Posted on 07/22/2005 1:59:59 PM PDT by zencat
Well .. I'm sorry Rich gave you that impression .. I get his daily column and I can guarantee you Rich is not concerned that Rove or Libby are in any kind of trouble.
And .. there has been plenty of talk that Russert may be the "subject".
I did not assume that about Rich, myself. I just said he COULD have been interpreted that way by his demeanor. And he was surrounded by people in the media who seem certain that only Rove/Libby have something to worry about. So his reserve contrasted with their certainty and their rabidness, I guess...
Wasn't Larry part of the CIA's LSD experiments?
I LOVED your understatement, below. I thought Rich was a loving conservative guy. (Just kidding!):
"Well .. I'm sorry Rich gave you that impression .. I get his daily column and I can guarantee you Rich is not concerned that Rove or Libby are in any kind of trouble.
"And .. there has been plenty of talk that Russert may be the "subject"."
See post 40 this thread if you haven't already.
More reading for me later..
I've seen that. Excellent research by that freeper. Just outstanding.
BINGO!
Ding, ding we have a winner! This is the most plausible and believable explanantion I have seen, yet.
True that. There are some idiots at the CIA who have not done a real days work in a long while. They have been using the agency to fund what amounts to classified vacations.
AND NOW ITS COMING TO AN END. And the few in the Agency who have been taking the vacations.....don't like it.
Larry Johnson is a fraud.
He was talking is crap on a talk radio station interview in the Dallas area once.
A guy called in who used to be a federal prosecutor and called Johnson a Fraud.
He pointed out if what Johnson was spouting off about was true (Johnson was claiming all sorts of secret missions), then Johnson would have just committed a federal crime by releasing classified information. He said he would be calling folks he worked with.
At that point....Johnson started backpedaling and saying that they weren't actually classified missions....but had that type of status.
So was this another one of those mock hearings that the dems have. Since they don't have the pull to actually line up a real one.
Interesting, like the last time, that the AP would not mention that if it is. Which it most likely is.
NEVERMIND THE FACT THAT THE LADY WAS NOT UNDER COVERT OR PROTECTED STATUS.
She went out giving public briefings and using her own name!
Larry Johnson is a fraud.
Sam,
I can't get that link to open up.
Can you post another one? The one that shows he did not donate money to Bush...
Would this not be a violation of ethics? These "hearings".
They are using tax dollars to fly in their left wing croanies to hold bogus hearings!
Heck.....sounds criminal to me!
And again, not to mention the fact that the lady has been shown to NOT have been under any covert or protected status.
The dems hold hearings like this all of the time...the reason no one knows about them is because they are usually about something other than the MEDIA...
therefore, the MSM will make a BIG deal about this. Dorgan has had about 2-3 of these kinds of dems only hearings about Halliburton---trying to get Cheney tied up in something bad...hasn't worked so far...but you are right.
It is OUR tax dollars NOT at work.
I have a question though about this SP---did he get testimony from Joe Wilson BEFORE the report from the Senate Intelligent Committee's report, and the British report about this came out?
Because the Senate Intel. Report pointed out several times that Joe Wilson lied, and is a liar...so if they know he is a liar, maybe he lied in grand jury testimony...
Sorry about that. Just see for yourself:
Advanced Individual Search
http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/advindsea.shtml
To be honest .. I really don't know
Behind the scenes, the single most important reason for the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson farce is that CIA Director Porter Goss has finally started to clean house at Langley. Goss's long-overdue shake-up is clearly backed by the White House, the top levels of the Pentagon and State Department, and the new National Director of Intelligence, John Negroponte.
OK, the farce began due to a Robert Novak article in 2003. Porter Goss didn't get to the CIA until late last year. It doesn't seem logical for the CIA to create the VP/JW kerfuffle in anticipation of Porter Goss putting on the janitor's uniform and cleaning out the CIA. I suppose you could explain much of this away be establishing that the White House was intent on cleaning out the CIA in 2003 or earlier.
Thanks, Sam.
If Greg Thielmann (State Department) is to be believed in this interview, there was no interest in this in January or February of 2003. So what happened between March and May that got everyone interested in the story?
http://www.echochamberproject.com/thielmann
Greg Thielmann interview
"In January, I submitted an Op-Ed to the Washington Post. And the theme of that Op-Ed was to try to raise warning flags about the way senior administration officials were using the term "Weapons of Mass Destruction."
..."The Washington Post didn’t have time for this piece. I wrote another Op-Ed in February immediately after Secretary Powell’s speech, pointing out the absence of any mention in his 85-minute elaboration of the uranium from Africa story. That Op Ed was also rejected. I wrote members of Congress."
(near the bottom of the page).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.