Print

[xmedia2004]

QUOTE

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's CIA-leak inquiry is focusing attention on what long has been a tactic of U.S. President George W. Bush's administration: slash-and-burn assaults on its critics, particularly those opposed to the president's Iraq war policies.

QUOTE

If top officials are indicted, it could seriously erode the administration's credibility and prove yet another embarrassment to Bush on the larger issue of how he and his national security team marshaled information -- much of it later shown to be inaccurate -- to support their case for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

With Dubya Approval ratings in a port a pottie now this.

I see an indictment lurking in the shadows, maybe Karl Rove will take one on the chin for Dubya.  

To some it might appear that the "thug" Chaney leaked classified information regarding the identity of an CIA operative that exposed Dubya's smoke and mirrors over Iraq.

We may be looking at the " last throws of life " of this scripted administration.

Maybe he in Chaney will go on vaction in time for the trial of " The mayor of Bagdhad"

Source

[thegame_evolution]

so does this mean if his approval rating goes below 15% he gets automatically impeached?? like the 10 run rule in little league baseball??

[XeroKitsune]

This is important because in the next election there is no way Bush will win the election... oh wait he can't run again. Soo the approvial numbers moot point, right?
Not that I trust polls to begin with, normaly you can phrase questions to mess with thier reactions. Much like some of the polls on the current war, a person who shouts the US should be out of iraq and a person who says the desert should have been hit with enough nucuar blasts to turn it into a single sheet of glass, are both chalked up to opposing Bush's approch to the war.

[lordvader129]

i often wonder if most americans really understand why they dont approve of bush, or if they just say they dont like him because everyone else says it

and also how many people realize how much (or little really) is actually in his control, most people i talk to disapprove of bush for reasons that dont even have anything to do with him, stuff that is congress's doing

[pug_ster]

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Oct 19 2005, 08:32 PM)

i often wonder if most americans really understand why they dont approve of bush, or if they just say they dont like him because everyone else says it

[pug_ster]

Our forefathers always stressed about the separation of Church and State.  Yet there are many people who voted for Bush just because that he is a Christian and not much else.  Now that's stupidity.  What happened to voting for the the person who has the best ideas, and the best qualifications for the job?

[Statecowboy]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Oct 20 2005, 03:02 PM)

Our forefathers always stressed about the separation of Church and State.  Yet there are many people who voted for Bush just because that he is a Christian and not much else.  Now that's stupidity.  What happened to voting for the the person who has the best ideas, and the best qualifications for the job?

[xmedia2004]

QUOTE

Unless of course you can impeach him. To my knowledge Bush hasn't committed any impeachable offenses. The whole "war on Iraq under false pretenses" cannot be blamed on Bush. He trusted the information from the intelligence agencies. Even if he coerced them to give him bad information, they are still at fault for being coerced. Maybe not to the everyday man, but Im pretty sure thats how Judge Roberts will see it

To pass along classified information to someone who doesnt have clearance to handle matter is essentially espionage, which is a felony.

And to lie, cover up this act before a grand jury is also a felony. To date, there is no smoking gun leading to Bush, but Chaney all but has a fork stuck in him.

The government would appear to have "flipped" someone close to Bush.

P.S.  Guys I started this thread to bring the issue of an elected official divulging the name of a CIA operative to settle a political score, to light.

How does religion have any bearing on this national security matter.

I thought that this was a serious issue, but if you all like I can stick to the more popular Jerry Springerish topics and popular distractions that only serve theatre.

[pug_ster]

QUOTE(Statecowboy @ Oct 20 2005, 09:04 PM)

Well I hate to break it to you, but people vote for someone who reflects their beliefs, views, and someone who will benefit them the most. 

[Statecowboy]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Oct 20 2005, 03:32 PM)

Maybe I am weird.  Let's say manager in a company who wants to hire an accountant.  To get the best qualified accountant, the manager a) went thru an exhaustive process of interviewing a couple of people and determine who is the most qualified.  b ) hire a friend from Church service who did his taxes last year.

[lordvader129]

QUOTE(puckSR @ Oct 20 2005, 05:17 PM)

He has almost no responsibility as Vice-president except to be the backup.

[xmedia2004]

QUOTE

Notes in the hands of a federal prosecutor suggest that Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, first heard of the CIA officer from Cheney himself, The New York Times reported in Tuesday's editions.

Source

Oh what a tangled web we weave when we practice to decieve.

[lordvader129]

sir walter scott.....and i have my own kudos

[Chupathingy]

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Oct 19 2005, 01:32 PM)

i often wonder if most americans really understand why they dont approve of bush, or if they just say they dont like him because everyone else says it

[pug_ster]

QUOTE

Ok, why religion. Statecowboy is correct. People can vote however they want, and the president can nominate whoever he wants. The issue at hand is not related to this at all.

This is the reason why people like Michael Brown was the President of FEMA and why Miers is nominated for Justice.  You're right, people can vote for whomever they want and the president can nominate whomever he wants.  But I am sure that many Americans can sleep better at nights when someone qualified is working in the government, not a bunch of beaurocrats.