Page 1 of 1

This week in Republican treason!

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 4:32 pm
by Gunslinger
Delay admits to not claiming money.

Meiers resigns.

Libby indicted.

I call for the death penalty!

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 10:58 pm
by Diogenes
Death penalty waorks for me.

Off yourself ASAP.

And someone let me know when a GOP member is caught giving classified military technology away to foriegn governments for illegal campaign funds.


For the record, if Lewis Libby is found guilty of imitating a Democrat under oath, he deserves what he gets.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:06 am
by BSmack
Diogenes wrote:And someone let me know when a GOP member is caught giving classified military technology away to foriegn governments for illegal campaign funds.
We need only go back to the last Bush and Reagan Administrations. Or did you miss Iran-Contra?

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:14 am
by Tom In VA
BSmack wrote:
Diogenes wrote:And someone let me know when a GOP member is caught giving classified military technology away to foriegn governments for illegal campaign funds.
We need only go back to the last Bush and Reagan Administrations. Or did you miss Iran-Contra?
Not really. The Iran Contra was the old "end justifying the means", i.e. did the end FREED AMERICAN HOSTAGES AND U.S. FRIENDLY GOVERNMENT SOUTH OF OUR BORDER, justify the means ?

Clinton and Gore's motivations were far more self serving.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 8:11 am
by Diogenes
Of course in some people's minds supporting anti-communists is worse than helping the PRC ICBM program and accepting ILLEGAL campaign funds from foriegn agents is no big deal.




We all know which way they vote.

But by all means, if someone was stupid enough to lie under oath about outing Joe Wilson as a partisan hack and lying sack of shit, nail his ass.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:10 am
by tough love
The fools still claim scoreboard. :roll:

The very worst of the worst U.S Admins EVER.
Bu$h Corp will do for the Pubs, what the Mulroney's did for Canada's Conservatives, and the typical P_Ugh company suck remains to blind and stupid to get that.

Enjoy your coming public abandonment, Idiot$.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Conten ... 8350116795

Bush administration as dangerous now as before

The crises engulfing the White House could not have come a day too soon, considering the consistent and blatant abuse of power by the Bush administration over five years.

The indictment against Lewis Libby, chief of staff to Dick Cheney, and the ongoing investigation of Karl Rove, the top political adviser to George W. Bush, speak to more than the crime of outing a secret CIA agent.

That was just a small part of a broad pattern of deceit and double standards set by the president and his cabal of ideologues.

Their mode of governance has been to do whatever they could get away with, including waging an unwarranted war on false pretences by fixing intelligence and exploiting public fears.

Libby was part of the neo-con clique of Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz (now at the World Bank), John Bolton (at the United Nations), Zalmay Khalizad (current envoy to Iraq) and others who, in the 1990s, called for invading Iraq to preserve "U.S. access to oil" and to foster the safety of "friends and allies like Israel."

Once in power, they wasted little time after 9/11 to put the Iraq plan into action, and fixed the facts to justify it.

Hence, the tall tales of Saddam Hussein's ties to Al Qaeda, his weapons of mass destruction and the phoney story of nuclear cake from Niger, which is what CIA agent Valerie Plame's husband Joseph Wilson discredited, only to see a vengeful White House blow her cover.

The probe into Libby and Rove will mean something only if it serves as the start of a process of holding this administration fully accountable for the deaths of 2,000 Americans and between 30,000 and 100,000 Iraqis, and the torture of hundreds in American detention centres.

The people who gave us Iraq are now targeting Syria and Iran, and are likely to get more belligerent in the days ahead to divert attention from their mounting domestic woes.

Canadians need to be alert to the possibility that Stephen Harper and other local chicken hawks, who wanted Canada to go to war in Iraq, may now want us to do Bush's bidding in his new ventures abroad.

The regimes in Iran and Syria do have a lot to account for.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants Israel to be "wiped off the map," a racist and anti-Semitic notion that Canada and others have rightly condemned. He also wants to pursue a nuclear program.

Syria is not co-operating with the United Nations' probe into its alleged complicity in the Feb. 14 killing of Rafik Hariri in Lebanon. It is also funnelling arms to Palestinian militias in Lebanon.

But Bush has a broader agenda against these two anti-American and anti-Israeli states: he wants to impose economic sanctions on both, and perhaps even engineer regime changes.

That's where much of the world, led by Russia and China, parts company with Bush. Canada should as well.

The Arabs, in particular, fear the kind of chaos Bush has created in Iraq, which threatens to destabilize the entire region.

# His diplomatic offensive on Syria/Lebanon is also open to accusations of hypocrisy:
# He wants the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon disbanded, while turning a blind eye to the Kurdish and Shiite militias in Iraq.
He strikes moral poses on Syria but sent detainees to the torture chambers of Damascus, which is how Canadian Maher Arar ended up there.

Canadian hands are not clean either. It was only after an independent inquiry concluded that Arar was indeed tortured in Damascus, as were three other Canadians, that Ottawa has now acknowledged that fact. Having done so, it is busy blaming Syria to deflect any questions about Canadian complicity.

Worse, even as Pierre Pettigrew demands that Damascus prosecute Arar's torturers, his government has been trying to deport Hassan Almrei, a Syrian detained in Canada, to the same Syrian torture chambers.

The Bush presidency has been dangerous to the world and to America itself. Canadians need to remain vigilant about its potential fallout on us.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:57 am
by BSmack
Tom In VA wrote:
BSmack wrote:
Diogenes wrote:And someone let me know when a GOP member is caught giving classified military technology away to foriegn governments for illegal campaign funds.
We need only go back to the last Bush and Reagan Administrations. Or did you miss Iran-Contra?
Not really. The Iran Contra was the old "end justifying the means", i.e. did the end FREED AMERICAN HOSTAGES AND U.S. FRIENDLY GOVERNMENT SOUTH OF OUR BORDER, justify the means ?

Clinton and Gore's motivations were far more self serving.
If you don't think those ends were self serving then you need to get out more often.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:49 pm
by Gunslinger
BSmack:

Why even discuss with Dio about Clinton. Clinton isn't the president and Dio is the looney fucking nutjob who believes Saddam bombed Oklahoma. That's why I didn't reply to him because he is a real life fucking idiot.

He believes in UFO's and has the intelligence maturity of a a fucking 4 year old.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:54 pm
by Gunslinger
Tom In VA wrote:
BSmack wrote:
Diogenes wrote:And someone let me know when a GOP member is caught giving classified military technology away to foriegn governments for illegal campaign funds.
We need only go back to the last Bush and Reagan Administrations. Or did you miss Iran-Contra?
Not really. The Iran Contra was the old "end justifying the means", i.e. did the end FREED AMERICAN HOSTAGES AND U.S. FRIENDLY GOVERNMENT SOUTH OF OUR BORDER, justify the means ?

Clinton and Gore's motivations were far more self serving.
I just did a google on this Chinese shit and I can only find it on personal homepages. Don't get off subject here by using someone elses legacy. I mentioned Bush, so it means I don't want to discuss Woodrow Wilson, I could give a fuck about Clinton, he isn't the president.

This thread is about how the Republican party has divided this country and fucked this country up. We will be paying for this adminstrations actions in the form of an epic terrorist attack and a crushed economy in the next ten years. We will be replaced by China and won't recover in our lifetimes.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:11 pm
by MSUFAN
Gunslinger wrote:BSmack:

Why even discuss with Dio about Clinton. Clinton isn't the president and Dio is the looney fucking nutjob who believes Saddam bombed Oklahoma. That's why I didn't reply to him because he is a real life fucking idiot.
Well; what does ANY rube of the Right say when confronted with blatant stomach peircing TRUTH about their "side"!?

They pull out the 6 year old Clinton Card! That's what.

I actually believe that the Right is abandoning this doofus, because they know that '06 is upon us. I can see 10 or more of them losing their House seats, and maybe 5 in the Senate!

Hoping for the best! :(

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:20 pm
by Diogenes
This thread is about how the Republican party has divided this country and fucked this country up.
According to the thread title, it's about treason.


Idiot.

Image


Excerpts here.

Review.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:35 pm
by Diogenes
MSUFAN wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:BSmack:

Why even discuss with Dio about Clinton. Clinton isn't the president and Dio is the looney fucking nutjob who believes Saddam bombed Oklahoma. That's why I didn't reply to him because he is a real life fucking idiot.
Well; what does ANY rube of the Right say when confronted with blatant stomach peircing TRUTH about their "side"!?

They pull out the 6 year old Clinton Card! That's what.
Nine years, actually.

If the moron who started this thread hadn't used the T word, i probably wouldn't have bothered.

The point being that the events of '96, if not actually treasonous, are as close to it as anything in modern history.

If you have anything even close, let me know.

Or just STFU, idiot.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:55 pm
by MSUFAN
A-hole;

Is anything like the lives of 2,000+ Americans, mislead to War, on a BED of lies and cooked up halftruthes, anything like treason?

Lemme know.

Otherwise..........

(Oh, you know the rest)

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 5:03 pm
by Diogenes
How many died in WWII again?

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 6:14 pm
by Gunslinger
Diogenes wrote:
This thread is about how the Republican party has divided this country and fucked this country up.
According to the thread title, it's about treason.


Idiot.

Image


Excerpts here.

Review.
See what you guys have done. Next thing he'll be doing is quoting and providing evidence from Oliver Stone movies.

This guy is nuttier than Jimmy Carter's shit.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 6:30 pm
by Diogenes
Gunslinger wrote:
Diogenes wrote:
This thread is about how the Republican party has divided this country and fucked this country up.
According to the thread title, it's about treason.


