Democrats & Liberals Archives

In The Public Interest

Yesterday Scooter Libby claimed that part of the leakage for which he is currently under indictment was authorized by W himself. Today the White House more or less acknowledged the truth of that - but claimed that the “disclosures” were “in the public interest”. I don’t know about the rest of the public but I for one am interested…for starters, I’m interested in why Bush decided to tell Cheney to tell Libby to tell Miller instead of just declassifying the darn NIE and holding a press conference.

Can anyone from Team Red come up with a plausible reason for the WH behaving this way? I'd love to hear it.

I'm also interested in why Bush said "If there's a leak out of this administration, I want to know who it is". I'm interested in why Libby needs to tell the prosecutors this now - after all, wouldn't Bush have volunteered this useful information when he was interviewed by Fitzgerald in 2004? I'm interested in why, if the disclosure was in the public interest, nobody wanted to be caught making that disclosure.

The NYT story ends with this:

"Declassifying information and providing it to the public when it is in the public interest is one thing," [McClellan] said. "But leaking classified information that could compromise our national security is something that is very serious. And there is a distinction" — a distinction Democrats refuse to see, he said repeatedly.

So, to summarize, this information is "provided to the public" via secret ways, then people perjure themselves and lie to the public to cover it up; and Scotty is surprised that some of us have trouble distinguishing between this and a serious leak - that some of us are suspicious that everything was not done, well, "in the public interest".

Posted by William Cohen at April 7, 2006 6:05 PM
Comments
Comment #138877

Was the expense of this investigation also “in the public interest”? I doubt it.

Posted by: womanmarine at April 7, 2006 6:35 PM
Comment #138887

This just in: White House spinning so fast that people at the building’s outer edge have ceased aging, due to relativistic effects more soon on this cosmically screwed up situation…

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 7, 2006 7:14 PM
Comment #138888

It’s the neolibs grasping for issues that are spinning.

Wilson was lying about the facts. His wife was not a covert agent. Information was declassified to defend wilson’s false charges. Democrats make a stink. Fitzgerald proves the outing charges are false. Fitzgerald in the interest to justify his work makes false charges against Libby. Neolibs spin and spin and spin and spin.

I hope that clears things up for ya.

Posted by: Nunya at April 7, 2006 7:23 PM
Comment #138890

Stephan, perhaps at this rate they can reverse time altogether and make this a non-event. After all the laws don’t apply to them so why should physics.

Posted by: Ted at April 7, 2006 7:25 PM
Comment #138891

This from our Commander in Chief, what an embarassment. I would have had more respect for these people if the white house would have just told the truth. We outed her cause her husband made us look foolish on our decision to invade Iraq.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 7, 2006 7:26 PM
Comment #138899

I am so embarassed, disgusted and humiliated by what this WH has done since W’s “reign” began !!!!
And Nunya…..I certainly hope your statement was meant to be a joke….
I wonder how long Republicans can hold their heads up and say with pride that this is what they voted for??
November is too far away for this insanity to stop!

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at April 7, 2006 7:39 PM
Comment #138903

Sandra let me respond to the truth and sincerity in your statement.

Posted by: Nunya at April 7, 2006 7:45 PM
Comment #138905

That’s funny Nunya. You’re the only one denying anything happened. Even the White House acknowledged it. I guess you must think Bush is lying about the lying. Keep the faith, brother! :)

Posted by: American Pundit at April 7, 2006 7:55 PM
Comment #138909

nunya…..you have only to turn on the tv….open a newspaper or go online to get the truth…….and as far as my sincerity….don’t doubt it!

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at April 7, 2006 8:04 PM
Comment #138914

I don’t know where all of this will land but watching it ain’t pretty.

I’m no fan of GW but I don’t rejoice in seeing anyone defame the office whether it be this President or Clinton or Nixon. Will we ever get a decent person back in office? Of course, this President has had a free pass with his party in the Majority in the legislative branches…to me, that makes them equally guilty for blindly trusting this untrustworthy person to simply “further” their so-called agenda.

Posted by: Tom L at April 7, 2006 8:16 PM
Comment #138916

Nunya conveniently leaves out of her/his “explanation” the fact that when asked about the leak, the leaker, the details,etc, the white house BOLDFACED LIED, time and time again.
Does that count for anything, anymore??

Posted by: Norby at April 7, 2006 8:20 PM
Comment #138919

# Reuters: “The court documents did not say that Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Plame’s identity.”
# The Associated Press: “There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame’s CIA identity.”

Posted by: JimmyRay at April 7, 2006 8:30 PM
Comment #138926

Reuters: “The papers cited Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, as testifying to a federal grand jury that Cheney had told him that Bush authorized him to disclose information from a secret National Intelligence Estimate to a New York Times reporter in July 2003.”

The Associated Press: “Vice President Dick Cheney’s former top aide told prosecutors that President Bush authorized a leak of sensitive intelligence information.”

Posted by: American Pundit at April 7, 2006 8:57 PM
Comment #138932

WORST PRESIDENT EVER.

Posted by: tree hugger at April 7, 2006 9:26 PM
Comment #138940

Tree hugger, I hope that you fully intended that your comment be spoken in the Comic Book Store Owner Guy from the Simpsons voice.

If so, brilliant comment. If not, still true.

Posted by: Yossarian at April 7, 2006 10:02 PM
Comment #138943

Norby said

the white house BOLDFACED LIED, time and time again.

Why are you bringing Clinton into this?

Posted by: nunya at April 7, 2006 10:15 PM
Comment #138945

If this was in the public interest, why was it called a security leak and investigated??

Amazing.

Just like the president is not breaking the FISA law, so why are they so anxious to change it to match what he is doing?

Amazing.

Posted by: womanmarine at April 7, 2006 10:22 PM
Comment #138946

nunya,

That’s it? Clinton lied so it’s okay for GW too?


First of all, we ain’t talking about Clinton here, we’re talking about W. Just like a die hard W follower to change the topic when pinned down.

….and for the record, I didn’t approve of lying then and I don’t now. Like womanmarine stated, W hasn’t only lied he’s knowingly broken laws.

Posted by: Tom L at April 7, 2006 10:26 PM
Comment #138950

William, good post. Good questions.

Stephen! Well, the man doesn’t often crack a joke, but when he does…
It is so perfectly wry, it is guaranteed to slay me!

On a darker note, do you guys realize that Judy Miller went to jail because Bush couldn’t bring himself to tell the public that he and Cheney had authorized the leaks? No wonder she retired from journalism afterward! No doubt she was promised she’d be very well taken care of — forever —- for being such a good wittle soldier.
Ah, how the aspens turn in clusters because they are connected by their roots…
It’s just so damn noble and poetic (or rather, pathetic), it brings a wee tear to my eye…

Posted by: Adrienne at April 7, 2006 10:36 PM
Comment #138952

The big question is, why did he play dumb all this time apparently hoping someone like Libby would not spill the beans? Dumb! YUP! That’s that right word alright!!!

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 7, 2006 10:45 PM
Comment #138953

Nunya-
I recall Bush promising to punish the leakers. I do not recall him telling the American public that it was he who ordered the information disclosed. Additionally, though this could be a potential out on the illegal leaking of classified information, I would not consider this a big victory if I were in your shoes.

They just as much admitted that they gave out information on a operative who Patrick Fitzgerald’s indictment of Scooter Libby describes the CIA taking steps to keep secret. It may be within the President’s authority, but deliberately doing so just to rebut Wilson’s accusations brings some problematic issues to the forefront. Among these are the fact that the CIA, before this ever happened had been explicitly warning the White House to keep this information out of the SOTU address. Also despite the fact that Wilson never saw the documents at that time, others did, and the IAEA, looking at the document, called it an amateur fake.

So essentially, the president blew the cover of an agent, covert or not, whose identity was being kept under wraps to rebut an account whose eyewitness story had problems, but whose facts were basically correct.

What bugs me, and others about that is that Bush’s rebuttal is fatally weakened by that the fact that it counters a truth, a truth made known to these folks ahead of time. One doesn’t rebut the truth to straighten out a story, one does it to create uncertainty where none naturally occurs. The action of revealing an agent’s identity is a particularly harsh attack on that person’s livelihood, not to mention a source of potentially lethal vulnerability.

In short, punishment. Argue as you like to the justification of punishing Valerie Wilson in the first place, but consider this: There are ways of disciplining people that risks considerably less of our security. To punish an agent in such a fashion is a political act, and a particularly vicious and machiavellian act more appropriate to a dictatorship or a communist country than to America.

As for false charges, maybe you should read the indictment. When one makes demonstrably false statements to the FBI and to the Grand Jury, this is what happens.

If you want to ge on this merry-go-round and continue to justify irresponsible and vindictive political games like this, go ahead. If you want to ignore the vast stores of statements made to the press and the public about Bush’s concern for catching the leaker, go ahead. If you want to continue to allege that the line between legality and illegality is the same as the one between good and evil, just keep on revolving about Bush and his Administration. The rest of America just wants a straight answer about all this, one it doesn’t seem this administration will give anytime soon.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 7, 2006 10:45 PM
Comment #138955

Nunya-
I recall Bush promising to punish the leakers. I do not recall him telling the American public that it was he who ordered the information disclosed. Additionally, though this could be a potential out on the illegal leaking of classified information, I would not consider this a big victory if I were in your shoes.

They just as much admitted that they gave out information on a operative who Patrick Fitzgerald’s indictment of Scooter Libby describes the CIA taking steps to keep secret. It may be within the President’s authority, but deliberately doing so just to rebut Wilson’s accusations brings some problematic issues to the forefront. Among these are the fact that the CIA, before this ever happened had been explicitly warning the White House to keep this information out of the SOTU address. Also despite the fact that Wilson never saw the documents at that time, others did, and the IAEA, looking at the document, called it an amateur fake.

So essentially, the president blew the cover of an agent, covert or not, whose identity was being kept under wraps to rebut an account whose eyewitness story had problems, but whose facts were basically correct.

What bugs me, and others about that is that Bush’s rebuttal is fatally weakened by that the fact that it counters a truth, a truth made known to these folks ahead of time. One doesn’t rebut the truth to straighten out a story, one does it to create uncertainty where none naturally occurs. The action of revealing an agent’s identity is a particularly harsh attack on that person’s livelihood, not to mention a source of potentially lethal vulnerability.

In short, punishment. Argue as you like to the justification of punishing Valerie Wilson in the first place, but consider this: There are ways of disciplining people that risks considerably less of our security. To punish an agent in such a fashion is a political act, and a particularly vicious and machiavellian act more appropriate to a dictatorship or a communist country than to America.

As for false charges, maybe you should read the indictment. When one makes demonstrably false statements to the FBI and to the Grand Jury, this is what happens.

If you want to ge on this merry-go-round and continue to justify irresponsible and vindictive political games like this, go ahead. If you want to ignore the vast stores of statements made to the press and the public about Bush’s concern for catching the leaker, go ahead. If you want to continue to allege that the line between legality and illegality is the same as the one between good and evil, just keep on revolving about Bush and his Administration. The rest of America just wants a straight answer about all this, one it doesn’t seem this administration will give anytime soon.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 7, 2006 10:48 PM
Comment #138964

I think it is pretty well agreed by those who post and respond on this site that Bush and Co. are rotten to the core and should be removed. I believe this, too. What I do not understand, fail to grasp, and am just plain confused about is why our elected Democratic senators and representatives ARE NOT AS OUTRAGED AS WE ARE!!
I mean, whose side are they on anyway? They seem to have no cojones when cojones are called for. The only guy who seems to upset is Feingold, and no one is taking him seriously.

Posted by: tasch at April 7, 2006 11:11 PM
Comment #138966

David R.: I think that many people,not just the White House assumed that Libby would keep his mouth shut,face the consequences and get pardoned by the President if convicted. Since Libby has chosen to speak out, perhaps his lawyer’s know that the prosecutor knows something he is not revealing. Perhaps there is a big bomb waiting to be dropped. A bomb so large that even the Rebublican Congress will be forced to impeach Bush and he won’t be around to issue pardons.

Posted by: jlw at April 7, 2006 11:12 PM
Comment #138973

Jlw,
Great point. Surely Libby could have taken a dive, knowing he would be pardoned and financially rewarded for the rest of his life. He seemed ideologically committed, a true believer. He would not have given up Cheney and Bush unless he had no choice. Something made him realize no pardon would ever be forthcoming, that hard time would be inescapable.

Apparently there were quite a few e-mails Fitz obtained that I don’t think he was ever supposed to see. It’s not uncommon for people to think that deleting e-mail causes evidence to disappear. Most people have no idea how much information can be retrieved through data recovery. If this is the case, Fitz may yet drop a bomb.

This is pure speculation on my part.

Posted by: phx8 at April 7, 2006 11:29 PM
Comment #138977

tasch:
“The only guy who seems to upset is Feingold, and no one is taking him seriously.”

I think they’re going to be taking all of this a lot more seriously now. Btw, If you haven’t done so already, you have the chance right now to go sign Feingold’s petition on Tom Harkin’s website:
Censure the President
There is a first step — so make your comment boldly and articulately. If Democrats can manage to take the House this November, no doubt there will be an impeachment of this treasonous administration.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 7, 2006 11:46 PM
Comment #138983

Adrienne,
Much as I would like it, I don’t see impeachment happening, at least not for Plamegate. First, the Democrats would have to take both the House and the Senate in November. Even with a electoral landslide that’s a tall order. Incumbency is just too advantageous, and sweeping Republican incumbents aside will probably take more than one election. Second, House & Senate Republicans will not impeach Bush. I mean, come on. The House Majority Leader once passed out tobacco lobby checks to his Republican colleagues on the floor of the House. There’s no chance a guy as corrupt as him would do the right thing. Third, Libby won’t go to trial until January. He & his lawyers will stall. If Fitz has a bombshell to drop, it might force Bush and/or Cheney to resign, but that’s a long shot. Fitz is notoriously careful, cautious, and thorough. And there’s too much involved in the impeachment process for it to proceed quickly. ‘High crimes and misdemeanors’ is a high threshold- or at least it should be- and again, it’s time consuming to put together a case, especially when Bushco can simply run out the clock and grant pardons as needed.

We’re left with the disgusting spectacle of a president repeatedly lying through his teeth about this, and everyone knowing it.

Posted by: phx8 at April 8, 2006 12:18 AM
Comment #138988

ADRIENNE news flash, a hired goon for rep cnythia mckinney just pushed and shoved a reporter a mr scott mcfarlene with wsb tv atlanta. and threatened to throw his a** in jail. a hired loser, goon,ex cop with no power at all! and hired by ms mckinney democrat real nice company she keeps around her, put your spin on that!

Posted by: mb at April 8, 2006 12:35 AM
Comment #138989

phx8,

What’s the old maxim? Oh yeah: It’s the thought that counts, no?
I’d like to see a situation where We the People force this Republican Congress to do what we all know is the right thing regarding this administration. Toward that end, every signature counts and every bit of pressure we can bear will work toward that goal.
There is an outside chance that the Dems will take a measure of control over this current state of utter Neocon chaos, and I believe we should make the most of that possiblity.
Indeed, I think we should act as though it is already a done deal!
Confidence can work like a charm in even the most hopeless or unlikely of situations. I’m the fiery type, and a very firm believer in that kind of optimism. And I know on a very personal level that occasionally, and amazingly, the right attitude can change everything in the blink of an eye. ;^)

Posted by: Adrienne at April 8, 2006 12:43 AM
Comment #138990

Ahem, REALITY CHECK FOR ALL THE ZEALOTS: Impeachment will not happen. Resignation will not happen. Censure will not happen. Democratic takeover of Congress will not happen. A Democratic Presidential win in 2008 will not happen. A waning of Republican dominance will not happen. History judging Bush as anything less than a great President who had the courage to stand up to the most vicious political opposition since the Lincoln administration will not happen. Continued deterioration and finally, destruction of the Democratic party WILL HAPPEN, leading to the Golden Age of the United States of America.

Posted by: Socrates at April 8, 2006 12:44 AM
Comment #138991

“why our elected Democratic senators and representatives ARE NOT AS OUTRAGED AS WE ARE!!
I mean, whose side are they on anyway? They seem to have no cojones when cojones are called for. The only guy who seems to upset is Feingold, and no one is taking him seriously.

Posted by: tasch at April 7, 2006 11:11 PM”

I have a different and much scarier slant on this than Adrienne: the answer is fear! How fearful should someone be of the “mad-hatter”?

How mad would you have to be to ignore vital info about an imminent attack on your own “kingdom”?

How mad would you have to be to ignore the advice of your own generals?

How mad would you have to be to “expose” your own spies?

How mad would you have to be to indebt your kingdom to one of your oldest and strongest political rivals?

How mad would you have to be to outsource the security of your own kingdoms shores?

How mad would you have to be to ignore your kingdoms poor and middle class?

Answer: As mad as King George W. Bush!

Fear rules in a “Kingdom”. What’s next, martial law?

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at April 8, 2006 12:45 AM
Comment #138995

Martial Law?

Hopefully. That way, all the whining, government is my nanny, lazy, worthless, treasonous, ungrateful liberal jackasses will finally be silenced. Oh the possibilities….

Posted by: Mohawk at April 8, 2006 12:56 AM
Comment #138996

Sometimes it’s hard to tell when people are being sarcastic. So if the intent was satire, or an attempt to be funny, please pardon me, sometimes picking up tone can be difficult.

Mb,
Can you provide a link? If true, why should anyone care?

Socrates,
That was satire, right?

Mohawk,
When you see Bush polling a 36% approval rating, what goes through your mind?

Posted by: phx8 at April 8, 2006 1:02 AM
Comment #138998

phx8
I think the existence of the Democratic party is satirical in itself. No, my comment wasn’t satire, just the plain old truth. Great isn’t it?

Posted by: Socrates at April 8, 2006 1:11 AM
Comment #139001

I frequently read the blogs here, and of course, read the comments, too.
Sometimes I post, but usually I just read and keep my opinions to myself.
But now I am bursting with complete and utter contempt for this administration, and all of those who excuse their actions.
I am not going to waste our time going through the list of things this administration has done wrong to disgrace our fine and noble country, because you all have read them before.
As a proud American who served in southeast asia and in the reserves, I am completely disgusted with our government. Not both parties. Just the republicans. Just the executive branch. Just George W. Bush and his henchmen.
I can’t even type, here, the complete and utter shame I feel for our government today. I love this country. I fought for our country. I want to make our country better.
We have to make drastic changes now. Let’s make it happen in the next election. Please.

Posted by: Cole at April 8, 2006 1:24 AM
Comment #139002

Socrates,
Vague pronouncements and predictions are not “truth.”

But I thought this line was interesting:
“History judging Bush as anything less than a great President who had the courage to stand up to the most vicious political opposition since the Lincoln administration will not happen.”

When a sitting President of the United States was put under oath and his opponents asked about his sex life, did you think that was “vicious political opposition” or just a fair test of character?

Finally, how do you think the 36% approval rating for Bush, and various polls showing people preferring Democrats to Republicans in Congress, how do you think that will play out in November. No vague pronouncemnts- please be specific.

Posted by: phx8 at April 8, 2006 1:24 AM
Comment #139004

phx8 (why should anyone care) it sounds like you dont care. it is on the front page fox news . com politics 16 hours ago headline mckinney security guard elbows with reporter. a couple of days ago it was a hot topic, what now she is a liar who cares? it is what you all are talking about on this blog liars! or your kind of liars?

Posted by: mb at April 8, 2006 1:29 AM
Comment #139005

I just learned that the information Dubya declassified had absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH VALERIE PLAME. Nice spin, though. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

Posted by: Duano at April 8, 2006 1:31 AM
Comment #139006

“Martial Law?

Hopefully. That way, all the whining, government is my nanny, lazy, worthless, treasonous, ungrateful liberal jackasses will finally be silenced. Oh the possibilities….

Posted by: Mohawk at April 8, 2006 12:56 AM”

Well folks, here we go, this is the mentality we have to look forward to if the Republicans are allowed to continue with their Dominionist Theocracy. Vote them out now or I’ll see you in the “re-education” camp.

Unless they send me to Gitmo.

KansasDem
PS: do you suppose the use of the color red to describe the repuglicans had a hidden meaning?

Posted by: KansasDem at April 8, 2006 1:35 AM
Comment #139007

phx8
I’m not among the 36% who approve of Bush’s job performance at the moment, yet I’ll be voting Republican in November, just like a lot of the other 64%. People that are saying they favor Democrats are saying they favor Democrats over Republicans other than THEIR Republican representatives, and polls bear that fact out. You, being a fervent disciple of the pollsters, should appreciate what that means.

Posted by: Socrates at April 8, 2006 1:41 AM
Comment #139008

The color blue sure describes the Democrats, you know, like the song. Bluuuuuuuue.

Posted by: Duano at April 8, 2006 1:44 AM
Comment #139009

Mb,
Here is the link for your story:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,190902,00.html

McKinney apologized. She was out of line. You refer to a reporter and a security guard who traded elbows, after which the guard snarled a threat. So what does this have to do with anything of national importance? Fox news. Lol. Did McKinney advocate going to some tropical paradise & kidnapping blonde white women, getting them drunk, and then sadistically murdering them? Fox news is an excellent resource for that kind of info.

Posted by: phx8 at April 8, 2006 1:47 AM
Comment #139010

was that blue velvet or blue suede shoes or blue moon or blue hawaii

Posted by: jim at April 8, 2006 1:54 AM
Comment #139012

The song is simply called Blue. You know, sad.

Posted by: Duano at April 8, 2006 2:00 AM
Comment #139013

I have been trying to figure out what is new in this story and the answer is nothing.

Libby was NOT talking about Plame. This has nothing to do with Plame.

He was talking about the Intelligence Assessment, parts of which were published in all the media in 2003. Nothing new.

The President is allowed to declassify anything he wants. that is why Libby used that for his defense. If the president authorized it, by definition it is not classified. This is a long standing practice codified by Bill Clinton.

Why did the president reveal the information?

It was political, but good political. Pete Wilson was passing around information that was wrong. People were believing it and it was undermining our security. The information in the report simply served to debunk Wilson’s incorrect statements.

This is news only because it has been conflated with Plame. This is not correct.

Posted by: Jack at April 8, 2006 2:04 AM
Comment #139018

“I just learned that the information Dubya declassified had absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH VALERIE PLAME. Nice spin, though. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

Posted by: Duano at April 8, 2006 01:31 AM”

And you learned that from whom? Did Bush give you a call? Or were you watching Hannity? Just curious. Sources are helpful in determining validity.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at April 8, 2006 2:13 AM
Comment #139019

Jack,
What was substantively wrong with what Wison was saying? Was it that there was no uranium being purchased? Was it that the claim was based on false documents? No, both of those statements were true. The only potential falsehood is in whether or not he actually saw the documents himself, and even if he was lying about that, it did not undermine national security. Or how did it?
The news is the utter hypocrisy of the president. He detests leaks. He hates leaks. He wants to prosecute the people who leak about his illegal wiretapping program. He wants reporters thrown in jail. Unless, of course, he can smear a political opponent by leaking something. Then it’s national security!

