Quixote1818
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:15 PM
Original message |
Poll question: Is Judith Miller in cahoots with the Bush Administration? |
TahitiNut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:17 PM
Response to Original message |
1. "cahoots" = "bed"??? If so, yes. |
niallmac
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
16. bed?...lets just say cahoots. I can't take the word picture. |
democracyindanger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:21 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Other: Always has been, always will be |
|
Whoever voted 'no' needs to google "Judith Miller" and "MET Alpha."
|
Mari333
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:21 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Judy is a Major Bush Whore |
niallmac
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
17. can't we refrain from smearing whores and prostitutes. When |
|
have they ever screwed the entire country?
|
madeline_con
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:22 PM
Response to Original message |
4. She went to jail, Cooper didn't |
|
I don't know either of them personally. I'd like to say that it's possible she feels a confidential source should remain just that, because it would set a precedent wherein no source could be protected.
It's possible that it's about journalism and being able to write without fear of being jailed every time one side disagrees with your article.
|
kodi
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
11. um, the SCOTUS, not her gets to make that decision |
|
it has never been the case where the state could not imprison someone for not reveling information directly related to the commission of a crime.
miller is simply a bad human being and a profound liar. she is directly responsible for much of the disinformation that led to the iraq invasion, endangered our soldiers while she was imbredded with them in iraq, and has acted above the law on numerous occasions. she is getting what she deserves.
she is not joan of arc, she is pond scum and i hope when all is said and done she is run out of town on a rail.
but yes, as you say..."It's possible that it's about journalism and being able to write without fear of being jailed every time one side disagrees with your article."
and it just as possible monkeys will fly out your butt someday too.
|
madeline_con
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
13. "... not reveling information directly related |
|
to the commission of a crime."
So, when Rove weasels his greasy way out of this, and I have confidence that he will, as all the "untouchables" in Washington will run off unscathed, does she get an apology because "no crime was committed"?
I'm honestly trying to understand the law regarding this, regardless of what may or may not fly out of my butt.
|
kodi
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
20. nope, you have to present what you know to a grand jury |
|
the purpose of sitting a grand jury is to find out if there is enough evidence to have the state say that a crime has been committed. the only way you get around it is to plead the 5th.
btw, madeline had a nice butt.
|
madeline_con
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
|
She may have a lot of confidential sources who would have been sweating bullets if she'd told about that particular one, so she went to jail. Someone may pay her a hefty sum when she gets out for staying quiet. ??
|
bridgit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:22 PM
Response to Original message |
5. well, i voted 'yes', but what i think... |
|
is that the bush admin set themselves up as the ultimate 'thing' you'd want to be a part of, or embedded with, if you were a 'journalist' & that access to them & their smug-ass, smirky world was parsed out by the ass kiss. miller isn't the only one who will be seen as willing to toss it all into the wind to sit at 'the mean girls' lunch table imo they're all over wash dc
|
Oversea Visitor
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:24 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Rove the brain Miller the mouth
|
gumby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
:rofl:
If Rove's the brain, and Miller's the mouth, what's the Christian Cowboy? hahahahaha
|
Oversea Visitor
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
Don't compare Christian and Cowboy to that piece of excrement
|
mcctatas
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
Cheney's enlarged colon.:evilgrin:
|
Nabia2004
(566 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:25 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Judith Miller has always been with the Dark Side of the force |
LiviaOlivia
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:26 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Is she just a corporate whore or a 'player'? |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-16-05 11:39 PM by LiviaOlivia
http://billmon.org/archives/002016.html~snip~ We're into some deep ethical shit here, at least if you're a journalist or still have the values of one. Utlimately, it gets to a debate over the future of the First Amendment in a system increasingly dominated by money and power. But along the way, it makes an intermediate stop at the question of whether, net-net, it is still in the public interest for journalists to protect their sources from the long arm of the law.
I've always been an absolute supporter of the duty -- not the right, but the duty -- of reporters to protect their sources. There was a time when I would have been an equally unthinking, knee-jerk supporter of a federal shield law. But, after what's come to light about the Rovians and their cozy little circle of journalistic collaborators, I have to think about it. Left to their own devices, corporate journalists seem increasingly inclined to act as an arm of the government, not a watchdog of it. Which means the licence granted by the traditions of the profession -- which in some ways extend even further than the legal rights guaranteed by the First Amendment -- can and are being used against the public interest, not to protect it. We seem to have run into yet another variation on the old Roman question: Quid custodiet ipsos custodes? Who shall watch the watchers?~snip~
|
caligirl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:33 PM
Response to Original message |
9. I'm betting Hannah was her source. |
Call me Deacon Blues
(512 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:33 PM
Response to Original message |
10. It's simpler than that . . . |
|
She's like every other Repug -- she's out for number one, and she's covering her own ass now that she's gotten caught. A Real Journalist is only after the truth; she's protecting a lie. News Flash Judy, your Pulitzer is worthless now. You can play the martyr all you want, but no one will ever believe another thing you write. She's not in bed with the Bushistas -- she's made her own bed. Now she has to lie (and that's a double entendre) in it.
|
gumby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-16-05 11:56 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Judy didn't 'Go' to the Dark Side |
|
That's where she was all along.
The bed she made might be getting pretty lumpy about now.
|
Eric J in MN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
26. I agree. She whored the idea that Gadafi was a big threat |
|
to the US during the Reagan years.
She didn't start whoring for Republican administrations just recently.
|
RUMMYisFROSTED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:11 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Sun Jul-17-05 12:13 AM by RUMMYisFROSTED
:shrug:
Se-cret Agent (wo)man Se-cret Agent (wo)man They've given me a number And taken away my Plame
|
moondust
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 12:30 AM
Response to Original message |
18. Karl Rove needed a big megaphone to out Plame. |
|
Edited on Sun Jul-17-05 12:32 AM by Xap
Guess who he called.
|
raysr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 02:11 AM
Response to Original message |
|
guards are having some fun with that nasty crack!
|
understandinglife
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 02:52 AM
Response to Original message |
24. She always has been. Once a criminal neoconster, always a criminal ... |
|
... neoconster. Judy used the 1st, first. She will soon only have the 5th on which to attempt to evade the truth. The Constitution that she has worked so diligently to destroy is the only reason she might get out of jail during the time of her trial for an untold number of acts of conspiracy and worse.
I just wonder how many of her bosses at NYT are complicit, but I have the fullest confidence Mr Fitzgerald will uncover that fact, as well.
Peace.
www.missionnotaccomplished.us
|
Poppyseedman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-17-05 07:49 AM
Response to Original message |
25. She is protecting herself |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 01:03 PM
Response to Original message |