Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of ? - Page 8 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #71 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-05-2006, 07:59 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Sep 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Ammonium
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
MS Fowler - 3/5/2006 9:21 PM

Maybe I am simple-minded. I think that people who lie under oath to a federal judge, or a State judge for that matter should be proscecuted.

In your world lies are OK if they further your political aims.
Simple minded or not, an affair and letting a major city, with vital petrolium and import centers, drown are two completely seperate things. If you want to call them the same than I will stop here.
Ammonium is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #72 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-05-2006, 08:44 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
Ammonium - 3/5/2006 9:59 PM

Quote:
MS Fowler - 3/5/2006 9:21 PM

Maybe I am simple-minded. I think that people who lie under oath to a federal judge, or a State judge for that matter should be proscecuted.

In your world lies are OK if they further your political aims.
Simple minded or not, an affair and letting a major city, with vital petrolium and import centers, drown are two completely seperate things. If you want to call them the same than I will stop here.
This is one of the main themes of the right wing's view. They miss the basic argument that the question of whether or not Clinton had a knobber from Lewinski had no bearing on the Whitewater investigation or the case before the judge, which equated the entire line of questioning to politically motivated entrapment. The judge agreed, however, Clinton did lie and did pay the consequences. No American Citizens were harmed, other than by the deep pocket spending of Special Prosecutor, several tens of millions of dollars to investigate a suspected sleezy deal that avoided the loss of some or all of a $43,000 or so land investment by the Clintons.

In this case the President failed to perform his duty, and covered it up with after the fact spin, distortion of facts, and outright lies. The familiar line "no one could have known" that is used now by Rice as often as by Bush, may be pursuasive to people who are genuinely baffled by Mother Nature and the complexities of human relations, like international diplomacy. For those of us who have to wrestle with Mother Nature regularly, the "no one could have known" line is offensive. Mother Nature does nothing to hide her methods. There were capable scientists giving advice, making projections of the storm's strength and predicting damage. I heard the news stories before Katrina hit, and no one was suggesting a Category 5 storm would not devastate the levies. They were being reported as questionable for a Category 3 storm. In the news clip that was presented the President was told the storm had an unusually large eye and the prediction was, "we should plan for a Category 5 storm to make landfall" or similar words.

Bush was told by other humans where the storm would make landfall, how strong it would be at that time and what the predicted consequences were, over and over. I agree with Bot, we should demand to hear whatever else there is for taped data. I am not sure how effective it will be since so many Americans are so discouraged they have given up and bought the Buoy Butter. Buoy Butter may make it easier to endure the fucking, but it is not a cure. The cure is to stop accepting criminal mediocrity, negligence and base dishonesty in the character of elected officials.

Apparently Bush, and now Blair, only respond when they hear God telling them things. If you all bought a four year supply of buoy butter in November 2004, we are in for more trouble. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #73 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 02:59 AM
BenzWorld Junior Member
 
Date registered: Aug 2005
Vehicle: 1989 W126AMG/WB SOHC 6.0 1986 R107 560SL
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of


Wow! Glad to see not a lot has changed. KV is still cutting and pasting and now blaming the president of the united states for levee breaks. I gotta look up Bush' civil engineering degree and nope... looks like he doesn't have one. Those civil engineers can't evven get a pothole right one might have their doubts on how well these levees will hold on a CAT4 hurricane. Should'a bailed outta dodge if they had any sense in their heads.

Hey Shabah, these idiots that think turning the Middle East to a thin sheet of glass shows how ignorant some americans are about your people, culture and might I add your heritage.

supr_duc1 is offline  
post #74 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 03:31 AM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1982 300SD
Location: Bel AIr, MD
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
JimSmith - 3/5/2006 10:44 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 3/5/2006 9:59 PM

Quote:
MS Fowler - 3/5/2006 9:21 PM

Maybe I am simple-minded. I think that people who lie under oath to a federal judge, or a State judge for that matter should be proscecuted.

In your world lies are OK if they further your political aims.
Simple minded or not, an affair and letting a major city, with vital petrolium and import centers, drown are two completely seperate things. If you want to call them the same than I will stop here.
This is one of the main themes of the right wing's view. They miss the basic argument that the question of whether or not Clinton had a knobber from Lewinski had no bearing on the Whitewater investigation or the case before the judge, which equated the entire line of questioning to politically motivated entrapment. The judge agreed, however, Clinton did lie and did pay the consequences. No American Citizens were harmed, other than by the deep pocket spending of Special Prosecutor, several tens of millions of dollars to investigate a suspected sleezy deal that avoided the loss of some or all of a $43,000 or so land investment by the Clintons.

In this case the President failed to perform his duty, and covered it up with after the fact spin, distortion of facts, and outright lies. The familiar line "no one could have known" that is used now by Rice as often as by Bush, may be pursuasive to people who are genuinely baffled by Mother Nature and the complexities of human relations, like international diplomacy. For those of us who have to wrestle with Mother Nature regularly, the "no one could have known" line is offensive. Mother Nature does nothing to hide her methods. There were capable scientists giving advice, making projections of the storm's strength and predicting damage. I heard the news stories before Katrina hit, and no one was suggesting a Category 5 storm would not devastate the levies. They were being reported as questionable for a Category 3 storm. In the news clip that was presented the President was told the storm had an unusually large eye and the prediction was, "we should plan for a Category 5 storm to make landfall" or similar words.

Bush was told by other humans where the storm would make landfall, how strong it would be at that time and what the predicted consequences were, over and over. I agree with Bot, we should demand to hear whatever else there is for taped data. I am not sure how effective it will be since so many Americans are so discouraged they have given up and bought the Buoy Butter. Buoy Butter may make it easier to endure the fucking, but it is not a cure. The cure is to stop accepting criminal mediocrity, negligence and base dishonesty in the character of elected officials.

Apparently Bush, and now Blair, only respond when they hear God telling them things. If you all bought a four year supply of buoy butter in November 2004, we are in for more trouble. Jim
Are we forgetting that the federal government cannot act without the request of the governor of the state?
I thought this was all brought up at the time.

As for the consequences of the "lie" being part of the evaluation, well OK, if thats what you want.I still see a lot of politics in viewing which lies are impeachable, and which are not.
But go ahead and bring the impeachment charges, if you think it will help.
MS Fowler is offline  
post #75 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 05:39 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
JimSmith - 3/5/2006 10:44 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 3/5/2006 9:59 PM

Quote:
MS Fowler - 3/5/2006 9:21 PM

Maybe I am simple-minded. I think that people who lie under oath to a federal judge, or a State judge for that matter should be proscecuted.

In your world lies are OK if they further your political aims.
Simple minded or not, an affair and letting a major city, with vital petrolium and import centers, drown are two completely seperate things. If you want to call them the same than I will stop here.
This is one of the main themes of the right wing's view. They miss the basic argument that the question of whether or not Clinton had a knobber from Lewinski had no bearing on the Whitewater investigation or the case before the judge, which equated the entire line of questioning to politically motivated entrapment. The judge agreed, however, Clinton did lie and did pay the consequences. No American Citizens were harmed, other than by the deep pocket spending of Special Prosecutor, several tens of millions of dollars to investigate a suspected sleezy deal that avoided the loss of some or all of a $43,000 or so land investment by the Clintons.

In this case the President failed to perform his duty, and covered it up with after the fact spin, distortion of facts, and outright lies. The familiar line "no one could have known" that is used now by Rice as often as by Bush, may be pursuasive to people who are genuinely baffled by Mother Nature and the complexities of human relations, like international diplomacy. For those of us who have to wrestle with Mother Nature regularly, the "no one could have known" line is offensive. Mother Nature does nothing to hide her methods. There were capable scientists giving advice, making projections of the storm's strength and predicting damage. I heard the news stories before Katrina hit, and no one was suggesting a Category 5 storm would not devastate the levies. They were being reported as questionable for a Category 3 storm. In the news clip that was presented the President was told the storm had an unusually large eye and the prediction was, "we should plan for a Category 5 storm to make landfall" or similar words.

Bush was told by other humans where the storm would make landfall, how strong it would be at that time and what the predicted consequences were, over and over. I agree with Bot, we should demand to hear whatever else there is for taped data. I am not sure how effective it will be since so many Americans are so discouraged they have given up and bought the Buoy Butter. Buoy Butter may make it easier to endure the fucking, but it is not a cure. The cure is to stop accepting criminal mediocrity, negligence and base dishonesty in the character of elected officials.

Apparently Bush, and now Blair, only respond when they hear God telling them things. If you all bought a four year supply of buoy butter in November 2004, we are in for more trouble. Jim
Like I said before, if lying to a grand jury wasn't a problem then ol' Scooter would be home free. Right? But lying is a problem and so Bill's knobber, not a crisis of state, is still a lie and Scooters Plame game, not a crisis of state is still a lie.

Sends the following message: Don't lie to the grand jury. Don't lie about anything. Tell the truth about everything. Got it?

Bot
Botnst is offline  
post #76 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 05:54 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
Botnst - 3/6/2006 7:39 AM
Like I said before, if lying to a grand jury wasn't a problem then ol' Scooter would be home free. Right? But lying is a problem and so Bill's knobber, not a crisis of state, is still a lie and Scooters Plame game, not a crisis of state is still a lie.

Sends the following message: Don't lie to the grand jury. Don't lie about anything. Tell the truth about everything. Got it?

Bot
I think we can agree that lying to the Grand Jury is not to be condoned.

Scooter's lying to the Grand Jury is a lot closer to a crisis of state than Clinton's lie about the knobber. In fact, I thought when the investigation started you and the right wingers that line up with you were all about hanging the bastards who outed the CIA agent. Now you are all clinging to innuendo and "the definition of the word "is"" to keep your White House staff of liars out of jail.

And the point of this discussion was all about Bush lying. While not a Grand Jury, lying to the American people, who are represented by the Grand Jury when there is one convened, in his official capacity as President concerning matters of state that are now genuine crises, is a violation of the oath the President swears to when he assumes the job. The message should also be "Don't lie to the American people in your official capacity as President. Don't lie about anything. Tell the truth about everything." Get it?

Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #77 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 05:59 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
MS Fowler - 3/5/2006 9:21 PM

Maybe I am simple-minded. I think that people who lie under oath to a federal judge, or a State judge for that matter should be proscecuted.

In your world lies are OK if they further your political aims.
If you sucked my dick, I'd lie about it.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #78 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 06:29 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
JimSmith - 3/6/2006 7:54 AM

Quote:
Botnst - 3/6/2006 7:39 AM
Like I said before, if lying to a grand jury wasn't a problem then ol' Scooter would be home free. Right? But lying is a problem and so Bill's knobber, not a crisis of state, is still a lie and Scooters Plame game, not a crisis of state is still a lie.

Sends the following message: Don't lie to the grand jury. Don't lie about anything. Tell the truth about everything. Got it?

Bot
I think we can agree that lying to the Grand Jury is not to be condoned.

Scooter's lying to the Grand Jury is a lot closer to a crisis of state than Clinton's lie about the knobber. In fact, I thought when the investigation started you and the right wingers that line up with you were all about hanging the bastards who outed the CIA agent. Now you are all clinging to innuendo and "the definition of the word "is"" to keep your White House staff of liars out of jail.

And the point of this discussion was all about Bush lying. While not a Grand Jury, lying to the American people, who are represented by the Grand Jury when there is one convened, in his official capacity as President concerning matters of state that are now genuine crises, is a violation of the oath the President swears to when he assumes the job. The message should also be "Don't lie to the American people in your official capacity as President. Don't lie about anything. Tell the truth about everything." Get it?

Jim
Actually, nobody was charged concerning Plame's outing because Plame's status was not covert. Look it up.

The Grand Jury system depends on people being truthful and complete in their testimony. It is not up to the person being questioned to determine what is, or is not, relevant. This is where both Clinton and Libby screwed-up. They thought they were better judges of what was necessary and pertinent than the investigating attorney. It's the lie that counts, not the subject.

Whether or not the president did or did not betray his oath of office is up to the voters. If your side gets a majority in Congress I have little doubt we'll see impeachment proceedings.

Bot
Botnst is offline  
post #79 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 08:42 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
old300D's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2003
Vehicle: '83 240D
Location: Denver
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
Botnst - 3/6/2006 6:29 AM


Actually, nobody was charged concerning Plame's outing because Plame's status was not covert. Look it up.

The Grand Jury system depends on people being truthful and complete in their testimony. It is not up to the person being questioned to determine what is, or is not, relevant. This is where both Clinton and Libby screwed-up. They thought they were better judges of what was necessary and pertinent than the investigating attorney. It's the lie that counts, not the subject.

Whether or not the president did or did not betray his oath of office is up to the voters. If your side gets a majority in Congress I have little doubt we'll see impeachment proceedings.

Bot
Are you stupid or just ignorant? Plame WAS covert. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179719/site/newsweek/

OBK #35

old300D is offline  
post #80 of 86 (permalink) Old 03-06-2006, 11:34 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
RE: Video shows Bush as complete, total, utter liar. Why no calls for impeaching this lying sack of

Quote:
old300D - 3/6/2006 10:42 AM

Quote:
Botnst - 3/6/2006 6:29 AM


Actually, nobody was charged concerning Plame's outing because Plame's status was not covert. Look it up.

The Grand Jury system depends on people being truthful and complete in their testimony. It is not up to the person being questioned to determine what is, or is not, relevant. This is where both Clinton and Libby screwed-up. They thought they were better judges of what was necessary and pertinent than the investigating attorney. It's the lie that counts, not the subject.

Whether or not the president did or did not betray his oath of office is up to the voters. If your side gets a majority in Congress I have little doubt we'll see impeachment proceedings.

Bot
Are you stupid or just ignorant? Plame WAS covert. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179719/site/newsweek/
If I have a choice I'd prefer ignorant. Her status was NEVER established as being legally a NOC agent. That is the crux of the allegations surrounding Plame. What Libby did may not have been a crime concerning Plame (depends on her status and hsi knowledge of her status) and he is not charged with outing her. He is charged with lying to a Grand Jury.

Here's some additional analysis you might (or might not) find informative, shoudl you choose to read it and understand it.

Bot



During the press conference, Fitzgerald was asked if he knew whether Libby revealed Plame's covert status knowingly; he responded:

Let me say two things. Number one, I am not speaking to whether or not Valerie Wilson was covert. And anything I say is not intended to say anything beyond this: that she was a CIA officer from January 1st, 2002, forward. I will confirm that her association with the CIA was classified at that time through July 2003. And all I'll say is that, look, we have not made any allegation that Mr. Libby knowingly, intentionally outed a covert agent. We have not charged that. And so I'm not making that assertion.[9]

Joe Wilson, Plame's husband, stated in a July 14, 2005 interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN that "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity."[11] When asked by Wolf Blitzer "But she hadn't been a clandestine officer for some time before that?", Wilson responded by saying "That's not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I'll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that's why they referred it to the Justice Department." This comment has been misinterpreted, but Wilson later explained his meaning to Associated Press: "In an interview Friday, Wilson said his comment was meant to reflect that his wife lost her ability to be a covert agent because of the leak, not that she had stopped working for the CIA beforehand. His wife's 'ability to do the job she's been doing for close to 20 years ceased from the minute Novak's article appeared; she ceased being a clandestine officer,' he said."[12]

A Washington Times article by Bill Gertz has asserted that "Mrs. Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a Moscow spy, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity." [13] The article goes on to say that the Cuban government learned of Plame's CIA status "in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana. The documents were supposed to be sealed from the Cuban government, but intelligence officials said the Cubans read the classified material and learned the secrets contained in them, the officials said." This information was used in a court briefing filed on behalf of several news agencies seeking to prevent Judith Miller and Matt Cooper from going to jail for not disclosing their sources to Patrick Fitzgerald and the federal grand jury investigating her exposure by Robert Novak. [14]. Washington Post reporter Dana Priest notes that these possible compromises of her identity did not change her undercover status: "Plame's case is different in that she was burned -- not once, but twice. The first time was by Aldrich H. Ames, the CIA turncoat who is believed to have given the Russians the name of every covert operative in the Soviet/East European Division over 10 years beginning around 1985. Not knowing exactly whom he had outed, the CIA recalled hundreds of operatives, including Plame, for their safety. Still, her undercover status remained intact until July, when syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak identified her by name as a CIA 'operative' in a column about her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, whom the CIA had sent to Niger to check on allegations that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium oxide there."[15] The Boston Globe also editorialized: "Once before, Plame was caught up in a case illustrating how costly it can be for a CIA officer to be in danger of having her cover exposed. The agency called Plame home in 1997 in fear that Aldrich Ames, the notorious Soviet mole inside the CIA, had revealed her true identity to his KGB handlers.... Such betrayals might have been expected in the Cold War. They should not occur because political operatives in the White House want to tarnish the reputation of a critic or settle scores with a CIA they may regard as too reluctant to tailor its analyses to the talking points of a vice president or a president."[16]

Botnst is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome