To: My2Cents
Yet, if the Clintons are behind this, why are we only seeing in on Drudge when they have the Clinton News Network and the alphabets at their beck and call? And why is their hand picked boy, Clark, now endorsing Kerry? I guess I'm just not smart enough to contemplate the inner workings of dirty politics.
48 posted on
02/12/2004 1:14:21 PM PST by
Quilla
To: Quilla
Yet, if the Clintons are behind this, why are we only seeing in on Drudge when they have the Clinton News Network and the alphabets at their beck and call? And why is their hand picked boy, Clark, now endorsing Kerry? I guess I'm just not smart enough to contemplate the inner workings of dirty politics.
Because they want it to be perceived as a right wing attack. That's why it's better for Foxnews to let someone else report it first.
To: Quilla
Dirty politics is mostly a mystery to me, too, but you can be darn sure if CNN could prove it was a Republican operative instead of a Democrat, that leaked this to Drudge, that would be all they were talking about-how awful Republicans are for bringing this up.
Instead, now upcoming on CNN is a piece on Dogs and politicians.
62 posted on
02/12/2004 1:20:53 PM PST by
uvular
To: Quilla
I wondered the same thing. Possible answer: Drudge is more willing to run with a story, without much corraboration. CNN, whatever it is, isn't willing to run a story, particularly one that was phoned-in by an anonymous Clinton person. With Drudge as the source, the Clintons are better able to hide the tracks leading back to them. Plus, the Clintons get their jollies out of being able to do their dirty work through Drudge, who first started the Lewinsky story.
65 posted on
02/12/2004 1:21:59 PM PST by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: Quilla
"Yet, if the Clintons are behind this, why are we only seeing in on Drudge when they have the Clinton News Network and the alphabets at their beck and call? And why is their hand picked boy, Clark, now endorsing Kerry?"Hmmm....good question...and really CREEPY?
BTW, have they demanded a witness to prove the witness in Alabama who said he witnessed Bush at the base in Alabama was really AT the base in Alabama to WITNESS Bush at the base? In Alabama? Yet? (my head is spinning)
98 posted on
02/12/2004 1:32:47 PM PST by
cake_crumb
(UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
To: Quilla
Plausible deniability...no finger prints on the knife.
178 posted on
02/12/2004 2:05:26 PM PST by
ijcr
(Age and treachery will always overcome youth and ability.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson