View Full Version : Scooter Boy
truckboy
October 28th, 2005, 02:20 PM
Just got this from Boston.com...
Vice President Dick Cheney's top adviser, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, has
been indicted on obstruction of justice, false statement, and perjury
charges by a grand jury investigating the leak of a covert CIA
operative's identity. No decision on charges for presidential advisor Karl Rove
was announced today. However he remains under investigation.
To read more, visit http://www.boston.com
TrailBate
October 28th, 2005, 02:33 PM
According to Hannity, it's almost impossible NOT to purger (sp?) yourself in front of a grand jury, because it's so easy to be caught in an inconsistency.
Rych
October 28th, 2005, 04:13 PM
Clinton did it, Scooter did it, both should pay. Neither will.
BG
October 28th, 2005, 04:22 PM
If it says LIBBY'S, LIBBY'S LIBBY'S on the label, label, label you can put it, put it, put it on the....
So he lied, lied, lied and we still don't know what the **** is going on.
BG
Slider
October 28th, 2005, 04:24 PM
Let's compare the differences and similarities.
Clinton was forced to face impeachment when asked about details of his sex life. He lied, primarilty because it was none of the Senate's business in the first place, but a group of republican thugs tried to force things.
Libby, on the other hand, purposely outed an undercover CIA agent for political purposes, then lied to hide his involvement. The conspiracy, in fact, is ongoing, since Rove is still under investigation, but has yet to own up to his own role.
In case you can't see this for yourself, the second issue is far, far more serious, and threatens our national security. The first simply added a few words to our vocabulary, and made me glad I never liked cigars.
Slider
BG
October 28th, 2005, 04:28 PM
"He lied, primarilty because it was none of the Senate's business in the first place, but a group of republican thugs tried to force things"
********
BG
TrailBate
October 28th, 2005, 04:38 PM
shouldn't that be "bull*bleep*"?
Republicans care more about Clinton's penis, than about dead americans.
kernel crash
October 28th, 2005, 04:58 PM
Here's what fat Teddy had to say, and he ought to know.
"Sen. Edward M Kennedy, D-Mass., said the indictment marked a "signifying a new low since Watergate in terms of openness and honesty in our government."
Did anybody catch Teddy whinning about Harriet Miers taking herself out of the picture for the Supreme Court. Saying that she never got a fair chance. As if he wanted to vote for her.
Slider
October 28th, 2005, 04:59 PM
Republicans care more about Clinton's penis, than about dead americans.
Ain't that the truth. If it wasn't, you'd hear more outcry about the treason and conspiracy, regardess of political orientation. We're talking compromised national secuity here, and the Bushies are comparing it, seriously, to Clinton's blowjob.
Instead of anger and calls for deeper investigation, we get weak, unupported Clinton criticisms, as if they had anything to do with trading the country down the river. The reason: Bush is a polarizing slimeball who has done immense damage to this country, and his backers are too invested in the divisiveness, having been suckered by the tactics, to admit it. Their position is so undefensible that they can't explore the issues fully, because that would reveal the last eight years as an incredibly wasteful excercise in self destruction.
All Bush has now is the core whackos that think, twistedly, that it is OK to commit treason in the name of some greater, vague, unnamed goal. This is pure bullsh!t.
Slider
kernel crash
October 28th, 2005, 05:00 PM
" Republicans care more about Clinton's penis, than about dead americans."
I was actually more concerned about the military secrets to China during the Clinton administration than what he was doing with his penis.
Mr_Cheeze
October 28th, 2005, 06:42 PM
" Republicans care more about Clinton's penis, than about dead americans."
I was actually more concerned about the military secrets to China during the Clinton administration than what he was doing with his penis.
and not to mention him giving a big two thumbs up to North Korea's promise that, yes, they would only use the uranium to produce nuclear power and not produce weapons.
Doh!
Oh but you know what we are doing now. We're talking about Clinton when this should be about those scumbag Republicans and their treasonous ways. Right Slider? A little thunder stealing maybe?
Mr_Cheeze
October 28th, 2005, 06:53 PM
Here's what fat Teddy had to say, and he ought to know.
"Sen. Edward M Kennedy, D-Mass., said the indictment marked a "signifying a new low since Watergate in terms of openness and honesty in our government."
Did anybody catch Teddy whinning about Harriet Miers taking herself out of the picture for the Supreme Court. Saying that she never got a fair chance. As if he wanted to vote for her.
I would say that the indictment marked a signifying new low since a certain Senator from Massachusetts used his political connections to obstruct justice and prevent an autopsy of a certain Mary Jo after a certain automobile accident on a certain bridge.
FriedRys
October 28th, 2005, 07:43 PM
Clinton was forced to face impeachment when asked about details of his sex life. He lied, primarilty because it was none of the Senate's business in the first place, but a group of republican thugs tried to force things.
No one forced him to bang that skank and lie about it, except maybe that skank he married.
catbbq
October 28th, 2005, 08:04 PM
I missed the news brief that said Libby was indicted for revealing an undercover spy. I thought it was for lying.
TrailBate
October 28th, 2005, 09:30 PM
and not to mention him giving a big two thumbs up to North Korea's promise that, yes, they would only use the uranium to produce nuclear power and not produce weapons.
Doh!
Oh but you know what we are doing now. We're talking about Clinton when this should be about those scumbag Republicans and their treasonous ways. Right Slider? A little thunder stealing maybe?
Hmm, when did N Korea kick out the nuclear inspectors and dismantle all the surveillance cameras? Was it LESS than 5 years ago?
Who has more Nukes? N Korea or Russia, who (according to Reagan fans) was tricked by Reagan into producing such a massive quantity of nukes?
Mr_Cheeze
October 29th, 2005, 09:30 AM
Hmm, when did N Korea kick out the nuclear inspectors and dismantle all the surveillance cameras? Was it LESS than 5 years ago?
???
And that somehow makes this a black mark for Bush? You're demented. The N. Korea screw up was all Clinton's gaff. You think Bush would have trusted one of the "axis of evil" with peaceful usage of uranium? About as much as he trusts Iran.
Unfortunately, all of this is moot know that if someone wants something bad enough, they'll get it. Clinton just let Korea have it a lot sooner than needed.
Speaking on the subject of nuclear weapons even further, I think Bush has been unfairly criticized in some regard over claims - whether you want to believe they were lies or not - that Iraq was seeking nuclear material to make weapons. Even Joe Wilson reported that "an Iraqi delegation had approached him in June 1999, expressing an interest in 'expanding commercial relations'." Let's see. What does Niger export? Uranium and, um, uranium! Oh, maybe Iraq was just interested in livestock... or maybe medicine for cholera. Yea that it.
FriedRys
October 29th, 2005, 10:07 AM
Who has more Nukes? N Korea or Russia, who (according to Reagan fans) was tricked by Reagan into producing such a massive quantity of nukes? Are you serious? Ever heard of the Cold War? When did that start?
TrailBate
October 29th, 2005, 12:40 PM
Huh?
You're blaming Clinton because N Korea restarted their nuke program on Bush's watch? Even though Bush said, uh, "Not on my watch"?
Yeah, I've heard of the cold war. It's the one everyone gives credit to Reagan for winning. total bs.
Why is it that when something bad happens during a Republican's presidency, it's his Democrat predecessors fault, but if something good happens, it's to the current Republican presidents credit?
MTBME
October 29th, 2005, 01:07 PM
That's because often times when "sumptin" happens, you may have to go back a ways to see how we got there.
Mr_Cheeze
October 29th, 2005, 02:57 PM
You can try to create revisionist history all you want regarding N. Korea. You'll still be wrong. Clinton's genius diplomacy allowed for PRNK to purchase uranium. Period. You can't change that by saying, "Well, ok, but it's Bush's fault they used it to build nukes. They promised Bubba they were only going to build a powerplant. "
TrailBate
October 31st, 2005, 08:51 AM
So, Iran's nuke program is Clinton's fault too? And so is Pakistan's nuclear black market? Bin Laden escaped from Tora Bora because of Clinton, also?
Mr_Cheeze
October 31st, 2005, 09:11 AM
So I guess that were Gore President, Kim Jong Il would have remained true to his "promise" to not make nukes? I see.
And hey, perhaps the Chinese would have been nice enough to also return all of those top secret nuclear documents that they procured while under Clinton's watch.
Yea, I can play the put-words-in-your-mouth game too.
truckboy
October 31st, 2005, 11:57 AM
Jesus Christ, you guys!
Everybody knows it's all spin. This thread is like a bad "Politically Incorrect" show, except for the lack of Rap stars. The truth is obviously somewhere in the middle.
But do you Clinton Haters really think that Bush and his boys DIDN'T play dirty to get Congress and the citizenry to OK going into Iraq? Be honest. You can't be that stupid. Isn't it time you dropped the blind allegiance to the Republicans? Yes, it is about time. About 5 years too late. Right on schedule.
Clinton may not have been the best man to be married to, but he was under attack from the right from day one and his only agenda was to try to be a good president. George W had a very long honeymoon after 9/11 and he used it to lie to the country to further his insane right wing Christian agenda. Good God, will you stop defending him?
Just like the right couldn't get Clinton on much, neither can Fitzgerald get any of Bush's boys on much, cuz they have kept it as secret as possible, but the truth has been obvious from the very beginning. They use smear and fear to get what they want. It's weakened the country. This is the kind of propaganda the ******* Nazis used for God's sake.
WAKE THE **** UP!!!
catbbq
October 31st, 2005, 01:14 PM
I haven't watch Politically Incorrect in awhile, but I remember it being much more funny than this.
I certainly wouldn't watch this on TV. Well, not for very long anyway.
truckboy
October 31st, 2005, 01:31 PM
It was the rappers and comedians, plus the token right-wing dupe that they could all ridicule that made it funny. It's off the air now.
TrailBate
October 31st, 2005, 02:19 PM
It was the rappers and comedians, plus the token right-wing dupe that they could all ridicule that made it funny. It's off the air now.
I'm sure Bush had something to do with why it's off the air now.....
truckboy
November 7th, 2005, 04:16 PM
Doubt it. He had bigger evildoers to go after than Bill Maher. Luckily, ridiculing the president isn't against the law...yet.
slapheadmofo
November 8th, 2005, 01:09 PM
So, Iran's nuke program is Clinton's fault too? And so is Pakistan's nuclear black market? Bin Laden escaped from Tora Bora because of Clinton, also?
In a nutshell wrt Pakistan - Reagan and Bush #1 at least made an effort to contol their aim to possess a 'Muslim bomb' thru withholding aid, pressuring France out of building a reactor for them, etc. Clinton cut them a break because he felt it wasn't fair that they be punished for trying to develop nukes when India already hed a Hindu bomb next door. Pakistan stole technology from the Dutch and bought the rest of what they needed mainly in Europe from the Germans. The cat was out of the bag by 98 when they exploded 6 devices. Don't know how much the Bush administration could've done about it at that point, though if they can control the climate, they should be able to bend time and go back to take care of things like this too.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/chron.htm
GeepNutt
November 9th, 2005, 09:06 AM
So, Iran's nuke program is Clinton's fault too? And so is Pakistan's nuclear black market? Bin Laden escaped from Tora Bora because of Clinton, also?
In a nutshell wrt Pakistan - Reagan and Bush #1 at least made an effort to contol their aim to possess a 'Muslim bomb' thru withholding aid, pressuring France out of building a reactor for them, etc. Clinton cut them a break because he felt it wasn't fair that they be punished for trying to develop nukes when India already hed a Hindu bomb next door. Pakistan stole technology from the Dutch and bought the rest of what they needed mainly in Europe from the Germans. The cat was out of the bag by 98 when they exploded 6 devices. Don't know how much the Bush administration could've done about it at that point, though if they can control the climate, they should be able to bend time and go back to take care of things like this too.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/chron.htm
How dare you come to this debate with facts and a timeline..... ;D
catbbq
November 9th, 2005, 09:23 AM
Don't know how much the Bush administration could've done about it at that point, though if they can control the climate, they should be able to bend time and go back to take care of things like this too.
He's working on it, but it is hard work. Its hard travelling through time.
http://mindprod.com/politics/bushismstimetravel.html
TrailBate
November 9th, 2005, 09:52 AM
Yep, Pakistan has been working on it's Nukes since 1960. When did they pass out all there tech knowledge to other countries? Who was responsible for the biggest nuclear black market in history, and how is he being punished? How is the Pakistani government responding to this, and how are they being punished?
catbbq
November 9th, 2005, 10:32 AM
Yep, Pakistan has been working on it's Nukes since 1960. When did they pass out all there tech knowledge to other countries? Who was responsible for the biggest nuclear black market in history, and how is he being punished? How is the Pakistani government responding to this, and how are they being punished?
Bush? Scooter? Slick?
Mr_Cheeze
November 9th, 2005, 10:53 AM
It was the rappers and comedians, plus the token right-wing dupe that they could all ridicule that made it funny. It's off the air now.
Actually, it is not. Real Time With Bill Maher on HBO is basically the same show, only better now that he, or his guests, can say anything they want without having to worry about the FCC or corporate. Sometimes his guests are real idiots with nothing to say (i.e. recently Spike Lee) or loudmouths that say too much (Ann Coulter), but Maher somehow makes it all work.
Personally, I enjoy the religion bashing.
Mr_Cheeze
November 9th, 2005, 11:00 AM
Yep, Pakistan has been working on it's Nukes since 1960. When did they pass out all there tech knowledge to other countries? Who was responsible for the biggest nuclear black market in history, and how is he being punished? How is the Pakistani government responding to this, and how are they being punished?
Actually, I would have to say that the Russians are... next to Clinton, of course. None of the former states of the former Soviet republic can account for all of the nukes they thought they had. How scary is that? As for Clinton, he was just far too trusting of these other nations like N. Korea, China, Pakistan and their promises to use the technologies for only peaceful purposes. Was that naivete or stupidity? Hey, maybe he was duped by faulty intelligence. :-\
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.