George knows Jack (Abramoff that is!) New photos according to Time Magazin

[ddeclue]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1151784,00.html?cnn=yes

The White House had been pretending that George and Jack never met and the problem was a Congressional one. Looks like they've just been caught in a lie! (another lie that is..)

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:
:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:
:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:
:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:
:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:
:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

Doug De Clue
Orlando, FL

[dennis4868]

1. I think we can safely say.....

that is this scandal included Clinton Tome Magazine would publish these puctures all over the world with happiness!

[Ready4Change]

2. When is the next Time due on the news stands?

when?

[0007]

3. Why didn't Time show the five photos with Abramoff?

Can't wait for the Press Conference on Monday with that little lying McClellan.

:bounce:
:woohoo::bounce:
:woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce:
:woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce:
:woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce:
:woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce:
:woohoo:
junior's a liar liar pants on fire

[ddeclue]

5. Why don't they just call him the official White House Liar?

instead of "Press Secretary"? It would be so much more accurate..

It would be like in medieval times when they had a "town cryer" to give you the news or a "court jester" to entertain the king... except in this case he would be the "king's liar"..


Doug D.
Orlando, FL

[onenote]

11. because they don't have the pictures to publish

As the article makes clear, the source that has the pics wouldn't give them to Time for publication. And frankly, from the description of the photos, I wouldn't get too excited. Yes it will be nice to see the press run photos of Abramoff and chimpy. But as the article also makes clear, most of the photos appear to be "clicks" -- photos that are taken at WH receptions by the hundreds. Such photos only tend to back up Scottie's claims that Abramoff and chimpy met at receptions. The one of the tribal leader and Abramoff and chimpy is more troubling for the WH, but even it shouldn't be overplayed. They key thing is that chimpy did meet with Abramoff at a non-reception type event. But its only one and it sounds like the kind of event where, again, the pres did a "drop by" on a meeting, exchanged some words, and had a few photos taken.

onenote

[NVMojo]

4. Bush, Jack & the Coushattas Tribal Chairman in DC/May 2001

http://www.texasobserver.org/showArticle_new.asp?ArticleID=13

[0007]

6. Bad news for junior

snip

According to a source close to the tribal majority, Chairman Poncho recently “revisited that issue” of his visit to the White House. He had previously denied it because he thought he was responding to press inquiries that implied he had a one-on-one meeting with Bush. He now recalls that he in fact did go to the White House on May 9, 2001. Tribal attorney Kathryn Fowler Van Hoof went with him, although she did not get into the meeting with the President. That meeting lasted for about 15 minutes and was not a one-on-one meeting. At the meeting, Bush made some general comments about Indian policy but did not discuss Indian gaming. Abramoff was at the meeting—for which he charged the Coushatta Tribe $25,000. The change in Poncho’s position is odd in light of the fact that he and his spokespersons have maintained for more than a year that he did not meet with President Bush in May 2001.

[f-bush]

7. one word: IMPEACHMENT

[ddeclue]

8. To use an inside programming joke: IMPEACHMENT++;

Bush already has committed the following impeachable offenses:


1) Lying to Congress about WMD's to start a war. (This falls under conspiracy to defraud the gov't, read John Dean...)
2) Outing a CIA operative in violation of Federal Law (this is a felony and you can throw in conspiracy and obstruction charges..)
3) Violating the FISA law and lying about it. (This is also conspiracy and obstruction and BUSH CONFESSED ON NATIONAL TV and promised to keep breaking the law instead of having it changed.)
4) Announcing the signing statements as having the force of law to override Congressional intent re: torture law.
5) Holding U.S. citizens without a trial indefinitely.

The list goes on and on but these are the worst offenses for which he rightfully should be impeached.

Doug D.

[f-bush]

9. Nice!

[ddeclue]

10. #5 is probably false arrest and kidnapping...also felonies..