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

145791025

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 494
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    Yes of course the man that reported the name should never be trusted to say where it came from. That would never fit with your agenda. CNN hired him too so obviously they are part of the grand Bush/Rove scheme.





    Er? The damage is pretty much done in outing Valerie Plame as a CIA operative. Whether Novak changes his story now is irrelevant. It's like repenting after beating someone over the head with the nearest blunt object. The damage is already done, brother.



    *momentarily ponders on that*
  • Reply 122 of 494
    We've always thought about this in the context of what is compromised in terms of national security. What operations? What agents? What networks that have been put into place during her career.That was the focus of our thinking. I will tell you that increasingly people are asking that question.



    --Ambassador Joe Wilson





    Needs to said again...
  • Reply 123 of 494
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    Yes of course the man that reported the name should never be trusted to say where it came from. That would never fit with your agenda. CNN hired him too so obviously they are part of the grand Bush/Rove scheme.



    LMAO...I wasn't talking about you Trumpy, but I find it interesting that you jumped to such an agressive defensive posture in no time. Hmmm.Did I touch a nerve?

    There you go again with your fantastic theories and your "ability" to distort reality.I guess it works in your little world.I made a comment about Novak and how he can't be trusted because the "operative' is now just an "analyst". Nowhere in my post did I imply Novak should reveal his sources if that's what YOU are implying. By the way, CNN hired Carville and Carlson...you don't hear me complaining about them do you?

    Quote:

    Serious implications... and because Gilsh said so too... so convincing..wow..really... amazing...



    LOL...again, pretty touchy aren't you trumpy? It is my opinion that this could have serious implications IF AGAIN, Wilson's wife is indeed a CIA operative and IF Rove or someone close to him leaked the info. to Novak. It could be serious enough for a felony charge and a conviction.You disagree? So are you saying there could be no serious implications if it's proven true that someone leaked info. to blow the cover of a CIA operative?

    Quote:

    I like how you try to label those with women around them a womanbeater. I suppose it is because you have had to declare your left hand your lover.



    Why are you even commenting on this? It wasn't directed at you unless you are the person from the other thread I am jokingly calling womenbeater. Touch a nerve again trumpy?? Hmmmm.Very interesting. VERY interesting. by the way, I'm right handed
  • Reply 124 of 494
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    I like how you try to label me with a wife around a womanbeater. I suppose it is because you have had to declare your left hand your lover. I mean in that sense I suppose you are a "beater" as well, you just misunderstand how the word is applied. Self love = beat your meat, but wife love doesn't = beat your wife. Hope that is clear for you now.





    LMAO...I see you edited your little post to add more about your sexual habits. I don't think we want to hear about them Trumpy...we don't care.

    Again, it's bloody hilarious that you think my post was directed at you. I guess if the shoe fits....
  • Reply 125 of 494
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman





    Serious implications... and because Gilsh said so too... so convincing..wow..really... amazing...



    I like how you try to label me with a wife around a womanbeater. I suppose it is because you have had to declare your left hand your lover. I mean in that sense I suppose you are a "beater" as well, you just misunderstand how the word is applied. Self love = beat your meat, but wife love doesn't = beat your wife. Hope that is clear for you now.



    Nick




    Anyone got a klingon to english translator so I could find out WTF trumptman is talking about?
  • Reply 126 of 494
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by giant

    Anyone got a klingon to english translator so I could find out WTF trumptman is talking about?





    I think he's trying to say " This is a good day to die " or something like that.
  • Reply 127 of 494
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Justice Department Launches Full Criminal Investigation Into the Leak of a C.I.A. Officer's Identity



    13 mins ago.



    1. It might not be a matter of "routine" anymore since very few complaints ever get beyond a preliminary investigation. (nytimes)



    2. I just found out that Joseph Wilson contributed $1000 to George Bush's campaign. Some Bush-Hater, huh?
  • Reply 128 of 494
    SO Aries is basically trying to say... It's OK to out Wilson's wife... he is a liberal and disagreed with the White House! He's sucking on the right-wing spin machine hooka again.
  • Reply 129 of 494
    latest from talking points memo:



    Another big problem with Novak's comments on Crossfire today. Today he said ...



    Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this. In July I was interviewing a senior administration official on Ambassador Wilson's report when he told me the trip was inspired by his wife, a CIA employee working on weapons of mass destruction.



    But then there's this passage in a July 22nd article in Newsday ...



    Novak, in an interview, said his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it."

    I'd say the story's changed.



    -- Josh Marshall
  • Reply 130 of 494
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gilsch

    LMAO...I wasn't talking about you Trumpy, but I find it interesting that you jumped to such an agressive defensive posture in no time. Hmmm.Did I touch a nerve?

    There you go again with your fantastic theories and your "ability" to distort reality.I guess it works in your little world.I made a comment about Novak and how he can't be trusted because the "operative' is now just an "analyst". Nowhere in my post did I imply Novak should reveal his sources if that's what YOU are implying. By the way, CNN hired Carville and Carlson...you don't hear me complaining about them do you?



    LOL...again, pretty touchy aren't you trumpy? It is my opinion that this could have serious implications IF AGAIN, Wilson's wife is indeed a CIA operative and IF Rove or someone close to him leaked the info. to Novak. It could be serious enough for a felony charge and a conviction.You disagree? So are you saying there could be no serious implications if it's proven true that someone leaked info. to blow the cover of a CIA operative?



    Why are you even commenting on this? It wasn't directed at you unless you are the person from the other thread I am jokingly calling womenbeater. Touch a nerve again trumpy?? Hmmmm.Very interesting. VERY interesting. by the way, I'm right handed




    So it wasn't directed at me. Am I supposed to feel better now that you declare that name calling substitutes for discussion? By what proof do you have that anyone on here or even being discussed is a wifebeater? It is a serious charge.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gilsch

    LMAO...I see you edited your little post to add more about your sexual habits. I don't think we want to hear about them Trumpy...we don't care.

    Again, it's bloody hilarious that you think my post was directed at you. I guess if the shoe fits....




    Naw, I figured your right hand was on the keyboard typing away.



    Rapist, I mean Gilsh..



    Oh teehee, don't get so jumpy, and reply or defend, that would just prove the shoe fits so wear it. Oh and of course no one would understand why someone would defensive about such a word or charge.



    You're pathetic.



    Nick
  • Reply 131 of 494
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tonton

    LOL!



    He sounds just like Scott. Seriously. "He just knows."



    And Trumptman, please quit while you're uh... please quit. You're only digging yourself deeper. You haven't said a word that has been meaningful to this issue. At least OBJRA is trying in the typical blind denial mode of argument (same as McClellan).




    I'll tell you what Tonton, you show me, beyond people calling for revenge and speculating what has been said that is "meaningful" to the issue.



    You guys are hilarious. OBJRA is an actual lawyer but he knows nothing about this. Robert Novak wrote the article, but doesn't know who he got the information from (all of you in here know better.)



    Meanwhile a writer and his blog, and a bunch of screaming leftists on a computer forum know it all. They give incite comments, like Bush gonna get a spanking now, or Bush got no brain Karl and Cheney do, etc.



    Of course that is meaningful discussion in the Tonton world.



    Nick
  • Reply 132 of 494
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman





    Glisch, none of what trumptman is talking about is relevant to the discussion. So just don't give him the pleasure of derailing one of the most legitimate threads of the year. If he has something to say beyond arguing with yet another member, then he will say it.
  • Reply 133 of 494
    good ol' drudge...



    http://www.ericpoole.blogspot.com/20...88724951484574



    Well, I would like to tell a little story today. I looked at drudge a couple of minutes ago, and there was a caption at the top, displaying the "Clinton appointee" Joseph Wilson cutting a check for $1,000 to the Kerry campaign. So I did a quick search on opensecrets.com, and noticed that "George H.W. Bush appointee" Joseph Wilson gave $1,000 to the Bush campaign in 1999. So I emailed Drudge, something along the lines of, "In the interests of journalistic integrity, it would be nice to give the whole story," and proceeded to point them in the direction of the George Bush for President contribution by Wilson. So what do you think he did? You guessed it, within 5 minutes the Kerry contribution was pulled. So much for journalistic integrity.



    drudgereport.com: Sept. 30, 2003 00:58:03

    drudgereport.com: Sept. 30, 2003 01:36:04
  • Reply 134 of 494
    To Drudge & the Right:



    As the lawyers say, when the facts are on your side, bang the facts. When the law's on your side, bang the law. When you've got neither, bang the table.



    When you don't even got a table, it would seem, you bang yourself.




    To The Rest of the Word:



    Its beginning to unravel...
  • Reply 135 of 494
    The following notice was sent to all White House employees:



    PLEASE READ: Important Message From Counsel's Office



    We were informed last evening by the Department of Justice that it has opened an investigation into possible unauthorized disclosures concerning the identity of an undercover CIA employee.



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



    The Department advised us that it will be sending a letter today instructing us to preserve all materials that might be relevant to its investigation. Its letter will provide more specific instructions on the materials in which it is interested, and we will communicate those instructions directly to you. In the meantime, you must preserve all materials that might in any way be related to the Department's investigation. Any questions concerning this request should be directed to Associate Counsels Ted Ullyot or Raul Yanes in the Counsel to the President's office. The President has directed full cooperation with this investigation.



    Alberto R. Gonzales



    Counsel to the President
  • Reply 136 of 494
    George Bush Senior



    "Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors."



    http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affair...ch_042699.html



    John Dean (of Nixon fame)



    "Adopting worse than Nixonian tactic, the deadly serious crime of naming CIA operatives...."





    Senator Schumer is now speaking to the senate about this matter...
  • Reply 137 of 494
    Here's the Dean article written 6 weeks ago.



    http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030815.html



    The White House's Unusual Stonewalling About an Obvious Leak



    In the past, Bush and Cheney have gone ballistic when national security information leaked. But this leak - though it came from "two senior administration officials" - has been different. And that, in itself, speaks volumes.



    On July 22, White House press secretary Scott McClellan was asked about the Novak column. Offering only a murky, non-answer, he claimed that neither "this President or this White House operates" in such a fashion. He added, "there is absolutely no information that has come to my attention or that I have seen that suggests that there is any truth to that suggestion. And, certainly, no one in this White House would have given authority to take such a step."



    So was McClellan saying that Novak was lying - and his sources were not, in fact, "two senior administration officials"? McClellan dodged, kept repeating his mantra, and refused to respond.



    Later, McClellan was asked, "Would the President support an investigation into the blowing of the cover on an undercover CIA operative?" Again, he refused to acknowledge "that there might be some truth to the matter you're bringing up." When pressed further, he said he would have to look into "whether or not that characterization is accurate when you're talking about someone's cover."



    McClellan's statement that he would have to look into the matter was disingenuous at best. This ten-day old column by Novak had not escaped the attention of the White House. Indeed, when the question was first raised, McClellan immediately responded, "Thank you for bringing that up."



    As David Corn has pointed out, what McClellan did not say, is even more telling than what he said. He did not say he was trying to get to the bottom of the story and determine if it had any basis in fact. He did not say the president would not tolerate such activities, and was demanding to know what had happened.



    Indeed, as Corn points out, McClellan's remarks "hardly covered a message from Bush to his underlings: don't you dare pull crap like this." Indeed, they could even be seen as sending a message that such crimes will be overlooked.



    Frankly, I am astounded that the President of the United States - whose father was once Director of the CIA - did not see fit to have his Press Secretary address this story with hard facts. Nor has he apparently called for an investigation - or even given Ambassador and Mrs. Wilson a Secret Service detail, to let the world know they will be protected.



    This is the most vicious leak I have seen in over 40 years of government-watching. Failure to act to address it will reek of a cover-up or, at minimum, approval of the leak's occurrence - and an invitation to similar revenge upon Administration critics.
  • Reply 138 of 494
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    I'll tell you what Tonton, you show me, beyond people calling for revenge and speculating what has been said that is "meaningful" to the issue.



    You guys are hilarious. OBJRA is an actual lawyer but he knows nothing about this. Robert Novak wrote the article, but doesn't know who he got the information from (all of you in here know better.)



    Meanwhile a writer and his blog, and a bunch of screaming leftists on a computer forum know it all. They give incite comments, like Bush gonna get a spanking now, or Bush got no brain Karl and Cheney do, etc.



    Of course that is meaningful discussion in the Tonton world.



    Nick




    Oh grow up! We've already been over this ( you probably didn't even read the post ). You know as well as I do you guys would do the same thing if the roles were reversed.



    Look Bush lied. There is no other possibilty. If he'll do that he might do other things ( isn't that what you guys were saying about Clinton? ).



    We don't want a president like that.



    And he's been getting away with many things we don't agree with for quite sometime now.



    If he's even half as bad as we suspect he deserves what's coming to him.



    When the war was about to start there was a bunch of screaming rightwingers on this forum ( screaming for blood that is ). Truly disgusting. Not even willing to ask if this was ethical. Not even questioning if the president was right about Iraq. Just willing to go along. So willing to jump on the war bandwagon so we could kick some Iraqi butt ( revenge for 911 as if that had anything to do with it )!



    Just the attitude dubbya was counting on I might add.



    I remember one guy saying it was ok if we get the Iraqi oil. Just imagine how cheap gas will be. I also think he said why should we wait to attack? Why should we wait until mushroom clouds are spreading through his neighborhood? This is the other smart mentality you would have us embrace?



    Well, things didn't quite turn out that way did they?

    There were no WOMD, he didn't even have a delivery system, and gas prices are higher than I care to think about.



    Larger anyalsis in hindsight of the situation in regard to the rest of the world shows how illogical this war, the money spent, and the reasons for it were.



    So what the heck are you talking about? What are you comparing this situation to?





    Also I've talked to a few lawyers that didn't know squat. They are people also. Yes for the present there is no formaly established crime. But there is a heck of a lot of evidence in that direction.



    I'll tell you what I see. You're worried this isn't going to just blow over.

    That's why you're in defense mode.



    I have been trying to tell you guys ( SDW, Trumpetman, Scott ) there are alot of people out there very angry with our president. You don't seem to be listening. They don't like liars, they don't like mismanagement, and they don't like the direction where this country is going under Bush rule.



    Well you had better just keep on smiling but better put a coathanger in your mouth at night. I think one way or another your precious, misbehaving president will suffer for his misdeeds.
  • Reply 139 of 494
    And it's interesting to hear Novak talk about White House arrogance.



    http://www.intellivu.com//main.asp?b...ovak092903.htm



    "Last week's Gallup Poll putting Bush's approval rating at 50 percent and showing him trailing Wesley Clark and John Kerry in trial heats is dismissed by the president's managers as the dreaded third-year presidential syndrome that was overcome by Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan with fourth-year landslides. However, those poll numbers take on new meaning in light of Bush's altered 2004 outlook. Replacing the old mantra that there is no way for Bush to lose, panicky Republicans studying the electoral map wonder whether there is any way that they can win.



    Dramatic deterioration in the outlook over the last two weeks is reflected in the experience by a Republican businessman in Milwaukee trying to sell $2,000 tickets for Bush's only appearance this year in Wisconsin Oct. 3. In contrast to money flowing easily into the Bush war chest everywhere until now, he encountered stiff resistance. Well-heeled conservative businessmen offered to write a check for $100 or $200, but not $2,000. They gave one reason: Iraq [...]



    The clamp on their wallets, they said, derived from their feeling that Iraq was "an albatross," and that "there is no end in sight." The performance by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld particularly came under fire. The U.N. speech made matters worse, in the eyes of these non-contributors, with the president going "hat in hand" to the General Assembly.



    Another domestic issue is continuing loss of industrial jobs, and that does not ease Republican anxiety. It causes hard analysis of electoral maps that poses difficult questions. Is it realistic to think about Bush winning big industrial belt states won by Al Gore in 2000 -- Michigan, Illinois and Pennsylvania? How good are chances for Bush to win West Virginia for a second straight time? Would Missouri slip to the Democrats if Richard Gephardt is on the ticket?



    No wonder the arrogance quotient at the White House is diminishing. Reporters regularly on that beat say they have been getting their telephone calls returned the last two weeks."
  • Reply 140 of 494
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    So it wasn't directed at me. Am I supposed to feel better now that you declare that name calling substitutes for discussion? By what proof do you have that anyone on here or even being discussed is a wifebeater? It is a serious charge.



    I don't care if you feel better or not.Suit yourself. It was obvious it wasn't directed at you unless you're the person I had a "discussion" about hitting women on another thread.It wasn't a charge.Stop making shit up .... I said I was JOKINGLY calling someone womenbeater. Hmmm....you're not the same person are you? Why did you take it personally then? By the way, it was womenbeater, not wifebeater. Nice try.
    Quote:

    Rapist, I mean Gilsh..



    How mature of you. Let's use your logic...."Gilsch already told me a couple of times that the post wasn't directed at me. What the hell, let me be an idiot and insult him anyways."

    Quote:

    Oh teehee, don't get so jumpy, and reply or defend, that would just prove the shoe fits so wear it. Oh and of course no one would understand why someone would defensive about such a word or charge.



    I'm gonna reply to this because you're directing it at me. My other post was not directed at you but you took it personally for whatever reason. Unless you're using two different screen names or something? Hmmm.

    Furthermore, your latest aggression towards me is coming after you had been made aware of, and you yourself even acknowledged that you knew the post was not directed at you. What is wrong with you?

    Out of respect for the other posters, I will not reply to your ridiculous posts in here.
Sign In or Register to comment.