Comments on: U.S. Attorney Scandal: “Partisan Fishing Expedition”

By: Wellstone

Wellstone — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 16:10:38 +0000

The White House is in denial. They LOST the Congress; Arlen Specter is no longer in charge of the Judiciary Committee.

In fact, according to reports, it was SPECTER who got the call from the President’s lawyer, Fielding, on the terms of the deal, not Leahy.

A subtle insult? Or just plain denial, stupidity, and arrogance? One guess, LOL!

By: brif

brif — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:46:26 +0000

uh jay, there’s nothing even close to illegal activity in the links you provided.

By: SpiderJ

SpiderJ — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:15:12 +0000

At any time, Libby could have said “I don’t remember who I spoke to.” He didn’t. He made up whatever answers he thought would get him off the hook. He did this to a grand jury, he did this to the FBI. He did this to Scott McClellan, who ended up speaking falsehoods to the press and having to go back on them later. Lies, lies, lies.

The only reason to refuse to be under oath is that you intend to lie. If you can’t recall, you say “I can’t recall.” This is not rocket science.

By: midderpidge

midderpidge — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:55:44 +0000

Libby was found to be guilty. He got a trial. His defense team tried to game the jury… what do you want?

By: pedromd07

pedromd07 — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:53:22 +0000

“If WH operatives are innocent they have nothing to fear in testifying under oath”

Of course the liberals have proven that to be untrue eh? Libby was convicted of “lying” to a grand jury cause he couldn’t remember which journalist he spoke to first. He wasn’t convicted of the crime that the prosector set out to prove. Bush is absolutely right: The lefties want a show trial, and figure the best way to trip someone up is to put them on the witness stand and start peppering them with questions.

Fine, now you get nothing, and bush can rightfully say he offered up all the questions you wanted on a silver platter but the democrat party wasn’t reallyi interested in the answers, they wanted a show trial.

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 13:05:41 +0000

I know! I know! Trolls are people that don’t believe what you believe.

Did I get it right?

By: Brad Eleven

Brad Eleven — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:29:00 +0000

mikefromtexas asked:

“What’s the difference between a troll and a scratched record???”

You can move the tone arm, or just take the scratched record off of the damn turntable if you’re tired of the same old song.

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:12:57 +0000

Wilbur: Don’t turn my comment against me. I was referring the power hungry Democrats. My alternative comment was going to be, “It’s fun being in charge.”

I thought you’d enjoy the “History of the World - Mel Brooks”, but I guess liberals really don’t have a sense of humor.

If WH operatives are innocent they have nothing to fear in testifying under oath.

Tell that to “Scooter” Libby.

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:43:01 +0000

Frank in brief: I despise democracy. Vive le roi Bushe!

By: buma

buma — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 08:02:15 +0000

If WH operatives are innocent they have nothing to fear in testifying under oath. To paraphrase Peggy Noonan, it would be irresponsible not to investigate Abu G’s actions.

By: mikefromtexas

mikefromtexas — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 05:42:54 +0000

What’s the difference between a troll and a scratched record???

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 04:50:20 +0000

midderpidge: Yes, I know you had so much faith in President Bush back in 2000, and now you’re disappointed.

By: midderpidge

midderpidge — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 04:09:51 +0000

Its funny that Bush (and Jay02C and Frank) still believe that the Bush administration has any kind of credibility. As usual, they hit the ground lying on this scandal. The only hope we have for the truth is to put them under penalty of perjury.

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:56:34 +0000

wilbur translated: It’s good to be King!

By: midderpidge

midderpidge — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:49:21 +0000

Gosh, Jay02c, to hear you talk, I thought the Dems were doing things like keeping the vote open while lobbyists and Tom DeLay chased and tracked down congressman and browbeat or bribed (with actual cash)them into changing votes.

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:36:50 +0000

Shorter Jay and Frank: look over there!

By: Jay

Jay — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:13:21 +0000

Oh and the fact that Democrats don’t give a rats about the two things I spoke of shows that all of their talk about changing things when took over was a complete load of horseshit, and you clowns are eating it up as if it were bowl of ice cream.

Enjoy yourselves chumps because there’s going to be a LOT more of this.

By: Jay

Jay — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:11:23 +0000

Here’s the link to story where the Democratic leadership is offering pork for votes.

By: Jay

Jay — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:10:11 +0000

Instead of investigating why a President fired US attorneys which is perfectly within his rights, why don’t liberals start calling out the Democratic leadership for essentially offering bribes for votes?

Of course, telling people they’ll get loads of pork if they’d just go along with the Democrats ‘plan’ for Iraq isn’t important. Parading Karl Rove in front of a Senate Committee for political purposes is more important.

And now as Frank points out, you have the Democrats allowing a corrupt, bribe taking member of the House to be a member of the Homeland Security Committee. Full accountability my big white ass.

But hey, Bush fired 8 US attorneys! Nail his ass!

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 01:46:59 +0000

That was then, this is now.