Posted by: Brian Poole at April 8, 2006 2:14 AM
Comment #139020

Jack,

There are a hell of a lot of questions that need to be answered before you or anyone else can so conveniently dismiss this as “old news” or “non-news”. Here’s a couple, just for starters:

If the president’s authorization of the disclosure of the NIE’s key judgments constituted “declassification,” why did White House press secretary Scott McClellan say at a July 18, 2003, press conference — 10 days after Libby met with Miller — that the information in the NIE “was just, as of today, officially declassified”?
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) raised this issue in an April 6 letter to Bush, noting that “on July 18, 2003, some time after Mr. Libby leaked this classified information to reporters, your Administration formally declassified portions of the NIE for public release, suggesting that the information had not been declassified until that time.”

I can’t find the link at the moment, but I read something claiming that all declassified material carries a timestamp of the exact time that it was officially declassified. If this is true, it will be very interesting to see what the timestamp says in this case….

Posted by: Charles Wager at April 8, 2006 2:15 AM
Comment #139023

“This has nothing to do with Plame.”

Jack, this has to be one of the most lame ass excuses I’ve heard from you. It came out of the Plame investigation so it has everything to do with Plame. Your arguement is equivalent to someone arguing that committing murder with a stolen gun has nothing to do with the stolen gun.

********

“The President is allowed to declassify anything he wants.”

Really? Even if it violates his oath of office? Or the constuitution? I disagree and I’ll bet history will eventually prove me right.

*********

“The information in the report simply served to debunk Wilson’s incorrect statements.”

Of course! That was proven when they found the big cache of WMD!

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at April 8, 2006 2:46 AM
Comment #139028

The GWB cult is crumbling and I’m laughing my ass off from afar!

Posted by: expatUSA_Indonesia at April 8, 2006 3:19 AM
Comment #139065

Anyone here know what a pathological liar is?

Posted by: Linda H. at April 8, 2006 11:05 AM
Comment #139091

The public interest? Since when does Bush or Republicans in general care about the public interest? They laugh at Democrats when they talk of the public interest. The only thing that counts with Republicans is self interest. They push for laissez faire and glorify the rich whose greed paid off.

Now that Bush is in trouble, he talks about the public interest. I say this is a great achievement for us Democrats: We have a Republican president talking about the public interest! It’s time to celebrate!

Posted by: Paul Siegel at April 8, 2006 2:20 PM
Comment #139098

>>Now that Bush is in trouble, he talks about the public interest. I say this is a great achievement for us Democrats: We have a Republican president talking about the public interest! It’s time to celebrate!

Posted by: Paul Siegel at April 8, 2006 02:20 PM

Paul,

Just another one of those phrases I wish I’d said first.

Posted by: Marysdude at April 8, 2006 2:34 PM
Comment #139115

WAAAAAAAAAAAA WAAAAAAAAAAAAA
I’ve never seen so many whining spineless whimps We have someone in the WH with balls and all you do is whine This “leak” is a NON story and you guys whine and cry about it like the world is coming to an end…If it were Clinton you’d be acing like he was the most courages Pres. we ever had for having the “courage to defend the american people and not worrying about his own image” Your all a bunch of crybaby intellectuals
GW is protecting the interests of America He beats Libs at their own game and you all cant deal with it whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!
Have a wonderful day..go out and enjoy the weather and try to forget that the world is coming to an end Not even Hillary can save you now MUHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Posted by: phillip at April 8, 2006 3:17 PM
Comment #139119

Phillip,

You and all your right-wing nuts are TRUE nutless cowards. It’s like one of the founding fathers described it:

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” —Ben Franklin

Bush isn’t protecting America … he’s protecting little girls [my apologies to little girls everywhere] like you who shake and quake at their own shadows ya wuss.

