Sid Blumenthal is not the best source if you want anyone to take you seriously on the right. He’s very hackish.
6.
Fledermaus
Besides, Clinton lied about Monica.
Oh, those were the days, the economy buzzing, wages going up and we all had nothing better to do than discuss whether a blowjob constituted sex. Man, I miss Clinton.
7.
Stormy70
Yes, Clinton who had to settle his sexual harrassment suit, after he committed perjury. Only Democrats can be permitted the nuances of sexual harrassment. Right, Ted Kennedy and Chris Dodd?
8.
ppgaz
Wow, a sexual harassment settlement. That’s …. well, rational. And indicative of nothing.
And then you have President Potatohead, laughing at having look under the sofa cushions for WMD.
Har-de-har-de-fucking-har. Ain’t that a hoot? Where are them durn WMDs anyway? HAR-DE-HAR!
Get it? The joke’s on us.
See, here’s the HILARIOUS part: A not-very-interesting lawsuit is considered equivalent when talking about a president who jokes around about the reason for starting a war.
Get it? I mean, it’s funny, right?
HAR-DE-FUCKING-HAR. Where are them doggone WMDs?
Oh my God, that is funny. That is so goddamned funny!
GET IT STORMY?
IT’S FUNNY!!!!!
9.
Sojourner
Yes, Clinton who had to settle his sexual harrassment suit, after he committed perjury.
God, how many times to I have to repeat this:
Number of deaths from Clinton’s blow job: 0
Number of American deaths from Bush’s lies on the Iraq war: more than 1750.
Poor Stormy. She finds it so hard to give a shit about those dead soldiers coming home from Iraq. But boy does she break into a sweat over a blow job. How strange is that?
10.
ppgaz
But sojourner, you are missing the point.
You see, it’s all so damned funny!
There are George Spud, and Karl, sitting there in the oval, just a-laughin and a-slappin their knees, tears a-rollin down their worldbeater faces ….
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. We pulled a good one! Where are those bleedin’ WMDs, Mister Prezdent? Under the rug?
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Hey, I never actually said “Valerie Plame.” I just suggested to Novak and that gullible bitch at NYT that maybe Wilson’s significant other — and you know, I could meant his GIRLFRIEND BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA — was a CIA agent. They can’t lay a hand on me!! We dumped a good load of good ol’ Texas Fertilizer on that Wilson sumbitch, didn’t we?
HARHARHARHARHARHARHAR.
Now Karl, remember, this prezdent thing is HARD WORK.
Hey, Karl, did you hear Limbaugh today? He STUCK IT to those friggin liberals, didn’t he? THOSE PUSSIES!!!
AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
—-/
Like some Republican jackass said in here the other day — I’m thinking, Rick — those liberals just take everything so SERIOUSLY.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
11.
Stormy70
I could care less about Clinton’s blow job in the oval office. I can see he was distracted when the terrorists were ramping up their jihad against us, blowing up Americans all over the globe. Then peddling our national security secrets to the Chinese, another great coup for a president who will not even rate on history’s scale. Plus, I didn’t bring Clinton up.
But, by all means, personally insulting me about not giving a shit about dead soldiers? Priceless. Your hatred comes through the keyboard quite well. Oh, and it seems the Iraq war keeps producing interesting results in the wider Muslim world. I am not the raving loon at the party guys.
12.
Sojourner
What was Bush’s excuse when the terrorists were not only ramping up but actually warning him they were going to attack??? Oh that’s right, he was on the ranch planning his invasion of Iraq.
Where in the article is there a suggestion that this change in attitude has anything to do with the Iraq war? Every time something positive happens, you guys are quick to give Bush the credit. But when something bad happens, it has nothing to do with Bush. What a bunch of crap.
13.
ppgaz
Aw, Stormy, don’t go all SERIOUS now!
This stuff is really funny!
See, we can talk about Clinton’s blowjob forever! That’s funny! And it’s the perfect line to drag out when ever the talk gets too SERIOUS.
Even the PRESIDENT laughs about this stuff. Right there in same oval office, I think, where the famous hummer took place, is where they filmed George — Mister Honor and Integrity In the White House himself! — joking around and looking under those cushions for those doggone WMDs!!! I mean, the irony!!
One guy acts like a fool in the oval, we can shit on him till hell freezes over.
Another one acts like a fool, and laughs at us, and he’s a FUCKING HERO.
LAUGH, STORMY! LIGHTEN UP! DON’T LET SOJOURNER GET YOUR GOAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can’t stop laughing. This is the most fun presidency I can ever remember.
14.
JG
Isn’t a salary cap communist?
15.
Stormy70
Bad things happen in a war, the enemy has a way of fighting back and changing their tactics. Then we in turn change our tactics, it is how wars have been fought through the ages. This will take years, and I would have laughed in someone’s face if they told me we would go this long without being hit again. Or that we’d changed the governments in two countries with historically low casualties. Each soldier’s death is tragic, but the casualty list is still an amazingly low number.
16.
Stormy70
Go to Drudge for new developments.
17.
Sojourner
I would have laughed in someone’s face if they told me we would go this long without being hit again. Or that we’d changed the governments in two countries with historically low casualties.
It would have reflected your ignorance if you laughed about the timeframe. This is totally expected based upon al Qaeda’s previous record.
You sure are quick to assume victory in Afghanistan and Iraq. Too bad the military commanders don’t agree with you.
18.
ppgaz
The big story on Drudge looks like a dud to me.
1. Novak claims to have used a reporter’s trick to get confirmation of a fact: I heard blah blah blah
2. Rove claims to have said, Yeah, I heard that too.
At this point, Rove confirms the famous fact (Plame, CIA).
3. Rove then claims he “heard this from another reporter” but doesn’t seem to remember who.
—-/
This is why I haven’t followed this goofy story or drilled into the details. We are still at the Major Bullshit stage.
Very skeptical of “leaks” from the Grand Jury process. If I were privy to what is going on in the GJ room, I sure as hell would not piss off this prosecutor by leaking. My ass could end up in jail — and for what? What would be my motive? To muddy the waters around this story? Why would I want to do that?
Novak and Rove together don’t make up one decent human being AFAIC. They stink. They are both veteran liars and gameplayers. These two have a story that sorta kinda maybe insinuates that all ol’ innocent Karl was doing was repeating what some other reporter — unnamed — had already told him?
Karl Rove is a powerful man in the top levels of the executive branch of the government of the United States. He casually “outs” a CIA agent and doesn’t know where he got the information? He knows full well that if the Novak dialogue was as claimed, Novak was using a well-known fishing technique. He fell for that old ruse, and let slip a White House – level “you’re it” on Plame?
If you believe that, then all I can say is, you’ll believe anything. That’s just pure bullshit.
You deserve these guys, Stormy, because your work here is starting to smell pretty bad too.
19.
foolishmortal
This site does not deserve a flame section. If you must post here, I demand you express yourself in the same manner as our host: via reason, analysis and such honesty as our prejudices allow.
20.
frontinus
affirmative, declarative statement = confirmation
“I heard that too” != declarative statement
“I heard that too” != confirmation
Novak is a damn fool if he ran with an “I heard that too”.
21.
Far North
God Damn Stormy, quit with the Clinton this, Clinton that crap. This has nothing to do with Clinton and everything to do with an administration that is so fucking arrogant and vindictive that it would willingly give up one of our own warriors (Valerie Plame) in order to even a political score. If Bush, Rove and company have a legitimate gripe about Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, then they should have come forward (like Joe Wilson did) and present the case in the open. Instead, what seems to have happened is that Karl Rove put the political interest of one man, George W. Bush, ahead of an entire nation.
It was a despicable act. Don’t you know that, Stormy70? Can’t you see that? Just what in the hell is the matter with you? This was an act of treason. Not just “pretend” treason that the wingnuts accuse war opponents of, but real, actual treson. Rove outed an agent that was serving her country because Rove declared her his political enemy. Don’t you know that? Can’t you see that? What the fuck is wrong with you?:
22.
Tulie
Hear hear Far North!
Bit of a random drunken rant here. I am sick and tired of being accused of being a pro-terrorism, anti-Amercun moonbat because I usually vote democratic. I vote democratic because I want balanced budgets, for the government to keep its fucking snout out of the bedrooms of consenting adults, and for the separation of church and state to actually be upheld. Freedom of religion means freedom from religion should someone so decide. But none of this is on topic.
A CIA agent’s name found its way into the newspapers, where it should not have been. Someone had to leak it, and it appears as of now to be K. Rove. The leaker screwed the pooch in a time of war. Get rid of him. If it turns out not to be Rove, fine. Fire the other yokel and draw them up on espionage charges instead. I don’t care a whit, less than I care for my old toenail clippings, who the leaker is and what fucking letter they have after their name. National security is national security.
All of this reeks of one of the first things to actually get me pissed of at something political: implications that Geraldine Ferraro (I know, quit yelling) was incapable of holding office because her husband, not her, had some tax…issues. Want someone out of your way? Attack the spouse! Works like a charm!
23.
AlanDownunder
The wanton blink-of-an-eye destruction of the CIA’s Brewster Jennings front organisation that took decades to develop is no small thing; but it’s only the tip of the Iraq ice berg.
The berg is PNAC Likudniks NoBidNoAuditContracts WarPresident IraqNotAfghanistan OilAddiction Diebold Crusade PatriotAct WithUsOrAginUs SunShinesOutOfUncleSam’sAss (the latter even now still dwindlingly true – thank goodness for honest diligent prosecutors).
And the Titanic is not just the USA – it’s the entire planet.
And the foregoing is ‘conspiracy theory’ which somehow proves that –
– I’m more socialist than capitalist (ie a lefty); and
– I’m a terrorist sympathizer.
Yeah right.
It’s simple. The Wilsons betrayed the White House, so the White House betrayed the USA.
(Reminds me of some cheese eating surrender monkey lingo: “L’etat, c’est moi”)
Whether the White House’s motive was to protect its DowningSt-mandated WMD-based pretence at legality by discrediting one dissenter or by intimidating all dissenters is utterly irrelevant.
Whether the Wilsons’ motive was to shaft the GOP, un-gag the CIA or alert the world is also utterly irrelevant.
How presumptious of those Iraqi citizens’ militias to assert 2nd Amendment-type rights! Meanwhile, in London… Osama bin who?
Q: What’s the difference between Vietnam & Iraq?
A: For Vietnam, Dubya had an exit strategy
Q: What’s the difference between Watergate & Plamegate?
A: One was a third rate burglary; the other was first rate treachery.
I can see he was distracted when the terrorists were ramping up their jihad against us, blowing up Americans all over the globe.
Oh you mean the same terrorists that were funded, trained and supported by the Reagan Administration? Oh that’s right. We can go back 10 years to blame someone for their mistakes but the Administration responsible for the rise of Al Qaeda doesn’t bear any of the blame.
If you want to play this silly retroactive blame game, your idol Reagan is the one who bears the blame over both Clinton and Dubya.
25.
Phil Smith
DV, you should read Charlie Wilson’s War before taking that line any further. You might learn something, but I promise you won’t like it. Hint: that was a bi-partisan fuckup. As with most of the pre-2001 errors, there is plenty of blame to go around, and anyone – anyone – who claims that it’s all on the other side of the aisle is either ignorant or a liar.
As far as the Plame thing goes, well, looks like game over. Whether it happens to be true that Novak told Rove, or it’s merely the clever machininations of the Evil Lord Rove, I’m willing to bet he’s completely off the hook. I asked a couple days ago where Rove learned it, but y’all were too busy sniping at each other to give it any thought, I guess. The fact is, it was pretty obvious that was going to be the key. If you’re really concerned about it, spend as much of your effort demanding that the special prosecutor determine how Plame’s cover got blown in the first place. I’ll hold my breath.
This won’t, of course, satisfy Rove’s detractors, as nothing less than a treason indictment and conviction would have. NB: I’m absolutely sure that you would have gone batshit without a conviction, regardless of the evidence. Because, you see, regardless of the loud and passionate protestations to the contrary, nobody who prejudged this case is actually a liberal. Not a goddamn bit of one. You people wouldn’t know John Stuart Mill if he rose from his grave and ate your brains. If you were actually liberal, instead of every bit the partisan hack that Darrell is, you’d have withheld judgment until you were in possession of even a couple of actual facts. But few of you did. There was a possibility that Rove could be strung up, so you went apeshit.
I’m also going to note what utterly laughable tacticians and logisticians are on display in these threads. You don’t keep your powder dry, you shoot at anything that moves, you commit all your forces at the first sign of enemy presence.
Finally, if you’re really pissed off by reading this, note that I didn’t name anyone. If you’re pissed, it’s only because the description fits you, and you know it.
26.
mac Buckets
an administration that is so fucking arrogant and vindictive that it would willingly give up one of our own warriors (Valerie Plame) in order to even a political score.
There are a lot of things wrong with that statement, but my favorite is “one of its warriors!” LOL! The Democratic canonization of a non-covert desk jockey continues apace… What’s the next step after “warrior?” “General?” And how many steps until “Saint Valerie?”
27.
Defense Guy
ppgaz
No, the truly funny thing is that you guys keep loosing elections and when you do, rather than regrouping and turning examination inward as to why this might be so, you scream about how the American public is stupid, the election was stolen and do everything in your power to ensure that the majority of the American public finds you unpalatable to say the least.
Now that’s funny, or sad, I’ll leave it to you to figure out which.
28.
Darrell
instead of every bit the partisan hack that Darrell is,
Hey, Phil, I agree with much of what you write. I think you’re generally really clear headed. But try and show a little decency by disagreeing with something I actually write.. something specific, instead of smearing me without basis as a “partisan hack”, ok? Would that be too much to ask of you? you know, since you’re the one claiming that everyone else is “too busy sniping at each other to give it any thought”. But look who’s guilty of “sniping”?
29.
mac Buckets
I asked a couple days ago where Rove learned it, but y’all were too busy sniping at each other to give it any thought, I guess.
And I said, he probably learned about it from a reporter or a friend. A security clearance certainly wasn’t necessary to learn that Plame was CIA, as Andrea Mitchell pointed out.
It’s like the Gannon wannabe-scandal, where the Democrats insisted that Gannon must’ve been tipped off from the White House, when the Wall Street Journal had published all the “super-secret” info three weeks before Gannon mentioned it.
Yes, Rove is off the hook, but he was never on a hook to begin with. There was never a case here, and the only one really suffering for Fitzgerald’s attempt to save face is Judith Miller.
Because, you see, regardless of the loud and passionate protestations to the contrary, nobody who prejudged this case is actually a liberal. Not a goddamn bit of one. You people wouldn’t know John Stuart Mill if he rose from his grave and ate your brains.
They’re NEO-liberals, Phil. Defined as “Whatever-Republicans-Do-Is-Evil-And/Or-Stupid, Even-If-Democrats-Did-It-First!”
30.
Phil Smith
Fair enough, Darrell. I didn’t call anyone out on the one side, and I shouldn’t have on the other. Retracted.
That should read “every bit the partisan hack that you claim your opponents are.”
31.
Defense Guy
What a great retraction.
32.
Darrell
They’re NEO-liberals, Phil. Defined as “Whatever-Republicans-Do-Is-Evil-And/Or-Stupid, Even-If-Democrats-Did-It-First!”
In other words, the left is dishonest as hell. I wish more people would just say it. It’s absolutely true. And since when was the left ever concerned about national security (hello, Sandy Berger!). Clinton named Morton Halperin to a top Pentagon post (undersecretary of Defense I believe?), and the left PRAISED that appt. Yet Halperin f*cking flew overseas to defend CIA traitor Philip Agee who really did “out” real covert CIA assets, not a desk jockey, he outed covert assets which ended in their assasination.. Halperin OPPOSED legislation to punish the outing of undercover agents because Agee was his close friend. Halperin sums it up: the CIA is “the subverter of everybody else’’s freedom.” He had accused the FBI of “murder”.
This is what Clinton gave us, but because Halperin was an anti-american leftist kook, the left CHEERED his appointment. Not a f*cking peep of concern over his defense of those who had outed actual CIA covert agents. Suddenly, the left says they are sooo concerned over national security over Plame, yet they cheered the appointment of Halperin. The left really is mostly composed of lying hypocrites. What other plausible explanation could there be? I’m open to listening, but I see no other explanation here unless you lefties can come up with on
33.
Darrell
That should read “every bit the partisan hack that you claim your opponents are.”
Again Phil, can you name for me something specific, a position I’ve taken, a position which cannot be defended logically? A “partisan hack” is someone who throws smears without any real basis, without regards to consistency. Kind of like what you’re doing. I may often be harsh in my words, but I always back up my statements. In other words, I arrive at my positions for for good and consistent reasons, not out of partisan hackery
34.
Darrell
In other words, I arrive at my positions for for good and consistent reasons, not out of partisan hackery
I should modify that statement to read “for sincere and consistent reasons…” If I see my reasons are not good, I’m willing to change my position. Again, you made a sh*tty unsubstantiated remark, and you refuse to explain or apologize, as an honorable person would do… you posture as if you’re so above it all
35.
Phil Smith
Darrell, the retraction and re-phrasing is intended to take your name out of the discussion entirely. The full sentence would read
If you were actually liberal, instead of every bit the partisan hack that you claim your opponents are, you’d have withheld judgment until you were in possession of even a couple of actual facts.
It references no individual by name.
36.
Stormy70
Darrell – I think he is addressing the left side of the debate here, but I could be wrong.
37.
Darrell
No Stormy, re-read what he wrote. I believe what Phil did, and btw I agree with most everything he writes, was to make an unsubstantiated smear on me, so as to enhance his cred with the lefties as someone ‘even handed’ who is ‘above it all’ who can’t be accused of being a rightwing extremist. His post was otherwise very true and insightful, but he chose to take an unnessary cheap shot at me and I called him on it
38.
Phil Smith
chose to take an unnessary cheap shot
Yes, and I admitted it, retracted it, and rephrased it.
39.
Andrew J. Lazarus
I believe Plame attended (in fact, was the presenter at) briefings in the EOB on WMD that were attended by Scooter Libby and other senior WH staff. Now, I don’t know if they were aware of her relationship to Wilson, but the name “Valerie Plame” would have been known to Rove, at least potentially, without any journalist or other outside source.
Having said that, I’m quite comfortable in waiting for the indictments. Indeed, I’d say Fitzgerald may have put to use something from the Starr Inquisition about using the press to help tenderize witnesses.
40.
prob
Man, I PROMISED to stay out of this, but I have been looking in and this statement is absolutely “HysDarrellcal”!!!
Again Phil, can you name for me something specific, a position I’ve taken, a position which cannot be defended logically? A “partisan hack” is someone who throws smears without any real basis, without regards to consistency. Kind of like what you’re doing. I may often be harsh in my words, but I always back up my statements. In other words, I arrive at my positions for for good and consistent reasons, not out of partisan hackery
no more to say here…the statement truly speaks for itself when you view who has said what to whom over the course of this (and other) threads…no names mentioned…
41.
Sojourner
The Democratic canonization of a non-covert desk jockey continues apace… What’s the next step after “warrior?” “General?” And how many steps until “Saint Valerie?”
How about a woman who served her country by putting her life on the line? Dumb ass, where’s the respect for those who serve to protect idiots like you? I thought the Repubs were the “patriots”? Obviously not. They’re quite happy to trash veterans and CIA agents who served honorably.
To think that you’re trashing this woman to defend the likes of Karl Rove is amazing. You have no shame.
Comments are closed.
Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!
Fledermaus
So here we are: whether it is OK to out a CIA agent during wartime has now become a partisan issue.
Bernard Yomtov
Fledermaus,
You don’t understand. Wilson! yellowcake! Niger! Wilson! “bipartisan Senate report!” “Authorized the trip!” Wilson! Schumer! “Cooper trap!” etc.
Besides, Clinton lied about Monica.
That should settle the matter.
JC
Sid Blumenthal lays it all out.
Bob
If I see Toensing on TV again, I’ll puke.
Arrrrggh!
Stormy70
Sid Blumenthal is not the best source if you want anyone to take you seriously on the right. He’s very hackish.
Fledermaus
Besides, Clinton lied about Monica.
Oh, those were the days, the economy buzzing, wages going up and we all had nothing better to do than discuss whether a blowjob constituted sex. Man, I miss Clinton.
Stormy70
Yes, Clinton who had to settle his sexual harrassment suit, after he committed perjury. Only Democrats can be permitted the nuances of sexual harrassment. Right, Ted Kennedy and Chris Dodd?
ppgaz
Wow, a sexual harassment settlement. That’s …. well, rational. And indicative of nothing.
And then you have President Potatohead, laughing at having look under the sofa cushions for WMD.
Har-de-har-de-fucking-har. Ain’t that a hoot? Where are them durn WMDs anyway? HAR-DE-HAR!
Get it? The joke’s on us.
See, here’s the HILARIOUS part: A not-very-interesting lawsuit is considered equivalent when talking about a president who jokes around about the reason for starting a war.
Get it? I mean, it’s funny, right?
HAR-DE-FUCKING-HAR. Where are them doggone WMDs?
Oh my God, that is funny. That is so goddamned funny!
GET IT STORMY?
IT’S FUNNY!!!!!
Sojourner
God, how many times to I have to repeat this:
Number of deaths from Clinton’s blow job: 0
Number of American deaths from Bush’s lies on the Iraq war: more than 1750.
Poor Stormy. She finds it so hard to give a shit about those dead soldiers coming home from Iraq. But boy does she break into a sweat over a blow job. How strange is that?
ppgaz
But sojourner, you are missing the point.
You see, it’s all so damned funny!
There are George Spud, and Karl, sitting there in the oval, just a-laughin and a-slappin their knees, tears a-rollin down their worldbeater faces ….
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. We pulled a good one! Where are those bleedin’ WMDs, Mister Prezdent? Under the rug?
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Hey, I never actually said “Valerie Plame.” I just suggested to Novak and that gullible bitch at NYT that maybe Wilson’s significant other — and you know, I could meant his GIRLFRIEND BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA — was a CIA agent. They can’t lay a hand on me!! We dumped a good load of good ol’ Texas Fertilizer on that Wilson sumbitch, didn’t we?
HARHARHARHARHARHARHAR.
Now Karl, remember, this prezdent thing is HARD WORK.
AH HA HA HA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Laughter is the best medicine, isn’t it?
This is all so funny!!!!!
WMDs!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
Hey, Karl, did you hear Limbaugh today? He STUCK IT to those friggin liberals, didn’t he? THOSE PUSSIES!!!
AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
—-/
Like some Republican jackass said in here the other day — I’m thinking, Rick — those liberals just take everything so SERIOUSLY.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Stormy70
I could care less about Clinton’s blow job in the oval office. I can see he was distracted when the terrorists were ramping up their jihad against us, blowing up Americans all over the globe. Then peddling our national security secrets to the Chinese, another great coup for a president who will not even rate on history’s scale. Plus, I didn’t bring Clinton up.
But, by all means, personally insulting me about not giving a shit about dead soldiers? Priceless. Your hatred comes through the keyboard quite well. Oh, and it seems the Iraq war keeps producing interesting results in the wider Muslim world. I am not the raving loon at the party guys.
Sojourner
What was Bush’s excuse when the terrorists were not only ramping up but actually warning him they were going to attack??? Oh that’s right, he was on the ranch planning his invasion of Iraq.
