New York Times’ Boldfaced Lies About Joe Wilson

[Stephanie]

Support the NYslimes....Cancel your subscription..

July 3rd, 2007
From the Orwellian pages of the New York Times:


Soft on Crime http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/03/o..._r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
When he was running for president, George W. Bush loved to contrast his law-abiding morality with that of President Clinton, who was charged with perjury and acquitted. For Mr. Bush, the candidate, “politics, after a time of tarnished ideals, can be higher and better.”

Not so for Mr. Bush, the president. Judging from his decision yesterday to commute the 30-month sentence of I. Lewis Libby Jr. — who was charged with perjury and convicted — untarnished ideals are less of a priority than protecting the secrets of his inner circle and mollifying the tiny slice of right-wing Americans left in his political base.

Mr. Libby was convicted of lying to federal agents investigating the leak of the name of a covert C.I.A. operative, Valerie Wilson. Mrs. Wilson’s husband, Joseph Wilson, was asked to investigate a central claim in Mr. Bush’s drive to war with Iraq — whether Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Africa. Mr. Wilson concluded that Iraq had not done that and had the temerity to share those conclusions with the American public.

It seems clear from the record that Vice President Dick Cheney organized a campaign to discredit Mr. Wilson. And Mr. Libby, who was Mr. Cheney’s chief of staff, was willing to lie to protect his boss…
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://sweetness-light.com/
Remember how boldly and easily the New York Times lies each and every time you read an article from them.

They are shameless, dangerous liars.

(By the way, if you are still confused about what actually happened in the Wilson/Plame non-scandal, you might take a look at my exegesis: When And Where Joe Wilson IV Outed Valerie Plame.)http://sweetness-light.com/archive/when-and-why-joseph-c-wilson-iv-outed-valerie-plame

 

[MontanaJack]

What's the matter there Steph? Sounds like the truth got stuck in your ass and caused some hemmeroids to explode.

 

[Stephanie]

Looks like I did a double post...

Could the mods take one off...

Thanks...

 

[MontanaJack]

Looks like I did a double post...

Could the mods take one off...

Thanks...

From the looks of this beaut, no thanks necessary. I'm sure they're used to following you around and cleaning up the pellets of shit you leave all over the board.

 

[Truthmatters]

Support the NYslimes....Cancel your subscription..

July 3rd, 2007
From the Orwellian pages of the New York Times:


Soft on Crime http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/03/o..._r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
When he was running for president, George W. Bush loved to contrast his law-abiding morality with that of President Clinton, who was charged with perjury and acquitted. For Mr. Bush, the candidate, “politics, after a time of tarnished ideals, can be higher and better.”

Not so for Mr. Bush, the president. Judging from his decision yesterday to commute the 30-month sentence of I. Lewis Libby Jr. — who was charged with perjury and convicted — untarnished ideals are less of a priority than protecting the secrets of his inner circle and mollifying the tiny slice of right-wing Americans left in his political base.

Mr. Libby was convicted of lying to federal agents investigating the leak of the name of a covert C.I.A. operative, Valerie Wilson. Mrs. Wilson’s husband, Joseph Wilson, was asked to investigate a central claim in Mr. Bush’s drive to war with Iraq — whether Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Africa. Mr. Wilson concluded that Iraq had not done that and had the temerity to share those conclusions with the American public.

It seems clear from the record that Vice President Dick Cheney organized a campaign to discredit Mr. Wilson. And Mr. Libby, who was Mr. Cheney’s chief of staff, was willing to lie to protect his boss…
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://sweetness-light.com/
Remember how boldly and easily the New York Times lies each and every time you read an article from them.

They are shameless, dangerous liars.

(By the way, if you are still confused about what actually happened in the Wilson/Plame non-scandal, you might take a look at my exegesis: When And Where Joe Wilson IV Outed Valerie Plame.)http://sweetness-light.com/archive/when-and-why-joseph-c-wilson-iv-outed-valerie-plame

You can convince yourself that nothing happened in the Plame case.

The rest of America sees through the crap you Choose to believe and finds the truth.

This admin outed a Noc agent for political purposes and have barred no holds to cover it up.

 

[Rosotar]

Support the NYslimes....Cancel your subscription..

July 3rd, 2007
From the Orwellian pages of the New York Times:


Soft on Crime http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/03/o..._r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
When he was running for president, George W. Bush loved to contrast his law-abiding morality with that of President Clinton, who was charged with perjury and acquitted. For Mr. Bush, the candidate, “politics, after a time of tarnished ideals, can be higher and better.”

Not so for Mr. Bush, the president. Judging from his decision yesterday to commute the 30-month sentence of I. Lewis Libby Jr. — who was charged with perjury and convicted — untarnished ideals are less of a priority than protecting the secrets of his inner circle and mollifying the tiny slice of right-wing Americans left in his political base.

Mr. Libby was convicted of lying to federal agents investigating the leak of the name of a covert C.I.A. operative, Valerie Wilson. Mrs. Wilson’s husband, Joseph Wilson, was asked to investigate a central claim in Mr. Bush’s drive to war with Iraq — whether Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Africa. Mr. Wilson concluded that Iraq had not done that and had the temerity to share those conclusions with the American public.

It seems clear from the record that Vice President Dick Cheney organized a campaign to discredit Mr. Wilson. And Mr. Libby, who was Mr. Cheney’s chief of staff, was willing to lie to protect his boss…
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://sweetness-light.com/
Remember how boldly and easily the New York Times lies each and every time you read an article from them.

They are shameless, dangerous liars.

(By the way, if you are still confused about what actually happened in the Wilson/Plame non-scandal, you might take a look at my exegesis: When And Where Joe Wilson IV Outed Valerie Plame.)http://sweetness-light.com/archive/when-and-why-joseph-c-wilson-iv-outed-valerie-plame

Yeah Steph, I'm afraid this is a no-brainer.

If Libby actually thought he was going to have to spend real time in jail he'd likely start making deals with the prosecutor in an attempt to buy his way out.

He knows too much for Bush to simply leave him flapping in the wind.

This solution was guaranteed to Scooter before he even went to trial.

There was never any real danger of him "taking the fall" for anybody.

Why aren't you outraged?

 

[Stephanie]

Yeah Steph, I'm afraid this is a no-brainer.

If Libby actually thought he was going to have to spend real time in jail he'd likely start making deals with the prosecutor in an attempt to buy his way out.

He knows too much for Bush to simply leave him flapping in the wind.

This solution was guaranteed to Scooter before he even went to trial.

There was never any real danger of him "taking the fall" for anybody.

Why aren't you outraged?

And you know all this...HOW???

 

[Rosotar]

And you know all this...HOW???

It's called logic and common sense.

It's the opposite of your denial and delusion.

 

[Stephanie]

It's called logic and common sense.

No...it's called made up BS...

But, have at it...

 

[jillian]

No...it's called made up BS...

But, have at it...

Ummmmmmmmmm....no. The result was a foregone conclusion and no way Bush could let him go to jail. Had to nip the investigation in the bud and take away his incentive for rolling over on Bush/cheney. That's what happens when someone obstructs justice. They get convicted and then have to testify against the real criminals.

I know the truth hurts, hon. S'okay.

 

[maineman]

No...it's called made up BS...

But, have at it...

are you suggesting that the jury of his peers ought to be ignored?

 

[Stephanie]

Ummmmmmmmmm....no. The result was a foregone conclusion and no way Bush could let him go to jail. Had to nip the investigation in the bud and take away his incentive for rolling over on Bush/Cheney. That's what happens when someone obstructs justice. They get convicted and then have to testify against the real criminals.

I know the truth hurts, hon. S'okay.

Hummm.

total Speculation...

And the new Dems. memo going around...

Wouldn't expect anything less...

 

[Edward]

are you suggesting that the jury of his peers ought to be ignored?

That is exactly what she is suggesting. She is suggesting that his Royal Highness who represents Duchess Stephanie gets to set aside the verdit of a jury of Duke Libby's peers and that King George can set aside the verdit and the sentence of a Judge and Joseph Wilson and Valarie Plame "can shut the fuck up and go to hell because her Royal Highness Duchess Stephanie and His Majesty Georgie have spoken." As for the verdict of the jury that means nothing to these people. They don't care about the verdict of a jury or the sentence of a judge instead when Joseph Wilson and Valarie Plame complain they are simply told, "to fucking bad if you object to us violating your rights because we voted for His Majesty George II."

 

[Edward]

Hummm.

total Speculation...

And the new Dems. memo going around...

Wouldn't expect anything less...

The fact remains that a jury of his peers found him guilty of obstruction of justice and a Judge who was appointed by George Bush himself decided to sentence Libby to 30 months in jail and upon appeal of that sentence the Appeals Court consisting of two Republicans and one Democrat upheld the sentence. As for the speculation. It isn't really speculation to use common sense and to decide that Bush commuting the sentence as opposed to giving him a pardon is because pardoning him would mean that he could be forced to testify in civil and criminal cases and could not plead the fifth amendment. On the other hand commuting his sentence now and waiting until Bush leaves office to pardon him gives the Bush administration near immunity.

 

[Stephanie]

That is exactly what she is suggesting. She is suggesting that his Royal Highness who represents Duchess Stephanie gets to set aside the verdit of a jury of Duke Libby's peers and that King George can set aside the verdit and the sentence of a Judge and Joseph Wilson and Valarie Plame "can shut the fuck up and go to hell because her Royal Highness Duchess Stephanie and His Majesty Georgie have spoken." As for the verdict of the jury that means nothing to these people. They don't care about the verdict of a jury or the sentence of a judge instead when Joseph Wilson and Valarie Plame complain they are simply told, "to fucking bad if you object to us violating your rights because we voted for His Majesty George II."

Are you crazy??

 

[Larkinn]

Hummm.

total Speculation...

And the new Dems. memo going around...

Wouldn't expect anything less...

As opposed to you calling the NY times a liar, which isn't based on total speculation?

By the way...I find it amusing that you exhort everyone else to cancel their subscription, but yet you obviously read them and provide them with money.

 

[Stephanie]

As opposed to you calling the NY times a liar, which isn't based on total speculation?

By the way...I find it amusing that you exhort everyone else to cancel their subscription, but yet you obviously read them and provide them with money.

I got the post off another site...

Can you read..???

 

[Larkinn]

I got the post off another site...

Can you read..???

I can read just fine. However, I didn't think you would be so boring as to just copy and paste from a shitty blog. I went there, saw that it was shitty, and left as opposed to reading half of it to get to where the nytimes article was. Why would I want to waste my time with that tripe?

 

[Stephanie]

I can read just fine. However, I didn't think you would be so boring as to just copy and paste from a shitty blog. I went there, saw that it was shitty, and left as opposed to reading half of it to get to where the nytimes article was. Why would I want to waste my time with that tripe?

Aaaa..

You are a Du person...

 

[Larkinn]

Aaaa..

You are a Du person...

Nice ASSumption.

No, I don't read Democratic Underground. I've actually never been to the website. From what I've heard its just a site with an obviously lefty bias. Unlike you, I don't like bias at all, as opposed to preferring only bias that agreed with me.