slater71
(586 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:12 PM
Original message |
Do you really think Rice will tell the truth? |
|
These people are so evil that I for one do not think she will ever tell the truth. Even under oath. Being under oath means nothing to these lying bastards.
|
KissMyAsscroft
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:14 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Amazing that conservatives have no problem with people defining what is is, now that the republicans are doing it.
And under oath, I might add.
|
alittlelark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Define what 'truth' is....... |
|
this cabal is so caught up in incestuous thought processes that they may be incapable of recognizing the truth - much less telling it.
|
Wetzelbill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:15 PM
Response to Original message |
|
funny. I don't think she really understands that she's lying though. I think she sorta believes what she is saying. Condi has evolved into delusion, Bush has always been there. Cheney is just nuts. I think the only one who understands they are lying is Rove and that fella ain't right in the head either. No morality.
|
freetobegay
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:17 PM
Response to Original message |
sniffa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:18 PM
Response to Original message |
|
i don't recaLL i don't recaLL there may have been instances where there may have been meetings but about what i don't recaLL
it worked for ronnie
|
skypilot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:18 PM
Response to Original message |
6. The real question is... |
|
...will she be nailed to the fucking wall when she does lie under oath? Will anyone pursue the matter seeing as no one's pole is getting waxed and there's no spunk stained dress to ooh and ahh over?
|
maddezmom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:18 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I don't think she knows what the "truth" is anymore |
|
just spinning, misrepresenting and telling partial truths is more her style.
|
pnorman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:28 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Let her lie her head off |
|
or even try to evade the questions. She'll be UNDER OATH; something that BushCo had been fighting tooth and nail until they had to give it up. That seems to have pissed off many of that Commision, and they're not likely to cut her much slack.
pnorman
|
mourningdove92
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 02:43 PM
Response to Original message |
9. I do not expect her to "lie" nor tell the "truth". She will |
|
talk out of both sides of her mouth, but SAY nothing. And yes, I expect she will be allowed to get away with it. After all, she is part of the administration that "never" said Iraq was an imminent threat.
|
rock
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:10 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Will her lips be moving? |
Blasphemer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:13 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Many evasive answers... |
|
She will flounder but I don't know that she will outright lie. Inconsistencies? - "I misspoke".
|
leftofthedial
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:14 PM
Response to Original message |
12. why would she start now? |
|
the real trick will be for her to tell lies that don't contradict her previous lies.
|
tom_paine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:17 PM
Response to Original message |
13. No. Like asking if Molotov will tell the truth about Stalin |
|
Edited on Fri Apr-02-04 03:17 PM by tom_paine
DEFINITELY no.
|
H2O Man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:26 PM
Response to Original message |
|
There are some interesting and insightful posts on here. I think one of the better points is can she tell the truth, even if she wants to? Consider what might stop her: (a) a boss wimpering that she needs to lie for national security? (b) she does not know the truth, because fellows Like Donald Rump didn't respect her enough to include her on everything? (c) she has a severe form of right-wing republican personality disorder, commonly associated by the inability to tell the truth twice consecutively? I think the administration feared the thought of her testifying, because she is the most likely to be honest. This will be a personal crisis for her. She appears to have a very rigid personality structure. That which is rigid often breaks under pressure.
|
Zinfandel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:27 PM
Response to Original message |
15. Fuck no, they have to be clever and trick the truth out of obedient Condi |
CityZen-X
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:29 PM
Original message |
The Skinny On Condisleeza! |
|
This pimple faced, rectum wrecked, Stanford Grad of a piece of Bu$h*t, On her knees scraping the hash marks of her testastone masters, patrionizing scumball wich, will never be able to tell the truth. For she truley believes that she is as white as the vomit she slurps!!
|
DrFunkenstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:48 PM
Response to Original message |
18. Sorry, I Don't Even Find This Slightly Amusing |
|
The thinly-veiled misogyny and racism in this post aren't exactly what I'd consider a rational debate, or even a normal level of decency - I don't care what she's done, comments like these reflect bile towards a lot more than one prominent black woman.
|
CityZen-X
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:29 PM
Response to Original message |
16. The Skinny On Condisleeza! |
|
This pimple faced, rectum wrecked, Stanford Grad of a piece of Bu$h*t, On her knees scraping the hash marks of her testastone masters, patrionizing scumball wich, will never be able to tell the truth. For she truley believes that she is as white as the vomit she slurps!!
|
Kahuna
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 03:42 PM
Response to Original message |
17. No she won't. Since the panel cannot interview any other.. |
|
people in the bush administration, she can cite anyone who hasn't been interviewed yet as a witness and they cannot not be called to confirm her testimony. Same goes for Chimp and Dr. Evil.
|
WhereIsMyFreedom
(605 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-02-04 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
19. They can interview them |
|
just not in public and probably not under oath.
I'm guessing that she will give many vague statements that are lies but to vague to prosecute her on. I think the only potential way to prove that she lies will be in the paper documentation that the commission receives from the FBI and CIA. Certainly the White House will not provide any useful (ie - incriminating) documentation.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 02:27 AM
Response to Original message |