1 posted on
01/03/2010 11:22:20 AM PST by
opentalk
To: opentalk
This is a bigger conflict-of-interest than it might seem at first glance. Arguably, the Underpants Bomber’s near-downing of a packed airliner on Christmas Day followed an abysmal failure to connect-the-dots on the part of our intel apparatus. It was, at its root, a data-sharing screw-up. This guy was CEO of a company which may have been part of the problem. It’s very much like putting Jamie Gorelick on the 9/11 inquiry panel.
2 posted on
01/03/2010 11:25:50 AM PST by
RightOnTheLeftCoast
(Obama: running for re-election in '12 or running for Mahdi now? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahdi])
To: opentalk
This administration does a lot of “waivering” on ethics.
3 posted on
01/03/2010 11:28:24 AM PST by
SumProVita
(Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
To: opentalk; Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; ...
4 posted on
01/03/2010 11:38:22 AM PST by
Nachum
(The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
To: opentalk
The first administrative action of any new Obama cabinet prospect is an ethics waiver.
5 posted on
01/03/2010 11:40:01 AM PST by
Delta 21
(If you cant tell if I'm being sarcastic...maybe I'm not.)
To: opentalk
Looking froward to the daily NYT article outlining the various ways the Obama administration in undermining our security like this waiver. They did it for Bush, right ?
BTW, Brennan was embarrassing on Fox News this morning
6 posted on
01/03/2010 12:00:55 PM PST by
Popman
(Election 2010: Congress: your pink slips are coming ............... :)
To: opentalk
Despite the huge arse conflict of interest here?
This lametard jack squat of an administration is so corrupt, the Clinton’s are speechless in admiration.
Given the sheer amount of ethics waivers they have utilized so far, its a wonder that they even know what “ethics” is/are.........
8 posted on
01/03/2010 12:37:22 PM PST by
cranked
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson