Scott Ritter Sex Conviction predicts his "Attitude Change" on Iraq -- as Ann COulter Predicted!

self | 1-20-03 | WL-law

[WL-law]

SO -- we now learn that Scott Ritter has had, as many suspected, some kind of "skeleton-in-the-closet" that accounted for his bizarre change-of-heart and his over-the-top conduct on the talking-head circuit. But how do we exactly connect the dots? Ann Coulter's first chapter in "SLANDER!" points the way.

As Ann pointed out, the liberal media, in the Ted Kennedy case and many others, will overlook personal "shortcomings" so long as you appropriately mouth the liberal party line -- and this is especially favored if you are a "liberal republican" or former conservative. Examples -- John McCain's politics are a personal innoculation from the liberal press against the taint of his "Keating Five" history.

So this 'paradigm" predicts perfectly Scott Ritter's conduct, NOW THAT WE KNOW THE SECRET IN HIS BACKGROUND AND WHEN IT OCCURRED. In other words, Scott understood -- either explicitly or implicitly -- that his public career was over UNLESS he took a particular position on his issues-of-expertise. ANd that position not only innoculated him (or so he thought -- we shall see in the fallout in the next few days) but it also "elevated" him to "sought-after status" among the liberal media talk-fests.

And so the mystery is solved.

[Howlin]

Only one problem with your theory: the media is NOT reporting it.

[Marylander]

Where is the reference for Ann Coulter's prediction?

[joesnuffy]

They're (commmie inspired media) are just gonna say : "He Was Set Up" by the CIA...and whose daddy was once head of?

[WL-law]

Only one problem with your theory: the media is NOT reporting it.

That isn't a problem with the theory as I understand it -- it's the predicted outcome. In other words, taking the liberal position buys protection, so long as you remain useful (watch out once you become expendable though, as Bob Packwood found out). And that's precisely the point Ann made, well supported with evidence.

[Marylander]

Oh, I see. She didn't make a prediction about Ritter. She had a general principle that might apply, or at least is worthy of investigation.

[WL-law]

Where is the reference for Ann Coulter's prediction?

It's the first (or second?) chapter of "Slander" -- I lent out my copy so I can't cite chapter and verse, although another Freeper will no doubt provide it

[wildbill]

I think the point of the post is that the liberal media will look the other way about personal failings if the "convert" makes his mea culpas about his previous conservative positions sufficiently loud and contradictory.

In this case, the theory goes, they suppress the news about the arrest since he is parroting their political line.

[grumple]

Doesn't matter...more people tune into internet than CNN...

My Mom used to have a bumber sticker on her truck..."More people smoke than voted for Bill Clinton". maybe this is why they are trying to ban smoking, so they can change this possibility...I don't know...same paradigm I think though...

Anyway, I'm glad to see this guy exposed though...liberal media will now have to backtrack to repair from damaged goods.

[Daveinyork]

David Brock was another one. His sexual orientation was outed. Then he turned his coat

[Howlin]

I bet he's not parroting anything. He has denied he has any "knowledge" of this arrest.

That makes him a documented liar; who on earth would listen to him now. (For that matter, who, other than liberals, listend to him before?)

[Double Tap]

That would support the theory. He has immunity as far as the media is concerned.

[grumple]

The book "Slander" that she wrote has an entire chapter dedicated to how the liberal media will protect those as long as they serve a purpose. Scott Ritter no longer serves a purpose...so into the ash-bin of sexual predator history he goes...

Slander is a great read!

[ohiobushman]

Remember the rules? You mentoned Ann Coulter's name.

[Taliesan]

the media is NOT reporting it.

They like him. He could drive a car off a bridge with a blonde in the back seat. It wouldn't matter.

[WL-law]

David Brock was another one. His sexual orientation was outed.

Brock's case was unusually perverse, in that it was the liberal left that "outed" him in the first place. But again, Brock may have felt that, once outed, the right would reject him, whereas the left would embrace anyone formerly-right who had "grown" in his views, a la Brock.

[WL-law]

Remember the rules? You mentoned Ann Coulter's name.

Sorry but I'm HTML-impaired. (that's why I can't spell-check my posts, BTW!!. Don't know how to do the pictures, although I admire the Coulter threads always.

[Howlin]

I'm not sure it does; after all, the story is out there....unlike some. Perhaps it will be like Lott and make it into the news later this week.

Anyway, he wasn't convicted.

[WL-law]

Scott Ritter no longer serves a purpose..

Well, I think he does, hence their immediate silence. The big change in the media, though, is that the left no longer has a monopoly control over it -- so if, i.e., Fox reports it and the story has legs, the rest of the media will follow.

[Tacis]

Not so fast!!! Always remember the shifty deviousness, the filth and corruption of the dems and their puppets in the ultra-liberal, extremist left wing media!! THIS could be the diversion!

So Ritter is supposed to have hustled some young honey on the internet. First, we have issues of proof and then we have issues of interpretation, intent, and free speech.

Always remember the media and Willie's taped deposition! The media made up the story that Willie had lost his temper while giving his deposition. When the tape was published, all the media would talk about was the fact that Willie hadn't lost his temper but not a word about the impeacable offenses that were proven.

This story is only a "Gee, that's not SO bad" cover. There is something much more damaging to Ritter and some one in the media or the dem anti-American movement who knows about it. I've always thought Ritter took really big bribes and/or was banging one of Sadaam's gazelles.

[grumple]

I think their silence is because of his exposure. Someone did not se the need for protecting him anymore, so he's been outed. The media will discuss the story's possibility largely but to continue to put him on will guarantee even more viewers taking those news channels even less seriously.

Hence, he no longer serves a purpose.

[Slipjack]

PING

[TLBSHOW]

Ann Coulter is always right when she prints her stories!

[Plutarch]

Do you realize the implications? If this is true (that turncoats to liberal do so to head off publicity of personal scandals), then Arianna Huffington has been doing a lot more than tooling around in SUV's and private planes. Not a pretty mental image.

[Freebird Forever]

Don't know how to do the pictures, although I admire the Coulter threads always.

I'm happy to help out.

[PokeyJoe]

I'll work some magic for you.

Ann (got my gun) Coulter

[PokeyJoe]

should we show everybody her beautiful gams? (legs)

[PokeyJoe]

gams with gun showing. Yeeehaw

[Double Tap]

Maybe not, but I find it interesting that and ADA has been fired for keeping the case quite. Sure does look like a cover-up of some sort.

[Howlin]

Now that part, I'm interested in hearing about. Wonder who she/he is/was?

[WL-law]

then Arianna Huffington has been doing a lot more than tooling around in SUV's and private planes. Not a pretty mental image.

I donno, I used to think she was kind of attractive.

Seriously, though, Ben Stein did a diary piece in American Spectator back in the time-frame when Arianna was still a conservative, and he basically said, from his personal experience, that Arianna was an egomaniacal BITCH of the highest order.

So I think in her case she is attracted to wherever the spotlight is greatest. For whatever reason, she feels it is greatest today on the left, especially in the left/West coast world she's returned to.

[Freebird Forever]

should we show everybody her beautiful gams?

Sorry 'bout the gross thing on the left (as usual)

[riri]

Slander is a great read

It sure is.

[Digger]

I remember here when I accused ol' Newt of being compromised when he started acting goofy - and I was booed by all of the "blinders-on" pubbies. What did we find out? These scenerios which turn out to be reality are easer to call, as RUSH says, with half your brain tied behind your back.

[Double Tap]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/825984/posts

I forgot how to post links.

[TLBSHOW]

Rush Limbaugh just read the Ritter daily news story on the air and has been slamming Ritter during different parts of the show. We know his stories get out to Millions of people.

[Paladin2b]

Do you realize the implications? If this is true (that turncoats to liberal do so to head off publicity of personal scandals), then Arianna Huffington has been doing a lot more than tooling around in SUV's and private planes. Not a pretty mental image.

Already happened, in a way. Her "change of heart" came just after it became public knowledge that Mr. Huffington was gay, and would never have gone into politics in the first place but for the urgings of his ambitious, grasping wife. I wish I had that Esquire article where Huffington explained how he and Arianna accomplished conceiving their children.

[alisasny]

Give it a few days. Ritter wont be on many more talk shows.

[chnsmok]

She used the word "blckmail" om Drudge's radio show last night.

[Red Jones]

Ritter had a completely different image and posture towards issues in 1998 when he first became a public figure than post-Bush election. Who knows why this is? Maybe he's just shown us the real scott ritter, a left winger who likes porn and maybe even child porn. But I don't put it past our CIA to be responsible for these changes in Ritter. And likewise, I don't put it past them to be responsible for the porn charge too. They would do this in order to discredit the first scott ritter - of course. People might say 'how could the cia cause Ritter to flip like this?' They are skilled at brainwashing people, facilitating the process with drugs, etc. Because the original scott ritter is nothing like the new scott ritter. I'm only coming up with a possible explanation.

[chnsmok]

"blckmail" om = "blackmail" on

[Cultural Jihad]

As Ann pointed out, the liberal media, in the Ted Kennedy case and many others, will overlook personal "shortcomings" so long as you appropriately mouth the liberal party line --

And the most extreme example of this would be the rapes and molestations by Billy Jeff; the One Free Grope is allowed to anyone who preaches and proselytizes abortion-on-demand.

[Faith]

Click here.

[TC Rider]

Anyway, he wasn't convicted.

Regardless, if remotely true, it shows he has a predilection for the teeny-boppers.

It could be that Saddam has tried to tempt all of the weapon inspectors, but only Ritter took the (jail) bait.

How hard could it be for Saddam to round up 2 or 3 thirteen year olds to entertain guests?

Saddam gets the party on video and Ritter is now his puppet.

The domestic case just serves to tip us off to what may have caused Ritter to flip.

A lot of Freepers have pointed to the book deal in the past, but that never clicked with me. I couldn't see him flipping for what seemed an insignificant amount of cash, when he can milk his celebrity for TV appearances and a domestic book deal.

[Howlin]

Oh, no doubt. And as somebody else pointed out yesterday, spies seem to like porno!

[Blue Screen of Death]

Want to destroy Scott Ritter in the eyes of the National Media? Start a roumor that he once lived next door to a conservative Christian who voted for Nixon.

[Lancey Howard]

Slander is a truly great book.
Interesting, factual, undeniable, and very well-documented.

[SW6906]

Isn't it interesting how The Perky Katie Couric wore a VERY short skirt on the day that she was to interview Ann? How many other times has she worn such a skirt? Methinks she was a little jealous of our Ann.....

[WL-law]

By the way, if I were defending Ritter on the original charge, based on the public facts disclosed, I'd argue that:

a) When Scott was "chatting" over the internet with his 'friend', he expected that he was chatting with a gay man "pretending" to be a 17 year-old girl -- that these were sex roles in an elaborate homosexual routine where both parties 'know the rules', and that Ritter, as an outwardly hetero marine, always interacts under a intentionally-feigned role-play

2) When he "contacted" via phone his 'friend', he expected the friend to be a gay man, and he would have hung up and terminated all contact if he discovered his friend actually was a girl

3) That because the police intervened "when they did", i.e., interposing themselves for the friend -- Scott had not yet committed the "penultimate act" required under the criminal law for Attempt crimes, i.e., he was denied the ability to "withdraw" based on learning the facts (i.e., discovering that the he-she was a real teenage she) that would have amounted to criminal conduct. Or, alternatively stated, he did not commit the "last necessary act" preliminary to committing the crime itself, hence not guilty of an "attempt" crime.

Anyway, that's the defense I'd have favored, IF, of course, Scott's true story was similar -- and I expect that it was. Scott's atty may well have used that defense, since the prosecution essentially dropped the case.

[TC Rider]

Want to destroy Scott Ritter in the eyes of the National Media?

Better yet, start a rumor that he protested outside an abortion clinic.