By Larry Johnson
closeAuthor: Larry Johnson
Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on November 21, 2007 at 1:20 PM in Current Affairs
Former Presidential spokesliar, oops, I mean spokesman , Scott McClellan, reminded us this week that the fish rots from the head. McClellan drops the truth bombshell that implicates George Bush and Dick Cheney in the sordid outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson. CNN reports that:
Amid a swelling controversy about the leak of Valerie Wilson’s name, McClellan went to the White House podium in October 2003 and told reporters that Karl Rove, the president’s top political adviser, and Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Cheney’s chief of staff, had not been involved. . .
There was one problem. It was not true,” McClellan writes in his new book, “What Happened,” which is to be released in April. “I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president’s chief of staff and the president himself.”
We knew about Rove and Libby. But now we can add the names of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Andy Card to the list of people who helped create the lie, i.e., that no one at the White House was involved in leaking the name of Valerie. We no longer have to wonder if any damage was done. We have the revelations in Valerie’s book, Fair Game, describing in detail her job as the operations chief for the Iraq Task Force and her mission of tracking down and eliminating weapons of mass destruction.
If outing a CIA intelligence officer collecting intelligence on our enemy during a time of war is not treason, then what is? George Bush commuted the prison sentence of Scooter Libby to help buy his silence. Why? McClellan’s revelation blows the cover on that sham. Bush was involved. Of course we will now witness the spectacle of Republicans, who delighted in castigating Bill Clinton for his confusion about the meaning of sex, themselves doing verbal gymnastics as they search for the true meaning of “involved”. Horseshit! This is an impeachable offense. George Bush not only helped obstruct justice, but continues to obstruct justice. The President is no longer an idle bystander. He is a participant in a cover up. He knew that Rove, Libby, Card, and Cheney were involved in leaking Valerie’s name. Yet the coward, the man who failed to complete his Reserve duty, went AWOL on his staff. He sent Scott McClellan out to lie to the press.
We already knew that Bush was neither honorable nor a man or his word. Despite his vow to remove anyone involved in leaking the name of Valerie Plame Wilson, he kept Card, Rove and Libby safe in the White House until Federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald blew the whistle. And even then, Bush refused to do the right thing. He acted immorally and illegally. Why should Scooter come clean when he knows his co-conspirator will get him off? And he did.
Now the ball is in the court of the Congress. Will the Democrats find their spine and enforce the law? I doubt it. They want the perks of power without being willing to bear the burden of upholding justice and and enforcing the law. Will the Republicans voice outrage at this betrayal? Not likely. Men of the character of Howard Baker, who called out Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal, no longer lead that party.
George Bush may be genial, but now we know he is scum. Facilitating the cover up of the crime of outing a CIA operative in a time of war puts blood on his hands. It is that simple.
UPDATE: Bloomberg News’ reports that:
McClellan doesn’t suggest that Bush deliberately lied to him about Libby’s and Rove’s involvement in the leak, said Peter Osnos, founder and editor-in-chief of Public Affairs Books, which is publishing McClellan’s memoir next year.”He told him something that wasn’t true, but the president didn’t know it wasn’t true,” Osnos said in a telephone interview. “The president told him what he thought to be the case.”
So Bush is a Moron? He’s not some janitor with an opinion. He’s ostensibly the Commander-in-Chief. And this begs more questions. Who did the President ask for information about this matter? Cheney? Card? Who lied to the President? Notably, no one lost their job even though the President supposedly belatedly discovered that he wasn’t given the straight poop? God save us from these deviants.
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
Larry, I was wondering when someone was going to post a topic on this matter and thinking that maybe you all had already eaten too much turkey and were too full to type. I’d like to see that entire gang from Congress Avenue in Austin go to jail, along with their cohorts in Dallas and Fort Worth.
oh can that include Perry, huh huh? can it? pleeaassee?
Poor Chris. He’s worried about his new boss.
By the way, Chris, if the Good Governor doesn’t look into getting my divorce informaton put back into the Public Record where it belongs, I might just have to contact that important person again.
Exactly. I’ve been commenting about the absolute need to try these Faustian Five for treason.
And didn’t Plame state that she had subsequent threats to her and her family, and that the White House refused to provide protection?
That leads me to believe that THEY are the source of the threats.
Your outrage expresses what a lot of us are feeling about this President. His character is quite shallow and cold because his main concern is for himself and the legacy he leaves as president. It is written that Bush invites historians to the White House to talk about his presidency in terms of presidential legacies. If these historians have any guts at all they should tell him the truth and let him know that he is the worst president and time will not help historians ratings of him. I’m reading the book by historian Doris Kearns Goodwin “Terms of Rivals” about Abe Lincoln. You could see how great Lincoln was and how down the presidential chain with Bush2 being the worst. IMPEACH BUSH & CHENEY NOW. Bush has lied so much that he is crying wolf every time he opens his mouth.
Any one know the statue of limitation on treason? I saw a clip this am of Joe Wilson say at a min. they should release the transcript of the Special Prosecutor. Add five more names to the John Doe list of the Wilson’s civil suit. Has Waxman recieved a document he requested?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/051407B.shtml
Hope the cost of Duct Tape does not go up to much this year.
I believe there is no statute of limitations on treason, just as there is none on murder.
Just confirmed that there is no statute of limitations on treason.
But the power of the pardon is absolute.
Yes, but you cannot pardon someone who has not been tried and convicted first. After all, there has to be something to pardon them FOR.
Tell that to Gerald Ford!
There’s that famous short story, “The Man Without A Country,” about an American Army officer who’s tried for aiding Aaron Burr’s filibustering expedition out West. The officer insists that he wishes he never hear the words “United States” again. As punishment he’s permanently placed aboard various U.S. Naval vessels where he’s quarantined from all news of his country. The point of the story is that this is what a traitor does, places himself at odds with the entire nation for whom he should feel loyalty.
Benedict Arnold was a case in point. Even though he was rewarded with a British commission and even though he had technically been loyal to the British Crown , other British officers shunned him and he wasn’t advanced very far in his military career, because he was mainly an opportunist loyal only to himself.
Best news in Novemeber 2007 yet! Thank you!
[...] Squeaky Wheel Seeks Grease wrote an interesting post today!.Here’s a quick excerpt Former Presidential spokesliar, oops, I mean spokesman , Scott McClellan, reminded us this week that the fish rots from the head. McClellan drops the truth bombshell that implicates George Bush and Dick Cheney in the sordid outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson. CNN reports that: Amid a swelling controversy about the leak of Valerie Wilson’s name, McClellan went to the White House podium in October 2003 and told reporters that Karl Rove, the president’s top political adviser, and Lewis [...]
Watch your back Scottie, I would advise your brother, Don and your mom the same. You know firsthand how this admin.’s retribution works…
Yes, indeed. Scottie, Don and his Mom. All of them at the Controller’s Office, Financial Services, Austin Energy. The Kuwaiti crooks amongst them should be deported.
Excellent post. Larry. I hope they frog march them all down the streets of Baghdad, butt naked, as someone else has said… These men are TRAITORS, and should be treated as such. Pariahs, unfit to inhabit the same planet as other people. I pray that I live long enough to see justice done.
There might have been some questions in the past 7 years about this administration’s high crimes and Misdemeanors..
I think that question has been clarified..
and answered.
great stuff! i was waiting for Mr Johnson to weigh in on Scottie’s book!! any chance he gets to speak about it on our MSM “news” networks??
Others weigh in:
“Just when you think the credibility of this White House can’t get any lower, another shoe drops,” said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. “If the Bush administration won’t even tell the truth to its official spokesman, how can the American people expect to be told the truth either?”
Several of the Democratic presidential contenders also weighed in. Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., called on Attorney General Michael Mukasey to investigate. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said the administration “has made a mockery of our legal system.” Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said the news is “outrageous.”
credit: USATODAY 11-21-2007
I don’t know why some people are acting so shocked at this revelation. Does anyone really believe that any White House spokesperson tells the truth as often as they lie, avoid, and obfuscate? Isn’t skill at lying, avoiding, and obfuscating in the official job description for that position?
As for Scotty’s claim that he “unkowingly” passed on false information - yeah, right! How many times did he knowingly pass on false information for every time he did so unknowingly? No one who reaches the position of official White House spokesperson is naive enough to believe that the talking points they are handed and memorize every morning are the truth.
No one is shocked. We’re just surprised it’s coming out now, and it’s coming from moonface.
They all knew. It’s criminal conspiracy. We knew it every time the shameless piglet’s waxy dome leaked the flop sweat of another failed lie.
That manuscript should be subpoenaed NOW.
Agreed.
agreed. They know their job is to convince us that what they are saying is true whether it is or not.
And why IS anybody acting shocked. Is there anyone…really…who did not know that Cheney outed Plame or that Bush knew what was happening and where the leak came from? Hell, we all knew. We were just waiting for confirmation so we could make them know that we knew so we could call them liars rather than just hint at it.
Bush and Cheney are the most impeachable Pres. and VP in our nation’s history yet Dems leaders prove themselves too weak to impeach. This is why they are so unpopular. We won’t forget and sooner or later we will get rid of these “republicrats” too.
….His character is quite shallow and cold because his main concern is for himself and the legacy he leaves as president….
BRING EM ON!
True, Centrocitta, and the core reason his character is shallow and cold is that he is a classic case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder with exceptionally strong sociopathic tendencies (narcissists are sociopathic by definition, but not all are full-blown sociopaths, and Bush just might be).
Due to the very nature of the disorder, NPD is virtually impossible to treat. Narcissists are miserable people, and they leave misery in their wake everywhere they go.
This adminstration is a classic study in Criminal Psychopaths, and yes I am going further than you.
Bush, in additon to his other pathologies, is seriously “Behaviorally Challenged” and should be treated as the 10 year old “problem child” he behaves as. As any public school teacher in the country can tell you, you do not give an inch, and when they finally, finally start modifying their behavior, you are very moderate in rewarding them.
Otherwise they will keep walking all over you and expanding what they see as their “winning” the game.
Scottie’s publisher is now retracting. says Scottie is not implicating Bush per se. What he didn’t say was that Cheney wasn’t involved. McClellan is probably right. Bush is a fuc*ing dumbass. The monster behind it is Cheney.
I will say that the Plame scandal never does die down and that is a good thing. The TRUTH will always prevail; the one thing that the Bush Administration didn’t account for in all it’s planning.
Happy Thanksgiving to the Johnson’s and the Plame-Wilson’s and to everyone else here at NQ.
I’d like to know what Scotty knew and when he knew it? Ditto the entire Bush White House? Fitzgerald’s investigation is still open. He ought to question McClellan, Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby, Card…all of them again.
Senator Dodd is already calling for a Justice Dept. investigation, which would be lead by newly confirmed AG Mukasey. We’ll see just how “independent” Mukasey is if he doesn’t investigate this.
So what took McClellan so long to tell the truth? These liars all wait to tell the truth until after they publish their memoirs, in order to boost book sales for their golden years. It’s outrageous!
And, yeah right, Bush was given the same assurances McClellan was that nobody was involved. I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Just checked Rep. Conyers’s blog and Senator Leahy’s website and nothing yet…. These two are the ones to watch for any Congressional investigations. They better be getting on it.
Also, while McClellan was lying to the press from the White House, didn’t some of those press KNOW that McClellan was lying? Yet they reported what McClellan said, the Bush denials, as fact. Some of the press knew that the Bush White House were a bunch of liars and traitors, yet they continued to repeat the lies, they continued to make the Bush administration’s case for war, and they continued to paint anyone who objected or questioned any of this as traitors.
They must have got wind of this overseas. The Euro is at 148.64. I think an impeachment would help the dollar rebound. Maybe that’s what Zarkozy was referring to when he warned Congress that it should not let the slide go to far.
Larry, you are very wrong if you think that Democrats have to “find thier spine”.They have to grow one. Why do you think that Republicans oppose so vehemently stem cell research? Because that is the only way that Dems will be able to grow one.
On the other hand, we now have a new definition to “bringing honor and dignity to the White House.”
For day weekend ahead. Would there be any significance to MacClellan releasing this information now?
a diary at DKos Cowardly Scott McClellan Retracts Allegation about Bush
from MSN article:
Publisher: McClellan doesn’t believe Bush lied
Yeah, McClellan retracts it after creating a huge public splash to increase book sales. “Whoops,” McClellan says, “I didn’t really say what I just said.”
Bingo, Leslie.
McClellan’s publisher isn’t the first to promise to “blow the lid off” something or other to tease advance orders, and the quote provided isn’t specific enough to actually say what the publisher clearly knew it would imply.
This isn’t even a tempest in a teapot. It’s more of a regatta in a gravy boat.
mmmmm, gravy. Ahhhhhhhggggggggg…..
Happy Thanksgiving, y’all.
Is anyone surprised about any retractions?
April is a long ways off…
No. Seemed too good to be true from the people who’ve raised the ratfuck to an artform.
So what took McClellan so long to tell the truth?
He’s not telling the truth. Watch the original clip of the briefing when he stated that Rove and Libby were not involved. He’s choking on it when he says it. He knew he was lying then and he is lying now. What else does “unknowingly” mean besides CYA. The designation “TOP SECRET” has not meant anything to this administration. From the podium as Scotty split W. said I will see ya in Texas. Ie shut up until I’m out of office.
I agree. Ari Fleischer was a wonderful liar. He could look you right in the eye and lie as if he was telling the truth. Scotty on the other hand was a terrible liar. He just couldn’t pull it off without choking up and stuttering and hesitating, thus giving away that he was lying.
Shirin, reminds me of a joke from “The Beverly Hillbillies.” A young musician tells Ellie Mae that next time he sees her he’ll bring his “lyre.” Ellie Mae gushes to her folks, “That fellow’s so honest he’s got to pay someone to LIE for him!”
Bush lied to America.
Not to worry.
Caesar’s henchmen will take the blame.
Can Armitage still say he was the one who said this?
Condi Rice was NSA, her Dep’t handled all conversation and communications oversight.
This goes past those five named, it’s just certification that the Senior positions were in on it, but remember others had charge to oversee their words.
Can we amend the AUMF to an AUML?
Authorization to Use Mendacious Lying?
There, no we can let Bush break the law right next to AT&T while Alexander Graham Bell rolls in his grave…
NEW FLASH Scot McClellan:
ignorance is no excuse in a court of law. Hope to see you there soon.
I thought Bush would fire anyone involved?
Ohhhh, he said “take care” of them. That includes promotions or commutations.
Can someone compel action on this? JAGS don’t take Holidays off. Failure to uphold or enforce the law can be considered complicity in some cases? Homicide gets a free pass?
The Authorization to Use Military Force is based on the mendacious and murderous lies of 9/11. These lies are far, far more serious than lies surrounding the Valerie Plame incident. Outing her was of course wrong, but I find it hard to be sympathetic for the CIA when they have allowed the fraud of 9/11 to continue so long. Show me a CIA employee with the courage,integrity, and patriotism to speak out about the 9/11 lies.
The AUMF should never have been passed, and should be repealed immediately.
I think we just lost one more John Doe. Get ‘em, Val!
I still think that they were out to get Plame, to get her out of the CIA, so that the question about WMD’s of Iraq would be hazy and that they could slow down the intelligence about Iran so that they can attack that too.
Wilson provided a cover for them to do so.
Getting Plame out gave them an opportunity to slow down the real true intelligence from that area and gave them an opportunity to beat the war drum for Iran.
God knows, we don’t want the truth if it conflict with what WE want to do!!!!
I couldn’t agree more.
Diane, this doesn’t make any sense.
Valerie Plame headed a group charged with finding evidence to support the President’s contention that Iraq was just crawling with WMDs, and she would be the first to tell you that she was doing her best to provide her President, who she serves, with that evidence.
Blowing her cover doesn’t change that. It doesn’t change the work the group was doing, and doesn’t change the evidence– or rather lack of it– that the group was uncovering. Removing Valerie from the head position– which blowing her cover didn’t do, and couldn’t be expected to– merely sees another appointed to that head position and the result is still the same: wishful thinking on Bush’s part, that he could invade, and it would somehow all be justified by the discovery of some WMD stockpiles, somewhere, anywhere, after that invasion.
Diane, oh how I wish that this particular conspiracy theory would go the way of the dodo. It detracts from the actual truth of the matter: the sheer pettiness that rightfully characterizes these monsters, revealed by their little scheme to discredit Joe Wilson by implying that he some sort of nepotism poster boy on a paid junket to exotic lands.
I’m left to believe, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that they neither knew nor cared about the “collateral damage” of Val’s cover being blown, and it doesn’t matter whether they knew or not: they should have checked.
They just didn’t give a shit, and boy, I can’t think of a single sentence that more accurately characterizes the current Presidency.
“It detracts from the actual truth of the matter”
That is the problem with all wild-ass conspiracy theories. They distract and detract from the reality of what actually happened and how and why.
And how is it that conspiracy theories are ALWAYS impossibly complicated? People who subscribe to them need to learn about Occam’s razor.
I don’t think it’s that wild-assed or that complicated. NO information allows cheney to say whatever he fucking wants without refutation. You see what he’s doing with the new NIE.
Conspiracies succeed by making themselves unbelievable and unacceptable, to the point that they are not investigated and all evidence is seen as coincidental. Those involved in a conspiracy must make a point of confounding or complicating any theories by adding unbelievable issues to them. Just because it appears unbelievable or its premise is unacceptable does not negate hard evidence. For instance to believe our government would kill thousands of its own innocent citizens for trillions in future profits and to change policy is not believable, but when the evidence becomes overwhelming as in 9/11, and the efforts to suppress the evidence is just as overwhelming conspiracy theories are justified. After all, you cannot suggest that all conspiracies never existed or were not successful. So when and what makes a conspiracy true to you. The gulf of Tonkin affair, the Boston tea party where “Indians” attacked a British trader ship, the Bay of Pigs. Just what makes you decide to investigate a conspiracy “theory”. Bush’s reaction when the country was under attack? What?
Keep in mind that the whole operation of “Brewster-Jennings” became compromised with the outing of Plame and anyone ever associated with it now became suspect. We now know from the Downing Street memos and from further investigations into the “yellow cake” story that Cheney knew the claim was false, knew that Wilson was right, and decide to teach the CIA (not just Plame) what happens when you question the VP. Cheney knew exactly what he was doing…distracting from the lies that got us into the war and punishing the CIA. Conspiracies are very real with this administration…considering how Cheney got and re-received the yellow cake forgeries from Italian intelligence determined to be forgeries by the CIA then came back to US again a 2nd time via Italian to British intelligence and claimed as real. Conspiracy from beginning to end and yes it was treason. There’s no distraction…just an application of the facts that have been ignored.
Cheney knew exactly what he was doing…
AGREED 100%.
Larry himself said dire consequences more than likely befell anyone and everyone associated with Brew-Jen. To think cheney was looking only at the short-term goal of discrediting/punishing Joe using Val is quite naive. Maybe that reasoning got over with the petty and juvenile Hood Ornament, but cheney, cheney?, not knowing the exact consequences of outing Val? Never. This is a “man” who executes 30-year plans.
Larry “horseshit” indeed…by the truckload.
Will the Democrats step up to the plate and hold the Bush administration accountable for outing Valerie Plame Wilson and for an INTELLIGENCE SNOWJOB that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead, injured and millions displaced? Or will we have to wait for the Democrats to wait until one of these psychopaths gets a BLOWJOB from an intern which the Republicans found so important to investigate.
At least McClellan is demonstrating that he has a conscience and they seem to be in short supply these days.
As a soccer mom and concerned citizen I made it too several days of the Libby trial (so interesting, Fitz was so impressive). Is there anything to the “sealed vs. sealed” envelope. I am a peasant, rookie, media junkie trying like hell to understand all of this hogwash.
Is there anything to the “sealed vs. sealed” envelope?
UH?
…..Will the Democrats step up to the plate and hold the Bush administration accountable for outing Valerie Plame Wilson and for an INTELLIGENCE SNOWJOB that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead, injured and millions displaced?…..
The Democrats have to have a reason for not acting. Maybe they fear another attack similar to or worse than 9-11 if they impeach. How do we know they haven’t been warned by these traitors?
“hundreds of thousands of dead…ed”
Please amend that to more than one million dead. That is the latest estimate based on scientific studies.
Oh by the way I went through the New York Times this morning and unless I missed it not a word about Scott McClellan dropping the truth.
[...] lie. He lied by proxy, in the form of the softly formed evasions of Scott McClellan. And all the evasions of others. And Bush himself? After McClellan said Rove and Libby weren’t involved in the case of [...]
So true.
Just read they re-arrested 3 people in the Natalee Hollaway case. This sure will cool the MSM off this story in a hurry.
That’s what I thought.
They’ve probably got something on Scotty. This is a criminal organization. They acted like one in the case of the Wilsons. They act like it every day of the week.
In both cases someone knows where the bodies are.
I think it won’t change the echo chamber that much, considering Fox Noise will be tied up driving “the gemmie my money” for W.
The issue will be come a talking point.
Can any lawyers out there answer if executive privilege is a valid defense argument for the commission of a felony?
INCOMING>>>>>>
Larry, with all due respect for some of your present political positions and the alleged purpose of this site, I must take issue with your statement:
Even as John Dean has so clearly stated, this is “Worse than Watergate”; this declaration does not imply that there was an abundance of character in the Republican leadership during the Nixon era, and Howard Baker is no exception. Fashioning him as a man of character is revisionist nonsense at best, a fact that a cursory glance at his Congressional record will prove. He, and his new found political recruit at the time, Fred Thompson, did every thing they could to obstruct the investigation into the corruption of the Nixon Whitehouse, until political expediency compelled him to support it.
As we all are painfully aware, the current crop of Republicans are much more strident and drunk on the power they have attained in the past few decades; this does not support some vicarious idea that they were any less determined to undercut our democratic ideals, it simply demonstrates that they were less organized and intoxicated, not less strident and ideologically bankrupt.
While we must be cognizant of the current crop of obstructionists in the Congress, and their facilitators in both parties, we must also be aware of those that are attempting to champion the cause of the public good over private advantage. Painting all Democrats with the broad brush of cynical derision, however cute and popular it may be, suffers from a lack of informed candor and honesty.
The judge in the Wilson’s civil case stated there “is no constitutional remedy available to them.” in dismissing the case. I must have missed something.
As Leslie mentioned above, the Plame outing case is not closed. At the end of the Libby trial, Fitzgerald went outside to the press and said words to the effect that it was stalled, and could not continue until new information came to light.
OOPS, someone just turned on the light.
Scottie’s word alone may not be enough to indict anyone, but investigating whatever reasons he has for what he’s saying might lead to something useful.
Is impeachment still off the table? Where and what is this majical table of lore? Since no one has ammended the articles of impeachment in the constitution lately, I assume it means the discussion tables in the committees and the floor of the House.
Various members of Congress have said that they don’t want to start an impeachment that would fail, because failure would make matters worse. In my mind, what specifically might be worse, is the position of House Speaker Pelosi if both Bush AND Cheney were impeached. As next in line, there would be a blizzard of accusations over her making a power grab.
On the other hand, letting committees take the lead on investigating impeachment, would at least bring many issues into the open.
Putting Impeachment Back on The Table
http://counterpunch.org/lindorff11222007.html
Yeah, I guess it’s still possible. Bush was selected in a 00 year. Supposedly, he’s not going to finish his term. All others elected in 00 years didn’t last either — except for Reagan who NEARLY didn’t last.
Eeerie, by the way. Today is November 22.
Ooooh, I forgot about the ‘00 Curse!
The newest FISA amendments are an effort to put the burden of oversight on the courts as protection to wrongdoers from the gov’t side.
You must now prove to thresholds of being beyond reasonable doubt that something is wrong to undertake oversight via judicial review.
It’s insulation for the Bushco. types, not oversight.
You will have to challenge a judge in court to make them apply oversight to Bushco. We’re supposed to call that a victory?
Demand prior oversight be applied again. The FISA bill allowed immediate access so long as judicial review was within ten days.
That’s a fair window for security reasons. Let’s accelerate the review process backlog and make certain all filing requirements by the Executive are met.
The burden should be on them to uphold professional conduct, we can review that and it is an obligation of the social contract. Still this affords the window of urgency we’d assume is met for the ticking bomb scenarios.
Include all past actions in the review. To the date it was initially changed.
The FISA judge resigned(first ever such incident) and can be called to testify, no longer bound by appointment to the Executive on grounds of Privilege.
His testimony is crucial, because Americans who have confirmed by teleco, lenders, or employers that they were spied on cannot claim standing since the Executive fails to report any action and hides behind an anonymous veil.
If needed independent counsel can have review, the former FISA judge can also assist in review past his sitting date, recused otherwise though obligated to provide testimony…
According to an MSNBC article ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21917188/ ), Scott McClellan’s publisher has asserted that McClellan “did not intend to suggest Bush lied to him.” Hopefully McClellan has reserved the right to word the text of his forthcoming book as he chooses.
The outing of Valerie Plame deserves to be the basis of an article of impeachment, but some insiders with important evidence may be inclined to stay mum until the current administration is over, if not forever. It remains to be seen what of an evidentiary nature, if anything, Scott McClellan will come out with. The majorities in Congress seem inclined to ride this second and last Bush term out without seriously considering impeachment, no matter what.
The transcript of a conference held in Crawford, Texas, on February 22, 2003, at which President George W. Bush and Condoleezza Rice discussed Saddam Hussein and Iraq with President Aznar of Spain, should serve as strong evidence that Bush acted deceptively and in bad faith in asserting that serious diplomacy was being undertaken as an alternative to invading Iraq. That deception and bad faith should be a basis of at least one article of impeachment.
Despite the unlikelihood of a successful result, Articles of Impeachment should be drafted, debated, and put to a vote—for history, for posterity, and for the Constitution.
I’ve just been reading a NYBooks and Scott Staton adaptation of the Aznar-Bush-Rice conference transcript (found here: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20770 ) that contains the following remarkable statements attributed to President George W. Bush:
Those eminent and worldly-wise individuals who knew that Bush was fantasizing, and who could have advised him well, never got a serious hearing.
Gibson calls for Medal of Freedom for Plame outer:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/21/gibson-wh-deserves-a-medal-for-outing-plame/
these neocons need to be hauled to Gitmo.
I notice that FIX Noise is building emergency generators. I suppose so they’ll be the only channel on during the Apocalypse. Well, if I were helping to hasten it I might worry that the lights would go out too.
Gibson: My Nominee for the next Worst Person in the World.
[...] an interesting post today on George Bush, Traitor and Liar in ChiefHere’s a quick [...]
“THE FREEMEN OF PENNSYLVANIA.
Friends, Countrymen, and Fellow Citizens, permit yourselves to be put in mind of certain liberties and privileges secured to you by the constitution of this commonwealth,and to beg to your serious attention to his uninterested opinion upon the plan of federal government submitted to your consideration, before you surrender these great and valuable privileges forever. Your present frame of government secures to a right to hold yourselves, houses, papers, and possessions free from search and seizure, and therefore warrants without oaths or affirmations first made, affording sufficient foundation for them, whereby an officer or messenger may be commanded to search your houses or seize your persons or property, not particularly described in a warrant, shall not be be granted.”
Centinel I(Samuel Bryan)
ital. Bryan
Negroponte was sent to Pakistan. Judges rule in Mushy’s favor. Mission Accomplished.
The Ambassador must have argued on the Florida precedent…
will our DNI continues to do the job of the State Dep’t since the incapable Condi again fumbled?
Perhaps she can fly the plastic ‘turkee’ to Baghdad this time since the job of being Secretary of State doesn’t seem to meet her skill set, or lack thereof.
Meanwhile someone takes a stand to say what must be said:
-aol
The European Union must have some kind of “deal” going with the USA. Is it just a coincidence that as the holiday shopping season approached, the Euro started soaring faster than ever? Is it just a coincidence that two days before Black Friday, the Euro is at 148.64 and Europeans are over there buying out East Coast cities? How can the airlines afford to keep running cheap trans-Atlantic flights when the cost of oil is nearly $100 a barrell?
Evil is as evil does, and the Bush administration and its top officials have definitely crossed the line into outright evil.
And the evil visited on our democracy by the Bush administration will taint our nation for decades to come, with Bush and his corrupt pals having packed the federal judiciary with fellow Republican travellers just as contemptuous of our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, the rule of law…with many of these Republican fellow travellers being racist, elitist, ego-mad individuals, hell-bent on subverting and destroying the hard-won principles of our country.
But, then again, this was the plan all along, formulated by the creators of the Federalist Society, beginning back during Ronald Reagan’s tenure as president. Class warfare. Culture warfare. Economic warfare. Religious warfare. Racist warfare. Destroying our democracy so these Republican fellow travellers could rebuild on the ashes of our democracy their “ideal” conservative, elitist society, with them being the rulers and all of the rest of us being their subjects.
The Redcoats are coming!! The Redcoats are coming!! Again!! And the Redcoats this time around are all the Red Staters…who watch only Faux News and listen to such Redcoat propaganda radio programs as Limbaugh’s, Hannity’s, Savage’s and O’Reilly’s.
I really pity the children of our nation and what they are getting ready to inherit. Not democracy. Not freedom. But a conservative police state. A fascist run society. Supposedly everything that a democracy is not, they will inherit. And all because of the evil of the Bush administration and the rubberstamping of this evil by so many complicit conservative Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress…all of whom have made their reservations (unknowingly, I presume) for a special place in Hell.
I’ve said this before. I hate to be repetitious and it sounds so very simple, but this sums up everything about Bush, people in his administration and his supporters. “Are they stupid or are they lying?” Ask that first.
I always thought they were just stupid GOP hacks..
Now I think they were really lying.
Damn shame..Time to take this corrupt admin down..
Thanks for your heartfelt post, Larry. Well said.
What I can’t understand (and, I’m repeating myself like a broken record) is why no one zeroes in on THE WHITE HOUSE IRAQ GROUP? ALL its members ought to be hauled in front of Patrick Fitzgerald and questioned about the purpose of their group and their role in trying to destroy, discredit, shut down, and silence Valerie and Joe Wilson.
It’s typical of Scottie to get all excited about his new book….let some of it out as a tease…to advance sales (as has been said)….to titillate about “all he knows” (I’m so important…I was THERE!)…..but then…almost immediately….little sweaty chickenshit….say, “oh no, no….I didn’t mean HIM!” I didn’t say “THE PRESIDENT” lied to me. He was ALSO a ‘victim”!” Yeah….rriiiiggght! Puh-lease!
Remember, when he left, the sickening banter between him and monkeyboy…..about how they’d retire to Texas together and sit on their porches exchanging fond memories of their days in power (oops, I just threw up a little….) I mean the man is SO D U M B!!!
What a completely pathetic bunch of nothing they all truly are!
And yet….THEY have been our very own Weapons of Mass Destruction of this country and everything it used to stand for.
The White House Iraq Group WHIG, Office of Special Plans OSP, there were several other cherry picking groups forget their names…oh yeah how about LIARS (lying is a Republican strategy)that have yet to be held accountable for their lies that have undermined National Security. Libby commuted, Ari Fleisher, Novak, Karl Rove all traitors able to fill US airwaves with their continued pack of lies and deceit. Lock these traitors up!
Christ all mighty how much more of the Bush administrations “compassionate conservatism” can the Iraqi people, Americans and others around the world take?
Kathleen, lying is a politician strategy employed by Republican and Democrat alike.
How can you tell when a politician is lying? Can you detect brainwave activity? Yes? Then, he is lying.
Shirin asks: How can you tell when a politician is lying?
His lips move.
Apologies to all except Shirin, it’s the oldest fucking joke there is.
Shirin, why do you suppose this is so?
Well, Sandy, Scottie is from Texas so he needs to watch his Ps & Qs becase he has to live there. It would be different if he were intelligent enough to compete with Americans from the rest of the country, thereby making it possible for him to secure a living outside of Texas.
…..I mean the man is SO D U M B!!!…..
Of course he’s dumb. He was working with his mother in the Controller’s office before Bush was selected for the White House. They are so inept in the City of Austin that they turned off my electricity three times before the actual date of my move. I had to call the Controller myself and tell her that she had better start doing the job she was being paid to do. Equally as stupid are the people that run the state Insurance Commission. My husband had to send back his driver’s insurance card THREE times because they could not differentiate between a Q and a G in the spelling of his name.
A whole host of comments, too volumous to read in detail. My concern, Larry, was why Scott McClelland would drop the ball in the way you mentioned. Then Mr M came to the rescue -
Bushco insulation.
I think that the precise purpose McClelland is spilling the beans. The critical word in unknowing. That will turn into unknown information. So the truth can be released with no one knowing about it after receiving the information, because it was unknown. I think all parties may admit to the fact they might have known but did not place any importance on the information and can’t really remember.
This Adminstration has shown remarkable durability in cocooning itself in waffle. Why stop now?
….and Bob Novak didn’t “know” either. Right….
P. Fitzgerald seemed unconvinced….
I am one person still clinging to Fitz’s words when he first announced Libby’s indictment “Truth is the engine of our Justice system” Hanging onto threads
If there is any hopeful future for us all, who ARE Pacifists by self oath(s), it’s just a ‘common sense’
issue, anyone of you is pls. quite welcome to take up
with me, especially a good lawyer, so that I can of course tell & e.g. help you & myself find out how & when to become whatever ‘Representatives of & Experts
on,’ what future’s whose & why, maybe & very likely to be continued, I’ve already been too betrayed!
Greetings, ‘J.A.,’ Ifound-
ittout@yahoo.com.