This is REAL treason Ann Coulter: Someone is going to Jail or worse!

1246725

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 494
    here's today's transcript...



    http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0309/29/cf.00.html



    he makes two very lame points...



    one is NO HARM has come to Plame... so what's the big deal?



    and the second was... my sources say she's an analyst... which is after the fact.... he originally reported she was an operative. This has been disputed by the washington post which investigated and says she is indeed an operative...
  • Reply 62 of 494
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    there is certainly a potential conflict of interest when the President of the United States is suspect, but the Justice Department is quite capable of invesitgating staff members...



    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS.



    I apologize for yelling, but you're clearly spinning the actual situation.
  • Reply 63 of 494
    Almost a fair point. The important distinction here is that those illegal activities were by the President of the United States... not an as yet anonymous white house staffer....





    yep. As I was watching crossfire bugala brought up the fact the republicans wanted to investigate the sec. of agri. (espy?) over some football tickets given to him. My memory fails but i also think there was also calls into Sec. of Commerce Rob Brown's activities. And for a lower level WH official, let's not forgot poor vince foster.



    there is certainly a potential conflict of interest when the President of the United States is suspect, but the Justice Department is quite capable of invesitgating staff members...



    I only wish those in congress during the clinton presidency also felt that way. The pollution of their frequent calls and refusal to take Janet Reno at her word make it very difficult to do that IMO.
  • Reply 64 of 494
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    Who wants to spin, it's more fun to watch all of you salivate, rant, and scream for blood.





    Nick






    Is that the best you can do?



    This must really have you worried!
  • Reply 65 of 494
    Quote:

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS.



    I apologize for yelling, but you're clearly spinning the actual situation.



    I'm not spinning anything. I was simply responding to how there is a difference between investigating the President and investigating White House Staff.



    So, I'm still not sure why you are yelling, or even what you are yelling about.
  • Reply 66 of 494
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    I'm not spinning anything. I was simply responding to how there is a difference between investigating the President and investigating White House Staff.



    So, I'm still not sure why you are yelling, or even what you are yelling about.






    True.



    But do you really think it's going to stop there?
  • Reply 67 of 494
    Quote:

    Is that the best you can do?



    This must really have you worried!



    If that's not flamebait I don't know what is?! Why don't you actually comment on the situation and not attempt to antagonize others who apparently don't care to join in. Is that not equally their right?
  • Reply 68 of 494
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    If that's not flamebait I don't know what is?! Why don't you actually comment on the situation and not attempt to antagonize others who apparently don't care to join in. Is that not equally their right?





    What do you think he was doing? Quit trying to turn this into something else!





    He dosn't care to join because he has nothing to say other than thumbing his nose at us.





    When all else fails that always seems to be the tactic. Distraction. Sorry your attempt didn't work.





    A lame attempt at that!
  • Reply 69 of 494
    Quote:

    True.



    But do you really think it's going to stop there?



    I believe that as a matter of law, it should go as far, and only as far as necessary to adequately prosecute those individuals who have violated the law. In order for that to happen, the Justice department must determine who, if anyone has actually broken the law, and then prosecute them.



    Remember, we don't know that anyone has broken the law yet... all we see are media stories, et al. If someone has broken the law, then they should certainly be prosecuted.



    However, it would be a tragedy to see the process hindered by either political party, be it those in the White House, or those Democrats who have already attempted to use this as a political sounding board. Just look at "the other" Senator from New York. He's been all over this. Do you think he cares about Justice, or attacking the President?





    (edit: The point is that justice is politically neutral.)
  • Reply 70 of 494
    Folks, let's not forget the bigger here. There aren't any WMD and people who spoke against the Bush regime were threatened.



    Bush is clearly worse than Nixon by lieing to star a war for oil and contracts.



    I'm going to be the first here to say the I-word: impeachment!
  • Reply 71 of 494
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    I'm not spinning anything. I was simply responding to how there is a difference between investigating the President and investigating White House Staff.



    So, I'm still not sure why you are yelling, or even what you are yelling about.




    You recognize no difference between "white house staffers" and "senior administration officials?" Mr. Prosecutor, with all due respect, I think you're being intentionally vague here.
  • Reply 72 of 494
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    I believe that as a matter of law, it should go as far, and only as far as necessary to adequately prosecute those individuals who have violated the law. In order for that to happen, the Justice department must determine who, if anyone has actually broken the law, and then prosecute them.



    Remember, we don't know that anyone has broken the law yet... all we see are media stories, et al. If someone has broken the law, then they should certainly be prosecuted.



    However, it would be a tragedy to see the process hindered by either political party, be it those in the White House, or those Democrats who have already attempted to use this as a political sounding board. Just look at "the other" Senator from New York. He's been all over this. Do you think he cares about Justice, or attacking the President.



    Be honest now.






    Look, to anybody but someone with the brain of a lung fish sure the president had a hand in this.



    -------------------------------------------------------------



    " Remember, we don't know that anyone has broken the law yet... all we see are media stories, et al. If someone has broken the law, then they should certainly be prosecuted. "



    -------------------------------------------------------------



    Even Dubbya?





    I have a really good feeling that the truth's going to come out on this and it isn't going to be pretty. Given everything he's done for this country it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.



    If it doesn't I'd be ok with him being damaged politically by this and not being president next time.
  • Reply 73 of 494
    Quote:

    You recognize no difference between "white house staffers" and "senior administration officials?" Mr. Prosecutor, with all due respect, I think you're being intentionally vague here



    Actually, I didn't call them "white house staffers" I merely commented that the Justice Department is perfectly capable of intestigating White House Staff. I further indicated that when matters of criminality involve the President of the United States, I would agree that a potential conflict of interest may exist.



    You don't know who leaked the story. You don't even know that it came from the White House. You also don't even know that the comment was in violation of any law.



    You believe certain things based on what you have read, however my point is that the prudent thing would be to allow the matter to be investigated since those individuals will have access to much more information than you or I.



    Additionally, in case you care, I no longer serve in the US Attorney's Office... I took a position teaching at the University of Michigan Law School. Yes, it's true, they actually hired a conservative law professor!



    It would have been improper for me to comment at all were I still working for the Justice Department
  • Reply 74 of 494
    Quote:

    Look, to anybody but someone with the brain of a lung fish sure the president had a hand in this.



    You're opinion notwithstanding, do you have any evidence to this effect?
  • Reply 75 of 494
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    You're opinion notwithstanding, do you have any evidence to this effect?



    Do you have any to the contrary?



    Taking into consideration what's happened regarding Bush and CO. in the last year ( no WOMD etc. ) it would seem to be the next logical step.



    That might be the way things work in the legal world but in another investigative venue in the world of science things are postulated before proven.



    Give it time.



    I think this story has legs.
  • Reply 76 of 494
    Weirdly... I agree with OBRJA..



    All we know is what reporters are telling us... and what the White House is and isn't saying.



    The Post has it's sources and Novak has his... and they're conflicting to an extent. Novak is apparently honing his story so as not to directly implicate anyone in the white house.



    But the Post reported that Plame was indeed an operative.



    So there's more questions then answers... did Novak's source not know... wasn't sure? And in terms of breaking the law... does it matter if they didn't know.



    And it is quite possible if her status is not classified that no law was broken...



    To me the bigger deal is that this was a move to punish Wilson through his wife... because he spoke out. Novak's glibness is nauseating. He takes part in trying to discredit WIlson... doing White House dirty work... and acts like "what's the big deal?"
  • Reply 77 of 494
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ShawnJ

    You imply that people in the Bush Administration who either leaked the information or condoned the leaking of the information or covered up the leaking of the information should not be screamed at for blood? Worse you derive sick pleasure from some of us who are legitimately concerned that Valerie Plame's career is over- that Valerie Plame's contacts' lives are in danger because Wilson had the nerve to criticize the Bush Administration? Tell me you were just kidding and you too are outraged. Tell me you have a sliver of credibility left.



    You imply...(long winded rant from self-deluded, self-important SPJ.)



    Then you wonder why I said what I did.



    The view is very nice today.



    Nick
  • Reply 78 of 494
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    I believe that as a matter of law, it should go as far, and only as far as necessary to adequately prosecute those individuals who have violated the law. In order for that to happen, the Justice department must determine who, if anyone has actually broken the law, and then prosecute them.





    And the white house is saying that until someone can pin a charge on them, they are going to continue breaking the law. It's exactly like mobsters that were clearly engaged in illegal activities and got away with it because of technicalities, except here we have the office of the president of the country doing it. The fact is that we KNOW that this happened, that it is wrong from every angle right down to putting the american people at risk (read: doing the exact OPPOSITE of what the office of the president should be doing) and the Bush admin has said, 'we will keep doing it as long as we can get away with it, even though what's happening is totally out in the open.'
  • Reply 79 of 494
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jimmac

    Is that the best you can do?



    This must really have you worried!




    My point was that I could no better job of proving the folks posting here look ridiculous than they themselves are doing.



    Besides why pick a fight when the people here do so enjoy arguing into the air. Half the posts aren't even to anyone, just screaming about someone did something bad and darn it, it is time for revenge for Clinton.



    It's more fun to watch a dog chase it's tail than to argue with it that it shouldn't be a dog. Likewise it's more fun to watch blood thirsty irrational, politically sold out leftist partisans make boobs of themselves than to argue with them as to why they shouldn't be that which they clearly demonstrate.



    As for this, I assure you that based off what I have read both from the links here and just around, I'm not worried about it.



    Nick
  • Reply 80 of 494
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Sep27.html



    it is pretty clear that someone in the White House is upset with other officials outing Plame. And that's why they are talking to the Washington Post about it.





    "Yesterday, a senior administration official said that before Novak's column ran, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife. Wilson had just revealed that the CIA had sent him to Niger last year to look into the uranium claim and that he had found no evidence to back up the charge. Wilson's account touched off a political fracas over Bush's use of intelligence as he made the case for attacking Iraq.



    "Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge," the senior official said of the alleged leak.



    Sources familiar with the conversations said the leakers were seeking to undercut Wilson's credibility. They alleged that Wilson, who was not a CIA employee, was selected for the Niger mission partly because his wife had recommended him. Wilson said in an interview yesterday that a reporter had told him that the leaker said, "The real issue is Wilson and his wife."



    A source said reporters quoted a leaker as describing Wilson's wife as "fair game."



    The official would not name the leakers for the record and would not name the journalists. The official said there was no indication that Bush knew about the calls.



    He said that if Novak's account is accurate, the leak was part of "a deliberate attempt on the part of the White House to intimidate others and make them think twice about coming forward."









    REMEMBER... this is coming from another Administration official. Someone is unhappy with how the Politcal side of the adminstration is conducting business.
Sign In or Register to comment.