Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DSM now on RushLimbaugh.com

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
oxbow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:30 PM
Original message
DSM now on RushLimbaugh.com
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 08:41 PM by oxbow
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_062005/content/truth_detector.guest.html

Let the games begin. Michael Smith may have to get the original copies of the DSM back from his source. That's the only way to verify their contents. The DSM as leaked has not been disproved, nor the contents questioned by the UK gov. However, this will be conveniently ignored by the RW echo chamber.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. It Will Not Work This Time
And on top of it all, they are putting attention onto the something veryyyyy explosive. Thanks Ditto Dumb Dumb!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. Never! Not a chance.
I'd as soon bob for apples in a commode as let that pig's cookie sully my cache.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oxbow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Here's the text
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT



RUSH: I purposely haven't talked about this Downing Street memo much because, frankly, A, it didn't interest me. And, you know, if it doesn't interest me I'm not going to talk about it. And the reason it didn't interest me is because it was just another one of these ginned up things by the libs, and it looks like it's got some similarities to Bill Burkett and the forged documents of CBS and Rathergate. In fact, the Associated Press has a story that the reporter who discovered the memos destroyed the originals and retyped them himself. There was some dispute over whether or not the original memos were destroyed. The original memos don't say anything. They don't prove anything, other than the Brits were concerned about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq themselves. Also, what's this reporter's name? British reporter Michael Smith, who broke the memo story in the London Times on May the 1st, revealed to the AP over the weekend that he protected the identity of the source that he'd obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals. His admission means there's now no independent way to determine the accuracy of the Downing Street memo, i.e., whether he made any typos or transcription errors that could have changed the memo's meaning.

Now, there's some differences here between the Downing Street memo and Rathergate. The Rathergate stuff, those memos are 20 years old written by a dead guy. I forget the name of the commanding officer at Bush's National Guard unit, but he's the guy that supposedly wrote them. These memos, the Downing Street memo, they're current. The people all involved are still alive and they haven't denied any of this and you would think they would if they were not true, but it appears to be much ado about nothing. Seems to me one of the things that the paranoid conspiracy-oriented left is glomming onto now, but when I saw this name Michael Smith, somebody -- I haven't had time today, folks, I've been swamped here this morning. You would not believe the intensity of show prep today because it's been quite intense just to catch up with everything and get it all organized here. But, Mr. Snerdley, would you do something for me or somebody out there research-wise? It seems to me this name Michael Smith, seems to me that there was a guy by the same name who worked with Mary Mapes at CBS during this whole Rathergate. Now, my memory could be all over the ballpark on this, so I'm not saying it's the same guy, I'm not even sure, but it seems to me that all the names that I remember seeing involved in this that are no longer working at CBS-- He wasn't a producer or anything, wasn't part of his name, wasn't part of the investigation that Thornburgh and the AP guy, whoever's name turned up-- (interruption) he's what? There was a Texas journalist named Michael Smith that was associated with Mary Mapes? Is he still in Texas or is he in the UK? I know Michael Smith is a common name. There are probably a thousand of them in New York alone or in any large population. I saw the name, I said hmm, it's very strange.

At any rate, the Downing Street memo, the reason it's such an item in the news is because it's what spawned this mock impeachment hearing that took place Thursday night in Washington. This is the thing that was chaired by John Conyers, and this is where all the anti-Semitism came out of the mouths of a bunch of Democrats that participated in this thing, and it's that which Howard Dean has now had to go out and say, "Anti-Semitism, why, that's not part of our party," blah, blah.

