Its official, Bush DID approve the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame

[elvis]

Missed the point entirely. I said that IF your claim is true then using YOUR logic the Clinton's are guilty of White Water. After all, you keep claiming Libby lied ( something he says did not happen, and that his lies were for Cheney. You say who else would he lie for.

Fine USING YOUR LOGIC, who would McDougal go to jail for? The only questions on the table for her were about White Water and the Clinton's. USING YOUR LOGIC, since Libby proves Cheney was the ring leader, McDougal proves the Clinton's were guilty.

That is YOUR logic, not mine.

OK.

Libby was found guilty of perjury. Why did he lie? or are you claiming he was innocent of perjury and found guilty because of a biased jury?

 

[elvis]

Missed the point entirely. I said that IF your claim is true then using YOUR logic the Clinton's are guilty of White Water. After all, you keep claiming Libby lied ( something he says did not happen, and that his lies were for Cheney. You say who else would he lie for.

Fine USING YOUR LOGIC, who would McDougal go to jail for? The only questions on the table for her were about White Water and the Clinton's. USING YOUR LOGIC, since Libby proves Cheney was the ring leader, McDougal proves the Clinton's were guilty.

That is YOUR logic, not mine.

I think Libby went to jail because he didn't believe in "ratting out" the people he worked for. Same reason G. Gordon Liddy went to jail.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That's a stretch, and frankly you sound like a Bush apologist.

No he doesn't. You are aware the Prosecutor admonished the Jury to convict him simply because he couldn't prove Cheney or Bush did anything? He told them since they could not convict the Vice President to convict Libby. He illegally brought up the supposed outing of Plame even though Libby was never charged with that , no evidence was presented she meet the criteria for that law,and none of them were told that Armitage was the one that did the "outing" and was never charged with any crime at all.

READ the law, it is illegal to conduct an investigation for the sole purpose of charging someone with Perjury, yet that is EXACTLY what was done. The Prosecutor spent months setting him up to charge him with the crime of Perjury on the hopes he could scare him into telling him something else. THAT is illegal.

 

[elvis]

No he doesn't. You are aware the Prosecutor admonished the Jury to convict him simply because he couldn't prove Cheney or Bush did anything? He told them since they could not convict the Vice President to convict Libby. He illegally brought up the supposed outing of Plame even though Libby was never charged with that , no evidence was presented she meet the criteria for that law,and none of them were told that Armitage was the one that did the "outing" and was never charged with any crime at all.

READ the law, it is illegal to conduct an investigation for the sole purpose of charging someone with Perjury, yet that is EXACTLY what was done. The Prosecutor spent months setting him up to charge him with the crime of Perjury on the hopes he could scare him into telling him something else. THAT is illegal.

you'll agree, then, that Clinton should not have been charged with perjury?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

you'll agree, then, that Clinton should not have been charged with perjury?

NO, Clinton was not investigated for Perjury. He did it and got caught on another matter completely. The Judge did not re question him over and over for months in order to trap him or twist his words. That you can not grasp that concept is sad indeed.

And as a matter of fact Clinton was NOT charged with perjury at all, he should have been, he was guilty as sin.

Now on his Impeachment he was charged with that, but again that was from a single instance and one follow up, where he even ADMITS he did it on purpose.

 

[DiveCon]

That's a stretch, and frankly you sound like a Bush apologist.

yeah, pesky things
like the truth dont matter

 

[elvis]

NO, Clinton was not investigated for Perjury. He did it and got caught on another matter completely. The Judge did not re question him over and over for months in order to trap him or twist his words. That you can not grasp that concept is sad indeed.

And as a matter of fact Clinton was NOT charged with perjury at all, he should have been, he was guilty as sin.

Now on his Impeachment he was charged with that, but again that was from a single instance and one follow up, where he even ADMITS he did it on purpose.

Ok. I see the difference regarding clinton.

 

[elvis]

yeah, pesky things
like the truth dont matter

Do you really think Libby didn't lie? What, do you think the Wilsons were out to get Bush?

 

[DiveCon]

Do you really think Libby didn't lie? What, do you think the Wilsons were out to get Bush?

you really think Libby would perjure himself?
you really think Bush was out to get the Wilsons?

 

[elvis]

you really think Libby would perjure himself?
you really think Bush was out to get the Wilsons?

I think Rove and Cheney were out to get the Wilsons when Valerie came up with evidence that contradicted the Niger yellowcake report. It was Valerie's job to know who had what, and she was proven correct by the Pentagon. The Pentagon released a huge report last year, saying Saddam was not trying to build a bomb, and incidentally, he was not connected to al qaeda.

 

[DiveCon]

I think Rove and Cheney were out to get the Wilsons when Valerie came up with evidence that contradicted the Niger yellowcake report. It was Valerie's job to know who had what, and she was proven correct by the Pentagon. The Pentagon released a huge report last year, saying Saddam was not trying to build a bomb, and incidentally, he was not connected to al qaeda.

did you mean the cherry picked one the dems released before the actual pentagon one was released that said the exact opposite?

 

[elvis]

did you mean the cherry picked one the dems released before the actual pentagon one was released that said the exact opposite?

No. The pentagon reported there was no connection between bin laden and hussein. The only person that said the opposite was cheney.

 

[DiveCon]

No. The pentagon reported there was no connection between bin laden and hussein. The only person that said the opposite was cheney.

please provide a link to this report

 

[elvis]

please provide a link to this report

Here's one.

Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda not linked, Pentagon says - CNN.com

 

[DiveCon]

Here's one.

Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda not linked, Pentagon says - CNN.com

thats not the full report

 

[elvis]

Here's another one.

Pentagon Report Shows No Iraq Plot To Assassinate Bush Sr.

This is from newsweek.

 

[DiveCon]

Here's another one.

Pentagon Report Shows No Iraq Plot To Assassinate Bush Sr.

This is from newsweek.

thats still NOT THE REPORT

 

[elvis]

thats still NOT THE REPORT

Right. all these news organisations are conspiring against Bush and Cheney. They have lied through their teeth. Saddam attacked the World Trade Center and the US was risking a nuclear attack on NYC if it didn't remove Saddam.

 

[DiveCon]

Right. all these news organisations are conspiring against Bush and Cheney. They have lied through their teeth. Saddam attacked the World Trade Center and the US was risking a nuclear attack on NYC if it didn't remove Saddam.

the news media does LIE
but thats not the issue
what you are finding are reports on an INCOMPLETE release of the report the dems did where they cherry picked the facts they wanted


there WERE ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda, but not operational ties
there is a difference
the pentagon report did not say no ties at all, but thats how the fucking liars in the media portray it
they said no operational ties
but there WERE ties
and no one ever claimed that Saddam had direct ties to 9/11 and they also try to claim that it was said

 

[elvis]

the news media does LIE
but thats not the issue
what you are finding are reports on an INCOMPLETE release of the report the dems did where they cherry picked the facts they wanted


there WERE ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda, but not operational ties
there is a difference
the pentagon report did not say no ties at all, but thats how the fucking liars in the media portray it
they said no operational ties
but there WERE ties
and no one ever claimed that Saddam had direct ties to 9/11 and they also try to claim that it was said

I am aware Bush said, from the get-go there was no connection between Saddam and Osama. cheney went on meet the press, however, and implied, that there was a connection. The result: 70 percent of the country thought Saddam hit the WTC.