And hey genius, if you don’t like that one, try this one on from a REAL Republican President:

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
— Republican President Theodore ‘Teddy’ Roosevelt

Bush isn’t worthy to wipe Teddy’s six, and neither are you, ya nimrod.

“Mission Accomplished” & “Bring It On”

Posted by: DA at April 8, 2006 3:34 PM
Comment #139158

phillip…..just for fun, how about we turn this around for a minute…..you tell us, at what point would you find yourself outraged at Bushco???? What would he, et al….have to do to make your backside pucker????? And then, pray tell…..would we live through it?

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at April 8, 2006 5:43 PM
Comment #139176

Sandra……..Immigration policy……..That makes my backside pucker We’ll live through it but at what cost…
Another thing about Bushco………..The republicans let you Libs get away with too much…They should be Jumping all over the Liars,Reid,Boxer,Pelosi,Kerry etc…The waffelers who you people trust this country with……
so their pascifism gets my blood boiling

DA…Is that pronounced DUH….I’m protecting little girls like you when I do tours in a desert that you would wilt in….you sit here on your computer in the safety of your office or wherever it is you hang out (starbucks perhaps)
Go to Iraq.So i say right back to you BRING IT ON
and when the Mission is accomplished and you get your new computer and a cafe latte you can thank all us nutless rightwingers who have the balls to stand up and actually do something besides hide behind a computer screen

Posted by: phillip at April 8, 2006 6:42 PM
Comment #139228

Sandra Davidson wondered:

What would [Bush], et al….have to do to make your backside pucker????? And then, pray tell…..would we live through it?

Well, Sandra, the upcoming Nookewlur War With Canada* hasn’t begun yet - so be sure to have enough DuctTape and Plastic Sheeting in your house! As for whether we’ll survive it or not (since most of us don’t have a Secure Undisclosed Location to go to before the bombs start falling), I would have to go by looking at History. The United States has attacked Canada twice before (although that’s generally not taught in American schools…), and so far the record is: Canada-2 / USA-Nil. Of course, Canada is an Ally and and a non-nuclear nation - but betting against a third attempt by the Cheney Regency might be a losing proposition. Besides, a good deal of Canada speaks French, and you know what that means…

Disclaimer:

*[The Nookewlur War With Canada is a wholly owned subsidiary of BushCo, a Halliburton Industries Company. Unauthorised duplication or rebroadcast of the Nookewlur War With Canada without specific permission of BushCo and the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing (NAMBLA) is a violation of Federal Law, and may result in prosecution, extreme rendition to Guantanamo Bay, or summary execution.]

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 8, 2006 9:35 PM
Comment #139260

Betty………..What the hell are you talking about…..Did you just get done smoking a big joint???????

Posted by: phillip at April 8, 2006 11:28 PM
Comment #139281

Phillip,

Betty’s talking just like you…

Posted by: Marysdude at April 9, 2006 2:13 AM
Comment #139348

Phillip and Duano are trolls. Do not feed the trolls.

Posted by: ElliottBay at April 9, 2006 12:31 PM
Comment #139350

Phillip,

Check out this site:
http://www.bandofbrothers2006.org/info/about/

“Band of Brothers is a new political organization formed to assist Democratic veterans running for elected office. We’ve already identified more than 50 fighting men and women who need our help to challenge the current administration on its failed policies at home and abroad.”

Perhaps you’d care to share your opinion of Democrats being “whining wimps” with these guys.

KansasDem
PS: Name calling only indicates the weakness of your argument.

Posted by: KansasDem at April 9, 2006 12:33 PM
Comment #139351

“Phillip and Duano are trolls. Do not feed the trolls.

Posted by: ElliottBay at April 9, 2006 12:31 PM”

Oops, my bad.
KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at April 9, 2006 12:34 PM
Comment #139452

Actually, I just used some Duano in my cwogged kitchen sink: it rewwy cuts the gwease.

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 9, 2006 9:26 PM
Post a comment