PDA

View Full Version : CIA Director Hayden: Valerie Plame Was Covert



mike60
07-28-2008, 04:54 PM
The DIRECTOR OF THE CIA CONFIRMS VALERIE PLAME COVERT AGENT STATUS UNTIL OUTTED BY NOVAK. WHO TOLD NOVAK?
The Denial corps will have to eat this with plenty of crow to cover the sour grapes taste they love so much..................



CIA Director Hayden: Valerie Plame Was Covert Agent
Posted Mar 16th 2007 11:41AM by David Knowles
Filed under: Iraq War, Scandal, House Committees

This will be a bitter pill for some conservatives to swallow. CIA Director Michael Hayden personally reviewed and okayed Henry Waxman's opening statement for Valerie Plame's testimony today. Furthermore, Hayden took pains to set the record straight: Plame was indeed a covert agent up until the day Robert Novak revealed as much to the public.

You see, many on the right (including some here at The Stump) have spent a lot of time trying to convince us otherwise. They never fail to use quotation marks when referring to the administration's "outing" of Plame so as to suggest that no such undercover status ever existed. While Patrick Fitzgerald may not have believed he had enough evidence to prove that a crime was committed, there was really never much doubt that Plame had covert status.

In fact, Plame's testimony proved illuminating on a number of fronts. Under oath, articulate, and forceful, she laid to waste a veritable forest of myths that the right has erected against her. No, she wasn't a mere pencil pusher, she'd undertaken undercover missions to foreign countries over the past five years. No, she hadn't been the one to select her husband to go to on his fact-finding mission to Niger. No, she didn't talk to Nicholas Kristof (or others in the media) about her job at the CIA. But most importantly, in the words of the man who now heads the CIA, she was very much a covert agent.
2008 AOL LLC. All Rights Reserved.

michaelsixty

Qtec
07-28-2008, 06:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This will be a bitter pill for some conservatives to swallow </div></div>
The problem is that they DON'T swallow it. They IGNORE facts and tend to rely on WND and Fox crap reporting for their facts!!!!!!!!!!!!
When presented with un-deniable truths, they close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears and chant "this is not true, this is not true............"......etc.

Its simple. Read any article/post here on the forum and then CHECK out the STORY through OTHER sources.
I don't know how many times I have slammed posts that are obviously unfounded in fact but not once has any GOP/ Rep tried to counter with a source or sources that were CREDIBLE.
Look at the replies to my posts- ALL are OPINIONS. Not one has tried to dispute my facts, they just ignore thyem. LWW and eg*r are the prime examples.



Q/............the GW Admin is tyhe most corrupt since Nixon- does anyone doubt this?

Q

mike60
07-28-2008, 09:37 PM
Qtec, The Reagan administration wins hands down. More than 200 indicted and convicted. He rarely pardoned anyone of his gang. We'll see how the present
gang measures up soon.

mike

ps: i expect someone to say hayden is wrong.

eg8r
07-29-2008, 09:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They IGNORE facts and tend to rely on WND and Fox crap reporting for their facts!!!!!!!!!!!!</div></div>Go back through this forum's history and let us know how many times someone has quote Fox. Every time you state this you remind us of your fear of people getting an opportunity to hear the other side.

Oh yeah, back to the subject...Once again, you guys think you have more facts but the "fact" is, no one is in jail for outing the secretary. You have nothing.

eg8r

wolfdancer
07-29-2008, 10:59 AM
"Plame was indeed a covert agent up until the day Robert Novak revealed as much to the public."

That is pretty hard to explain away, or deny???

I believe the real story though is why didn't the admin give credence to Joe Wilson's findings re" the yellow-cake, but instead
take the word of a single unreliable source.
And the timely outing of Valerie, helped to cast some doubt on him, with congress???

mike60
07-29-2008, 01:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They IGNORE facts and tend to rely on WND and Fox crap reporting for their facts!!!!!!!!!!!!</div></div>Go back through this forum's history and let us know how many times someone has quote Fox. Every time you state this you remind us of your fear of people getting an opportunity to hear the other side.

Oh yeah, back to the subject...Once again, you guys think you have more facts but the "fact" is, no one is in jail for outing the secretary. You have nothing.

eg8r </div></div>

I do admire your ability to stick your fingers in your ears and go YAYAYAYAYAY.


mike

Bobbyrx
07-29-2008, 01:57 PM
Ok, she was covert.....why did Richard Armitage admit to outing her?

LWW
07-29-2008, 02:12 PM
Then why did Joe Wilson out her to a retired general?

LWW

wolfdancer
07-29-2008, 03:04 PM
if i told you why, I might have to kill you.
Why the f**k would you ask me? I'm limited to what I read and see on TV, and not privy to yours and Ed's "insider" info.
But i'll hazard a guess...Joe wanted to destroy his own credibility before Congress, and not interfere with GWB/Cheney's plans. AND then he could look like the GOOD guy in this sorry scenario. Who knows he may even be as corrupt as them.

mike60
07-29-2008, 04:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ok, she was covert.....why did Richard Armitage admit to outing her? </div></div>

Bobby, Maybe because he's a fool.

mike

wolfdancer
07-29-2008, 11:02 PM
"Once again, you guys think you have more facts but the "fact" is, no one is in jail for outing the secretary. You have nothing."
Ed, you are absolutely right,no one is in jail for outing the secretary.(She's now a secretary, and not a covert agent??) Someone was however sentenced to prison for lying and obstructing the investigation though. If your man is so completely innocent...why would someone have to lie, etc?
Maybe they should have called you or lww as expert witnesses for the defense???????????????????????????????/////
Sorry, but you argument is so lame, I'm surprised that BD allowed it to be published


"Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in prison Tuesday for lying and obstructing the CIA leak investigation.

Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald told the court Libby's lies created a "house of mirrors" for investigators, reports CBS News correspondent Bob Orr. Fitzgerald implored the judge to impose a tough sentence "to make it clear the truth matters."

eg8r
07-30-2008, 09:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If your man is so completely innocent...why would someone have to lie, etc?
</div></div>Not sure but good thing he was sentenced to prison for lying.

They did not need myself and lww on the defense, are you too dumb to notice the defense has won this case?

I don't care if you think an argument is lame or not, what is lame is your insistent behaviour that you somehow have facts. You have NOTHING. Your argument is NOTHING. Until future indictments become future sentences for the guilty your case is NOTHING.

eg8r

LWW
07-30-2008, 09:33 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If your man is so completely innocent...why would someone have to lie, etc?
</div></div>Not sure but good thing he was sentenced to prison for lying.

They did not need myself and lww on the defense, are you too dumb to notice the defense has won this case?

I don't care if you think an argument is lame or not, what is lame is your insistent behaviour that you somehow have facts. You have NOTHING. Your argument is NOTHING. Until future indictments become future sentences for the guilty your case is NOTHING.

eg8r </div></div>
But, we already knew that.

LWW

mike60
07-30-2008, 12:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If your man is so completely innocent...why would someone have to lie, etc?
</div></div>Not sure but good thing he was sentenced to prison for lying.

They did not need myself and lww on the defense, are you too dumb to notice the defense has won this case?

I don't care if you think an argument is lame or not, what is lame is your insistent behaviour that you somehow have facts. You have NOTHING. Your argument is NOTHING. Until future indictments become future sentences for the guilty your case is NOTHING.

eg8r </div></div>


eg8r, A pardon after a conviction means the defense lost. No conviction no pardon needed. Please try harder.

mike

eg8r
07-30-2008, 01:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">eg8r, A pardon after a conviction means the defense lost.</div></div>Look I know you are older so I am hedging my bets it is memory and not the glaring stupidity you are showing on this thread. The conviction was for lying and obstruction...THE ENTIRE CASE WAS ABOUT AN OUTED SECRETARY. No one was convicted of outing the secretary. The defense kicked your butt and all your lame bogus "facts". You guys still continue to post old crap and expect a different outcome but in the end your sorry butts had nothing.

eg8r

Qtec
07-30-2008, 02:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The conviction was for lying and obstruction. </div></div>

If nobody did anything wrong, why was he lying and obstructing?????????????


Answer that one.

WHY? did he lie?

Who was he protecting?

Don't you want to know? Or are you cool with a lying corrupt Administration?

I know you are. LOL



Q

Q

Bobbyrx
07-30-2008, 03:18 PM
Why was there a trial when Fitzgerald knew who leaked the name to Novak BEFORE the trial began.....and it wasn't Libby

Deeman3
07-30-2008, 03:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why was there a trial when Fitzgerald knew who leaked the name to Novak BEFORE the trial began.....and it wasn't Libby </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">Never would have happened outside an election year. Nancy is now calling Rove to testify in a case of executive priveledge I though was settled in Reagan's, then Clintn's time. Why now? What can Rove now do? </span>

eg8r
07-31-2008, 07:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If nobody did anything wrong, why was he lying and obstructing?????????????</div></div>Q this is no different to saying if you don't live in the US why bring up issues with our poor, or with smoking in public buildings.

I don't know why he lied or who he "might" be protecting and I don't act like I do. You don't either. You think you know because you sit fat and happy on a mole hill of "facts" but those facts turned up nothing. You still have nothing.

eg8r

wolfdancer
07-31-2008, 08:25 AM
maybe you can't quite read, or just read into something what you want to hear.....
I've written post after post stating that I have no f**king facts, while you....seem to be claiming the guy is innocent...which means you do have the facts.
Well, O.J. was innocent as well.....using your logic.

wolfdancer
07-31-2008, 08:31 AM
I think Ed would argue that it was just a coincidence that Judas had the 30 pieces of silver....if Judas was a Republican.

eg8r
07-31-2008, 09:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've written post after post stating that I have no f**king facts</div></div>Don't worry, you have never been very high on a credibility list anyways. I know you only have an opinion when Gayle sends you a PM.

I have not said I have any facts that anyone is innocent either. I am simply pointing out that your "facts" (read: the BS left wing crap you and Gayle's other sheep keep posting on this forum) have been proven to be worthless. No one is in jail for outing that secretary.

eg8r

mike60
07-31-2008, 03:36 PM
Alright children settle down. The trial was for Felonious Criminal Acts. Not goosing the secretary or stealing office supplies. let's review for the special needs children:

FELONIOUS CRIMINAL ACTS, What the hell is wrong with you children? Does it matter at all that the VP's Office is crooked?

CIA DIRECTOR HAYDEN SAYS PLAME COVERT, Don't say it! You don't know what Hayden knows so save it.

YOU ARE THE PEOPLE IN THE PEOPLE Vs. LIBBY, I hear Mexico is nice if you don't like it here.

Now go back in your houses and lose the torches.

mike

LWW
07-31-2008, 04:56 PM
What was Plame's field of expertise at the CIA?

LWW

mike60
07-31-2008, 05:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What was Plame's field of expertise at the CIA?

LWW </div></div>

Now Larry we've discussed this before. Anyone know? OK You Ed, "She was a secretary desk lady" Now Ed, You know that's not true. Anyone else? OK, Well i'm not
entirely hapy with this class. Some of you are just going to have to read and write 1000 times, "I'm knee deep in a river in Egypt". Then there will be ice cream in the cloakroom.

Actually Larry she was operating a network of people in Iran mostly but people get around. The little group reported on WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and related systems , deployment, that sort of thing. All the nonsense about how she was well known to the Russians wouldn't apply here if it was true or not the Saddam and the Iranian Mullahs aren't very fond of the Soviets. Them being atheists and all, but they bought a lot of military hardware from them and from us through third party fronts to avoid the messy trading with the enemy act. That's funny George being Prescott Bush's Grandson.

Cheers,


mike

mike60
08-02-2008, 01:16 AM
My stock answer..............
Since you asked.....
Somewhere there is a world where this is illegal and it should be............

George Bush was appointed Resident by the Supreme Court Conservative majority when the fixed electronic voting machines couldn't seal the deal even with the 90,000 voters thrown off the registered to vote list in Florida and the staff of several Republican congress critters rioted in the offices of the Dade county election commission to stop a legal recount to ensure Bush an unearned term as Resident. The wonder of it all.
How a few well placed felons may disrupt an election and then use the justices to strip the state of the right to determine their own count when
it is obvious the chosen resident is losing. That numbers of citizens are so stupid that they defend the very group that disenfranchise their votes. You crackers and other fellow travelers are just being spun for the profit of a group so beyond your ability to comprehend that they've
got you volunteering your rights away to catch boogymen that are smarter than you and get away with crime and theft while you fools hold the door for them. You rant about the two important secret investigations that were actually well known by the bad guys that did so well when in fact both programs were already useless. Your little band of complainers, and you are few in number. Should just join up and go fight. Or drive a truck for the contractors until you get your ass handed to you by an EID or vote for McCain for a lot more WAR PROFITEERING by your
corporate money vacuum. You really are beneath contempt for just believing what is laughably called conservative. as if........


miguel
___

LWW
08-02-2008, 03:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mike60</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[Actually Larry she was operating a network of people in Iran mostly but people get around. The little group reported on WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and related systems , deployment, that sort of thing.
Cheers,


mike</div></div>
Thank you.

Now, which agency primarily supplied the Clinton and B-B-B-BOOOOSH! admins with data as to Saddam's WMD capability?

LWW

mike60
08-02-2008, 02:16 PM
Hey Larry, Past CIA Director Tenet was a believer. Of course the VP Cheney was pushing this also. President Bush stated he would try diplomatic remedies but quickly
forgot that promise which i believe is VP Cheney's influence. Members of the Congress have repeatedly stated they were misled. History makes itself.

michaelsixty

mike60
08-09-2008, 12:57 AM
not yet....

Gayle in MD
08-09-2008, 06:45 AM
BECAUSE THERE WAS MORE THAN ONE PERSON INVOLVED IN THE LEAK!

You're premise is incorrect.

Why don't you and Ed try to answer this: Why did the CIA request an investigation to find out who was involved in leaking the identity of a CIA, NOC, SECRET, agent, whose identity was designated SECRET, right in the report that Powell had in his posession when they all left together on AF1? AND why did George Bush say that if anyone in his administration was involved in leaking the identiy of a secret agent, he'd fire them, when he knew damned well that he, himself, AND Cheney, Libby, and Rove were ALL involved. Bush was the one who de-classified the information in an effort to retroactively save all their asses.

Gayle in Md.

wolfdancer
08-09-2008, 06:11 PM
and ....if it was so obvious that Joe himself leaked the info...wouldn't that play right into GWB's hands?
and...The justice dep't wasted all that time and effort investigating what according to people here was an open and shut case?
AND,.... Libby is convicted for attempting to cover up Joe's deceit?
You couldn't sell that story, even to the "Inquirer"
Real problem here is some folks (re:Ed) can't admit their party leadership was guilty of "dirty tricks", which in this case went beyond just "swift-boating" someone to get elected. The stakes were a little bit higher this time.

mike60
08-09-2008, 09:10 PM
The useless trash that poses as true patriotic Americans that are so convinced that nothing is criminal about Cheney or his butt boy Bush are just idiots.
Of course they are the defenders of the Constitution, NOT. Of course they are intelligent, NOT. They are up to their asses in the Egyptian River.

Tiresome and devoid of honor they cluster together out of dire need for approval of each other as no one else will even look at them.
Sorry, i just get tired of the denial and stupidity.
miguel

eg8r
08-10-2008, 06:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why don't you and Ed try to answer this: Why did the CIA request an investigation to find out who was involved in leaking the identity of a CIA, NOC, SECRET, agent, whose identity was designated SECRET, right in the report that Powell had in his posession when they all left together on AF1?</div></div>Why, to give sheep like you something to talk about for years even though nothing ever came of it.

eg8r

wolfdancer
08-10-2008, 07:54 PM
I've got an even better idea...why not drop the subject in it's entirety ....it can't be settled here anyway.
Some of us believe she was a covert op....you believe she was an overt secretary......overt/covert..."you say either and I say either,
let's call the whole thing off"....it's beginning to stink up the joint.
'course I'm still amazed that you can't put two and two together, and come up with four....hope that you aren't working for some military contractor....we'd never win this war

Qtec
08-10-2008, 08:38 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've got an even better idea...why not drop the subject in it's entirety ....it can't be settled here anyway.
Some of us believe she was a covert op....you believe she was an overt secretary......overt/covert..."you say either and I say either,
let's call the whole thing off"....it's beginning to stink up the joint.
'course I'm still amazed that you can't put two and two together, and come up with four....hope that you aren't working for some military contractor....we'd never win this war </div></div>

There is no doubt.
Plame was covert
Anyone who continues to call her a secretary is an idiot or is not acquainted with the facts.
If eg8r is so sure of his case, let him prove it!


Don't hold your breath.

Q

mike60
08-11-2008, 12:09 AM
A few silly rightwingbats can be wrong. Overandoverandoverandover, etc.

miguel

eg8r
08-11-2008, 09:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've got an even better idea...why not drop the subject in it's entirety ....it can't be settled here anyway.
</div></div>I don't even know why you guys continue to chat about it other than you need something to pin on W in hopes of getting a shot at the White House.

eg8r

eg8r
08-11-2008, 09:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If eg8r is so sure of his case, let him prove it!</div></div>Again, I don't need to prove anything, I was not the one making accusations. LOL, you guys are the ones saying someone did wrong, it your responsiblity to prove anything. I am just patiently waiting till the accused are tossed in jail. Until then you are living in a fairy tale.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-11-2008, 09:30 AM
yeah, their Republican buddies can commit treason, and they defend it. As long as nobody got a BJ, they don't have any complaints, not even over four thousand dead Americans who gave their lives for a lies, and no immediate threat.

Disgusting.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Gayle in MD
08-11-2008, 09:33 AM
Yeah, according to Ed's standards, Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman are still alive, and no crime was committed.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

eg8r
08-11-2008, 09:38 AM
You obviously cannot follow the trail can you. In this country you are innocent until proven guilty. That is it. You either believe in our country, its law, its Constitution or not. You guys want it both ways. Nicole Simpson and Ron are dead, there was a crime committed and OJ came out of the criminal courts as an innocent man. Case closed. I am surprised you guys have to rehash this crap for years when you don't get your own way.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-11-2008, 09:43 AM
It's called suspending critical judgement. Same thing required by organized religion.

28% of AMericans are nuts. Guess who they are. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

It's just a coincidence that (Cambodia)Richard Nixon, (Iran Contra)Ronald Reagan, and (Iraq) George Bush, have all been investigated for making false and misleading statements about their military adventures.

BTW, there is a new book out called The Age Of Impeachment that gives a lot of details about the committee investigations of Nixon, Reagan, and Bush's shananigans, all involving lies and misleading statements about military adventures, just a coincidence I'm sure.
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Qtec
08-11-2008, 11:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If eg8r is so sure of his case, let him prove it!</div></div>Again, I don't need to prove anything, </div></div>
Yes you do. You are the one making claims that contradict the OFFICIAL story. Put up or shut up.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was not the one making accusations.</div></div>

Yes you are. You, despite a mountain of evidence still you dispute Plame's role by the CIA but you provide nothing to support your ABSURD suggestion.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> LOL, you guys are the ones saying someone did wrong, it your responsibility to prove anything. <u>I am just patiently waiting till the accused are tossed in jail.</u> Until then you are living in a fairy tale.

eg8r </div></div>

Your whole argument is that no-one was convicted in outing Plame. SO WHAT?
Are you saying a crime has only been committed if someone gets convicted for such crime?

In GW's SotU speech he tried to mislead the US public. Wilson called him on it. GW had to concede and the 16 words were recinded.
Wilson got attacked and they outed his wife to do it.

Its pretty sad when an Admin outs one of its own spies in an attempt to cover up its own indiscretions.



Q

Q

eg8r
08-11-2008, 11:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes you do. You are the one making claims that contradict the OFFICIAL story. Put up or shut up.</div></div>You can say I do till you are blue in the face, but I don't need to prove a thing. The court has already proven it. You guys have no facts no matter how much you want to believe it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes you are. You, despite a mountain of evidence still you dispute Plame's role by the CIA but you provide nothing to support your ABSURD suggestion.</div></div>I have stated before that I call her a secretary to bug you guys. You think there was a crime committed yet the courts do not agree. Your mountain of evidence is no more than a mountain of garbage.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your whole argument is that no-one was convicted in outing Plame. SO WHAT?
Are you saying a crime has only been committed if someone gets convicted for such crime?</div></div>I am stating that your accusations do not hold water. No matter what evidence you think you have, no matter what evidence you dreamed up, the fact of the matter is that none of it stuck. Keep looking, maybe one day you will be able to get this conspiracy up to the ranks of "Who shot Kennedy".

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-11-2008, 11:29 AM
You are denying that fact that the CIA requested the investigation to learn who, all, had been involved in the leaking of the identity of a covert, NOC, CIA agent.

You also deny that the special prosecutor stated clearly that Libby threw sand in his eyes, obstructing the investigation, which left a cloud over the Vice President's office, and then further deny that Libby was convicted of said obstruction of justice, into the outing of that CIA, NOC Agent.

YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY. Further, you, of all people have no right to call anyone here a hypocrite, not that that would stop you.

All in all, you're a joke.

I don't have time right now to discuss it further, I'
m going shopping for a new bigger boat, and maybe a bigger house, too. I'm still shopping to heal the country from 9/11.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Gayle in MD
08-11-2008, 11:30 AM
Libby was found guilty.

eg8r
08-11-2008, 11:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You are denying that fact that the CIA requested the investigation to learn who, all, had been involved in the leaking of the identity of a covert, NOC, CIA agent.</div></div>I am not denying anything. I am stating for you guys to put up or shut up? No more, no less. You failed the first time, maybe you will get a second chance. If someone is convicted for actually doing what you say then I will applaud the justice system just like I did when Libby was convicted.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't have time right now to discuss it further</div></div>You never discuss anything, you rant. As for your bigger boat, I hope you love it. Nothing better than being the best hypocrite possible. I just hope you give some of your local homeless a ride. Maybe you can invite the media so they can get a picture of you patting yourself on the back.

eg8r

eg8r
08-11-2008, 11:42 AM
You might want to go look at that case again, no one was found guilty of outing the secretary. I did applaud the justice system for finding him guilty of lying though.

eg8r

wolfdancer
08-11-2008, 12:00 PM
I doubt if your Mr. Bush could get elected dogcatcher after his failed 8 yr term in the WH.
Problem is I don't see much of an improvement in whomever replaces him.
If Obama wins the race, it'll be as much a vote against the (mis)direction that Bush has led the country on, then a vote against McCain

Gayle in MD
08-11-2008, 12:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am not denying anything. <span style="color: #000066">Yes you are, yu're denying the obvious. </span> I am stating for you guys to put up or shut up? <span style="color: #000066">We've already put up plenty, but you are still denying the facts. </span> No more, no less. You failed the first time, <span style="color: #000066">No, you failed to acknoweldge what is as plain as the nose on your face. </span> maybe you will get a second chance. <span style="color: #000066">We don't need a second chance, the whole country knows what they did, all except for the "Deny till you die, nutty 28%. </span> If someone is convicted for actually doing what you say then I will applaud the justice system just like I did when Libby was convicted.
<span style="color: #000066">That may happen at some future time, however, you'd probably still deny it. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </span>
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You never discuss anything, you rant. <span style="color: #000066">I type, just like you do, but you righties call facts, rants, because you don't like facts, just the fantasies you slurp up from the right wing press, and the crooked Bush Administration. </span> As for your bigger boat, I hope you love it. <span style="color: #000066">Thanks, I love the one I already have, actually. </span> Nothing better than being the best hypocrite possible. <span style="color: #000066">You ought to know, big boy. </span> I just hope you give some of your local homeless a ride. <span style="color: #000066">We don't have many homeless in my neck of the woods, but if they show up on my pier and identify themselves, they'd be welcomed. </span> Maybe you can invite the media so they can get a picture of you patting yourself on the back.

<span style="color: #000066">Yeah! I'll go for that, and I'll wear one of my latest ti shirts...

"I Told You Bush Was A LIAR!"

"Don't Blame ME, I voted Democratic"

"If You'll Deny, Till You Die, You Must Have Voted Republican!"

"Support The Republican Iraqi Welfare Program FOR TERRORISTS, Vote For McSame"

"If You Can Spend Like A Drunken Sailor, The Republican Party Needs YOU!"

"Support Fascism, VOTE REPUBLICAN!"

"THANKS GEORGE, WE"RE SO BROKE, We Can't Even FIX THE BRIDGE TO NO WHERE!"


"WHERE IS ARCHIBALD COX WHEN WE NEED HIM!"</span>

"VOTE DEMOCRATIC! REPUBLICANS HAVE NO SENSE OF DIRECTION!"

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

eg8r </div></div>

eg8r
08-11-2008, 06:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I doubt if your Mr. Bush could get elected dogcatcher after his failed 8 yr term in the WH.
</div></div>You really have lost it. My post has nothing to do with W trying to get elected.

eg8r

wolfdancer
08-11-2008, 06:50 PM
AND my answer had nothing to do with your post....just expressing my thoughts, which you can cut and paste for your scrapbook