Idiot.

Image


Excerpts here.

Review.
I looked at the sites but all the big words hurt my head.
You were the one who said "I just did a google on this Chinese shit and I can only find it on personal homepages."


Since I know you are too cheap to educate yourself by droping the $15 or so for the book (and probably too lazy to hit the library) i thought i'd help you out.





:twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Like you would actually be interested in the truth.



Actually I knew it would be over your head, but maybe some of the others might be interested.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:55 pm
by Gunslinger
Diogenes wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:
Diogenes wrote: According to the thread title, it's about treason.


Idiot.

Image


Excerpts here.

Review.
I looked at the sites but all the big words hurt my head.
You were the one who said "I just did a google on this Chinese shit and I can only find it on personal homepages."


Since I know you are too cheap to educate yourself by droping the $15 or so for the book (and probably too lazy to hit the library) i thought i'd help you out.





:twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Like you would actually be interested in the truth.



Actually I knew it would be over your head, but maybe some of the others might be interested.
I do go to the library and I do purchase books, but I would never read retarded shit about Saddam bombing Oklahoma or Loch Ness. See, I'm not a child and I have intellectually matured.

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 8:04 pm
by Diogenes
See, I'm not a child and I have intellectually matured.



:twisted:

Rawhide trying to bring on the funny.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:51 pm
by tough love
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/ame ... 323311.ece

Special report: Bush faces his Watergate
Sleaze, leaks and an indictment add up to the worst presidential crisis since Nixon. And it will get worse. The White House has lost one key man but the whole chain of command may be engulfed by a scandal slowly revealing the lies that led to war.
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
Published: 30 October 2005

Presidential second terms are prone to scandals, from Bill Clinton's embarrassments over Monica Lewinsky to Ronald Reagan's implication in the Iran-Contra imbroglio. But the troubles now circling George Bush's White House could be even worse than Watergate.

It might not appear that way at first. Mr Bush is unlikely to have to join Richard Nixon, the only president in US history forced to resign from office. But the issues raised by "Plamegate" - the leaking of the identity of Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA agent - are far more significant than those involved in the "second-rate burglary" of the Democratic National Committee's offices in Washington's Watergate complex in the 1970s. They go to the heart of why America, and its faithful ally, Britain, went to war in Iraq.

The immediate problems are bad enough. On Friday Vice-President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted for obstruction of justice and making false statements to a grand jury. Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor appointed to investigate Ms Plame's outing, announced that he was not indicting Karl Rove, President Bush's closest adviser, although he remains under investigation and may have to give evidence against Mr Libby.

The administration and its friends ( :lol: ) have done their best to portray the Plamegate affair as an obscure, "inside the Beltway" scandal, of interest only to Washington obsessives and conspiracy theorists. On Thursday evening, as the whole of Washington speculated over his position, Mr Rove did his best to reinforce that view.

At his large home in the Palisades district of Washington, Mr Rove stepped from the driver's seat of his blue Jaguar XJ6 and smiled at a waiting cameraman as he headed inside. Moments later, when The Independent on Sunday rapped on his heavy wooden door, his reaction suggested a relaxed family evening rather than someone waiting to be fed to the lions. "Sorry, but we're all having dinner right now," he said.

It is also true that Washington's Democrats, who have suffered years of humiliation at the hands of a Republican Party which holds not only the White House but majorities in both houses of Congress, are rubbing their hands with glee over the scandal at a time when Mr Bush is already reeling from record low approval ratings and problems on many other fronts.

Earlier in the week, the President had already suffered one humiliating setback when he was forced to accept the withdrawal of his nomination for the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers, after a fierce campaign from right-wing members of his own party.

Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, said: "It's not good news but it could have worse. That's all you can really say. I would emphasise the bad: there is no good way to spin this, though no doubt they will try." :lol:
He said that Mr Rove would be able to continue to do his behind-the-scenes work from the White House.

Yet it is possible to view this week's events in much, much starker terms if one steps back from the all but incomprehensible minutiae of the indictments and of who is alleged to have said what to whom and focuses instead on the broader narrative.

If one believes that the government of George Bush - actively assisted by that of Tony Blair - conspired to make a fraudulent case for the invasion of Iraq, then it is possible to see this week's events as nothing less the first fallout for the administration of their attempt to cover-up what they did.

More than 2,100 US and British soldiers and perhaps 100,000 civilians have died since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. If one believes that using false statements and twisted information to mislead a nation and launch that war is a greater crime than orchestrating a dirty tricks campaign against your political rivals, then it is possible to set this week's events in the context of the seminal Washington scandal from which Plamegate - and all the other "gates" - take their inspiration.


Remember, no one knew where it would all lead when, on June 17 1972, five men appeared for a preliminary hearing at a Washington court charged over a break-in at the Democratic party national headquarters at the Watergate complex.

To appreciate the broader potential of Libby's indictment one cannot avoid a little of the labyrinthine background. Mr Fitzgerald's investigation focussed on the leaking of the identity of Ms Plame, wife of former US ambassador Joe Wilson.

In the summer of 2003 Mr Wilson had publicly questioned claims made by Mr Bush that Iraq had been seeking to buy uranium from Niger to re-establish a nuclear weapons programme. The threat of a "mushroom cloud" had been presented to the American public as one of the reasons for a war against Iraq.

Mr Wilson had investigated the claims at the behest of the CIA and found them to be false. Soon after he went public, a conservative columnist, Robert Novak, claimed that Mr Wilson's wife, Valerie, worked for the CIA and that she had suggested sending her husband to Africa. The leak was widely interpreted as an attempt to undermine the former ambassador, who had, ironically, been commended by Mr Bush's father as "a true American hero" for standing up to Saddam Hussein during the 1990 hostage crisis.

It is now clear that a number of officials spoke to reporters about Ms Plame's identity and her alleged role in sending her husband to Africa. The indictments accuse Mr Libby of lying about what he told the reporters about her and where he learned she worked for the CIA. Indeed, as the indictment makes clear, one of the several sources Mr Libby spoke to about Ms Plame's employment was Mr Cheney.

On Friday, the news of Mr Libby's indictment on five felony counts - two of lying to FBI investigators, two of lying to a grand jury and one count of obstructing justice - rapidly reverberated around this incestuous and self-regarding city. Less than half-an-hour after the charges were filed, the 22-page indictment was posted on to the prosecutor's official website for everyone to tear into.

Shortly afterwards, at a press conference, Mr Fitzgerald finally broke his silence and said he believed that Mr Libby, 55, chief of staff to probably the most powerful US vice-president in history, had repeatedly lied and mislead investigators looking into the leaking of a covert CIA operative's name. That was why he had been charged with offences that carried up to 30 years in jail.


"We brought these cases because we realised that the truth is the engine of our judicial system," said Mr Fitzgerald. "We didn't get the straight story and we had to - had to - act. When citizens testify before grand juries they are required to tell the truth. Without truth, our criminal justice cannot serve our nation or its citizens. ***The requirement to tell the truth applies equally to all citizens, including persons who hold high positions in government."

In the immediate term, Mr Bush and his White House team will busy themselves by focusing on their agenda and perhaps organising some sort of shake-up of administration officials, not least finding a replacement for Mr Libby who immediately stood down.

***Shortly after the indictments were released, Mr Bush praised Mr Libby for "working tirelessly on behalf of the American people". He added that while he and his administration were saddened by developments they intended to "remain wholly focused on the many issues and opportunities facing this country". :lol:

In the short term this may be possible. Stephen Hess, a former speechwriter for President John F Kennedy, said that most Americans would have no idea who Mr Libby was or what he had done. Of much greater concern to them, he said, was the state of the economy, the war in Iraq and petrol prices. He said that other scandals such as that involving Monica Lewinsky and President Bill Clinton had much greater traction with the public.

"Next week he will be nominating a new justice of the Supreme Court, which is something of infinitely more importance than the [doings] of Scooter Libby. We have a 5-4 balance and this [nominee] will be swing vote," he said. "Everybody will be chasing this story."

But such an assessment might ignore what may develop from Mr Libby's trial and what news may emerge in the remaining 39 months of Mr Bush's presidency. Democrats would like a much broader inquiry, using a Libby trial to examine not just whether or why he lied but the wider effort by the White House to make the case for war against Iraq and to then discredit critics.

And there remains the very real possibility that Mr Rove could yet be charged over the affair, a much more damaging matter for Mr Bush. It is known that Mr Rove spoke to several reporters about Ms Plame. The indictment also reveals that prosecutors know that an unidentified White House official - "official A" - spoke to Mr Novak. It has now emerged that official A is Mr Rove.

Mr Fitzgerald declined to say if Mr Rove will be charged, but given what is already known, this is very possible.

There is also the chance that in Mr Libby's trial prosecutors could seek to call Mr Cheney as a witness, especially since it is known he spoke to him about Ms Plame. He could be asked how he learned of Ms Plame's identity and whether he knew or even suggested that his chief of staff speak to reporters about her. Mr Wilson has always maintained that Mr Cheney must, at the very least, have been aware of what was happening.
Quote: ***->The requirement to tell the truth applies equally to all citizens, including persons who hold high positions in government... :lol:


That trial could also examine the activities of the so-called White House Iraq group, a small group of senior officials established in August 2002 and chaired by Mr Rove to coordinate the government's activities and "sell" the war in Iraq to the American public. Mr Libby was a member of this group.

And as preparations for Mr Libby's trial are being made, investigators are separately looking into the source of the original forged documents that found their way into the hands of Italian intelligence and which claimed Iraq was seeking to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger. It was those forged documents that resulted in Mr Wilson being dispatched to Africa. To this day it remains unproven who forged these documents.

If, on Thursday night, Mr Rove needed a reminder of the potential perils ahead for him and his boss, he would have needed to do nothing more than look out of the White House windows before he left for home. On the pavement outside were demonstrators holding a vigil and calling for US troops in Iraq to be called home. Among the demonstrators was Cindy Sheehan, the mother whose soldier son was killed in Iraq and who this summer became a focus for the anti-war movement when she demonstrated outside of Mr Bush's Texas ranch.

Mrs Sheehan told the IoS that she would welcome any indictments and that she hoped the American public would see that the war was based in lies. After Mr Libby's five indictments were announced she issued a new statement directed at the man who sits in the Oval Office. She said: "The responsibility for lying to the American people and targeting critics and dissidents needs to go all the way up the chain of command. Scooter Libby was clearly one of the administration's attack dogs unleashed on opponents of this fraudulent war, but he serves higher masters."

Presidential second terms are prone to scandals, from Bill Clinton's embarrassments over Monica Lewinsky to Ronald Reagan's implication in the Iran-Contra imbroglio. But the troubles now circling George Bush's White House could be even worse than Watergate.

It might not appear that way at first. Mr Bush is unlikely to have to join Richard Nixon, the only president in US history forced to resign from office. But the issues raised by "Plamegate" - the leaking of the identity of Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA agent - are far more significant than those involved in the "second-rate burglary" of the Democratic National Committee's offices in Washington's Watergate complex in the 1970s. They go to the heart of why America, and its faithful ally, Britain, went to war in Iraq.

The immediate problems are bad enough. On Friday Vice-President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted for obstruction of justice and making false statements to a grand jury. Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor appointed to investigate Ms Plame's outing, announced that he was not indicting Karl Rove, President Bush's closest adviser, although he remains under investigation and may have to give evidence against Mr Libby.

The administration and its friends have done their best to portray the Plamegate affair as an obscure, "inside the Beltway" scandal, of interest only to Washington obsessives and conspiracy theorists. On Thursday evening, as the whole of Washington speculated over his position, Mr Rove did his best to reinforce that view.

At his large home in the Palisades district of Washington, Mr Rove stepped from the driver's seat of his blue Jaguar XJ6 and smiled at a waiting cameraman as he headed inside. Moments later, when The Independent on Sunday rapped on his heavy wooden door, his reaction suggested a relaxed family evening rather than someone waiting to be fed to the lions. "Sorry, but we're all having dinner right now," he said.

It is also true that Washington's Democrats, who have suffered years of humiliation at the hands of a Republican Party which holds not only the White House but majorities in both houses of Congress, are rubbing their hands with glee over the scandal at a time when Mr Bush is already reeling from record low approval ratings and problems on many other fronts.

Earlier in the week, the President had already suffered one humiliating setback when he was forced to accept the withdrawal of his nomination for the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers, after a fierce campaign from right-wing members of his own party.

Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, said: "It's not good news but it could have worse. That's all you can really say. I would emphasise the bad: there is no good way to spin this, though no doubt they will try."

He said that Mr Rove would be able to continue to do his behind-the-scenes work from the White House.

Yet it is possible to view this week's events in much, much starker terms if one steps back from the all but incomprehensible minutiae of the indictments and of who is alleged to have said what to whom and focuses instead on the broader narrative.

If one believes that the government of George Bush - actively assisted by that of Tony Blair - conspired to make a fraudulent case for the invasion of Iraq, then it is possible to see this week's events as nothing less the first fallout for the administration of their attempt to cover-up what they did.

More than 2,100 US and British soldiers and perhaps 100,000 civilians have died since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. If one believes that using false statements and twisted information to mislead a nation and launch that war is a greater crime than orchestrating a dirty tricks campaign against your political rivals, then it is possible to set this week's events in the context of the seminal Washington scandal from which Plamegate - and all the other "gates" - take their inspiration.

Remember, no one knew where it would all lead when, on June 17 1972, five men appeared for a preliminary hearing at a Washington court charged over a break-in at the Democratic party national headquarters at the Watergate complex.

To appreciate the broader potential of Libby's indictment one cannot avoid a little of the labyrinthine background. Mr Fitzgerald's investigation focussed on the leaking of the identity of Ms Plame, wife of former US ambassador Joe Wilson.

In the summer of 2003 Mr Wilson had publicly questioned claims made by Mr Bush that Iraq had been seeking to buy uranium from Niger to re-establish a nuclear weapons programme. The threat of a "mushroom cloud" had been presented to the American public as one of the reasons for a war against Iraq.

Mr Wilson had investigated the claims at the behest of the CIA and found them to be false. Soon after he went public, a conservative columnist, Robert Novak, claimed that Mr Wilson's wife, Valerie, worked for the CIA and that she had suggested sending her husband to Africa. The leak was widely interpreted as an attempt to undermine the former ambassador, who had, ironically, been commended by Mr Bush's father as "a true American hero" for standing up to Saddam Hussein during the 1990 hostage crisis.

It is now clear that a number of officials spoke to reporters about Ms Plame's identity and her alleged role in sending her husband to Africa. The indictments accuse Mr Libby of lying about what he told the reporters about her and where he learned she worked for the CIA. Indeed, as the indictment makes clear, one of the several sources Mr Libby spoke to about Ms Plame's employment was Mr Cheney.

On Friday, the news of Mr Libby's indictment on five felony counts - two of lying to FBI investigators, two of lying to a grand jury and one count of obstructing justice - rapidly reverberated around this incestuous and self-regarding city. Less than half-an-hour after the charges were filed, the 22-page indictment was posted on to the prosecutor's official website for everyone to tear into.

Shortly afterwards, at a press conference, Mr Fitzgerald finally broke his silence and said he believed that Mr Libby, 55, chief of staff to probably the most powerful US vice-president in history, had repeatedly lied and mislead investigators looking into the leaking of a covert CIA operative's name. That was why he had been charged with offences that carried up to 30 years in jail.

"We brought these cases because we realised that the truth is the engine of our judicial system," said Mr Fitzgerald. "We didn't get the straight story and we had to - had to - act. When citizens testify before grand juries they are required to tell the truth. Without truth, our criminal justice cannot serve our nation or its citizens. The requirement to tell the truth applies equally to all citizens, including persons who hold high positions in government."

In the immediate term, Mr Bush and his White House team will busy themselves by focusing on their agenda and perhaps organising some sort of shake-up of administration officials, not least finding a replacement for Mr Libby who immediately stood down.

Shortly after the indictments were released, Mr Bush praised Mr Libby for "working tirelessly on behalf of the American people". He added that while he and his administration were saddened by developments they intended to "remain wholly focused on the many issues and opportunities facing this country".

In the short term this may be possible. Stephen Hess, a former speechwriter for President John F Kennedy, said that most Americans would have no idea who Mr Libby was or what he had done. Of much greater concern to them, he said, was the state of the economy, the war in Iraq and petrol prices. He said that other scandals such as that involving Monica Lewinsky and President Bill Clinton had much greater traction with the public.

"Next week he will be nominating a new justice of the Supreme Court, which is something of infinitely more importance than the [doings] of Scooter Libby. We have a 5-4 balance and this [nominee] will be swing vote," he said. "Everybody will be chasing this story."

But such an assessment might ignore what may develop from Mr Libby's trial and what news may emerge in the remaining 39 months of Mr Bush's presidency. Democrats would like a much broader inquiry, using a Libby trial to examine not just whether or why he lied but the wider effort by the White House to make the case for war against Iraq and to then discredit critics.

And there remains the very real possibility that Mr Rove could yet be charged over the affair, a much more damaging matter for Mr Bush. It is known that Mr Rove spoke to several reporters about Ms Plame. The indictment also reveals that prosecutors know that an unidentified White House official - "official A" - spoke to Mr Novak. It has now emerged that official A is Mr Rove.

Mr Fitzgerald declined to say if Mr Rove will be charged, but given what is already known, this is very possible.

There is also the chance that in Mr Libby's trial prosecutors could seek to call Mr Cheney as a witness, especially since it is known he spoke to him about Ms Plame. He could be asked how he learned of Ms Plame's identity and whether he knew or even suggested that his chief of staff speak to reporters about her. Mr Wilson has always maintained that Mr Cheney must, at the very least, have been aware of what was happening.

That trial could also examine the activities of the so-called White House Iraq group, a small group of senior officials established in August 2002 and chaired by Mr Rove to coordinate the government's activities and "sell" the war in Iraq to the American public. Mr Libby was a member of this group.

And as preparations for Mr Libby's trial are being made, investigators are separately looking into the source of the original forged documents that found their way into the hands of Italian intelligence and which claimed Iraq was seeking to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger. It was those forged documents that resulted in Mr Wilson being dispatched to Africa. To this day it remains unproven who forged these documents.

If, on Thursday night, Mr Rove needed a reminder of the potential perils ahead for him and his boss, he would have needed to do nothing more than look out of the White House windows before he left for home. On the pavement outside were demonstrators holding a vigil and calling for US troops in Iraq to be called home. Among the demonstrators was Cindy Sheehan, the mother whose soldier son was killed in Iraq and who this summer became a focus for the anti-war movement when she demonstrated outside of Mr Bush's Texas ranch.

