martinis at some Washington Black Tie Fund Raiser squealing about her 'cover' beening blown, the CIA was desperately trying to save one of their own's life from out in the field after the 'leak' all of America watched Kerry perpetrate on nation-wide TV. No investigation needed there - anyone watching, thousands of Americans, could be called as witnesses to THAT debacle! You libs attacking Bush on Plame don't dare speak of THIS Dem 'leak' that really jeopardized the life of a CIA agent and cost america one of its established Intel sources. Oh the hypocracy of the Democrats!

We've already talked about all of Slick Willey's crimes, 'indiscretians', and hypocracy...but how about a few other Dems.

Lets discuss Ms. Nancy Pelosi. She made one of the 1st attempts on Tom DeLay's career when she acused him of going on trips paid for by lobbyists. No one was looking at this issue at all, but someone stupid must have advised her to ambush Delay on it. Only a few days after the accusation, the Ethics committee began looking at ALL trips made by Senators. To Ms. Pelosi's dismay, her own trips were investigated, and it was discovered that she too had gone on a few of these junkets, even more than DeLay. She, in fact, was named as one of the worst offenders. This sudden back-fire in her political attack sent her and numerous of her Democratic colleagues scrambling to amend (ie falsify) and re-file their travel vouchers to erase the evidence of their own 'ethics' issues. Oh, the Hypocracy....and this is the same repugnant woman who had the nerve to say that the GOP has formed a 'Culture of Corruption'. How she can say that with a straight face in light of the Clinton administration's history - even continued scandals into Bush's 2nd term, as well as her own ethics issues, is amazing!

Now the liberal media and the Dems are going after Bush about Abramoff (or however you spell his name). When the story 1st broke, GOP Senators began returning the money they had received from him, saying they had no idea about what he was doing. I'll give them credit - a few Dems did, too...but several of the big-named Dems who had gotten money from him released press statements saying they had no idea what he was doing at the time so they were not giving any of the money back. LOL! Yesterday, the media tried to give Bush garbage about having a picture made with Abramoff. Bush replied that he takes thousands of Grip-and-Grin photos a year and doesn't remember them all, nor does it mean he knows and/or likes the people he is shaking hands with. He then added to the reporter, "I mean, I've taken pictures with YOU." It's not like Bush was in bed with and took bribes from the Chinese Military...:rofl

Remember Enron? This company/group was playing both sides of the fence to be a big political player, putting millions into the pockets of big name GOP and Dems alike. Now the Dems, many of whose names are on Abramoff's list of payoffs, are screaming for blood, pointing their fingers at the list of GOP names as well as at Bush. They should have learned a lesson from Pelosi's Travel-scam. Be careful what box you open because your plans could backfire...and usually do!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom