Reply With Quote
Good thing they managed to keep that pic out of the press before the election last year...oh, wait...
Wag the dog?
Strangely, have never met
The Associated Press
Monday, January 8, 2007; 7:35 PM
Washington PostWASHINGTON -- A liberal watchdog group published on its Web site Monday a picture of President Bush and imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the kind of photo the White House has refused to release.
The picture was taken at a campaign fundraiser in December 2003, according to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. It was taken by a private photo contractor who posted it on a Web site, but then was removed before it made it into distribution, said Melanie Sloan, CREW's director.
--
Kim Eisler, Washingtonian magazine writer and a friend of Abramoff's, confirmed the photo's authenticity for The Associated Press. He said he had seen the picture at Abramoff's house.
~Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary."The President does not know him, nor does the President recall ever meeting him."
Good thing they managed to keep that pic out of the press before the election last year...oh, wait...
I'll bet with all the pictures Bush or any other President makes with people we
could even find one of Bush and boutons.
It's not the picture. It's the lying about the picture.
You mean like: "I didn't have sex with that woman" or lying to a grand jury.
Something like that.
My understanding was that they just would release any pictures. But I could be
wrong. Everyone knew whathisface made lots of trips to the WH.
But...oh, never mind.
Exactly like that.You mean like: "I didn't have sex with that woman" or lying to a grand jury.
Something like that.
Impeachably, Starr Report like that.
, I have a picture with the President and he doesn't know me from Jack.
Anyone in here ever heard of a photo op?
Trivia question for the day. Just how many people have their picture taken with the President of the United States every year?
Bonus: How many of those people does the President know personally?
Oh, and SpunkChomper, I think you'd have a point if Jack Abramhoff had sucked W's and the President was testifying under oath.
Last edited by Yonivore; 01-09-2007 at 07:12 PM.
Yeah, Chumper! Quit hating on the Prez. He didn't lie under oath, he just lied normally, which is perfectly acceptable.
Yeah, Chumper! Quit hating on the Prez. He didn't lie under oath, he just lied normally, which is perfectly acceptable.
You know for a matter of fact that he's lying from one photo. Ok.
You couldn't think no matter what I have, dip .I think you'd have a point
See you next blog ripoff, Clintonbot.
Abramhoff was the single biggest GOP fundraiser, and had his pic snapped with Georgie. Either Shrub is as stupid as we say he is, or he's a liar extraordinaire. I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that politician's know their donors, and he fibbed, but you may actually be right: he may be that stupid, and not lying.
I hate W, but this could easily be written off as a photoshop or a photo op, lie or no, this is too easy to wiggle out of.
Photo shops are usually VERY easy to spot by experts, and don't you think the White House would have brought some in by now? Their silence is deafening.Kim Eisler, Washingtonian magazine writer and a friend of Abramoff's, confirmed the photo's authenticity for The Associated Press. He said he had seen the picture at Abramoff's house.
Who gives a ??
Obviously Bushco did.
^^And the dimm-o-craps.
So both sides agree that was a silly question.
whatevz. If you found a picture with OBL and Saddam arm-in-arm, you'd be the first one screaming that it proved conclusively that the Iraq war was justified. You're so full of crap sometimes.
Yeah, when you combine the photo with the megabytes and reams of do entation of their relationship, already recovered from Iraq, yep, I'd say that would be pretty conclusive. But, I don't expect a photo because it appears they operated through proxies.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