Mrs Sheehan told the IoS that she would welcome any indictments and that she hoped the American public would see that the war was based in lies. After Mr Libby's five indictments were announced she issued a new statement directed at the man who sits in the Oval Office. She said: "The responsibility for lying to the American people and targeting critics and dissidents needs to go all the way up the chain of command. Scooter Libby was clearly one of the administration's attack dogs unleashed on opponents of this fraudulent war, but he serves higher masters."

*** :lol: :lol: :lol: ***


It's gonna be great, it's gonna be like when the rotter$ get theirs at the end of a bad movie. :)

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:32 pm
by DrDetroit
Not properly reporting campaign contributions is "treason?" And DeLay self-reporting this is "treasonous?"

And the lefty pundits allege that righties are cracking up? LOL!!

This was supposedly the motherlode. Bush and Cheney caught up in a conspiracy, Rove indicted...this was "FitzMas" for the Democrats.

And they got a lump of coal. An assistant to Cheney that the public doesn't even know being indicted for lying about a crime that never took place...bwaahhahahahahahaaaaa!!

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:13 pm
by tough love
Larry Sabato Wrote:
It's not good news but it could have been worse. That's all you can really say. I would emphasise the bad: there is no good way to spin this, though no doubt Dr. D will try.
:lol:

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:20 pm
by Mister Bushice
The republican apologists like Detroit can spin all they want, but this administration will never crawl out from under all of this Bullshit they have created and the media is running with. It will end up being talked about over anything else he has done and it won't be complimentary. His legacy will be as an administration that was clouded in controversy, lies, failed promises, and a war that no one wants. The comparisons to the Nixon era are there. Not as extreme, but they are there.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:28 pm
by Variable
Tough Love wrote:Mrs Sheehan told the IoS that she would welcome any indictments and that she hoped the American public would see that the war was based in lies. After Mr Libby's five indictments were announced she issued a new statement directed at the man who sits in the Oval Office. She said: "The responsibility for lying to the American people and targeting critics and dissidents needs to go all the way up the chain of command. Scooter Libby was clearly one of the administration's attack dogs unleashed on opponents of this fraudulent war, but he serves higher masters."
Dude, no one on this side of the border gives a shit about Cindy Sheehan, what she thinks or what she has to say, other than Michael Moore, and a few cubicle-dwelling chicks in the HR department of every corporation. Her comments aside and their relevance aside, this chick is no more a celebrity than some 95lb butterface with a DD boobjob who eats sixteen madagascar hissing cockroaches on Fear Factor. Who the fuck cares what she thinks about the Bush Administration or this scandal? Please stop giving her your attention so she'll go away.

Cindy Sheehan "issues as statement"? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:33 pm
by BSmack
mvscal wrote:We want to fight these people right now and there is no better place to do it in the world than Iraq.
Speak for yourself paleface.

As a matter of fact, you could be over there right now.
I'm sure you're well qualified having already been over there. But that didn't stop Ted Williams.

You think you're better than the Splendid Splinter?

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:44 pm
by DrDetroit
Mister Bushice wrote:The republican apologists like Detroit can spin all they want, but this administration will never crawl out from under all of this Bullshit they have created and the media is running with. It will end up being talked about over anything else he has done and it won't be complimentary. His legacy will be as an administration that was clouded in controversy, lies, failed promises, and a war that no one wants. The comparisons to the Nixon era are there. Not as extreme, but they are there.
"All this bullshit" like what?

The media had Cheney, Rove, and Libby standing at the gallows last week and what happened? Libby gets indicted for perjury and obstruction. I apologize if I appear under-fucking-whelmed.

As for the war no one wants...your party sure wanted it in 2003, loser.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:09 pm
by Mister Bushice
My "party" which party is that?

As usual, you're way off. I've been against the way this war was implemented since it became clear it was a bad idea that was poorly planned - like about 3 months into it.

And again no matter how you spin it, this is not Cheneys administration, it is Bushs. He will bear the legacy, and it won't be a good one.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:19 pm
by Tom In VA
Mister Bushice wrote:My "party" which party is that?

As usual, you're way off. I've been against the way this war was implemented since it became clear it was a bad idea that was poorly planned - like about 3 months into it.
Well then you're in the wrong line of work. You should stop this bullshit mod job and go throw your hat in the ring, literally, in one of the inner rings of the Pentagon. :P
Mister Bushice wrote: And again no matter how you spin it, this is not Cheneys administration, it is Bushs. He will bear the legacy, and it won't be a good one.
Too soon to tell.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:52 pm
by DrDetroit
Mister Bushice wrote:My "party" which party is that?

As usual, you're way off. I've been against the way this war was implemented since it became clear it was a bad idea that was poorly planned - like about 3 months into it.

And again no matter how you spin it, this is not Cheneys administration, it is Bushs. He will bear the legacy, and it won't be a good one.
Like you would know anything about planning for a war or the post-war period. You're simply spitting talking points.

Oh, and please, enough with the armchairing bullshit. You're in no position to know what was planned, not planned, what was anticipated, not anticipated. Of course, you knew that Islamic terrorists would flood Iraq following the regime's fall, right? You knew this, huh?

Puhlease.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:02 pm
by BSmack
Mister Bushice wrote:As usual, you're way off. I've been against the way this war was implemented since it became clear it was a bad idea that was poorly planned - like about 3 months into it.
Yep, I remember welcoming you onto the bandwagon.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:03 pm
by Gunslinger
mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:His legacy will be as an administration that was clouded in controversy, lies, failed promises, and a war that no one wants.
It won't. The controversy was manufactured and these alleged lies don't exist. History takes a longer view of the situation and these partisan sputterings aren't going to make the cut. Nobody is going know who John Kerry or Howard Dean is in fifty years.

More importantly, the war will be successful. A stable Iraq will be the linchpin of one of the most revolutionary sea changes in Middle Eastern politics and culture since the advent of Islam.

If you think a bomb blast here and there and a few drive bys makes for meaningful military resistance, you really don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

We want to fight these people right now and there is no better place to do it in the world than Iraq.
Iran is a good example, why didn't you also mention about the accomplishments being made in Iran. I know why, because you are a fucking idiot.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:05 pm
by Gunslinger
DrDetroit wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:My "party" which party is that?

As usual, you're way off. I've been against the way this war was implemented since it became clear it was a bad idea that was poorly planned - like about 3 months into it.

And again no matter how you spin it, this is not Cheneys administration, it is Bushs. He will bear the legacy, and it won't be a good one.
Like you would know anything about planning for a war or the post-war period. You're simply spitting talking points.

Oh, and please, enough with the armchairing bullshit. You're in no position to know what was planned, not planned, what was anticipated, not anticipated. Of course, you knew that Islamic terrorists would flood Iraq following the regime's fall, right? You knew this, huh?

Puhlease.
Clinton should have planned better for the Bosnian war and I sure wish Truman had an answer to Japan during WW2. These presidents you expect them to be qualified for a job and all they do is fuck everything up, thankfully Jesus gave us Bush for the war in Iraq.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:21 pm
by Gunslinger
mvscal wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:Iran is a good example, why didn't you also mention about the accomplishments being made in Iran.
Such as?

Go ahead and try to lay out a coherent take instead of the inane, stream of consciousness gibberish you usually vomit on to this forum.
Yeh, I know I couldn't think of anything but failure when I think of Iran and those guys are actually creating nuclear stuff.

Coherrent take? Who versus you? Shitbag we know how fucking retarded you are and what you are going to say, it's handed out in a fax every morning from Washington.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:27 pm
by Variable
Gunslinger wrote:Coherrent take?
I laughed. :lol:

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:34 pm
by Gunslinger
Variable wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:Coherrent take?
I laughed. :lol:
You believed this was a discussion? I wouldn't "debate" race relations with a skinhead or a black panther, then why the fuck would I debate anthing with these dumbfucks?

This is a smack board.

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:42 pm
by Variable
Gunslinger wrote:
Variable wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:Coherrent take?
I laughed. :lol:
You believed this was a discussion? I wouldn't "debate" race relations with a skinhead or a black panther, then why the fuck would I debate anthing with these dumbfucks?

This is a smack board.
See, it's funny because you misspelled "coherent", which makes it ironic because,...ah, nevermind. You just ruined the moment.


BTW, "Main Street" is a smack forum. This forum is for discussion and/or debate. Kindly read the threads at the top of the forum at your nearest convenience. TIA.

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:13 am
by Gunslinger
mvscal wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:Yeh, I know I couldn't think of anything but failure when I think of Iran and those guys are actually creating nuclear stuff.
Bush wasn't President in 1979. Sober up, dumbfuck.
God awfullest fucking thing I ever saw, I did.

To make some allusion to what you are eluding to would mean those crazy fucks that say the US gave Iraq it's weapons (Rumsfeld) are correct.

Jesus Christ you are a looney fuck, I'll be sure and tip you when I see your homeless ass 7 years from now on a street corner. (ahem!! Next to the Gulf War 2 soldier, of course)

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 3:02 am
by MSUFAN
Again, I say it amaizes me.

No, not the content of the dimwits I read.

More along the lines again, of how Dr. and Mv continue to lick each others turcutters again, and again!

These guys have just GOT to be workmates at some bullshit lobby group, or boring assed accounting offices.

Either that, or they are as gay as a 3 $ bill !!!

Which is it, you dicks?

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 3:07 am
by Variable
MSUFAN wrote:Again, I say it amaizes me.

No, not the content of the dimwits I read.
Oh, I thought you were referring to Fubuclown getting "allusion" right and then butchering "alluding", a derivative of the same word, in the same sentence. That Indiana public education is rearing its ugly head again. :lol: