slater71
(586 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 12:36 PM
Original message |
Hour 20 minutes for Rush to talk about Wilson problem. |
|
He only mentioned it and went to break. Then a caller asked him why it took him so long to talk about it and why wouldn`t he call for a special prosecuter. He blew him off saying that it was to early and no one is trying to stop Ashcroft.
|
ewagner
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 12:41 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Almmost goes without saying |
|
Edited on Mon Sep-29-03 12:42 PM by ewagner
If it were a Democratic Administratin that's ALL he would have talked about the 1 hour and 20 mins.
Can't the dittoheads get their mind around the hypocrisy of this guy?
on edit: Another shinning example of just how "patriotic" this SOB is. He should be concerned about American security no matter what!
|
Evil_Dewers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 01:00 PM
Response to Original message |
|
You aren't missing a thing.
|
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 02:22 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Questions Rush forgot to answer re Wilson and Whitehouse |
|
From the ABCnote:
"Has President Bush made clear to the White House staff that only total cooperation with the investigation will be tolerated? If not, why not?
Has he insisted that every senior staff member sign a statement with legal authority that they are not the leaker and that they will identify to the White House legal counsel who is?
Has Bush required that all sign a letter relinquishing journalists from protecting those two sources? Has Bush said that those involved in this crime will be immediately fired? If not, why not?
Has Albert Gonzalez distributed a letter to White House employees telling them to preserve documents, logs, records? If not, why not?
Has Andy Card named someone on his staff to organize compliance? If not, why not?
White House officials who might have legal or political exposure on this are going to have to decide whether to hire lawyers or not, and the White House counsel's office is going to have to decide what legal help they can and should provide to officials if and when the DOJ wants to talk to them.
That means that the '90s practice of every Washington bureau of calling members of the bar to see who has hired whom is about to heat back up. The first one to report someone hiring a criminal lawyer wins a prize, as does the first person who develops that lawyer as a source on all this.
A reminder that students of recusal politics will have to consider the Rove-Ashcroft history"
|
10digits
(127 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 02:58 PM
Response to Original message |
|
when he was advising the Dean campaign.
|
tkmorris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Edited on Mon Sep-29-03 03:17 PM by tkmorris
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:23 AM
Response to Original message |