Libby: Bush authorized the Plame leak

[BIGJACK]

:banghead:
by LAK: The bottom line is; why was Plame's status "leaked"?

Right on. How can there be any doubt that the white house leaked the information and GWB is the "house head" so any way you look at it he has the responsibility, as he said immediately after the leak was made public. GWB needs to asspire to the phylosophy of "THE BUCK STOPS HERE" instead of his life time of "it was somebody else."

 

[Ezekiel]

To a degree, I'm somewhat desensitized to certain wrongdoings by political figures: it appears that, to get high on the flowchart, you're likely to have engaged in some questionable activity.

That being said, I'm surprized by the lack of virulent press-bashing in the so called "Liberal Media." (Which I heard about on Hannity, O'Reilly, Meet the Press, et al )

Bill gets torn open because he got a hummer from a young juggy chick -- which is grounds for divorce, but not impeachment -- and George passes about bad info as if it were true, attacks other nations, and runs a shop that leaks classified info while barely getting tagged.

All this has told me, disregarding any wrongoings, is that the "liberal media" is a myth.

 

[DRZinn]

passes about bad info as if it were true,

Pot, meet kettle. I b'lieve y'all have the same last name. Black, right?

 

[shermacman]

passes about bad info as if it were true

What information did Bush "pass about as if it were true"? If this is another attempt to describe his handling of UN Resolution 1441 then your question is just plain ignorant. Everyone in the civilized world believed that information to be true. Here is one of your heroes:

"Now, let's imagine the future. What if he [Saddam] fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And someday, some way, I guarantee you, he will use the arsenal” - Bill Clinton, Meet the Press, February 17, 1998 ."

 

[Sungun09]

Reply to Lone Gunman

Like you, i voted Bush in 2000.

I made a mistake.

Give me someone that knows and follows the Constitution as LAW not as suggestion. Remember, today's patriotic American can just as easily be classified as a terrorist. The only difference is who is in power.

Regards

PS - I don't need government "protection", I need honesty... either provide it or resign mr. or ms politican

 

[robertbank]

shermacman

The UN resolution and the inspection process could have continued as to the date they left no such weapons had been uncovered. Up until Bush & Co the US had never attacked anyone without being attacked first. Iraq never attacked the US, Bin Laden did from his base in Afganistan. For Saddam to have been a significant threat with WMD's someone in the West would have had to sell him the technology either France, Germany, Russia, the U.K. or the US. Since none had, and the only significant supplier of weapons to Iraq were the US and Russia why not wait for the UN inspectors. Saddam was nothing more than a tin horn dictator in a world of tin horn dictators no more or less of a threat to the US than a handfull of other tin horns.

Bush has got the US in a worse mess now then Saddam ever was. Leave early and the Muslim terrorists scream victory and Iraq slides into Civil War and likely intervention by Iran. Stay and the terrorists have a made in heaven training base for terrorist activities and the US has a defense bill that will have to be paid for by taxpayers for generations.

Churchill once said that to be careful about unleashing the dogs of war for you may not get the result you wish for.

Our household prays for the safe return of our troops in Afganistan and yours in Iraq nightly. It seems old men have a penchant for sending young men to war. Maybe it is time to change the age of enlistment. Might take the shine off of such activities.

Take Care

 

[Robert Hairless]

Since the President of the United States of America may declassify information, the People of the Internet demand to know by what right George W. Bush declassified this information.

We, The People of the Internet know that President Bush must have had some devious motive for declassifying this information when it is part of his job to declassify such information, and we don't like having that kind of thing done to us.

The People of the Internet insist that George W. Bush should have consulted us, The People of the Internet, before declassifying this information when he had the right to do so.

(May I remind The People of the Internet that our club beanies are now available at the web store on http://www.geekstore.com. One size fits all!)

 

[robertbank]

Sungun09

Remember, today's patriotic American can just as easily be classified as a terrorist. The only difference is who is in power.

You can say that again just ask King George 111 of England. LOL

Benedict Arnold - *Loyalist in the UK

- American traitor

*from what I have read the Brits thought what he did was bad form but certainly not a traitor to the Crown.


Robert Hairless - priceless!

Take Care

 

[Manedwolf]

"Now, let's imagine the future. What if he [Saddam] fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And someday, some way, I guarantee you, he will use the arsenal” - Bill Clinton, Meet the Press, February 17, 1998 ."

We should not march into Baghdad. . . . To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us, and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day Arab hero . . .assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinnable urban guerrilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability."
- George Herbert Walker Bush, in his 1998 book A World Transformed

 

[Ezekiel]

passes about bad info as if it were true,
Pot, meet kettle. I b'lieve y'all have the same last name. Black, right?

Let's see. One, admittedly, was about a blowjob. The other regarded armed invasion. "Not a valid comparison."

El presidente Jorge Shrub is a moron.

Let's see what else he leaks in the interest of Republican politics or war.

 

[gc70]

One thing that I find surprising about the Wilson-Plame episode is that the media accepts everything Wilson said as gospel. Does it not occur to anyone else that Wilson's findings that Niger was not involved in any skulldudgery with Iraq might have reflected a bit of bias and self-interest?

from the Vanity Fair article on Wilson and Plame:

After only one year in the job Wilson decided to retire and go into the private sector because "we wanted to have kids, and felt that it had become very difficult to live off two government salaries." He set up a consultancy, J. C. Wilson International Ventures, with an office in downtown Washington at the headquarters of the Rock Creek Corporation, an investment firm of which little is known. Wilson's right-wing critics have been quick to condemn the affiliation as "murky," though Wilson does not work for Rock Creek and merely rents space and facilities there.

"I have a number of clients, and basically we help them with their sort of investments in countries like Niger," explains Wilson. "Niger was of some interest because it has some gold deposits coming onstream. We had some clients who were interested in gold.... We were looking to set up a gold-mine company out of London."

 

[DRZinn]

Actually, I was referring to you, and many others like you, "passing about bad info as if it were true."

There are plenty of valid criticisms of Bush. He won't secure the border. He's increased the size of the government as a whole and nondiscretionary spending in particular, especially Medicare. He's gotten us deep into debt. He's put civil liberties in serious jeopardy. But he didn't lie about Iraq, he didn't go AWOL from the ANG, and he didn't steal the election. Wipe the spittle from your lips and talk about what actually is wrong with him.

 

[Ezekiel]

Everyone in the civilized world believed that information to be true.

I find this to be a significant falsehood.

However, even were I to offer you a shred of credibility, no other government found such viable enough to wantonly invade another sovereign nation. That would seem to imply a modicum of doubt.

Or, only our President is a loony.

Either way, "Bush sucks, this [war] was a bad idea."

And you haven't even addressed the leak, which is the entire backbone of this thread.

 

[Ezekiel]

But he didn't lie about Iraq, he didn't go AWOL from the ANG, and he didn't steal the election.

[sigh] Disagreement abounds.

But, hey, if you desire to heap more upon the guy: we'll go with your reasons to despise him.

"I'm not choosy."

Any thoughts on the leak?

 

[SIGarmed]

Let's see. One, admittedly, was about a blowjob. The other regarded armed invasion. "Not a valid comparison."

El presidente Jorge Shrub is a moron.

Let's see what else he leaks in the interest of Republican politics or war.

I love it. More Bush haters that will use anything to further their hate agenda.

You're only upset that the president was able to counter the charges effectively by showing real proof.

 

[Ezekiel]

I love it. More Bush haters that will use anything to further their hate agenda.

You're ony upset that the president was able to counter the charges effectively by showing real proof.

Actually, "not so much." But, nice try. (I don't hate Bush, I just see the blatently obvious proof of his suckage.)

"Evidence of ineptitude is not an effective counter to critique." :banghead:

 

[gc70]

Bill gets torn open because he got a hummer from a young juggy chick -- which is grounds for divorce, but not impeachment

I'm sorta' a fan of Bill, but I was also awake during the part where he lied under oath in court proceedings.

On September 9, Independent Counsel Starr submitted a detailed report to the Congress in which he contended that there was "substantial and credible information that President William Jefferson Clinton committed acts that may constitute grounds for an impeachment" by lying under oath in the Jones litigation and obstructing justice by urging Ms. Lewinsky "... to to file an affidavit that the President knew would be false."

 

[DRZinn]

But, hey, if you desire to heap more upon the guy: we'll go with your reasons to despise him.

OK. (But not in this thread, so as to stay on topic.)

Actually, I don't despise him any more than most politicians. He's gotten more done, but it isn't because he's more evil, it's because he has a Congress that (mostly) agrees with him.

 

[DRZinn]

And the leak? Politics as usual. A law may have been broken, in which case prosecution would be warranted. But it appears this is not the case. I'm not interested enough in this particular incident to research it.

 

[cosine]

Anyone else having trouble getting a good reception because of all the noise that's floating about?

 

[Don Gwinn]

Let's bring this back to discussion or close it.

No more "El King Jorge de Busho" nonsense, either, from either side. Speak English and use correct names, please.

 

[LAK]

Shermacman

but when the commander-in-chief authorizes the release of declassified material to defend his administration's position it is treated as a betrayal of the public trust, if not an impeachable offense.

Pray tell, in what way did leaking Plame's CIA status somehow vindicate the WH in any part this matter concerning Joe Wilson? And specifically on what matter did Joe Wilson lie?

----------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[roo_ster]

Pray tell, in what way did leaking Plame's CIA status somehow vindicate the WH in any part this matter concerning Joe Wilson? And specifically on what matter did Joe Wilson lie?

LAK, I will try again to disabuse folks from making themselves look foolish by calling on Joe Wilson's credibility.

See my post #68 in this very thread.

The information is there in Report on the US Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq, if you will only read. Pages 39-47.

Joe Wilson has been shown as an out-&-out liar on several points. PP39-47 is not a pretty read, as it evicerates JW credibility to the point that I can not take seriously folks who call on his stories.

 

[Ezekiel]

Actually, I don't despise him any more than most politicians. He's gotten more done, but it isn't because he's more evil, it's because he has a Congress that (mostly) agrees with him.

"Concur."

I don't think this Plame leak stuff is going away for a while...

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

I don't think this Plame leak stuff is going away for a while...

You've got that right. I first became aware of all this nearly three years ago. At the time, Bush apologists were saying that this was a non-story and that it would soon go away. It hasn't gone away; it's gotten bigger with each passing year, and it looks to get bigger yet.

When I first heard about this in '03, I reminded the people who thought it was nothing that many people thought the Watergate burglary was nothing in '72, but after festering for two-and-a-half years and one election cycle, it brought down a president. The timeline for this bears erie parallels.