Reply With Quote
And this is the group of people you think orchestrated a grand conspiracy to blow of the WTC?
Very interesting testimony going on here getting minimal M$M coverage...
Editor and PublisherThe "CIA leak" trial resumed today, after two critical days of testimony from reporters Judith Miller and Matt Cooper. As in past days, E&P will provide running updates here.
After a long day or legal wrangling and no witnesses, an FBI agent took the stand shortly before 3 p.m. She is Deborah Bond, a 19-year veteran, called into the probe of who may have leaked name of classified agent.
She described the bureau's interview with I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on Oct. 14, 2003. Asked where he first learned of Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, he had told the FBI then -- from the vice president, on or about June 12 that year, in a telephone conversation.
Vice President Cheney had also said that she worked in "CP" or counter-proliferation at the agency. How did Cheney know this? From someone at the CIA -- possibly director George Tenet, but Libby wasn't sure.
How to explain Libby originally claiming he had first heard about Wilson's wife from NBC's Tim Russert in July? He had simply forgotten he had actually heard it from the vice president a month or more earlier, Libby said. But Libby's notes, produced by prosecutors during this testimony, did show notations from June 12 regarding Wilson's wife. And Libby later confirmed this in a second FBI interview.
Reports that Armitage was the 1st leaker maybe wrong. The M$M screwed this one up again if it turns out that Cheney disclosed Plame's iden y before Armitage told Woodard in "mid June", as Woodard stated. All we need to know now is what Woodard meant by "Mid-June". If this "Mid-June" turns out to be a date later than June 12th, 2003 (The date Cheney told Libby), then Cheney is the leaker...or...hummmm........
And this is the group of people you think orchestrated a grand conspiracy to blow of the WTC?
they were off their game?
It's gonna be decades before we put this all together.
Dude, you really are an idiot aren't you?
No, I am a truth-seeker.
No. You're just in idiot. And thats the truth.No, I am a truth-seeker.
I think the WH fabricated the notion of sacrificing libby to save rove. I think it's to protect Cheney. Rove screwed the pooch in the last election and he would be easy to fire. Cheney can't simply be fired, he was elected. I think they're trying to prevent Cheney's removal. Bush would collapse without that madman's support.
No, I am a truth-seeker.
If you were a "truth-seeker" then you'd do some of the research into all this stuff on your own, not just read what others have wrote and assume it's a fact.
I've read all the websites and watched all the video's as well, does that make me a "truth-seeker".
"Cheney can't simply be fired"
The Nov mid-terms showed the US voters overwhelmingly "firing" dubya and ead, their bull war.
If the Dems had any balls, they'd impeach both of them and get the pre-WTC and pre-Iraq war lies, crimes, derelictions of duty out in the open and into the Congressional record and history books.
Overwhelmingly?
The 'Psychosis' of reality...how the tempest in the teapot in boiling all over Cheney..
Why Cheney Cracked Up
By FRANK RICH
Ny TimesIn the days since Cheney lost it on CNN, our nation’s armchair shrinks have had a blast. The vice president who boasted of “enormous successes” in Iraq and barked “hogwash” at the congenitally mild Wolf Blitzer has been roundly judged delusional, pathologically dishonest or just plain nuts. But what else is new? We identified those diagnoses long ago. The more intriguing question is what ignited this particularly violent public flare-up.
The answer can be found in the timing of the CNN interview, which was conducted the day after the start of the perjury trial of Mr. Cheney’s former top aide, Scooter Libby. The vice president’s on-camera crackup reflected his understandable fear that a White House cover-up was crumbling. He knew that sworn testimony in a Washington courtroom would reveal still more sordid details about how the administration lied to take the country into war in Iraq. He knew that those revelations could cripple the White House’s current campaign to escalate that war and foment apocalyptic scenarios about Iran. Scariest of all, he knew that he might yet have to testify under oath himself.
Mr. Cheney, in other words, understands the danger this trial poses to the White House even as some of Washington remains oblivious. From the start, the capital has belittled the Joseph and Valerie Wilson affair as “a tempest in a teapot,” as David Broder of The Washington Post reiterated just five months ago. When “all of the facts come out in this case, it’s going to be laughable because the consequences are not that great,” Bob Woodward said in 2005. Or, as Robert Novak suggested in 2003 before he revealed Ms. Wilson’s iden y as a C.I.A. officer in his column, “weapons of mass destruction or uranium from Niger” are “little elitist issues that don’t bother most of the people.” Those issues may not trouble Mr. Novak, but they do loom large to other people, especially those who sent their kids off to war over nonexistent weapons of mass destruction and nonexistent uranium.
dubya, scooter, puto, condi are all stooges for head, who is the de facto president, which explains how the Repug mucky mucks would push dubya for prez in first place, primarily as the "Bush" brand-name, with the understanding that head would be veep, knowing that dubya's naivete, simplicity, ignorance, political incompetence and inexperience, etc would be compensated for by head pulling all the strings, calling all the plays, defining the strategy, from the bogus Iraq war, tax cuts, protecting/enriching the oilcos, driving out career professionals in all branches of govt to be replaced by Repug henchman and industry lobbyists.
There is no doubt that puto purging US attorneys so late in the term to be replaced by Repug puppets is also head's way of protecting corrupt Repug criminals across the nation.
should congress impeach themselves for giving the president the authority to go to war?
"should congress impeach"
There should intense hearings on the WHIG and the run up to the Iraq war, to show how Congress, esp the Dems, were duped by the cherry-picked intelligence, by the classified/suppressed serious doubts by NatSec about ALL the cherry-picked intelligence.
WHIG/Exec hyping and misrepresenting the case for war places the vast majority of the blame on the Exec, not on the rubber-stamping Congressional Repugs or the bullied and intimidated Dems and press.
There should also be hearings on the fatal dereliction of Exec duty in the months before 9/11. The Exec allowed 9/11 to happen. Americans have been willingly bamboozled with "there was NO WAY to stop 9/11 (which probably came straight out of head's group)". Willing because most people don't ever want to believe the Exec being asleep at the wheel (while savoring their tax cutting success) was the real enabler of 9/11.
However, as the vast majority of Americans have turned against the Exec due to the Iraq war, I bet a lot more a willing to ask and hear that the Repugs ed up badly in the months before 9/11, allowing it to happen.
I don't believe the Exec set charges in WTC, but I can fully believe that head and neo- s would not put 100% of the Exec's energy into fending off an attack, because they were looking for a reason to start the Iraq war, which is what an attack on the US would provide.
That is why head repeatedly lied for a couple years after 9/11 that Saddam was involved in 9/11, even after dubya came out and said Saddam was not involved in 9/11. For his twisted, perverted, evil, insane mind, head knew, as soon as it happened, that 9/11 was the perfect reason to start the bogus Iraq war. Saddam = jihad terror/Al Quaida was exactly what head was looking for.
The Libby trial is exposing how crazy head and his people went when Wilson published his article exposing the yellowcake bull as bull .
too funny!No. You're just in idiot. And thats the truth.
and THE TRUTH!
The US Voters showed us they believed in G W BUSH by electing him TWICE! so stfu and put your tin hat on straight.
Clanny, you're moving from serious to silly, like whott
"electing him TWICE!"
Lost the popular vote by 600K in 2000, one of the extremely rare times the popular vote did not correspond to the electoral vote.
In 2004, re-elected by the smallest margin ever for a sitting prez, even with the bull help of "I'm THE WAR PRESIDENT" derived from his bull , fake, bogus Iraq war that was started, March 03 as "the immediate and the only option", as a Repug presidential campaign tactic.
2 years later, in 2006, the vast majority of US had turned against the Repugs in Congress and the the Exec, and fired them for their bull Iraq war, which was the dominant issue in the campaign and still is.
You're talking to ME as if I were some ignorant, dumb red-state sheeple/rabble?
Last edited by boutons_; 02-04-2007 at 09:36 PM.
gore conceded... get over it.... lol
??
600K more for Gore is a fact, no matter what Gore did.
facts are so hard for some to understand...
Election of President of the United States and Vice President of the United States is indirect. Presidential Electors are chosen by the popular vote every four years on Election Day. Although ballots list the names of the presidential candidates, voters within the 50 states and the District of Columbia are actually choosing Electors from their state when they vote for President and Vice President. These Presidential Electors in turn cast the official (electoral) votes for those two offices.
Bush is the worst thing that EVER happened to this country. Trust me, we're not challenging your intelligence.
technicalities of anachronistic Electoral college, yawn.
Do you really think I don't know how it works?
600K more for Gore is a fact, no matter what Gore did.
and of course you didn't address the Nov 2006 election where, Repug re-districting notwithstanding, the Repugs lost both houses, clearly, at the very least, a resounding vote of no-confidence in dubya/ head, even outright protest at how the Repug Exec is running the country, and ing up in Iraq.
Looks like Corso needs to realize you can't jack off into someone's koolaid constantly and get away with it, CORRRSSOOO
Newsweek: The CIA Leak: Boring In on the Veep
MSNBCFeb. 12, 2007 issue - The Scooter Libby trial has put a new focus on Vice President Cheney's own role in the leak of CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson's iden y. When the CIA on July 11, 2003, sent over a draft statement taking responsibility for President George W. Bush's inaccurate assertion that Iraq had sought uranium from Africa, Cheney wrote on the cover sheet "Unsatisfactory" and underlined the word, according to a trial do ent. The veep thought the agency wasn't going far enough in distancing Cheney's office from the trip by Joseph Wilson (in which the ex-ambassador claimed he'd debunked the uranium shopping reports). "The vice president was frustrated and upset," Libby told the FBI, according to Deborah Bond, an FBI agent who later questioned Libby on the leak.
The next day, aboard Air Force Two, Libby and Cheney talked media strategy, Bond said. "There was some discussion ... about whether they should report to the press that Ambassador Wilson's wife worked at the CIA," Bond testified that Libby told her. Bond added that Libby said "they may have talked about it." This is the first suggestion that Cheney himself talked about disclosing Wilson's wife's iden y to the press as a way of undercutting Wilson's credibility.
...more...
and here's the shington Post:
Vice President's Shadow Hangs Over Trial
Vice President Cheney's press officer, Cathie Martin, approached his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on Air Force Two on July 12, 2003, to ask how she should respond to journalists' questions about Joseph C. Wilson IV. Libby looked over one of the reporters' questions and told Martin: "Well, let me go talk to the boss and I'll be back."
On Libby's return, Martin testified in federal court last week, he brought a card with detailed replies dictated by Cheney, including a highly partisan, incomplete summary of Wilson's investigation into Iraq's suspected weapons of mass destruction program.
Libby subsequently called a reporter, read him the statement, and said -- according to the reporter -- he had "heard" that Wilson's investigation was instigated by his wife, an employee at the CIA, later identified as Valerie Plame. The reporter, Matthew Cooper of Time magazine, was one of five people with whom Libby discussed Plame's CIA status during those critical weeks that summer.
After seven days of such courtroom testimony, the unanswered question hanging over Libby's trial is, did the vice president's former chief of staff decide to leak that disparaging information on his own?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
