in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:25 PM
Original message |
OMG!!!! The UK reporter who broke the DSM is going to be on HARDBALL!!!! |
oasis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:27 PM
Response to Original message |
1. More good news, Tweety won't be there to kick him around. |
kliljedahl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
My thought exactly, maybe we'll get some real questions. Keith’s Barbeque Central
|
Mark Williams
(309 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:27 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Video Will Be Posted Online Soon |
|
The video of this will be posted over at DEMbloggers.com after it has ended.
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:27 PM
Response to Original message |
3. He'll be on after this commercial! |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:29 PM
Response to Original message |
4. David Gregory is hosting tonight! THIS should be good |
|
until he has Anrea Mitchell on. :puke:
|
Cush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:29 PM
Response to Original message |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:31 PM
Response to Original message |
6. A memo based on a briefing??? NO it is NOT! |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 06:32 PM by in_cog_ni_to
It is the MINUTES from an OFFICIAL meeting.
we should email Gregory and CORRECT that statement! Maybe Smith will. ;)
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:33 PM
Response to Original message |
8. He showed the protests in DC!! |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. The reporter is talking about RICHARD CLARKE, PAUL O'NEIL |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 06:34 PM by in_cog_ni_to
and Bob Woodward BOOKS! THEY all said the same thing!
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. First question to Smith...WHY did you destroy your notes? |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 06:37 PM by in_cog_ni_to
Michael Smith is explaining exactly what he did with the ORIGINAL documents. He shredded the PHOTOCOPIES...NOT the originals!
|
indie_voter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
rocktivity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:35 PM
Response to Original message |
10. His name is Michael Smith, and I hope he GALLOWAYS 'em! |
kliljedahl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
15. He did, he did, he did |
|
Refuted every objection & doubt. Keith’s Barbeque Central
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 06:44 PM by in_cog_ni_to
When Blair was at the "Crawford??? Summit??? :rofl: he agreed at THAT time to support the chimp's war. That was in APRIL 2002, wasn't it????
|
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
24. Great rebuttal to the admin's defense that they went to the UN... |
|
after the date of the memo. Smith made the point that they had to go to the UN in order to justify its legality because regime change is internationally illegal.
|
Beaverhausen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:40 PM
Response to Original message |
CatWoman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
14. David Kay coming up next. |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
kliljedahl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
|
Thank gawd for no Tweety. Keith’s Barbeque Central
|
leftchick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:42 PM
Response to Original message |
17. neo-freak Woolsey up next |
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:42 PM
Response to Original message |
18. I feel like he did a great job. Even though he got slammed right away.. |
|
with the "what did you do with the documents question".
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
22. BUT he explained that PERFECTLY! |
|
He did a great job of explaining EXACTLY what he did with ALL of the documents....originals and photocopies.
|
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
27. Yes he did. Made sure everyone knew that.... |
|
no one, Blair, Bush, US, UK had denied to accuracy of the minutes content.
|
indie_voter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
31. I was thrilled he was asked! |
|
Straight from the horses mouth so to speak, puts an end to this idiocy! ;)
|
CantGetFooledAgain
(635 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:44 PM
Response to Original message |
21. Smith did very, very well |
|
And, was treated fairly by Gregory.
|
oasis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:46 PM
Response to Original message |
23. Yes they went to the UN but Bush pulled Hans Blix before inspections were |
|
done. Since no WMD were found, regime change is the only likely conclusion we can come to.
The "We went to the UN" story won't fly.
|
oasis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
25. PNACer Woolsey to put spin on it. |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
|
OH FUCK!!!! Woolsey is talking "pursing phrases" British speak!!!! That is SUCH BULLSHIT!!! Won't fly, Woolsey!
|
indie_voter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
36. HELLLLOOO Earth to Woolsey |
|
A BRITISH reporter was just on, there is NO mistaking what it means to him or anybody with a brain.
Keep digging the hole though...
|
No DUplicitous DUpe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #36 |
54. Woolsey and Kay were no better than |
|
Sean and Rush would have been.
|
Donailin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
39. how fucking extensive is this godamned coverup? |
|
good God can they fucking have someone like Richard Clark or Scott Ritter on??
Of course not, they tell the truth.
fucking GE!!
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
49. No shit. What kind of investigative guests are these.... |
|
Why do I give a shit what they say?
|
annabanana
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:46 PM
Response to Original message |
26. Gregory let him finish his sentences |
|
and he got the point across that they only went to the UN in order to get an EXCUSE, and a JUSTIFICATION and a COVER for going to war. That the reason as it stood (regime change) was ILLEGAL under international law and they had to figure out a way to make it "legal".
I was glad that he made it so clear.
|
kliljedahl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:48 PM
Response to Original message |
28. Don't tell me about "British Usage' Woolsey, you Asshat |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 06:48 PM by kliljedahl
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
32. THAT was the argument the RWers STARTED with! |
|
They have run out of excuses! They've reverted back to their OLD ONES!
|
Moochy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
|
He's saying we could have gone to war whenever we wanted to, legally. he disagrees it was illegal, and british laywers' panties were just in a bunch.
Fixed: depends on what the meaning of is is.
|
kliljedahl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
42. Thought of that, didn't want to go there |
merbex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:49 PM
Response to Original message |
30. It is time to supoeana British people - can we do that? |
|
Fixed doesn't mean fixed to these guys
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
37. The Senate had Galloway testify. I hope they bring |
|
Michael Smith here too! They won't though. The Brits won't take their bullshit and they know that from having Galloway here. :7
|
No DUplicitous DUpe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:49 PM
Response to Original message |
33. David, Ask The Question... |
|
...Was the Iraq threat real?
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:50 PM
Response to Original message |
35. did he explain the part about destroying the COPIES of the originals?? |
|
I just turned on SOFTBALL and missed him.
|
indie_voter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
41. YES! He explained the entire thing! |
|
He destroyed the PHOTOCOPIES and gave the ORIGINALS back to his source. That was the first question Gregory asked him.
|
SoCalDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #41 |
47. That's the part that bothers me though.. |
|
without the originals, OR the photocopies, it opens the door fro speculation..
Anyone brave enough to hand over originals, should not request them back.. Those originals should have been put into a safety deposit box, and left there.
Suppose that the whistleblower gets scared, and destroys the originals....whom to believe then:(
|
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #47 |
51. If the content was being denied, that would be one thing. But its not. |
indie_voter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #47 |
63. check out raw story for the reason why he gave back the originals |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #47 |
|
only a LIMITED number of people had access to the original documents. It would be pretty easy to narrow down who could have given the info to Smith and then "suicide" him/her like they did David Kelly. :scared:
|
CantGetFooledAgain
(635 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:53 PM
Response to Original message |
40. One look at that guy Woolsey... |
|
...and I know everything I need to know about him. Look at those eyes. Look at that cold stare. That is an evil man.
|
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
45. That's exactly what I thought. You could tell right away he'd be spewing |
|
the RW talking points of the night...
|
Moochy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
46. Socks are Woolsey's favorite favorite clothes Sir |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 07:01 PM by Moochy
He looks like Dobby...
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #46 |
kliljedahl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:55 PM
Response to Original message |
44. Commercial, need a fresh beer & popcorn |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:57 PM
Response to Original message |
48. In LEGAL terms...Woolsey doesn't think the Americans were wrong. |
oasis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #48 |
56. Gregory's not letting Woolsey change the thrust of the memo. |
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #56 |
60. It's nice to have a moderator actually stay on point & not give in... eom |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:59 PM
Response to Original message |
52. Kay...the memo is a tempest in a tea pot.. |
|
what's important is what's happening on the ground in Iraq! Oh brother!
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #52 |
55. i guess the Constitution doesnt mean anything, huh Mr Kay. |
|
Why is this guy such a right wing pansy? He still work under Bolton or something?
|
CantGetFooledAgain
(635 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #52 |
66. How can people say shit like that?? |
|
What's going on now is important, and the memo is ALSO important because it provides strong evidence of violations of international and US law.
And why must everybody pretend that "9/11 changed everything"? What 9/11 did was to provide them with the excuse they needed to do everything that they talked about doing before 9/11. Hmmm, that's not the least bit suspicious. :sarcasm:
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 06:59 PM
Response to Original message |
53. do they have transcripts made available??? |
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #53 |
58. I'm pretty sure MSNBC has transcripts or it repeats at 10:00 p.m. central |
SlavesandBulldozers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:03 PM
Response to Original message |
57. interesting how Tweety doesn't participate in this |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 07:06 PM by SlavesandBulldozers
what's Tweety's excuse this evening?
on edit: not that I'm watching it or anything, can't stand any of those shows. but am just curious at to why Tweety's out.
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #57 |
59. Don't know. He's a weasel. n/t |
SlavesandBulldozers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #59 |
62. didn't he do the promo for it earlier |
|
because i know people were referencing this show earlier this afternoon, apparently after seeing the promo for it. was there any hint that Tweety wasn't going to be the host?
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #62 |
65. Well, the graphics from MSNBC that were posted here |
|
had Tweety in them. :shrug: I don't know what happened to him. Maybe KKKRove threatened him.
|
oasis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #57 |
61. Tweets wouldn't have the guts to challenge Woolsey as Gregory did. |
|
Gregory is a journalist asking probing questions.
|
SlavesandBulldozers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #61 |
|
I will never forget Gregory asking * if he ever made any mistakes. That was a great moment.
I do find Tweety's absence rather suspect.
|
bj2110
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #57 |
69. He definitely was on the promos for the piece... interesting... |
oasis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-20-05 07:13 PM
Response to Original message |
67. Newsweek guy on Olberman show makes good point "No war plans" |
|
is what the Bush's were saying all along.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 17th 2024, 11:23 PM
Response to Original message |