Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 4/9/2006 6:36:25 AM EDT
Did we go over this lastest stuff?

What's the story here?

If the reports that Bush directed/authorized Libby's leaks (via the VP) are true, we're in for a looooong summer.

Thoughts?
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:48:08 AM EDT
Bush has the authority to do so. Also, the "leaks" had nothing to do with Valarie Plame.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:49:50 AM EDT
The "leak" was the daily security estimate with regards to Niger, released by Libby et al under the direction of Cheney and Bush to counter the FALSE NYT article by Joe Wilson. Wilson omitted critical intel on Niger and the Security Estimate had DEFINITE proof Iraq HAD been looking into trade with Niger, COMPLETELY BYPASSING THE UN. Niger is NOT an exporter of any significant goods other than yellow cake uranium.

That is ALL. Nothing regarding Mrs Wilson's identity was ever released.

Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:51:58 AM EDT
I don't think the content of the leak material is an issue here.

But I have heard Bush condemn leakers personally.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:56:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:56:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
I don't think the content of the leak material is an issue here.

But I have heard Bush condemn leakers personally.




Bush punish one of his own or himself? never happen.
gonna suck to have hillary in office, but the neocons seem dead set on making it so.

Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:57:34 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:57:38 AM EDT
What disapoints me is the underhanded way in which this info was "declassafied". I wish Bush had the balls to say "here is the intel that says "x", now go pound sand..." but instead he authorized Libby to "leak" the info.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:58:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
I don't think the content of the leak material is an issue here.

But I have heard Bush condemn leakers personally.



Uh, if the President authorized the release, it is not a leak. That is an executive function...now if someone didn't have presidental approval to release information, that would be a tacit leak.

You see, if Rove/Cheney/Libby released information without presidental approval, that would be a leak. But to claim Bush authorized a leak is a contradiction on itself.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 6:59:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
Thoughts?



We're in for a LOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGG summer.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 7:04:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bhart89:
What disapoints me is the underhanded way in which this info was "declassafied". I wish Bush had the balls to say "here is the intel that says "x", now go pound sand..." but instead he authorized Libby to "leak" the info.



that's what I'm trying to say....

I'm not concerned about the technical definition of "leak," I'm disturbed by the actual method of information dissemination.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 8:43:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Greenhorn: Bush has the authority to do so. Also, the "leaks" had nothing to do with Valarie Plame.
Exactly, he is the Commander-In-Chief and he can authorize the release of information to the public via the press.

Valerie Plame was a "secret agent" in her own mind. You aren't a secret agent when reporters already know you work for the CIA. You are simply a CIA employee whose function no more secret than the guys sweeping the floors. Valerie claiming to be a secret agent is like me claiming to be SEAL operator. I'm not with the SEALs, I'm a Space Shuttle Door Gunner. He He He!
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 8:44:53 AM EDT
Well, according to Ben Affleck, Bush is a traitor and should be hung.

What more needs to be said?

Link Posted: 4/9/2006 8:49:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2006 8:51:18 AM EDT by raven]
Couple of things:

1. Ipso facto, if Bush authorized disseminationg this info, then it cant be criminal. The press doesn't judge the law.

2. Valerie Plame wasnt a secret squirrel super duper undercover spy who was ruinined by this story.

3. The only hinky thing is why Bush went this route, leaking to friendly media. But that can be explained as a bad idea, a bad decision, by a White House who has strived to disconnect and not play the partisan political gotcha games the press and impotent Democrats insist on playing. It will be hilarious to watch the press excoriate Bush over his leaking methods after the dozen or so anti-Bush stories they're created from leaks. Completely hypocritical, but they'll do it. Watch.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 8:57:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NoVaGator: that's what I'm trying to say.... I'm not concerned about the technical definition of "leak," I'm disturbed by the actual method of information dissemination.
That's like saying you should've used UPS instead of FedEx. It's nothing to be concerned about. Now if Libby was talking to a foreign spy about information that was not cleared to be released, then it's a problem.

It just shows you how stupid the liberal media is in general. As others have stated, they accuse the Bush Administration of being too secretive. But a member of the Administration is authorized and communicates information from a briefing, they call it a leak! It's literally a "be careful what you ask for you might get it situation". Since President GW Bush acted in a non-secretive manner, the press are forced to repackage the story in BS and try to pawn it off on the guillible so they can stick to their theme.

Man, Bush is smart! Or maybe it's Rove........
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 9:04:23 AM EDT


long summer?

dude, I'm buying more stripped receivers and hicap mags.


Link Posted: 4/9/2006 9:06:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By five2one:

long summer?

dude, I'm buying more stripped receivers and hicap mags.





Wise man. Got your priorities straight.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 9:08:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bhart89:
What disapoints me is the underhanded way in which this info was "declassafied". I wish Bush had the balls to say "here is the intel that says "x", now go pound sand..." but instead he authorized Libby to "leak" the info.





That's what makes this shit so F'ed up......if you want to declassify something to support your case/point, why do it this way? If the President had/has the authority to do so, why hide it? Why leak something at all? Just bring it out, and say,"Here it is..."............it's going to be a long summer indeed, and I'm sure more shit will come out before this is over.......
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 9:10:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Well, according to Ben Affleck, Bush is a traitor and should be hung.

What more needs to be said?





Asswhack said that? well, shit, it's a done deal, close the books!!
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 9:17:00 AM EDT
This is a fantasy, but wouldnt it be a trip if Bush gave a press conference and articulated how silly all these Washington games are? Call the press on their practices?

Sort of West Wing stuff, but it'd be so fucking cool. Turn the spotlight on the press and put them on defensive for a change. It was done to a degree during som of Bush's appearances, over Iraq.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 9:19:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By nationwide:

Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
Thoughts?



We're in for a LOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGG summer.



On the other hand, another blue eyed blond could turn up missing in the Carribean and the herd would drop this like a gooey turd.
Top Top