END TRANSCRIPT

know your enemy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Pigboy forgets a crucial fact.
The leaking source is still out there, with the originals...
What a douchebag.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catch22Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. OMG, Could Rush be right???
You don't think there could me more than ONE fucking Michael Smith do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyRingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. It's funny, that's how Rush operates.
In his association of the DSM with "Rathergate", there may or may not have been someone named Michael Smith involved, but it doesn't matter.
The link has already been made to his loyal listeners, and the message is clear: "disregard the British memo as faked".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oxbow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #9
16. If thats what he's doing, its very good strategy
Sneaky and underhanded, but very skillful nevertheless. He might not be as hopped up on Vicodin as I thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kansasblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. These docs first came public in the UK right before the election
of Blair. They caused major problems in the election. He lost a lot of seats in Parliment. He never aurgued at that time that they were fake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wurzel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. The "original copies" is a distraction.
Smith never had originals. He had only copies which he deliberately destroyed to prevent any possibility of their being traced. Also by typing them it makes it much more difficult to prosecute him under any "secrecy act" because he never published the orignals. Neither Bush nor Blair has disputed the authenticity of the information in the DSMs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oxbow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. right. should have said "original photocopies" :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. michael smith said he was sent the originals
and the paper's lawyers told him to photocopy them and send the originals back to his "source" which he did. this gave the times ownership of the photocopies.

then they typed them out and got rid of his photocopies so the "source" could not be identified.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. Right, and there were some kind of "marks" on the originals
that would have identified his source (handwritten notes maybe?), who could be arrested under British law for leaking the minutes.

The marks would have shown up on the photocopies, which is why he had to destroy them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wurzel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
20. Then whoever sent him the originals was a complete idiot.
Edited on Tue Jun-21-05 09:40 AM by wurzel
Or he was was so intent on getting the story out he was willing to take the risk of spending the rest of his life in jail. Of course this is a Murdoch own paper. His only intention is to hurt Blair. I think he also own Fox News. If he does he should have to explain why he is playing the story up in Britain and ignoring it here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
6. Well, then, we'll just conveniently ignore them right back
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 08:48 PM by rocknation
Are THEY willing to stand up and publicly declare it a phony? Blair and his esteemed colleagues aren't!

On Hardball this evening, Michael Smith told David Gregory that for legal reasons he photocopied the orginals, gave the originals back to the source, had the memos retyped from the photocopies, then destroyed the photocopies. Gregory didn't ask him what "fixed the facts" meant, but he was more than happy to raise the question with the two guests he had on afterwards!

link

:headbang:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
10. This is part of how they spook the press now.
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 09:08 PM by creeksneakers2
I think one of the reasons the media was slow to take up the Downing Street memos was that they feared winding up like CBS if the memos turned out to be forged. The White House didn't claim the CBS memos were forged until after the story ran. They can sabotage anybody that way, by not denying, so there is really no way to verify memos. By not issuing denials of false stories until after the stories run, the White House can frighten the entire press out of using memos for any story. Very clever.

Rush is just carrying on the plot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drnaline Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Stupid question?
Wouldn't he be giving his source away to prove the story is true? The reason he returned them in the first place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oxbow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Not necessarily
I would think that he could just black out any part of the photocopies that would implicate his source.

btw-
Welcome to DU Drnaline!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HR_Pufnstuf Donating Member (782 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
17. lol.
Edited on Tue Jun-21-05 02:33 AM by HR_Pufnstuf
"paranoid conspiracy-oriented left"

Then in next sentence..

"but when I saw this name Michael Smith... ... my memory could be all over the ballpark on this, so I'm not saying it's the same guy, I'm not even sure, but it seems to me that all the names that I remember seeing involved in this that are no longer working at CBS"

..

"I saw the name, I said hmm, it's very strange."


Who's the conspiracy buff here?


--

Further,

It did not happen at night, as in "Thursday night in Washington".

http://sonikreducer.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/15/133533/194

ie.

Downing Street Minutes and Pre-War Intelligence
U.S. House of Representatives, Conyers, J. (D-MI)
Washington, District of Columbia (United States)
ID: 187209 - 06/16/2005 - 2:00 - ns


---

"We are going to be much tougher and in-your-face with the Republicans when they say things that aren't true,"

- Howard Dean, Boston, MA, 6-20-5
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
18. No, Mick Smith does not need to do anything...
The documents were authenticated by British officials, commissioners, reporters across the globe, and in America as well as think tanks. If Rush Drug Fuck wants more proof, then I suggest he call his handlers. They, I am sure, have notes of their own.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:44 AM
Response to Original message
19. I got nauseated...
when the words "truth detector" came up on the title. I had to leave or heave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC