|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by powerclown
....And now that Bush won the election,....
............Now after losing the election, its all sour grapes and politicizing the Politicization of the war. If one thinks its entirely the Republicans' fault for the hardships of the country these days - without any Democratic complicity, duplicity and bald-faced pandering - they are misjudging the situation imho.
|
Stole the election, is a more accurate term, with the complicity of the MSM:
Quote:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...ck=1&cset=true
November 1, 2005 latimes.com :
Robert Scheer:
<b>What Judy forgot: Your right to know</b>
THE MOST intriguing revelation of Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's news conference last week was his assertion that he would have presented his indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby a year ago if not for the intransigence of reporters who refused to testify before the grand jury. He said that without that delay, "we would have been here in October 2004 instead of October 2005."
Had that been the case, John Kerry probably would be president of the United States today.
Surely a sufficient number of swing voters in the very tight race would have been outraged to learn weeks before the 2004 election that, according to this indictment, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff — a key member of the White House team that made the fraudulent case for invading Iraq — "did knowingly and corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice."
It is deeply disturbing that the public was left uninformed about such key information because of the posturing of news organizations that claimed to be upholding the free-press guarantee of the 1st Amendment. As Fitzgerald rightly pointed out, "I was not looking for a 1st Amendment showdown." Nor was one necessary, if reporters had fulfilled their obligation to inform the public, as well as the grand jury, as to what they knew of a possible crime by a government official.
How odd for the press to invoke the Constitution's prohibition against governmental abridgement of the rights of a free press in a situation in which a top White House official exploited reporters in an attempt to abridge an individual's right to free speech...........
|
Quote:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...overup_worked/
<b>The coverup worked</b>
By Thomas Oliphant, Globe Columnist | November 1, 2005
WASHINGTON
NO ONE really noticed, but Patrick Fitzgerald made an unassailable point last week about the timing of the indictment that his CIA leak investigation has produced so far.
''I would have wanted nothing better," he said, ''that when the subpoenas were issued in August of 2004, witnesses testified then, and we would have been here in October of 2004 instead of October of 2005."
Give or take a nuance and some garbled syntax, the prosecutor was in effect showing that the quixotic pursuit of a nonexistent right or privilege by some news organizations is one reason President Bush was reelected last year.
John Kerry is still easy to lampoon, as if his narrow loss were in fact a 20-point landslide. But imagine last week's astonishing developments unfolding in the fall of 2004. Imagine not only the large book of perjury that Fitzgerald threw at I. Lewis Libby, but also the still-tangled web of the infamous Official A in the grand jury's indictment and imagine President Bush trying to explain in the midst of a presidential campaign what that official is still doing on the public payroll.
Karl Rove's management of a campaign based on government-inspired fears of imminent terrorist attacks and of a cartoon portrait of Kerry as Osama bin Laden's soul brother, Rove's friends' assaults on a distinguished military record during the Vietnam War, and his allies' efforts to make the entire nation fearful that gay people who love each other might get married, not to mention Kerry's own mistakes as a candidate, might have been seen in a very different context...
......I would add that <b>the obstruction of justice alleged in this case kept us from knowing material things about our leaders at the moment we were deciding whether to keep them in office.</b> In more common speech, obstruction of justice is a coverup, and the coverup worked -- just as the Watergate coverup in 1972 kept facts from the public that would have guaranteed Richard Nixon's defeat.
|
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...103101386.html
What the 'Shield' Covered Up
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, November 1, 2005; A25
Has anyone noticed that the coverup worked?
In his impressive presentation of the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby last week, Patrick Fitzgerald expressed the wish that witnesses had testified when subpoenas were issued in August 2004, and "we would have been here in October 2004 instead of October 2005."
Note the significance of the two dates: October 2004, before President Bush was reelected, and October 2005, after the president was reelected. Those dates make clear why Libby threw sand in the eyes of prosecutors, in the special counsel's apt metaphor, and helped drag out the investigation.
As long as Bush still faced the voters, the White House wanted Americans to think that officials such as Libby, Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney had nothing to do with the leak campaign to discredit its arch-critic on Iraq, former ambassador Joseph Wilson.
And Libby, the good soldier, pursued a brilliant strategy to slow the inquiry down. As long as he was claiming that journalists were responsible for spreading around the name and past CIA employment of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, Libby knew that at least some news organizations would resist having reporters testify. The journalistic "shield" was converted into a shield for the Bush administration's coverup.
Bush and his disciples would like everyone to assume that Libby was some kind of lone operator who, for this one time in his life, abandoned his usual caution. They pray that Libby will be the only official facing legal charges and that political interest in the case will dissipate.
You can tell the president worries that this won't work, because yesterday he did what he usually does when he's in trouble: He sought to divide the country and set up a bruising ideological fight. He did so by nominating a staunchly conservative judge to the Supreme Court..........
|
You're on the losing, already discredited, and soon to be prosecuted in numbers that you can't imagine yet, <b>side</b> of this fight, powerclown. The American sheeple are slow to "get it", but quick to anger when they finally do "get it". They are starting to figure this Rove "Op" out, and the MSM is starting to come around to help them see what really happened in "Election 2004". The traitorous thugs that you defend....folks who smeared a war hero in 2000, and another in 2004, simply because they ran for election against Bush, will be held accountable.
Patrick Fitzgerald is unmarried, annoyed, brilliant, full of integrity and extremely good at his job.(he's described what these fucks did: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102802234.html">He likened Libby's actions to throwing sand in an umpire's eyes.</a>) and he is aware (he said so) of what the folks who you stand up for, really did. Offenses against all of America. This prosecutor is your worst nightmare....Count on it !
Quote:
http://www.sentienttimes.com/05/june...formation.html
The Disinformation Society
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
George Bush’s re-election has been explained as a red-state-versus-blue-state “values” gap. But research shows a majority of Bush voters were misinformed about White House policies on the environment, Iraq, and terrorism. Instead of news, they got propaganda disseminated by the right-wing machine, corporate broadcasters, and journalists who think balance is reporting one side. In a new epilogue to his recent book, Crimes Against Nature, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. shows how, almost two decades after Reagan’s FCC eliminated the Fairness Doctrine, the media have hidden the real gap—between America’s values and those of its government.............
|
Last edited by host; 11-02-2005 at 04:07 AM..
|