« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Waxman, White House Strike Deal on Security Officers' Testimony
It's been one subpoena-crazy day, what with the White House refusing to comply with congressional demands for information about nine fired U.S. attorneys. But there's at least one set of subpoenas that won't be issued today. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) has been able to come to terms with the White House about the deepening White House Security Office scandal.
On Tuesday, Waxman wrote to White House Counsel Fred Fielding to detail new allegations that the WHSO -- entrusted to ensure compliance with procedures to safeguard classified information -- is dysfunctional. The heads of the office, just-departed director James Knodell and deputy Ken Greeson, took no action when presented with charges that aides to President Bush and Vice President Cheney left classified documents strewn throughout hotel rooms and across their desks, and they themselves took cellphones and Blackberries into secure facilities in violation of protocol. A frustrated Waxman told Fielding that unless House Government Oversight Committee investigators received access to interview three current and former White House officials who could speak to the alleged pattern of abuse, Waxman would ask the committee for authority to subpoena them.
Waxman said he'd seek the subpoena authority at the committee's business meeting today. But committee aides explain that the meeting is off, as Fielding and Waxman have reached an agreement, averting the subpoenas for now. The White House has consented to "transcribed interviews" with Alan Swendimen, director of the Office of Administration; Mark Frownfelter, an ex-security officer; and former WHSO head Jeff Thompson. "The fact that we were able to reach an agreement on testimony and getting the interviews to take place will be helpful in moving the committee's inquiry forward," says an Oversight Committee staffer.
Why is the committee so interested in the three relatively obscure bureaucrats? According to Waxman's letter, Fielding offered the committee Swendimen, Frownfelter and Thompson in order to forestall Waxman's efforts to get former White House chief of staff Andy Card before his panel. The committee considers the three well-positioned enough to shed light on how security procedures for handling classified information at the White House could have deteriorated to the degree Waxman detailed in his letter.
But the staffer adds that nothing in the deal restricts the committee's ability to seek additional testimony, if necessary, from Card or anyone else. For now, the committee feels that the White House is dealing with it in good faith. We'll see if that feeling lasts.
Comments (81)
JohnW1141 wrote on June 28, 2007 6:14 PM:Its more stalling. The clock is ticking down, Bush and Cheney will escape undamaged.
Anonymous wrote on June 28, 2007 6:21 PM:Great, so we'll learn that some underling staffers were incompetent. We need to aim higher.
Bonnie wrote on June 28, 2007 6:23 PM:Good faith????? From the White House?????? HaHaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!rofl
theWalrus wrote on June 28, 2007 6:25 PM:Do those "transcribed interviews" included taking an oath? I hope so.
If Fielding is offering witnesses, something must be up - they've probably been well coached and will follow in the footsteps of those before them - plausable deniability in the form of "I don't know".."I can't recall".."I don't remember who told me to.." etc. Basically useless.
Can't Waxman walk and chew gum at the same time? Go ahead with these interviews AND subpeona the other, bigger fish. Keep the heat on. More subpeonas just make the whole Bush gang look like they are stonewalling (which of course they are).
Bonnie wrote on June 28, 2007 6:26 PM:Good faith??????? From the White House???????? HaHaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ROFL!!!!!!!!
Rionn Fears Malechem wrote on June 28, 2007 6:27 PM:I'll bet you a dollar.
theWalrus wrote on June 28, 2007 6:30 PM:Something smells fishy. These guys being offered up will continue the plausable deniability defense like others before them. "I don't know", "I can't recall", "I don't remember who told me to..." And, of course, they'll contradict each other.
Waxman should go ahead with these "interviews" (under oath we hope?) AND send out subpeonas! The more they subpeona, the more the WH says NO and the more the public sees them as stonewalling.
theWalrus wrote on June 28, 2007 6:33 PM:Sorry for (the sort) of double post - posting takes FOREVER here...maybe someone could check it out.
Dennis wrote on June 28, 2007 6:33 PM:I hope Waxman made it clear to Fielding that Card is "on the table" and will be on the mat, if necessary.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
NYFM wrote on June 28, 2007 6:37 PM:Just an observation, as per the first comment- it seems they are indeed trying to run out the clock.
OCPatriot wrote on June 28, 2007 6:59 PM:It seems there is a lot to hide and they are working overtime to make sure it stays hidden.
Time to put Waxman & Company's feet to the fire. They wimp out every time. Let's threaten them with no support come re-election, and see how they react. It's pure stupidity and timidity when they back down at every turn. No wonder Congress' approval rating is going down. If the Republicans had the situation reversed, you can be sure they wouldn't wimp away at every Democratic rebuff. Disgusting, these politicians, on both sides.
ScrewBush wrote on June 28, 2007 7:06 PM:Remember it's not about being completely opaque, what Fielding is doing is allowing for a slow bleed of information. Enough to wet the interest, but certainly not enough to really amount to anything. Perhaps after digesting these morsals, Waxman & Company will want to go one more rung up the ladder. This will lead to a fight of sorts, time goes by, time goes by, and finally Fielding delivers one more witness, time goes by, time goes by, the dance continues, and lo-and-behold, it's election time, or damn near close enough, wouldn't it be silly to impeach now, why the Dems would just end up look vindictive right?
Impeach or get off the pot.
oldtree wrote on June 28, 2007 7:11 PM:there are stains on the pantaloons. when snowjob says outragejesus, and fielding comes to deal in the same day?
gregor wrote on June 28, 2007 7:17 PM:there will be carpet cleaners in the white house. they follow the plumbers
Even the Supreme Destroyer of Evil of the Democratic party turns out be an utter fool.
Anonymous wrote on June 28, 2007 7:23 PM:So the much touted Supreme Destryer of Evil of the Democratic Party turns out to be an utter fool.
bg wrote on June 28, 2007 7:36 PM:My Congressman is Henry Waxman. He doesn't wimp out, he is a bulldog on our side---and he can walk and chew gum at the same time--while going after this administration and taking care of the People's business. There are lots of people to go after on both sides of the aisle, but not Henry Waxman
Gtash wrote on June 28, 2007 7:53 PM:I suppose it doesn't need to be pointed out that evidence has time to be "disappeared" during this manuver and since we don't know where or how well it is secured, we shall never know it is gone when time comes to subpoena, will we?
gtash wrote on June 28, 2007 7:55 PM:I suppose it doesn't need to be pointed out that evidence has time to be "disappeared" during this manuver and since we don't know where or how well it is secured, we shall never know it is gone when time comes to subpoena, will we?
Tomazulob wrote on June 28, 2007 8:10 PM:Is this the time to state the obvious? OK, here it is--IT'S FLIPPIN' GEORGE BUSH!!!!! Good faith, my patootie.
Doug wrote on June 28, 2007 8:10 PM:As far as I know there is no statute of limitation on felonies; there is nothig to prevent prosecution of anyone, from the President downwards, after an administration leaves office.
Gregory X wrote on June 28, 2007 8:13 PM:The case has to be built from the bottom up, slowly but surely. Waxman's investigators have already interviewed former members of the White House security staff, which is why he knows how loose the security has been. The testimony of this next group of staffers can be compared to that of the whistleblowers for inconsistency and lies. Lying to a congressional investigator is a felony. These three Bushies will be in for quite a squeeze. After their testimony Waxman can make the case that he has no other option but to interview the highest officials. This is when the shit will hit the fan. Waxman is doing a great job.
Jim Gardner wrote on June 28, 2007 8:42 PM:A modest proposal: the Democrats offer to drop all oversight hearings and guarantee blanket pardons to everyone from Bush and Cheney on down to the lowliest political appointee if they all just resign and let themselves be replaced by the Clinton-Gore administration. Bill Clinton and Al Gore will have 17 months to stabilize the country so that there still *is* a country by the time of the next election.
If folks in the White House were smart, they'd take the deal. Oh wait...
barrelhse wrote on June 28, 2007 8:48 PM:"Good faith"- gimme a break.
Sully18 wrote on June 28, 2007 9:27 PM:Can they indict Bush and Cheney once they`re out of office?
eugene debs wrote on June 28, 2007 9:37 PM:yes will they be under oath?
eugene debs wrote on June 28, 2007 9:38 PM:yes will they be under oath?
Anonymous wrote on June 28, 2007 9:46 PM:A few questions, the answers to which may explain the near-frantic resistance to security oversight:
(1) Did the OVP provide classified materials to foreign nationals, outside of approved channels?
(2) Did OVP allow foreign nationals access to secure areas, outside of approved channels?
Why these two questions? Perhaps OVP provided classified materials to Mr. Chalabi and others? Perhaps to representatives of foreign governments, Israel for one?
Theory behind the questions: OVP engaged in its own efforts to move forward their policy, outside "standard" USG channels, efforts which included providing US intelligence information to individuals who shared the views of OVP, and their allies at the Department of Defense.
tomm wrote on June 28, 2007 10:25 PM:Javert Waxman, my congressman for 15 years, doesn't need to spend a time on re-election from an absolutely safe seat. AND he is nobody's fool, either. Yes, it's terrible to have to wait patiently for the slow minuets to proceed when everyone knows what is going on, but the fact is the Dums in Congress DO know what's going on. They all have calendars and many can count the days even without one. Most of them don't even need a weathervane to tell which way etc.
Look, politics is the art of the possible, and people like the implacable Javert W. have a better grasp on the possible than I do, politically speaking. No one thinks Abu Gonzales is competent or honest, everyone knows he has lied to Congress and is the Monarch's mouthpiece, representing not the people of the republic but the Klown King of Krawford. Doubtless everyone also knows that torture and Plame leaks and coverups and lack of investigation and lack of accountability and no-bid contracts and everything else all emanates directly from the Oval Office like the stink from the head of a rotten fish in Denmark.
The question is how to nail the bastards, and this isn't some horseshit Clinton bj impeachment (where lying under oath was so important it could bring down a popular AND SUCCESSFUL president) no matter how often sots like Christopher Hitchens want to pretend, for example, that Scooter committed no crime and that there is no victim when the justice system is successfully obstructed, as he told Tweety today.
This is nothing less than an attempt to rescue what's left of the Constitution and to restore the Republic our forefathers bequeathed us by confronting-- necessarily slowly, necessarily carefully and w/ great precision-- the traitors who seized it, who subverted it, who continue to undermine and destroy it.
Don't you know that Fitzgerald knew who was responsible? Can't everyone see whose filthy fingerprints are all over everything foul and hateful our slender majority is attempting to confront?
And remember, too, what viper-tonged James Wolcott wrote long ago: "The surest way to be proven wrong is to give George Bush the benefit of
the doubt." If the gawd Beloved Leader purports to believe in exists, justice WILL be done. And Thos. Jefferson: "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."
It's not just the curve of history that inclines toward justice. Don't forget -- "Murder will out."
These bastards know what the stakes are. They can read the handwriting and fear the judgment of history. The panic they feel watching the skein of their lies and malice and corruption and evil and utter filth draw tigher around them is as nothing today to what it will be each remaining year of their miserable lives.
Keep the faith.
Anonymous wrote on June 28, 2007 10:37 PM:Is anyone else as weary from all this 'Executive Privilege" crap as I am? It's more of the same stuff day in and day out. We can't accept this arrangement until the next election. "Waiting out the clock" is cowardly and we are not required to live this way. Our Constitution makes provisions for us to remove people from office. Why the delay.
El Pavo wrote on June 28, 2007 10:56 PM:Zen koan of the day - does Bush know he's a fascist?
Roberta wrote on June 28, 2007 11:36 PM:Thanks, Tomm, for your comments about Waxman and patience.
I, too, feel frustration with the process and that it's glacial. But when I step back and remember that the crimes of the state that the Congress must parse and prove have occurred over at least 6-1/2 years, if not longer (since I get the feeling that many of these plans were made before Bush "took" office), I see that both houses of Congress have done a heckuva a lot since the Dems took it back.
It's an exacting process to build and prosecute cases, even when you're not battling executive privilege and the might of the US Executive Branch. As cliché as it sounds, every i must be dotted and every t must be crossed.
But I wouldn't want it any other way. If it was easy to get rid of a president and his cohort, don't you think that the Republican Congress would have done much more to Clinton than they did? Maybe Bush, Cheney, et alii will leave office without impeachment or even charges against them. Bummer, but better done properly.
What the Congress is doing is truly for the history books. With hearings by so many Senate and House committees and tangible results from them--even if the results are merely that the executive flouted subpoenas--there will be no chance that Bush's administration will be seen as anything but the fetid and corrupt creature that it is.
These senators and congressmen aren't stupid (at least not the ones doing the real work in the committees). They are all on the same page and they have a plan. Javert is a good metaphor for Waxman (though Javert's victory could only have been Pyrrhic) to show his doggedness and determination. But some of the others aren't slouching either. Leahy, Sanchez, Whitehead, Conyers, and others are doing solid work and asking the right questions. They can't be as direct as we would like them to be until enough people have hanged themselves with their lying and obfuscation.
And they're doing it, one by one. Heck, even the seemingly unrelated questioning of Christine Todd Whitman and her CYA answers help to lay a nice, sturdy foundation for charges to be brought and the historical excoriation of every aspect of this administration.
And one by one, people outside the Beltway are finding their spines, as well. Jill Simpson and her revelations about the Alabama gubernatorial election? Wouldn't have been possible before all these hearings. She would simply have been too scared for her career.
So keep heart, TPMmuckraker readers. [Insert your own aphorism about patience here.]
In conclusion, hasn't it been awe inspiring to see the level of control the Congress has maintained during these testimonies? I'd have been screaming that they're lying bastards within minutes.
jerry wrote on June 28, 2007 11:38 PM:This is probably obvious to everyone, but it took me a while to understand why Cheney is not letting his office comply with the Classified Information directives.
The mainstream view is apparently that he wants to make sure there is a strong executive. I think this is mistaken (or only partial credit.)
The policy he is not complying with, according to Steven Aftergood of the FAS (speaking on the Diane Rehm show Monday), is one that ensures the National Archives knows how much classified material is being produced, and how much destroyed. Two simple numbers. The numbers are so that the National Archives can determine at the end of the presidency if all of the classified materials have been sent for archival (and study and release to the public in future years.)
The value of not producing those numbers is that when necessary, Cheney, et. al., can destroy classified information that might be embarrassing and there will be no way for the archive or anyone else to determine that.
The classified information scandal is really about allowing Cheney to shred documents that could be used in an investigation or prosecution.
JamesRobert wrote on June 28, 2007 11:38 PM:Color me perplexed. On the one hand, we're hating Cheney for being secretive, on the other hand we're upset that the Executive is sloppy with classified documents. Fug dat. If it was up to me, there'd be no such thing as a classified document. What can't be said out in the open should be left unsaid. Grrr.
jerry wrote on June 28, 2007 11:40 PM:(apologies if this is a dup, the first didn't seem to take.)
This is probably obvious to everyone, but it took me a while to understand why Cheney is not letting his office comply with the Classified Information directives.
The mainstream view is apparently that he wants to make sure there is a strong executive. I think this is mistaken (or only partial credit.)
The policy he is not complying with, according to the FAS, is one that ensures the National Archives knows how much classified material is being produced, and how much destroyed. Two simple numbers. The numbers are so that the National Archives can determine at the end of the presidency if all of the classified materials have been sent for archival (and study and release to the public in future years.)
The value of not producing those numbers is that when necessary, Cheney, et. al., can destroy classified information that might be embarrassing and there will be no way for the archive or anyone else to determine that.
The classified information scandal is really about allowing Cheney to shred documents that could be used in an investigation or prosecution.
greenharper wrote on June 28, 2007 11:51 PM:To Doug at 8:10 p.m., re statutes of limitation (S/L) on felonies: it depends on the felony. Sorry, this is sans citations. Most federal felonies: must indict within 5 years of commission of crime charged. Certain federal banking crimes: S/L is 10 years, though financial institution may per Treasury regulations shred documents after 5 or perhaps a few more years (regs may have changed since I worried about this): good luck, prosecutors. There may be a few other similar specialized S/Ls. Murder: fair game as long as alleged perpetrator is breathing. In other words, when the present administration leaves office there will still be some time to pop certain of its members for certain of their federal felonies. Many in fact could be popped for these right now, except for who runs the Department in charge of popping.
eyeball wrote on June 29, 2007 1:11 AM:the wise folks on this thread are those counseling a slow patient accretion of information. one does not strike at the king and risk missing. waxman has done well to get fielding to come this far and its a clear sign of a successful ju-jitsu move. the post and times sent a loud message today when the both led with the subpoenas. that must have scorched fielding, who cares a lot more about his DC rep than the hardcore types like cheney and addington. those 2 will be back with bechtel or booth while fred has to make a living as a washington lawyer. this is a big development and boy are the repubs going to look like turds when the truth emrges about their sloppy handling of state secrets. let me remind y'all of this quote from john bolton in his letter defending libby: "With classified information, it was frequently hard to know who was cleared to see what or what could be discussed with whom. If there is anyone who fully understands our 'system' for protecting classified information, I have yet to meet him." how reassuring. these guys are in for it.
eyeball wrote on June 29, 2007 1:13 AM:the wise folks on this thread are those counseling a slow patient accretion of information. one does not strike at the king and risk missing. waxman has done well to get fielding to come this far and its a clear sign of a successful ju-jitsu move. the post and times sent a loud message today when the both led with the subpoenas. that must have scorched fielding, who cares a lot more about his DC rep than the hardcore types like cheney and addington. those 2 will be back with bechtel or booth while fred has to make a living as a washington lawyer. this is a big development and boy are the repubs going to look like turds when the truth emrges about their sloppy handling of state secrets. let me remind y'all of this quote from john bolton in his letter defending libby: "With classified information, it was frequently hard to know who was cleared to see what or what could be discussed with whom. If there is anyone who fully understands our 'system' for protecting classified information, I have yet to meet him." these guys are in for it.
JNagarya wrote on June 29, 2007 2:00 AM:Javert Waxman, my congressman for 15 years, doesn't need to spend a time on re-election from an absolutely safe seat. AND he is nobody's fool, either. Yes, it's terrible to have to wait patiently for the slow minuets to proceed when everyone knows what is going on, but the fact is the Dums in Congress DO know what's going on. They all have calendars and many can count the days even without one. Most of them don't even need a weathervane to tell which way etc.
Look, politics is the art of the possible, and people like the implacable Javert W. have a better grasp on the possible than I do, politically speaking. No one thinks Abu Gonzales is competent or honest, everyone knows he has lied to Congress and is the Monarch's mouthpiece, representing not the people of the republic but the Klown King of Krawford. Doubtless everyone also knows that torture and Plame leaks and coverups and lack of investigation and lack of accountability and no-bid contracts and everything else all emanates directly from the Oval Office like the stink from the head of a rotten fish in Denmark.
The question is how to nail the bastards, and this isn't some horseshit Clinton bj impeachment (where lying under oath was so important it could bring down a popular AND SUCCESSFUL president) no matter how often sots like Christopher Hitchens want to pretend, for example, that Scooter committed no crime and that there is no victim when the justice system is successfully obstructed, as he told Tweety today.
This is nothing less than an attempt to rescue what's left of the Constitution and to restore the Republic our forefathers bequeathed us by confronting-- necessarily slowly, necessarily carefully and w/ great precision-- the traitors who seized it, who subverted it, who continue to undermine and destroy it.
Don't you know that Fitzgerald knew who was responsible? Can't everyone see whose filthy fingerprints are all over everything foul and hateful our slender majority is attempting to confront?
And remember, too, what viper-tonged James Wolcott wrote long ago: "The surest way to be proven wrong is to give George Bush the benefit of
the doubt." If the gawd Beloved Leader purports to believe in exists, justice WILL be done. And Thos. Jefferson: "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."
It's not just the curve of history that inclines toward justice. Don't forget -- "Murder will out."
These bastards know what the stakes are. They can read the handwriting and fear the judgment of history. The panic they feel watching the skein of their lies and malice and corruption and evil and utter filth draw tigher around them is as nothing today to what it will be each remaining year of their miserable lives.
Keep the faith.
Posted by: tomm
Date: June 28, 2007 10:25 PM
Very well said. For those without patience, and the ability to think: this is not a football game. Nor is it a detective/police program that is all wrapped up in an hour. Acting precipitously, and too soon, would be a mistake.
The Committees would not be sending subpoenas to such as Cheney if they didn't already have sufficient evidentiary grounds on which to base them, and with which to enforce them.
bjobotts wrote on June 29, 2007 2:23 AM:btw eyeball***no matter what Fielding does his rep will not be affected. It will never be an issue.
Others on these comments should know that when they are referring to the Republican response or vote or position they are talking about a unified (overall)one position party voting or responding the same unified way.
When you are referring to the Democrats it's like referring to 12 Partys rolled into one. There are that many factions to the Democratic party. Some Democratic factions always vote the same way and back each other and some (hardline, moderates, progressives, blue dog etc.) don't. You don't know how they will vote or what they will support in unison.
So when you say "the Dems won't...."(whatever) keep in mind you are referring to "some Dems". Because "some Dems" like Waxman know that crimes have been committed but that the WH cannot release information or let certain staff be interviewed because it would incriminate them, so they will never comply with the subpoenas. Some Dems, like Waxman also know that "executive privilege" is not a law but is a principle which can be used to justify non compliance with the subpoenas but when evidence of a crime or that a crime has been committed surfaces then that trumps executive privilege and the subpoenas can no longer be ignored.
So while some Dems, like Pelosi and Conyers are walking around telling other Dems like us that impeachment is not on the agenda because it is too inconvenient and would take up too much time and detract from "policy making" etc., other Dems like Waxman and Rockefeller are trying to get indictments against Bush/Cheney/Rove and Gonzales for criminal offenses like the crooks they are.
By now most of the public understands that there is no justifiable reason not to comply with the subpoenas except that the information would incriminate them. The WH is using the stall time to destroy and delete as much of the information as possible. They need time to go through all the documents and get rid of the incriminating ones while saving the others so it just looks like a few got lost. They need time to gag, threaten or bribe possible witnesses. Oh if only the documents(or at least what's left of them)in question could be seized to prevent further destruction..
Proven or not, because the WH has no legit reason to refuse to turn over the information requested, it leads to the conclusion that they have good reason to hide everything. Therefore, Most of us already believe they are guilty of violating the constitution and are covering it up.
bjobotts wrote on June 29, 2007 2:52 AM:Based on the response of the WH , the only way to not know this is to not want to know.
btw...Waxman and Conyers both know that this issue of non compliance with the subpoenas will have to be enforced by the courts which will turn this whole affair into a criminal investigation which will negate invoking Executive Privilege. Pretty smart of Some of those dems eh?. Led 'em right up to the slaughter house door with deliberate investigations., since some Dems took impeachment off the table, it's another way to proceed. Just saying...
Paul Rosenberg wrote on June 29, 2007 2:58 AM:GOOD FAITH?
Who knew Waxman had such a gift for comedy?
bjobotts wrote on June 29, 2007 3:09 AM:also btw tomm**********It's not just the curve of history that inclines toward justice. Don't forget -- "Murder will out."
"These bastards know what the stakes are. They can read the handwriting and fear the judgment of history. The panic they feel watching the skein of their lies and malice and corruption and evil and utter filth draw tigher around them is as nothing today to what it will be each remaining year of their miserable lives."
These "bastards" are sociopaths. They have no conscience, feel no remorse or shame, and have enough profit from their corruption to live comfortably, even in prison, for the rest of their miserable lives.
Gypsy wrote on June 29, 2007 7:37 AM:That's not panic they feel, just disappointment. That's not guilt either but rather remorse that history will not be kind to them. Telling them they were irrelevant and will not be noted or remembered at all by history...now that might get to them.
That's why they think they understand torture, because it's worse than murder. You kill the man's spirit and the mind and body are left alive to endure it for the rest of their days.
Sorry to tell you these things for how you think is what I wish for too.
I think it will be worse in history than not being remembered. I think they will be remembered as war criminals and thiefs. If we don't hold them to account then this could be the beginning of the fall of the US. If we don't restore the rights, that they have removed, for even 10 years then we may never get them back. If a whole generation of children grow up without these rights then it will be taken for granted. I believe we are at a turning point. We can head for totalitarian or fight to restore our democracy. These people must answer to the rule of law. Even Dick Cheney is not above the law no matter how many toady lawyers twist themselves in knots trying to say he is. Impeachment should start with him today.
Ask yourself how different history would have been if we had not allowed all these people to skate on Iran-Contra. Too many of them were involved as far back as Nixon and just keep getting richer and more powerful and coming back again and again. If they had been held to account back then we would not be here now. We can not let them excape the judgement of history again or we will have more of them pop up again later.
St. Augustine wrote on June 29, 2007 8:34 AM:Rob LA Ca.
Date: June 29, 2007 8:16 AM
Audi partem alteram
It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience...
Gypsy wrote on June 29, 2007 8:52 AM:Rob it is your side that always goes to the UN-AMERICAN PUKE ARE DELUSIONAL LEVEL. Give us facts that support what you say or go back to your right wing web sites. In this web site the arguments are better than that. There is no person on this web site that does not love America and all it stands for. I do not impune your patriotism or even Bush and Cheney's but there are bad characters all through history and these people wanted to go to Iraq because Bush wanted to be a war President. He also said there were WMD but ignored any evidence to the contrary. It is unquestionable that Cheney is a richer man since being Vice President and if you look at the Corporate give aways under this administration then their friends are too.
I have never voted straight Democrat or Republican but on the individual that I thought would be the best of the candidates offered. If you are upset with us then you are upset with the wrong people. It is Bush and Cheney responsible for the mess this country is in at the moment. It is Bush and Cheney who have said the Constitution is a Quaint Document. They took an oath to uphold the Constitution and they have instead shreaded it. So either make an argument not based on name calling or go away.
thomas wrote on June 29, 2007 9:16 AM:Rob's off his meds
SC is narrow, as in mind
Raph Levien wrote on June 29, 2007 9:32 AM:I wrote this in March, on Firedoglake:
Knodell is the Brownie of classified information. He’s certainly done a heckuva job of making sure the security levees were not breached.
Anyone care to disagree?
Billy Pilgrim wrote on June 29, 2007 9:53 AM:Gypsy
Nicely done. Those venturing in from right wing web sites may do so with an initial purpose to disrupt, but once exposed to rational thought their untamed natures might undergo involuntary improvement. Rather than chastising them, they should be directed to saner methods of viewing reality.
PTF wrote on June 29, 2007 10:27 AM:@Ralph
I worked with Jim Knodell when he was still part of the Secret Service Presidential Protective Division (he apparently retired and got the WHSO job).
He was a perfectly pleasant bureaucrat, but easily flustered. USSS stuck him in their travel/operations shop taking care of logistical coordination and airplane tickets instead of protection. I doubt he would have the will to stand up to even the most minor of Bush appointees, let alone the Chief of Staff. Another patsy, unfortunately, left in charge of the big deal issues.
Xman wrote on June 29, 2007 11:13 AM:Yep, it is frustrating as hell, BUT, let's not forget to look at the brightside: The Dems are persistent! They are just going to keep trying to pry the lid of the can of worms until they finally get a little fingernail under the lip of the lid and then they will rip it off, knock the can over and scatter the contents ...all over hell.
Jail. Prison. Suicides. Hits. Destroyed lives and reputations.
In this poker game, the pot/prize is a lot bigger than Watergate ever was. The fight will be harder and meaner and the bodies bloodier.
So says my crystal ball....
Gypsy wrote on June 29, 2007 11:39 AM:Thank you Billy. I have people like him in my family and they just get mad at me when I make a point and won't speak to me for a while. I have learned to make a reasonable argument and then let them pout. If they throw a fit well that's their problem. I make sure my facts are well established and then don't worry about what they think.
I believe it takes a braver person to make the points we try to make in this country today because they, after all, worship the likes of Ann Coulter. They have 91% of the Talk Radio to beat us up on. See how flustered Coulter got in the face of a polite request to stop with the lowest common denominator and debate on facts. Elizabeth Edwards may have finally punctured her in a way that will be her unraveling. It was bad enough to go after the widows of 9-11 but to go after a person using their dead son is beyond reprehensible. Unless every person in America who has ever lost a child is a Democrat then she may be toast. Even the people on the right are now saying that Ann Coulter is for herself. They are putting some distance between her and themselves now.
Bullies only know one thing and that is they back down when you stand up to them.
slb wrote on June 29, 2007 12:35 PM:Thundering applause for tomm, and a big kiss on the cheek for "St. Augustine"
Well said, guys.
Scorpio13 wrote on June 29, 2007 4:28 PM:The insight of the posters on this thread is, to say the least, astounding! It is truly comforting to know there are so many other intelligent thinking citizens willing to speak out against the corrupt criminals who currently occupy the WH. I agree things are not moving quite as quickly as some would like. What we must remember is that this is a PROCESS. And the wheels of justice do turn slowly. I have every reason to believe that Waxman and others working on this very important job know exactly what they are doing. We must not impatient. As always, one must built one's case and pick the right moment. When all is said and done heads will roll.
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 29, 2007 5:07 PM:Gypsy you are high. At the very least you could pass it around. You are beyond reproach. You people are just full of hate and it's undeniable. You simply lie just like BJ Clinton did. It's all you have left. Democrat have nothing to offer besides raising taxes to buy votes.
"All through history and these people wanted to go to Iraq because Bush wanted to be a war President. He also said there were WMD but ignored any evidence to the contrary. It is unquestionable that Cheney is a richer man since being Vice President and if you look at the Corporate give aways under this administration then their friends are too."
Prove it! You can't because this all a pathetic pack of lies. This is nothing but your sick hate, stupid opinions or guessing game. Have you all been hyponotized or what? Talking points been drilled in your heads. Show me some links ,where do you get these lies?
BJ Clinton makes 43 million after being broke in one year talking trash about our Country and what about those blind trusts ?
Cheyney donated what was it 7 million to charity and Big Al Gore donated a whole $375.00 measly dollars to charity one year.
Are you domb as a rock? Every democrat is on the record sayiong Sadam has WMD's And is an imminent threat.
"He also said there were WMD"
No liar , he said what the inteligence told him , what every foriegn inteligence as well said even the man on the moon said the same thing. Democrats are the straight up liars and that is all they will ever be because that is all they are competant enough to do. A party of communist wanabes.
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 29, 2007 5:23 PM:speak out against the corrupt criminals who currently occupy the WH.
You don't even have a leg to stand on.
CRIME STATS
- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122
There are no business partners busted or no woman bringing charges of rape against President Bush, nothing. You cannot even pretend Bush is criminal at all.
Roberta wrote on June 29, 2007 8:11 PM:Hi Rob LA Ca.,
I don't have to pretend that Bush is a criminal. All I have to do is to quote from Senate Joint Memorial 8016, State of Washington, 60th Legislature, 2007 Regular Session, by Senators Oemig, Regala, Kohl-Welles, Kline, Spanel, Fairley, Kauffman, Fraser and Prentice, which says it very well:
On September 8, 2006, when summarizing a bipartisan Senate investigation into prewar intelligence on Iraq, Senator John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV, the Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said that, "The Committee's investigation into prewar intelligence on Iraq has revealed that the Bush Administration's case for war in Iraq was fundamentally misleading. The Administration pursued a deceptive strategy of using intelligence reporting that the Intelligence Community had already warned was uncorroborated, unreliable, and in critical instances, fabricated."
The President, the Vice President, and members of the President's Administration appear to have deliberately misrepresented the severity of the threat from Iraq by providing distorted intelligence to Congress and the public in order to justify war with Iraq.
The President has publicly admitted to conducting electronic surveillance of thousands and perhaps millions of American civilians without seeking warrants.
The President, the Vice President, and members of the President's Administration have acted to strip American citizens of their constitutional rights, based solely on the discretionary designation by the President of a United States citizen as an "enemy combatant."
Such offenses, if committed, are subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States of America.
Petitions from the country at large may be presented by the Speaker of the House according to Clause 3 of House Rule XII. If the President and/or members of his administration committed such offenses, ignoring these offenses would undermine core American values of truth and justice. Impeachment is a process defined in the United States Constitution by which charges are brought against a President or Vice President or civil officers of the United States. The filing of these charges is followed by a trial in the United States Senate that determines guilt or innocence. In order to preserve confidence in the office of the Presidency and the Executive branch, our senators and representatives in the United States Congress should determine whether there is sufficient evidence to charge President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney with the above offenses and, if so, follow the Constitutional process of impeachment.
There's so much more that can be cited, including numerous violations of the Geneva conventions, obstructions of justice, abuses of power in violation of the presidential oath of office, but any well-versed news reader already knows about these things, which have been demonstrated clearly.
Rob, it's about as valuable to cite "crime stats" from the Clinton era as justification for not exposing the crimes of the Bush administration as it would be for you to claim that you got fat because of what I eat.
Does any of this help you?
Gypsy wrote on June 29, 2007 10:26 PM:Thanks, Roberta. I suspect that Rob will still say it was all Clinton's fault. That is the default position of the wingnuts. The fact is that Bush is the one that said he wanted to be a war President. That was before he wanted to be a Peace President and before he was the Decider and the Commander Guy. What a Super Hero. He
and everyone involved with his administration constantly implied that Saddam Hussein was part of 9-11. Click here: YouTube - Bush: Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, This is what Bush said when directly asked. Not every Democrat said that there was WMD. There were around 13 who voted against the war resolution because they read the case. Bob Graham stated that the case wasn't made when he ran for President in 2004. He was on the Intelligence Committee.
Scott Ritter was on many shows back then stating that any weapons that had survived would have been degraded. Saddam Husseins son in law told them all the weapons had been destroyed after the Gulf war but they chose to ignore him and he was murdered by Saddam. Yes Saddam Hussein was a bad guy. He did kill many people in 1988 collectively and many since. His sons were maybe worse so there are no tears over the exit of them. The Bush 41 administration didn't seem to mind then, and Rumsfield and Cheney did business with him in the 90's. After all he was going after our enemies then. The evidence of connections between Al Qaeda and Saddam were always tenuous but stated in a loud voice. Just as you assert that the Democrats are so bad.
Click here: NO QUARTER: Doug Feith, Reinventing History
In the mean time the Project for a new American Century were livid that Clinton wouldn't go to war with Iraq. Ironic since Bush 41 and Brent Scowcroft believed that removing Saddam would create a vacuum that would destabilize Iraq and the middle east. Gosh maybe Bush should have listened to his earthly Father. There is so much Freudian running through this tale but the sad thing is the military is caught in the middle. The assertion of possible Nuclear Weapons was the real hook. When Bush stated this in his SOTU Speech it gave me pause. I think no one could believe that he would lie about that. But when Joe Wilson tried to get them to correct it and when they didn't we all know what happened to him and his wife. The Italian papers were forgeries and appeared to have been bad ones at that. Then the Downing Street Memo came out. Click here: Text of the Downing Street Memo | AfterDowningStreet.org. I know it is hard to imagine facts would be made to fit the fact we were going to war.
Maybe they really did believe this was part of the war on terror, but they kicked out the weapons inspectors who could have proved one way or the other. Wouldn't it have been better to have given them the time to have saved lives and shouldn't war be a last resort?
It is a fact that Haliburton stock has gone up since Cheney became Vice President. It is also a fact that Cheney still holds stock in Haliburton and draws a salary which he states will not be affected by their success or failure. It is also a fact that they have had many no bid contracts. There have been many allegations about sub-standard water and food served to our brave Soldiers (way to support the military).
I do not for one minute believe you were ever a Democrat since most people who have changed parties in the last 6 1/2 years have gone the other way and I wish I were stoned with these people in the White House. I am a little Grandmother in Texas who has watched these same people since the days of the Iran Contra and the Iran Hostage Crisis. I was paying very careful attention in the days before war because my gut told me that what was about to happen was not going to be right. I am not a pacifist, I just believed that we should have stayed focused on Osama Bin Laden and we would have been in far better shape now. We have used up our Military and wasted our money as we have destabilized the whole region. What have we gained? Bin Laden is in Pakistan rebuilding and planning the next attack on us. Terrorism has metastasized. We have helped them to recruit and train new terrorist in Iraq. How would you feel if you were an Iraqi and at first were happy we liberated them but then as they realized we weren't securing them became upset and then realized we were saying we wanted to fight there so we didn't have to fight here. How arrogant. How totally lacking in humanity to liberate a people, and then totally destroy their entire country and people.
As for blaming Clinton for everything, if you will go back and check I believe it was Dick Cheney and George Bush 41 who began the downsizing of the military referred to as the peace dividend. I live close to Ellington AFB and remember thinking that maybe it was a bad thing to get rid of all the bases. I knew there would be more wars. In a country where peace activist are verbally assaulted and spied upon while war mongers are the norm, how could it be any other way? Scott Ritter also said that the day we are forced to go to war should be a day of national mourning. As the Daughter of a WW II Soldier who arrived on Omaha Beach June 6, 1944, I couldn't agree more. Only men who have never fought rush to war. There is much money in war and I would love to see how much defense stock was owned by the cheerleaders of this war. I believe in a strong but smart defense and the Cheney/Bush administration has fought a stupid and weak war. They fought it on the cheap and have probably lost it because they never listened to the experts. I am praying we can find an honorable way out and begin to rebuild our military and reputation in the world. I am always hopeful that cooler and saner minds will take over but there is little reason to believe that will happen. As for Clinton, one thing I do know about him is that many lies were told and a failed land deal was the beginning of 70 million dollar investigation resulting in a perjury trap which he stupidly walked into. He should have told them that he would not answer questions which were none of their business and had nothing to do with his job as President. These people will not even answer questions which I believe that WE THE PEOPLE have a right to ask.
I am sick of bullies like you. What are you on? Why do you hate America? I am an American first and I love everything this country stands for and will even fight for people like you to spew your hate because that is what freedom is. It is even the freedom to be stupid and ignore all facts that don't fit your ideology.
Kevin wrote on June 29, 2007 11:31 PM:Do those "transcribed interviews" included taking an oath? I hope so.
as long as you have a transcript, thats good enough. Lying to congress is a fed offense, even without an oath.
Thats why the admin does not want to talk with a transcript. so they can lie and then say you "misheard" them
JNagarya wrote on June 30, 2007 10:53 AM:Rob "It's Clinton's Fault" --
The first WTC bombing occurred 1 month after Clinton took office. It was his fault, because it happened on his watch.
9/11 occurred 8 months after Bushit took office. It was Clinton's fault because it happened on Bushit's watch.
Clinton, using every means at his disposal, tracked down, arrested, prosecuted, and imprisoned those who committed the first WTC bombing.
Bushit, et al., knowing that police work doesn't work -- even though it did -- would have invaded and bombed New Jersey, where the perpetrators of the first WTC bombing were caught.
The second WTC attack occurred on 9/11/2001, the person behind it allegedly being Osama bin Ladin. Bushit invaded Afghanistan allegedly to capture bin Ladin. Instead, Bushit allowed bin Ladin to escape, and he remains at large.
After the Madrid bombings, through international police work, the perpetrators were located, arrested, extradicted to Spain, tried, convicted, and imprisoned.
Bushit, et al., knowing that police work doesn't work -- even though it did -- would have invaded and bombed its ally Italy.
I'd ask if you know the meaning of "intellectual honesty" but we already know the answer to that.
Not so by the way: torture is a war crime, and is defined and prohibited as such by the US Constitution. As it is defined and prohibited by the US Constitution, it cannot be made legal by Congress, Executive, or even both of those with the approval of the Judiciary.
Wars of aggression -- invading a non-threatening sovereign nation -- is defined and prohibited by the US Constitution as a crime against humanity. The invasion and occupation of non-threatening sovereign nation Iraq was and remains an illegal war of aggression.
There is truth, and there is falsehood. That is a standard on which is based rule of law and stability of gov't. Reality is not reducable to "everything is opinion, and all opinions are equal, so everything is up for grabs because there is no truth".
Want to know the meaning of "intellectual dishonesty"? Look in the mirror.
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 30, 2007 3:07 PM:Your are pathetic.
"The first WTC bombing occurred 1 month after Clinton took office. It was his fault, because it happened on his watch."
How was it his fault moron ? You are such liars and frauds by default it is a waste of time proving you all wrong. Simply because you all lie and cry at the same time.There is not a single position that can be relied on or can half faith in to run with honesty and integrity when there is a "D" next to their name.
The only reeson would even blame clinton for the first WTC bombing is because Clinton is no longer in office but mainly just so you can put the blame for 9/11 squarely on President Bush. You are a dirty despicable and dishonest democrat. You all are. Screw the the whole lot of you.
I am not like you thank GOD and that is why I had no problem telling the co called Democratic Party to F**K OFF! You are democrats first and foremost, that is plain and clear. I am an AMERICAN FIRST AND FOREMOST and none of your lies will ever CONVINCE ME OF WHAT I ALREADY KNOW AS FACT AND TO BE THE TRUTH.
You pathetic imbeciles , I have family members that work directly with congressman in three states, lobbyist and city councils all democratic. I remember how they spoke when I didn't give a shit about politics or knew the difference between and democrat or a repubican. That has all changed now so sorry if I "choose" to no longer blindly and ignorantly vote for the party of criminal frauds, racists , race baiters, felons , rapists and child molestors. You choose to do so with a smile on your faces. You are sick and deluded and have no other choice, democrats till death.
God Bless America and the brave honorable men and women that fight HER.
Roberta wrote on June 30, 2007 4:54 PM:Rob LA Ca,:
Even taking typos into account, I'm pretty confused about the last line of your 3:07 post, specifically the last three words.
"God Bless America and the brave honorable men and women that fight HER."
Did you mean HERE? Was martial law declared and I missed the memo?
If HER is what you meant, does this refer to America? Brave and honorable men and women are fighting against America and you want God to bless them?
Or does HER refer to God? This would mean that brave and honorable men and women are fighting against God the Mother?
Or is your whole last line sarcastic? Remember, sarcasm is really tough to get across in writing.
I realize that you're angry and not wanting to hear any reasonable arguments against WHAT [you] ALREADY KNOW AS FACT AND TO BE THE TRUTH, but taking a little more time to be clear about what you mean might make your case more persuasive.
Maybe I'm sick, an imbecile, deluded, and a smiling child molester [personal insults don't really help persuade people either], but I reread what I post before I post it to make sure that what I've written will be understood.
I'm terribly sorry that the congressmen with whom your family members work don't seem to do their jobs well. Statistically, there will always be people in a group who are kind of dim, lazy, uncommitted, and incompetent. It's a reflection of the world at large. And, unfortunately, our Congress is most truly representative of all Americans if it reflects all Americans.
But this doesn't mean that there are no senators and representatives that are smart, diligent, dedicated, and competent. I happen to think that some of them are currently on the committees that are, step by step, investigating, examining, and taking appropriate and Constitutional action against the misfeasance, malfeasance, and crimes of the entities and agencies in the executive branch of this current government.
I truly don't think that what matters now is whether someone, anyone, is a Democrat or Republican. We're well past that now. What matters is to reclaim the balance among the branches of government that has been compromised and corrupted by people who have no respect for the Constitution.
There are all kinds of Democrats and all kinds of Republicans. There are all kinds of Independents, too. And anyone can be an asshole.
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 30, 2007 5:47 PM:"They took an oath to uphold the Constitution and they have instead shreaded it."
Exactly how and when did this happen? I didn't feel a thing and since you are such touchy feely types did you feel it?
How did it feel "when Democrats lied and 3 million died" in Southeast Asia? did you feel it? That actually happened.
like you said:
"So either make an argument not based on name calling or go away."
Oh and liberal activist judges and their stupid self defining meaning of what they think the Constitution should read are a joke. They are the ones shreading the Constitution and you have the nerve to give them credibility.
Quite pretending to care about our Constitution or our Country while you actively engage in undermining the president of the United States and his Administration in a time of war. If there were a democrat in office istead of a republican not only would none of you make a peep , your leader would actually be quilty of such crimes just like your dear sweet Slick Willie, BJ Clinton.
Democrats are desparately trying to Clintonize George W Bush and that's all there is to it , you are miserabe basturds for it and what's hilarious is you do it by choice. Actually it's insane.
"Want to know the meaning of "intellectual dishonesty"
DEMOCRATS, IT'S A FACT YOU MUST DENY FOR THE SURVIVAL OF YOUR CRIMINAL RAT PARTY.
"The invasion and occupation of non-threatening sovereign nation Iraq was and remains an illegal war of aggression."
You are an incredulous to the facts and the truth. You like your leaders are so dishonest and unbelievable you have got into the habit of always using the word "REAL".
REAL Transparency , Real Reform , Real Bipartisanship real real real. You "TRUELY" are the party of perpetual fraud. It's is what you are. I understand , you can't help yourself , they have made you that way. I did not attend the democrat madrasas aka public schools which clearly has helped to ward off their propaganda.
It really frustrates you loyal democrats that this has been one of the most corrupt free Administrations in recent history ? Sure it does.
Liars commence lying in 4-3-2-1....
Gypsy wrote on June 30, 2007 6:06 PM:Roberta, Your posts are way too reasonable for Rob. So are mine. We seek to change his mind with reason and fact. He already knows it all. There is no fact that can change the mind of an ideologue because they see the world as either people who agree with them are good, or people who disagree with them are evil. I believe this is because in all his post he has not laid out one real fact that proves anything. Even if the statistics about the Clinton Administration are true and I don't know if they are, then it proves there were many people in the Government at that time who were dishonest. The same thing is going on now. The difference is that the Republican's who made it a whole industry to prosecute and criminalize politics during the 90's have done everything to protect the criminals in this Administration. The fact that Duke Cunningham was a crook does not mean Bush is, but there are things which have been protected because they refuse to answer to a Congress of Democrats that they did not believe they would ever have to face. I believe they thought that they would not loose. I watch many of the hearings and the Republicans aren't there to seek truth but to try to make it look like a Democratic witch hunt.
The whole reason that I read this web site every day is that Josh and his group of journalist and investigators always let the story unfold as information becomes available and they have been ahead of most of the MSM on several important stories including the Attorney General Stories.
I have enjoyed reading your post Roberta more than Rob's, but I have to admit it is always fun to torment someone like him who is after all more like Ann Coulter, a agent provocateur. If he really believes all the BS that he spouts then I feel really sorry for him.
Last but not least, his last line:
God Bless America and the brave honorable men and women that fight HER. I believe if you take it in totality then it was a Freudian slip. God Bless the men and women who fight HER (America). These people are much like the ones in Germany that we all have asked. Why did they keep silent? Why did they not realize the evil being done to the Jews? If it takes every last breath I have, no one will ever be able to say that about me if we truly become the totalitarian state that seems to be the way we are headed. I am praying for the pendulum swing to go back. I watched a great debate about Conservatism vs. Liberalism today and they each have their own problems. But the one quote that I took away from it was from a man that I admire very much, Bobby Kennedy Jr. He said that we should hold at bay big Government with the Right hand and hold at bay big Business with the left. What a great way to look at the balance the way that power has traditionally been. At this moment Business has gained way too much power and has got to be checked with regulations meant to promote fair and free trade, ie capitalism but to prevent unfettered corporatism. People have always got to be first. Corporations are entities that exist to make money, therefore they are unfettered by morality unless the people who run them are moral or unless regulations control how far they can go.
Rob if you really want to change minds then come up with ideas and facts. Go out and challenge your own suppositions. Just maybe you will learn something that will change your thinking.
Gypsy wrote on June 30, 2007 6:10 PM:Rob,
LOL. Is there spittle collecting in the corners of your mouth. This is such bovine excrement that I can't help but just laugh at you.
Betty /weekend supervisor wrote on June 30, 2007 6:31 PM:Dear TPMmuckraker Readers
Please forgive Rob LA Ca, he is off his medicines. We allow Rob to surf the internet for theraputic reasons, however he occaisionly stops taking his medications. Not to worry, here at Gateways Hospital & Mental Health Center, we only need to use a straight-jacket to restrain him on infrequent occasions.
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 30, 2007 7:26 PM:Correct ,it was a typo. "Fight for HER" Her/Country
I'm hardly in the mood for sarcasm while the party I used to vote for goes about the business of undermining the Commander in Cheif in a time of war, engages in smear after smear not just here but also on foreign soil for the sole purpose of fullfilling their despicable and desparate need for POWER.
I don't need anyones forgiveness , if anything you need it. Seems this is a place where one goes to sing to the choir. I clearly remember the last few years of relentless crying and whining from Democrats especially the lies of the 2000 election. The democrat party has been taken over by incompetant socialist/Communists and criminal frauds and you people are clueless and just don't care. After all they call themselves Democrats and thats good enough to fool you.
As far as medication is concerned , there is none for BDS so you'll just have to deal with be miserable and perpetually outraged. It's no wonder it democrats that are no desperate for Govt. funded health care , you all need it.
Roberta wrote on June 30, 2007 8:02 PM:Gypsy,
Thanks for your thoughtful posts, as well.
I usually am not bothered by the ranters in these threads, but I have watched and read about Elizabeth Edwards's little contretemps with Ann Coulter with much interest. I have nodded my head in agreement that discourse that includes (or is only) personal insults or attacks is not in the best interests of political dialogue.
I am interested to see if there will be the kind of backlash against Coulter that hit Don Imus after his racial slur that went too far. It wasn't that he hadn't made the slurs for years that got him, it was that he attacked people who did not put themselves in the public eye.
While it can clearly be argued that John Edwards knowingly put himself on public display to run for president, it's also valid to argue that the loss of his son should not be open to ridicule and used in ad hominem vitriol. The expensive haircut? Fine. Giuliani's marriages, fine. Clinton's extramarital interests, fine. These are choices they made that have political consequences.
Coulter might just have alienated even her fans with the tasteless remarks about the Edwards's dead son. And Elizabeth Edwards's reminders about Coulter's 9/11-widows' opinings can't help either. No matter how much bile and excrement your audience savors or tolerates, there's that point where all but the sociopathic step back and say, "yuck."
So Rob hit a nerve that was already tingling in me. Crazy as it sounds, I feel kinda sorry for him, and for Ann Coulter. What angry, unhappy people they must be. So very sad.
I hope that in the coming debates and campaigns the candidates can stick to criticizing positions and actions rather than sinking to personal attacks. I know there are some good politicians out there that deserve even to be called statesmen, such as Waxman, Leahy, Conyers, Whitehouse, and Sanchez. I'd love to discover that there was a real statesman or -woman among the presidential candidates. I don't care what party they belonged to; they'd get my vote.
security code: linen
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 30, 2007 8:44 PM:How I wish I could use an Oscar Wilde quote regarding politicians and pundits: "It is simply washing one's clean linen in public."
" Rob,
LOL. Is there spittle collecting in the corners of your mouth. This is such bovine excrement that I can't help but just laugh at you."
No, that would be your spittle face , Cris Matthews.
"We allow Rob to surf the internet for theraputic reasons,"
Oh really? Thank you my communist leader , thank you.
http://newsbusters.org/node/13855#comment
http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp
Learn something on your owm and quite being slave to democrat lies and talking points. The democrat media has been exposed , as if you didn't know.
1st City Citizen wrote on June 30, 2007 9:12 PM:Gypsy and Roberta
I am enjoying reading your replies to Rob LA Ca's(does he mean CA?) asinine invectives. The fellow is so far to the right that he thinks anything to the left side of the starboard rail is liberal.
I suspect that we'll be see more of people like Rob, people who are probably so incensed at the failure of the Bush administration that they lash out at anyone about anything.
Rob reminds me of the fellow who reason for banging his head against a brick wall was, "Because it feels so good when I stop".
Keep banging away Rob!
Gypsy wrote on June 30, 2007 9:44 PM:Rob, I visited the sites you put up. I am not at all impressed by your information. So the media votes for Democrats. Maybe that is because they see what the Republicans are doing and the Corporate media won't print. If you think either of those sites made a coherent argument then you really are delusional. I don't care if you have so much talk radio. I pay so that I can listen to the reasonable argument and interviews with people on Air America. I go to many sites and read. I watch many shows with differing views. I watched in real time as your President kicked out the weapons inspectors so they wouldn't prove there were no WMD. It might have interfered with going to war. I will not waste any more time on you because you don't even know what you are talking about. If it mattered to you about criticizing a President in a time of war then you should hate Bush and DeLay. They both criticized Clinton during a time of war. A war I might ad in which he trusted the Generals to run it and his objective was achieved and we didn't loose one Soldier except by accident.
I might even have bought the reason of going to war to bring a Democracy to the Middle East but that was only about the 3rd or 4th reason offered even as the others were proven wrong. You won't catch me defending the Viet Nam war under any circumstances. This is Bush's Viet Nam. He has proven to be a completely inept and ineffectual Commander in Chief. If he had led a coalition or not arrogantly turned down help after the initial war was over he might have been able to win this but he is a typical chickenhawk. He was awol when it counted and when he professed that he supported the Viet Nam war. Which brings me to another point. If you believe in this war so much then sign up and go give the brave Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines who are fighting. They could use some help since they are over deployed. Basically I have had enough of you. You need far more help than Roberta and I can give you. You are such a phony. There is no way you were ever a Democrat. You are way too whiny.
Roberta. I couldn't agree with you more that there was something inside of me that say I am sick of being polite to people who speak evil about 9-11 widows or make fun of people who have lost their children. In my family I have 2 sisters who lost children. You never get over it. The Edwards have been remarkable in dealing with their grief in public and trying to stay positive. I think I would like you for a friend. You seem to be intelligent and a thinking reasoning person. Something you don't find many of these days.
Oh and Rob. I would never want to censor the right. They completely discredit themselves when put up against reasonable dialogue. Let them speak all they want to. Truth will eventually out. I would never legitimize them by censoring them. That is another of their myths.
1st City Citizen, thanks for the help. Be sure to visit those sites Rob referred to. They really will change your minds. LOL.
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 30, 2007 10:30 PM:"What angry, unhappy people they must be. So very sad."
Democrats and their tranference. Why is it that just about everything you accuse republicans of you are actually the one guilty of doing or about to get caught in the process.?
Democrats are the perpetually miserable and outraged even after you lied your way into the Majority in 2006.
"They completely discredit themselves when put up against reasonable dialogue."
Liar, that should be the only response to the party of losers.
Democrats run from reasonable dialogue , they are cowards period. FOX NEWS BOO! Look at them run.
Why are your leaders crying about talk radio when they have been spewing their propaganda everywhere else. Communists must have complete control of information. When are you going to drop the farce , calling yourselves democrats?
Air America ? More democrat fraud. Always using words like "America" "Truth"
You are a stupid joke. Clintons war? Passing out hot dogs / humanitarian. Clinton was a draft dodging POS. He disgraced our Country and the Office of the Presidency. White trash sexual deviant and a criminal. You just can't admit the truth. 85% of felons vote democrat. ask Fraud Kerry and Rodham Clinton, it came out of their stupid mouths.
You people are a waste and beyond help. Enjoy singing to your choir.
Gypsy wrote on June 30, 2007 10:58 PM:I just can't stop laughing at you Rob. The transference occurs from your side. I watched the debate in the House yesterday or the day before when right wing media tried to ramp up the lie that the Democrats were trying to restore the fairness doctrine. What a phony bunch you are. There was never a move like that. But why does it bother you so much that we might even want fairness. You have 91% of the stations in the country and we have 9. You are the ones who want censorship. We are happy to compete with you fairly. It is the corporations who would love to stop our voices. If you aren't afraid of a fair debate why would that be? What 91% isn't enough for you? How will you argue when your bunch are in the minority for the foreseeable future because of just the kind of crap you are spouting? You will be yelling minority rights then. You are such a phony. Everything you say we are guilty of, you have been guilty of in your posts. We have all tried to change your mind with reason and you have raged like an animal. Go back and read your post. If you were fair and, I don't believe for a minute you are, you would see it.
1st City Citizen wrote on June 30, 2007 11:03 PM:Roberta and Gypsy
Rob certainly appears to want a confrontation. I really don't want to confront him directly, he seems to be too ignorant to know what rational and reasoning mean.
I will henceforth refer to him only in the 3rd person, much like his doctor's at Gateways Hospital & Mental Health Center, which, BTW, has several programs for social deviants, like Rob.
Rob LA Ca. wrote on June 30, 2007 11:21 PM:"There was never a move like that."
Did I say that? No I didn't.
Explian all the whining and crying from Kerry , Frankenfeintein , peloser and the rest of the Rats?
They are the ones who were saying they wanted it restored , not me.
"We have all tried to change your mind with reason and you have raged like an animal."
What? are you stoned? Change my mind about what?
what reason and who is we all?
Do you have a clue what is going on in the Real world ? You don't even have a clue what your party leaders are spewing. You don't know much at all. It's no wonder you believe what you choose to believe. I bet you do a good Stevie Nicks impersonation.
Nathanael Nerode wrote on July 1, 2007 9:47 AM:Waxman's pretty fast-moving actually. From what I can see he's pushing forward a *lot* of investigations simultaneously, not just this one. I doubt he will allow for any delay in getting these "interviews"; I'm sure he figures a wait of a couple of weeks will not be significant in this case -- especially since a different subpoena battle is running right now.
Al in Austex wrote on July 1, 2007 9:15 PM:Rob ,
Rob LA Ca. wrote on July 1, 2007 11:25 PM:I invite you to take a deep breath & know that the damamge that BushCo is doing to our country everyday is far worse then lying about consensual sex. Rob don't believe us -go "Google the internets" reference ex Congressman Bob Barrs real concerns about BushCo assault on our civil liberties. Remember Congressman Barr -Rob, he was part of the Impeachment Posse that got President Clinton's indictment ( Impeachment) heard ( Tried ) by the Senate.
Rob - I feel your pain- but listen to Congressman Barr ( the good ex congressman is also a former CIA field officer ) - Barr introduced VP AL Gore two years ago when Gore was given a major speech regarding the Bush illegal wire domestic tapping program. BTW- Bob Barr is like a lot of us - we value our Civil Liberties enough to fight for them-we also believe passionately in the right to bear arms - Remember too Rob that the real Enemy is in the Tribal Areas outside of Paktia - not in Mosul . The FORMER is part of the Salafist/Wahabe
fundamentalist worldwide network that attacked us on 11 Sept 2001-the LATER is a pissed off nationalist that would very much invite us to end our illegal occupation of his country. And the Later -even as we speak is killing the Former in Al Anbar as oftens as he kills US Service members-he wants neither group in his country Iraq. Why does the VEEP still cite discredited reports about the Atta meet and greet in Prauge with alleged Iraqi Intelligence Assets ?
Rob why didn't we go up the mountain with everything we had at Tora Bora & kill UBL ( we had the entire 10th Mountain Division in that AOR ) ? Why did the Chain of Command lie about Pat Tillman's death ?
Rob I want to respect you & your opinions. But I can't do that and keep Our Country safe . Rob-- TurdBlossom , Cheney & The Decider have betrayed your trust >
I wish you God Speed Rob , but I also pray you answer these questions cited up thread this post.
Meanwhile me and Bob Barr still probably have more guns then we need -but not as many as we would like to have - just in case you and Grannie Mille get any unkind or ill advised ideas Rob,
"worse then lying about consensual sex."
Why do continue to lie? It wasn't about sex and you know it. I voted for him and he had guilty written all over his face. It was his own fault , it was his lies that brought about lewinsky , the blue dress etc.He commited perjury and that was the least of his crimes.
"Country safe . Rob-- TurdBlossom , Cheney & The Decider have betrayed your trust >"
Bullshit , they are doing what democrats don;t have the guts to do. They loath the military and praise communist dictators. Don't you listen to what your leaders say?
"Bob Barr is like a lot of us - we value our Civil Liberties enough to fight for them-"
I believe you believe that. I value my life and my civil liberties are in no way being harmed by my President. The only ones destroying our Country and civil liberties are the democrats. Democrats give aid and comfort to the ememie as if it humanitarian aid. It's not , it's treason and worthy of a firing squad. Democrats are serial liars and frauds and they have deceived but good.
This is how the democrats support our troops and protect our Country.....
"The following letter was written by Lt. Jason Nichols, a Naval officer who is currently serving in Baghdad. He is also the head of Appeal for Courage, a group of American active duty and reserve service personnel who are appealing to Congress to stay and finish the war.
Senator Reid:
When you say we’ve lost in Iraq, I don’t think you understand the effect of your words. The Iraqis I speak with are the good guys here, fighting to build a stable government. They hear what you say, but they don’t understand it. They don’t know about the political game, they don’t know about a Presidential veto, and they don’t know about party politics.
But they do know that if they help us, they are noticed by terrorists and extremists. They decide to help us if they think we can protect them from those terrorists. They tell us where caches of weapons are hidden. They call and report small groups of men who are strangers to the neighborhood, men that look the same to us, but are obvious to them as a foreign suicide cell.
To be brief, your words are killing us. Your statements make the Iraqis afraid to help us for fear we’ll leave them unprotected in the future. They don’t report a cache, and its weapons blow up my friends in a convoy. They don’t report a foreign fighter, and that fighter sends a mortar onto my base. Your statements are noticed, and they have an effect.
Finally, you are mistaken when you say we are losing. We are winning, I see it every day. However, we will win with fewer casualties if you help us. Will you?"
Respectfully,
LT Jason Nichols, USN
MNF-I, Baghdad
http://www.americans-working-together.com/id223.html
You cannot defend the defenseless. Democrats have obstructing and undermining president Bush in a time of war because the only thing they care about is taking power and micro managing everyones lives. Or havent you noticed? You know we used to hunt down and kill the Communists and now the democrat party is full of them hiding under the label , liberals. You explain why democrats are implementing the Communist goals to the T.
Anonymous wrote on July 2, 2007 12:36 AM:"Why does the VEEP still cite discredited reports about the Atta meet"
Discredited? got a link ?
"Rob why didn't we go up the mountain with everything we had at Tora Bora & kill UBL ( we had the entire 10th Mountain Division in that AOR )"
What is everything we have amount to? What makes you think we didn't and besides what are you trying prove? Everything we got? You looking to cause more Pat Tilman senarios?
Why didn't BJ Clinton take Bin Laden when he was offered? Or when there were a dozen red dots on his forehead whaat some three separate times?
That is what you should ask yourself.
Do you think BJ would be able to pull in 43 million dollars in one year flapping his yap disgraceing our Country if he imprission the leader of Al Qaeda? Do you? 43 million dollars?
"Why did the Chain of Command lie about Pat Tillman's death ? "
Why sdon't you ask them? Are you poeple that stupid? Why don't you just pick up a rifle and try and take over this Country you cowards. You kill our soilders with your words , your lies and your demanding answers to question that aren't any of you damn business. You shit for brains should be shot in the head everytime you divulge classified information and give aid and comfort to the enemy and watch our soilders get blown up because you wanted to get a good picture(tip off by terrorist).
You ask such stupid questions about the Comander in Cheif and nothing about your Traitors and Thiefs. You think yourselfs as Americans ? Bullshit, you are DEMOCRATS. That much is obvious. No link required.
Al in Austex wrote on July 2, 2007 5:46 AM:Okay Rob et al - you are doubtlessly convinced of your Rightness. But does it ever occur to you that maybe just maybe we invaded the wrong Arab Country - (assuming we needed to invade an Arab Country -) would we have been better off invading the Kingdom Of Saud ? Seventeen of the nineteen hijackers came from Saudi Arabia Rob .
Rob LA Ca. wrote on July 6, 2007 12:27 PM:And I would thank you kindly not to impugn my Patriotism because I would want our Senoir Civilian Leadership to answer for their collective criminal activity. And many have asked Rummy why the NeoCon run Government lied about Pat Tillman's death , Jessica Lynch's heroics,& the torture at Abu Gharib ( among much more ) . And that is the heart of the sruggle going on right now w/ Dubya - him & Cheney are making us less safe not more. We need accountability for the misdeeds done in our name by these Neo Con criminals.
BTW Rob, President Clinton was tried and acquitted of High Crimes & Misdeameanors in the Senate- could we ask the same treatment for the Current Administration- in the interest of Comity & Commonsense.
Moreover , Rob I am more afraid of a CONUS based standing Army of Mercenaries run by a Christian Fundamentalist -then I am of UBL . Go google "Blackwater" or "Titan Security " Rob - see how our tax dollars are being spent to make sure Christian Dominionist have there very own attack helos-
Carry On there Rob - but at least be smart about it .
Less safe? Prove it. Not only have we not been attacked , we have stopped several in the process and captured the perps.
If you haven't noticed , democrats have done absolutely nothing to protect this Country nor can they even admit that there is an enemy who wants to kill us for the simple reason that we are not Muslim.
"you are doubtlessly convinced of your Rightness"
I know what I hear and know what I see. Do you spend any time at all fact checking or researching what has been said by who and when? I logged thousands of hours in a short few years.
When are any of you going to come up with a single fricken "LIE" told by President Bush in the run up to the war.
"their collective criminal activity."
What criminal activity?
Ask your partners in the media about their premature stories about Jessica Lynch
"Neo Con criminals."
What the hell is this crap? The fact of the matter is that this has been one of the most ethical and crime free Administrations in history.There are no women filing rape charges, no corrupt partners doing time for land deals being made.
Accountability? What would a democrat know about accountability?
Clinton was acquitted ? He is a convicted felon. The House did the lawfull duty , the Senate did not. One can only wonder why the FBI files of Republican members were reported missing or lost ? Intimidation perhaps?
It's really a waste of my time here since this democrat party and its ignorant supporters are completely consumed by hate , jealousy and envy.
"A federal appeals court on Friday ordered the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging President Bush’s domestic spying program, saying the plaintiffs had no standing to sue."
"Bush’s domestic spying program"
More lies. Explain how monitoring calls made by known al Qaeda members coming into the US equals Domestic spying program?
"Rob I am more afraid of a CONUS based standing Army of Mercenaries run by a Christian Fundamentalist -then I am of UBL"
Of course you are, your own shadow scares you. Why would you be affraid of OBL? You are partners with his , you give them aid and comfort and send them lawyers.
CONUS? WHAT?
It's not my fault democrats are a bunch of Godless criminal hethans hell bent on destroying this Country with so they can force their sick and proven failure agenda of socialist communism down our throats.
When have democrats demonstrated they were capable of having commonsense? Democrats are no longer even remotely American. It's no wonder you hate this Country. Why don't you just leave and go to your favorite dictator run Country you constantly heap praise on?
PATRIOTISM? YOU DISPLAY NO SUCH THING.
Hansel2 wrote on January 1, 2008 2:57 PM:To all:
Rob has been a joke on far more sites than this and his embarrassing rants are legend.
He admitted quite some time ago on Wiz Bang that he hadn't actually voted until the last election. The guy's somewhere in his last 20's or early 30's and NEVER VOTED. That should give you some idea of how shallow this fellow has been most of his life.
Furthermore, as I'm sure you've figured out, there is no rational, thoughtful argument that can convince him of anything. He is pathetically delusional.
He's the only one who doesn't know it.
Fortunately, the majority of American's are patriotic and sharp enough not to hold onto his fear-based rationale. Bush and company have been a plague on this planet for the last 6 years and, while I hope they will be replaced with someone at least temporarily better (and certainly smarter) we will still have to deal with lemmings like Rob who will never EVER understand that their chest-pumping at the expense of others who DO fight and do give a darn about this country is cowardly and sad.
Oh, and as is his insecurity, expect him to always seek the last word on these threads.