Posted on 07/28/2006 5:44:54 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
William Rivers Pitt has finally rendered up a non-answer about his part in the Non-Indictment That Dares Not Speak Its Name. This was in response to a challenge from DUmmie kstewart33 who boldly asked in this THREAD, "William Pitt: How about an explanation?" Unfortunately for DUmmie kstewart33, Pied Piper Pitt responds with a lame non-answer as we shall see. I wonder if Pitt will be allowed to be so evasive if he is forced to take the stand if there is a criminal trial against his buddy, Jason Leopold, for making threats against various bloggers including, most notably, SEIXON. Remember, Pied Piper Pitt was in the forefront of vouching for the "noble" journalistic integrity of Jason Leopold and has acted as his chief enabler on the Web. Therefore it is to be expected that any criminal proceedings against Leopold must include Pitt on the witness stand. One can only hope that such a trial will be televised so we can watch the squirmings and evasions by Bukowski's most devout patron. As usual, the Pied Piper Pitt evasion is in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, amused at the fact that Pitt placed his entire political cojones into the greasy palms of Jason Leopold, is in the [brackets]:
William Pitt: How about an explanation?
[I was DESPERATE to claw my way into fame. I figured that since it was a sure thing that Karl Rove would be indicted by Patrick Fitzgerald, why not announce it as a fact and then lay claim for this amazing scoop when it happened? Who knew that this could have completely backfired on me and now am so openly mocked by my fellow leftists that my only consolation is imbibing deeply of liquid refreshments nightly at Bukowski's?]
Now that you're posting again, might you give us all a full explanation of what happened concerning the Rove indictment/Jason Leopold/truthout fiasco several weeks back. You remember: the series of stories that had us all convinced that Rove would be indicted after 24 business hours or 48 or whatever?
[The indictment really happened. I just got a little ahead of the news cycle on that one. The indictment will be announced the moment the Great Pumpkin arrives.]
No fair sneaking back into the forums without telling all of us chumps what the heck happened.
[What happened is that I have gone from merely predicting indictments that didn't happen to prophesizing a grand apocalyptic End of the World VISION based on a complex series of events which must fit together perfectly like a vast jigsaw puzzle for it to happen.]
calling folks out is a no no.
[How dare you call on Pied Piper Pitt to account for making fools of us all.]
This is in bad taste. Regardless of the situation...
[Yecch! A fellow DUmmie seeks the truth. This is in bad taste.]
Thou shalt not ask for accountability...ye shall bow thy head and baa in acquiescence as does the rest of the DU flock.
[Ye shall bury thy head in the sand as does the rest of the DUmmie flock.]
Is this personal? Did he take away your virginity, or something?
[That is a question that might be asked in a courtroom concerning a certain Girls School scandal in Newton.]
Hey Bill- if you are reading this, somebody still loves ya, Baby!!!
[Is that you, Jason Leopold?]
I would venture to guess that Leopold was probably right and Death Star Cheney once again pulled off the impossible (to mere mortals) anyway. What HAVEN'T these assh*les gotten away with? Just sayin'.
[Yeah, Karl Rove really was indicted and Patrick Fitzgerald merely kept mum when Rove's lawyer lied about there being no indictment. It sounds like the Good Fairy Leopold has been sprinkling Pixie Dust on your brain.]
You should be ashamed for posting this. Will has done more for this party than you ever will.
[Absolutely. Will has done more to make the Democrats look like complete fools than you ever will. That videotape of the Michigan Democrats (including Hillary) standing up and cheering the Truthout announcement of the Rove indictment just can't be topped for sheer idiocy. Thanx, Will. You done GOOD!]
No one should ever be ashamed for wanting to know if information is true or not, and while I agree that Will Pitt certainly has every right, as much as anyone else to post here, I'd like to hear about that fiasco as well.. tho I imagine they might want to post it at their site and then link it here for us all to scratch our heads over
[They already did post an explanation at the TruthOut site. Karl Rove was really indicted but they just got ahead of the news cycle in announcing it.]
Will never claimed direct knowledge-he said he trusted the people whom claimed direct knowledge, as in "I doubt they are lying".....thereby lending his considerable weight to the story.As best I can guess,some deal was in fact arranged.Myself,I am tired of people that to this day post snarky stuff against both Leopold and TO.And to bring Will's credibility in when he was a character witness is unfair....till the entire cabal is taken down and the history is written, I'll abstain....
[According to Will himself, one of the sources that he trusted was Joe Wilson. And thanx for reminding us that Pitt was a character witness vouching for that font of journalistic integrity, Jason Leopold.]
Shameful violation of the rules. This will hopefully be locked VERY soon. SHAME on you.
[Shameful violation of DUmmieland rules. Seeking the truth. SHAME on you.]
Why don't we all just alert the mods.... I did. This is clearly against the rules.
[Clearly against the rules to seek out the truth in DUmmieland.... And now the moment we have all been waiting for. An uncharacteristically cryptic "explanation" from the Pied Piper himself. Heeeeeeeere's WILLLIIEEEEE!!!]
Ready?
I can't.
Not because I don't want to, or because there isn't a good one. I do and there is. But any and all information on this issue is going to come from Marc Ash, and he is my boss, and that's how it is. I am required to abide by the rules of my employer, and that's one of them.
Sorry.
And, P.S., I've been a member here since April of 2001, so I'm not sneaking anywhere.
[So there you have it. Pied Piper Pitt could easily give us an explanation about the Hoaxmas story but he can't because he must defer to that journalistic giant and fashion photographer, Marc Ash. If only fashion photographer Ash would give Pitt a deferment on the TruthOut rules, Pitt could explain the whole thing thus lifting the weight that is crushing his political career that never happened.]
Locking. Calling out another member is against the rules. Also, in the future, if you see something like this, please just hit the Alert button instead of telling the poster why their thread will be locked. The mods will handle it.
[Locking. Also in the future, any thread daring to question Pitt about the Non-Indictment That Dare Not Speak Its Name will be instantly locked.]
It's from the Brahm Stoker book Dracula.
Count Dracula had Jonathan Harker buy Carfax Abbey so he could quietly come to England to do evil.
Gotcha! The name was familiar but I couldn't place it. Thanks for the heads up. I never read the book but, as a kid, loved the movie with Bela Lugosi. That's the only horror flick I've ever enjoyed (outside of Young Frankenstein, that is).
Just a few short months ago, that would have earned DUmmie kstewart33 an official Lousy FReeper Troll Memorial Tombstone.
How times change....
The best part is that each one would need to impeach the other's credibility to save his own skin. Pass the popcorn.
One can only hope that such a trial will be televised so we can watch the squirmings and evasions by Bukowski's most devout patron.
Pity JimRob wouldn't get pay-per-view rights on it.
He's already got the "gibbering" part down pat.
It comes naturally; especially when induced by a few cold ones.
Nobody likes being played for a sap. (Compare the current reaction of FReepers who had previously defended Mel Gibson from the allegation of anti-Semitism -- the same dynamic applies.)
They just keep coming back, like a herpes infection....
Dummies resurrecting Andy. Check on Conservative Underground. New thread on DU. A Dummie related the DU version of Andy/Beth/Pitt/ vs Johns Hopkins, Paypal, etc., to a lawyer who will appear on the thread to render an opinion after Dummies tell what they know.
Beth jumped right on discouraging a discussion on "a public forum," Velma D. bounced on presumably to prevent further "sh-- storms."
Why don't the Dummies just go to their archives? DU May 11 and May 17 2005 should keep the "lawyer" entertained.
Think Velma D and Beth are breaking their fingers mashing the Alert button.
Pitt probably doing his nightly turn at Bukowski's for the amusement of the barflies; since Fat Che's departure Pitt has nobody covering his back in any Andyscam re-runs.
PJ, this thread isn't going to last.
That could be a big time problem for the Andy crew. If the thread isn't shut down before the lawyer makes an appearance, wouldn't it be interesting should some trolls also appear to point the way?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.