Wrong! There was never a legitimate offer. That weak old argument has been shot down so many times it is laughable. Why don't you go post the article by the phony who now works for Fox News and was involved in the whole scam in the first place, so we can shred his and your credibility at the same time. That is a weak reply no matter how low a person's standards are.
Monkeys are flinging poo and reaching for poo...interesting. 9/11 happened. There's no use assigning blame. I would consider Bush's actions after 9/11 deplorable, but that's a view I'll leave to the historians. If the Plame leak is a non-issue, it'll be because of Clinton's Whitewater scandal. For every white collar crime Clinton has been accused, Bush has seemed to up the ante with far more serious consequences. Rove should definitely see jail time for his act of treason. A party for strong national defense should see to it....
Clinton ABSOLUTELY WAS OFFERED bin Laden on a silver platter and turned them down. You libs don't believe it because you don't want to. Here are the FACTS: Sudan offered to give bin Laden to Saudi Arabia, which would have effectively ended his career as terror mastermind. Clinton didn't push the Saudis to accept, and as a result, bin Laden moved into Afghanistan and began plotting 9-11. ABC News reported the following: "Federal agents seeking bin Laden had developed a plan to have a plane fly in and attack a compound in Kandahar, Afghanistan, where the terror leader was believed to have been holed up back in 1998 — three years before the devastating attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. But when the plan went up the chain of command for approval, it was killed by then-Attorney General Janet Reno. 'They came to the decision that this plan was probably too dangerous, that the loss of life on the ground would have been significant,' (former FBI agent Jack) Cloonan said. 'There was concern that people around the bin Laden compound would be killed.'" AND THE FINAL NAIL IN YOUR COFFIN: Clinton has been taped after his presidency saying, "I did not bring him (OBL)here because we had no basis on which to hold him." "Mr. Bin Laden used to live in Sudan ... And we’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again. They released him. At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."
I agree. I personally don't think that any president is truly to blame for 9/11. I was just commenting to basso that IF blame had to be assigned, Bush would have to shoulder more of it than Clinton. And apparently in t_j's world, the word "fact" is defined as "information that has been debunked and is demonstrably untrue." I guess t_j really lives in bizarro world where his rantings truly are fact.
Pretty hard to argue with Clinton being on tape *admitting* that he didn't bring bin Laden to justice because of legal technicalities. That's a fact.
that's what i've never understood about that story being "debunked." clinton said it. he said it, himself.
I guess t_j really lives in bizarro world where his rantings truly are fact. In DC, a lie repeated often enough becomes conventional wisdom. TJ! Get your *facts* correct. It was GWB that turned down the offer.
I almost hate to bring up the Rove bit again...with this flashback to thread trash talk re-runs from last year...but... Now what? So Rove's the one. Ignoring whether he inhaled, or what exactly the definition of sex is...what to do? Nevermind the Clinton inquisition...what now. About this. a) As TJ said, is this a tired ol' story that should be let go? No one was hurt. One CIA agent now must work behind a desk. Dirty tricks, for sure...but just boys being boys? b) Dismiss him. Take one for the team. Banish him to the speakers circuit and a plumb appointment someplace and draft the press release about accountability and standards and how we were so terribly surprised that he let himself be a victim of bad judgment... c) Hang him high. Jail the bugger. This is serious serious stuff. I really don't know. Does anyone care? Is this overblown? Seems the ones who care most have a stake in this. Are the 50% of Americans who voted Republican, and continue to do so, outraged? I don't see it. I expect the left to howl in protest, the GOP to admit no wrong, and the public to yawn. Seems that if you have enough scandal, then you have none. Like a blitzkrieg of wrong doings. Eventually, it's all ignored. Kind of a neat irony, isn't it? It's like we've heard it all before. Rove leaked the info! Bush mislead about the war! Huge deficits! Greater income disparity! Lost liberties! Prisoner abuse! Geneva convention doesn't apply! Whatever, dude. We got it. Any one of these would be an issue. But all together....just noise. The liberal left (helps if you have a handy nickname for your critics) making their usual protest. Crazy. On a serious note...however...how big is this? Away from the hyperbole...we know it's a felony (but then so is robbing a post office, i think), we know one agent's identity was leaked...but no one was hurt. They COULD have been hurt...but weren't. No national security secrets were lost. So...is a reprimand in order..or something more. What do you think?
Hey TJ can we arrest you because your an dick? I mean you haven't committed a crime but we know you're a dick. We have a thing called the rule of law in America. Now I know how hard that is for you to understand, and we all know you're okay with abandoning the rule of law in these trying times.
Yeah, I guess saving 3,000 lives and billions of dollars really isn't worth breaking legal precedent. What a joke. Sounds like the same "pamper the terrorists and let the free" logic that the libs are propagating with regard to Gitmo.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss the possibility that Karl Rove was responsible for the leak of Valerie Plame’s name. Please stay on topic or start a new thread if you need to rehash the blame for 9/11.
Actually, all I have ever heard is pundits (O'Reilly, Limbaugh, etc.) claiming that Clinton said it. I have never seen a quote in a legitimate publication nor have I heard audio or seen video of Clinton saying that. The pundits (and morons like t_j) spout it regularly, but I have never actually seen a legitimate source quote Clinton. Not once. I would be happy to offer analysis if I DID see a legitimate source, but so far that has not surfaced.
Prepare some indictments or throw him in jail, and then let Bush pardon him like a Caspar Weinberger or a Marc Rich...
IMO it would bring back a little more respect in the admin if Rove was fired. But then he'd just go back to behind the scenes.
Other than this non-story, what beef do liberals have with Rove (other than him repeatedly whipping the Dem strategists)?
P(Karl Rove exposed Valerie Plame's CIA identity) = 1; P(Karl Rove goes to jail for exposing Plame's identity | GWB stays as US President) = 0; 0 << P(Karl Rove goes to jail for exposing Plame's identity | GWB gets impeached for misleading the country to War) <= 1. End of discussion.
