Posted on 12/08/2011 1:58:30 PM PST by Rufus2007
On Thursday, testifying before the House Judiciary Committee on the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal, Attorney General Eric Holder debated the definition of lying with Wisconsin Republican Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner. The back-and-forth drew outrage from conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who grew angry at the entire Obama administration in ways that he said he couldn’t even express on his Thursday program.
“I am so enraged at Obama,” Limbaugh said. “I keep asking myself, what is the most effective way to express it to people without it arousing sympathy for this poor schlub? Or without making people mad at me? I can’t tell you. I literally cannot describe — it would require profanity for me to accurately tell you what I think of this, what he’s done, what he’s continuing to do. It infuriates me beyond my ability to express it.”
“This is perhaps the most corrupt administration we’ve had in my lifetime, and I’m including Nixon in this,” he said. “Nixon was a piker. Nixon could only dream of this kind of stuff because Nixon never had the media covering up for him. But I’m telling you, this is bad.”
...more (w/audio)...
(Excerpt) Read more at thedc.com ...
Simple follow up. “If your intention was not to lie or mislead and you knew the information provided was incorrect,what exactly was your intention in providing it?” Did anyone ask this question at the hearing?
scooter libby did nothing except ‘disremember’
so he was convicted of ‘lying’ to the feds.
everyone knew then and now that it was Richard Armatage, Colin Powells fair haired boy, who outed Plame
“Right, you can’t lie unless you intend to,” Limbaugh continued. “It’s all about your state of mind. True, true — it can hold true for a rapist — ‘I thought she loved me.’ No, no — Sandusky: ‘Those boys loved me. Those boys begged for it. Those boys followed me. I loved those boys. Prove I’m lying. My state of mind wasn’t to abuse those kids. I loved those kids. You can’t accuse me of abuse. It wasn’t my state of mind.’”
This will surely be part of Sandusky's defense, too. It was all just love!!
To play devil’s advocate, I agree that one has to know something isn’t true for a false statement to be considered a lie. That said, I’m sure Holder is a lying sack of ...
see post #3
Yeah! **That** guy is mad? Does anyone believe this act?
Get real.
I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby was wrongly convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice because he didn't remember a conversation he had with Tim Russert (now deceased) months before. A conversation that had nothing to do with the Valarie Plame/Joe Wilson 'case', which was bogus from the beginning because the prosecutor knew all along who 'leaked' Plame's name to political columnist Robert Novak (also now deceased). It wasn't Libby. The entire Plame/Wilson/Libby fiasco was nothing but a calculated politically-motivated ploy to hurt President George W. Bush prior to the '04 election. It obviously failed and he was re-elected by a comfortable margin. However, by the lights of the Democrats, somebody in the Bush administration had to be found guilty of something criminal to justify the months of investigations and the millions spent in attempting to pretend that President Bush did something criminal or at least had a hand in covering up some nefarious acts done with his knowledge.
Enter Scooter Libby, a (then) 56-year-old, well-respected attorney who served in the Bush White House under both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby was basically railroaded into court, convicted on four of the five felony counts against him and, despite his lack of a criminal record and his years of high-level service to the government was sentenced severely: 3½ years in prison, a quarter-million dollar fine and supervised release when the prison sentence was ended. President Bush mercifully commuted the prison sentence in 2007 to predictable howls of outrage from the left. 'Ol Scooter Libby suffered a grave injustice and comparing AG Eric Holder's excuses for supplying Mexican drug gangs with lethal weapons as anything comparable to Scooter Libby's failure to recall an relatively innocuous telephone conversation months before is patently absurd.
Nuance, dude - you're forgetting nuance. Jeez, you'd be a lousy liberal. Liberals don't need to know something is true to lie about it - their expertise is that they don't need to know anything at all to lie. They just see how the windes are blowing, and what the powers that be get stressed about versus happy over, and then - nuance, remember nuance - like a little doe tiptoeing out to dip its little lips into the stream, they start bowing and curtseying and speaking words in the generla direction of their masters until... until a shape begins to form, a happiness in their masters because of the kinds of syllables they are forming into phonemes, to create what some would say are words but to them are merely sincere efforts to bring more love and joy and peace and hope into the world, until their masters are happy again. And then, they'll look you straight in the eye and pass a lie detector test as they declare they have no idea they said anything at all, let alone lie.
Holder and his underlings have LIED UNDER OATH TO CONGRESS.
I'd like to remind everyone that Scooter Libby gave incorrect information he believed to be true and wound up convicted of a crime. Where was Holder in defending Libby? Why wasn't he at the forefront of Libby's defense? Oh, that's right, because Holder was too busy thinking up ways to subvert the Constitution and commit crimes in case he ever got another chance in government.
Mark
"I didn't intend to rob the bank, so you can't call my appropriation of cash a robbery"
"I didn't intend to shoplift, therefore that candy bar is really mine and wasn't stolen"
"I really didn't intend to fly that airplane into the World Trade Center, therefore you can't really classify my actions as that of a terrorist"
The problem is they have e-mails going back and forth showing they were all passing the Buck to write a Letter to state information that was a LIE,what was their state of Mind when these e-mails were written should have been the question
So what did I get wrong?
I don't think you understood my comment.
Patrick Fitzgerald is responsible for helping make the rule of law in this country a joke.
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.