Where in the article is there a suggestion that this change in attitude has anything to do with the Iraq war? Every time something positive happens, you guys are quick to give Bush the credit. But when something bad happens, it has nothing to do with Bush. What a bunch of crap.
ppgaz
Aw, Stormy, don’t go all SERIOUS now!
This stuff is really funny!
See, we can talk about Clinton’s blowjob forever! That’s funny! And it’s the perfect line to drag out when ever the talk gets too SERIOUS.
Even the PRESIDENT laughs about this stuff. Right there in same oval office, I think, where the famous hummer took place, is where they filmed George — Mister Honor and Integrity In the White House himself! — joking around and looking under those cushions for those doggone WMDs!!! I mean, the irony!!
One guy acts like a fool in the oval, we can shit on him till hell freezes over.
Another one acts like a fool, and laughs at us, and he’s a FUCKING HERO.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
LAUGH, STORMY! LIGHTEN UP! DON’T LET SOJOURNER GET YOUR GOAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can’t stop laughing. This is the most fun presidency I can ever remember.
JG
Isn’t a salary cap communist?
Stormy70
Bad things happen in a war, the enemy has a way of fighting back and changing their tactics. Then we in turn change our tactics, it is how wars have been fought through the ages. This will take years, and I would have laughed in someone’s face if they told me we would go this long without being hit again. Or that we’d changed the governments in two countries with historically low casualties. Each soldier’s death is tragic, but the casualty list is still an amazingly low number.
Stormy70
Go to Drudge for new developments.
Sojourner
It would have reflected your ignorance if you laughed about the timeframe. This is totally expected based upon al Qaeda’s previous record.
You sure are quick to assume victory in Afghanistan and Iraq. Too bad the military commanders don’t agree with you.
ppgaz
The big story on Drudge looks like a dud to me.
1. Novak claims to have used a reporter’s trick to get confirmation of a fact: I heard blah blah blah
2. Rove claims to have said, Yeah, I heard that too.
At this point, Rove confirms the famous fact (Plame, CIA).
3. Rove then claims he “heard this from another reporter” but doesn’t seem to remember who.
—-/
This is why I haven’t followed this goofy story or drilled into the details. We are still at the Major Bullshit stage.
Very skeptical of “leaks” from the Grand Jury process. If I were privy to what is going on in the GJ room, I sure as hell would not piss off this prosecutor by leaking. My ass could end up in jail — and for what? What would be my motive? To muddy the waters around this story? Why would I want to do that?
Novak and Rove together don’t make up one decent human being AFAIC. They stink. They are both veteran liars and gameplayers. These two have a story that sorta kinda maybe insinuates that all ol’ innocent Karl was doing was repeating what some other reporter — unnamed — had already told him?
Karl Rove is a powerful man in the top levels of the executive branch of the government of the United States. He casually “outs” a CIA agent and doesn’t know where he got the information? He knows full well that if the Novak dialogue was as claimed, Novak was using a well-known fishing technique. He fell for that old ruse, and let slip a White House – level “you’re it” on Plame?
If you believe that, then all I can say is, you’ll believe anything. That’s just pure bullshit.
You deserve these guys, Stormy, because your work here is starting to smell pretty bad too.
foolishmortal
This site does not deserve a flame section. If you must post here, I demand you express yourself in the same manner as our host: via reason, analysis and such honesty as our prejudices allow.
frontinus
affirmative, declarative statement = confirmation
“I heard that too” != declarative statement
“I heard that too” != confirmation
Novak is a damn fool if he ran with an “I heard that too”.
Far North
God Damn Stormy, quit with the Clinton this, Clinton that crap. This has nothing to do with Clinton and everything to do with an administration that is so fucking arrogant and vindictive that it would willingly give up one of our own warriors (Valerie Plame) in order to even a political score. If Bush, Rove and company have a legitimate gripe about Joe Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, then they should have come forward (like Joe Wilson did) and present the case in the open. Instead, what seems to have happened is that Karl Rove put the political interest of one man, George W. Bush, ahead of an entire nation.
It was a despicable act. Don’t you know that, Stormy70? Can’t you see that? Just what in the hell is the matter with you? This was an act of treason. Not just “pretend” treason that the wingnuts accuse war opponents of, but real, actual treson. Rove outed an agent that was serving her country because Rove declared her his political enemy. Don’t you know that? Can’t you see that? What the fuck is wrong with you?:
Tulie
Hear hear Far North!
Bit of a random drunken rant here. I am sick and tired of being accused of being a pro-terrorism, anti-Amercun moonbat because I usually vote democratic. I vote democratic because I want balanced budgets, for the government to keep its fucking snout out of the bedrooms of consenting adults, and for the separation of church and state to actually be upheld. Freedom of religion means freedom from religion should someone so decide. But none of this is on topic.
A CIA agent’s name found its way into the newspapers, where it should not have been. Someone had to leak it, and it appears as of now to be K. Rove. The leaker screwed the pooch in a time of war. Get rid of him. If it turns out not to be Rove, fine. Fire the other yokel and draw them up on espionage charges instead. I don’t care a whit, less than I care for my old toenail clippings, who the leaker is and what fucking letter they have after their name. National security is national security.
All of this reeks of one of the first things to actually get me pissed of at something political: implications that Geraldine Ferraro (I know, quit yelling) was incapable of holding office because her husband, not her, had some tax…issues. Want someone out of your way? Attack the spouse! Works like a charm!
AlanDownunder
The wanton blink-of-an-eye destruction of the CIA’s Brewster Jennings front organisation that took decades to develop is no small thing; but it’s only the tip of the Iraq ice berg.
The berg is PNAC Likudniks NoBidNoAuditContracts WarPresident IraqNotAfghanistan OilAddiction Diebold Crusade PatriotAct WithUsOrAginUs SunShinesOutOfUncleSam’sAss (the latter even now still dwindlingly true – thank goodness for honest diligent prosecutors).
And the Titanic is not just the USA – it’s the entire planet.
And the foregoing is ‘conspiracy theory’ which somehow proves that –
– I’m more socialist than capitalist (ie a lefty); and
– I’m a terrorist sympathizer.
Yeah right.
It’s simple. The Wilsons betrayed the White House, so the White House betrayed the USA.
(Reminds me of some cheese eating surrender monkey lingo: “L’etat, c’est moi”)
Whether the White House’s motive was to protect its DowningSt-mandated WMD-based pretence at legality by discrediting one dissenter or by intimidating all dissenters is utterly irrelevant.
Whether the Wilsons’ motive was to shaft the GOP, un-gag the CIA or alert the world is also utterly irrelevant.
How presumptious of those Iraqi citizens’ militias to assert 2nd Amendment-type rights! Meanwhile, in London… Osama bin who?
Q: What’s the difference between Vietnam & Iraq?
A: For Vietnam, Dubya had an exit strategy
Q: What’s the difference between Watergate & Plamegate?
A: One was a third rate burglary; the other was first rate treachery.
GO DARRYL!
The Disenfranchised Voter
Oh you mean the same terrorists that were funded, trained and supported by the Reagan Administration? Oh that’s right. We can go back 10 years to blame someone for their mistakes but the Administration responsible for the rise of Al Qaeda doesn’t bear any of the blame.
If you want to play this silly retroactive blame game, your idol Reagan is the one who bears the blame over both Clinton and Dubya.
Phil Smith
DV, you should read Charlie Wilson’s War before taking that line any further. You might learn something, but I promise you won’t like it. Hint: that was a bi-partisan fuckup. As with most of the pre-2001 errors, there is plenty of blame to go around, and anyone – anyone – who claims that it’s all on the other side of the aisle is either ignorant or a liar.
As far as the Plame thing goes, well, looks like game over. Whether it happens to be true that Novak told Rove, or it’s merely the clever machininations of the Evil Lord Rove, I’m willing to bet he’s completely off the hook. I asked a couple days ago where Rove learned it, but y’all were too busy sniping at each other to give it any thought, I guess. The fact is, it was pretty obvious that was going to be the key. If you’re really concerned about it, spend as much of your effort demanding that the special prosecutor determine how Plame’s cover got blown in the first place. I’ll hold my breath.
This won’t, of course, satisfy Rove’s detractors, as nothing less than a treason indictment and conviction would have. NB: I’m absolutely sure that you would have gone batshit without a conviction, regardless of the evidence. Because, you see, regardless of the loud and passionate protestations to the contrary, nobody who prejudged this case is actually a liberal. Not a goddamn bit of one. You people wouldn’t know John Stuart Mill if he rose from his grave and ate your brains. If you were actually liberal, instead of every bit the partisan hack that Darrell is, you’d have withheld judgment until you were in possession of even a couple of actual facts. But few of you did. There was a possibility that Rove could be strung up, so you went apeshit.
I’m also going to note what utterly laughable tacticians and logisticians are on display in these threads. You don’t keep your powder dry, you shoot at anything that moves, you commit all your forces at the first sign of enemy presence.
Finally, if you’re really pissed off by reading this, note that I didn’t name anyone. If you’re pissed, it’s only because the description fits you, and you know it.
mac Buckets
There are a lot of things wrong with that statement, but my favorite is “one of its warriors!” LOL! The Democratic canonization of a non-covert desk jockey continues apace… What’s the next step after “warrior?” “General?” And how many steps until “Saint Valerie?”
Defense Guy
ppgaz
No, the truly funny thing is that you guys keep loosing elections and when you do, rather than regrouping and turning examination inward as to why this might be so, you scream about how the American public is stupid, the election was stolen and do everything in your power to ensure that the majority of the American public finds you unpalatable to say the least.
Now that’s funny, or sad, I’ll leave it to you to figure out which.
Darrell
Hey, Phil, I agree with much of what you write. I think you’re generally really clear headed. But try and show a little decency by disagreeing with something I actually write.. something specific, instead of smearing me without basis as a “partisan hack”, ok? Would that be too much to ask of you? you know, since you’re the one claiming that everyone else is “too busy sniping at each other to give it any thought”. But look who’s guilty of “sniping”?
mac Buckets
And I said, he probably learned about it from a reporter or a friend. A security clearance certainly wasn’t necessary to learn that Plame was CIA, as Andrea Mitchell pointed out.
It’s like the Gannon wannabe-scandal, where the Democrats insisted that Gannon must’ve been tipped off from the White House, when the Wall Street Journal had published all the “super-secret” info three weeks before Gannon mentioned it.
Yes, Rove is off the hook, but he was never on a hook to begin with. There was never a case here, and the only one really suffering for Fitzgerald’s attempt to save face is Judith Miller.
They’re NEO-liberals, Phil. Defined as “Whatever-Republicans-Do-Is-Evil-And/Or-Stupid, Even-If-Democrats-Did-It-First!”
Phil Smith
Fair enough, Darrell. I didn’t call anyone out on the one side, and I shouldn’t have on the other. Retracted.
That should read “every bit the partisan hack that you claim your opponents are.”
Defense Guy
What a great retraction.
Darrell
In other words, the left is dishonest as hell. I wish more people would just say it. It’s absolutely true. And since when was the left ever concerned about national security (hello, Sandy Berger!). Clinton named Morton Halperin to a top Pentagon post (undersecretary of Defense I believe?), and the left PRAISED that appt. Yet Halperin f*cking flew overseas to defend CIA traitor Philip Agee who really did “out” real covert CIA assets, not a desk jockey, he outed covert assets which ended in their assasination.. Halperin OPPOSED legislation to punish the outing of undercover agents because Agee was his close friend. Halperin sums it up: the CIA is “the subverter of everybody else’’s freedom.” He had accused the FBI of “murder”.
This is what Clinton gave us, but because Halperin was an anti-american leftist kook, the left CHEERED his appointment. Not a f*cking peep of concern over his defense of those who had outed actual CIA covert agents. Suddenly, the left says they are sooo concerned over national security over Plame, yet they cheered the appointment of Halperin. The left really is mostly composed of lying hypocrites. What other plausible explanation could there be? I’m open to listening, but I see no other explanation here unless you lefties can come up with on
Darrell
Again Phil, can you name for me something specific, a position I’ve taken, a position which cannot be defended logically? A “partisan hack” is someone who throws smears without any real basis, without regards to consistency. Kind of like what you’re doing. I may often be harsh in my words, but I always back up my statements. In other words, I arrive at my positions for for good and consistent reasons, not out of partisan hackery
Darrell
I should modify that statement to read “for sincere and consistent reasons…” If I see my reasons are not good, I’m willing to change my position. Again, you made a sh*tty unsubstantiated remark, and you refuse to explain or apologize, as an honorable person would do… you posture as if you’re so above it all
Phil Smith
Darrell, the retraction and re-phrasing is intended to take your name out of the discussion entirely. The full sentence would read
It references no individual by name.
Stormy70
Darrell – I think he is addressing the left side of the debate here, but I could be wrong.
Darrell
No Stormy, re-read what he wrote. I believe what Phil did, and btw I agree with most everything he writes, was to make an unsubstantiated smear on me, so as to enhance his cred with the lefties as someone ‘even handed’ who is ‘above it all’ who can’t be accused of being a rightwing extremist. His post was otherwise very true and insightful, but he chose to take an unnessary cheap shot at me and I called him on it
Phil Smith
Yes, and I admitted it, retracted it, and rephrased it.
Andrew J. Lazarus
I believe Plame attended (in fact, was the presenter at) briefings in the EOB on WMD that were attended by Scooter Libby and other senior WH staff. Now, I don’t know if they were aware of her relationship to Wilson, but the name “Valerie Plame” would have been known to Rove, at least potentially, without any journalist or other outside source.
Having said that, I’m quite comfortable in waiting for the indictments. Indeed, I’d say Fitzgerald may have put to use something from the Starr Inquisition about using the press to help tenderize witnesses.
prob
Man, I PROMISED to stay out of this, but I have been looking in and this statement is absolutely “HysDarrellcal”!!!
no more to say here…the statement truly speaks for itself when you view who has said what to whom over the course of this (and other) threads…no names mentioned…
Sojourner
How about a woman who served her country by putting her life on the line? Dumb ass, where’s the respect for those who serve to protect idiots like you? I thought the Repubs were the “patriots”? Obviously not. They’re quite happy to trash veterans and CIA agents who served honorably.
To think that you’re trashing this woman to defend the likes of Karl Rove is amazing. You have no shame.