Skip to comments.
W pals bushwhack CIA leak prosecutor
New York Dailiy News ^
| Oct 24 05
| THOMAS M. DeFRANK and MICHAEL McAULIFF
Posted on 10/24/2005 1:16:10 PM PDT by churchillbuff
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 221-225 next last
To: new yorker 77
Care to explain yourself, or are you just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping something will stick.
121
posted on
10/24/2005 2:27:20 PM PDT
by
Redleg Duke
(9/11 - "WE WILL NEVER FORGET!")
To: LibertySF
I'll expand "hypocrite" to include any member of the MSM who has ever relied upon or praised the leaking of classified information for any purpose whatsoever, and who now suddenly professes to be appalled that anyone would leak classified information.
To: bigsigh
I thought I was the senior trollHere's the difference; you're honest; churchillbluff is not.
And I don't remember you actively smearing anybody; this one does that.
123
posted on
10/24/2005 2:28:19 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: va4me
I said it before, I'll say it again, whether he realizes it or not, Fitzgerald is doing Al Qaeda's bidding by going after the individuals that have architected a policy that has made us all safer, and has liberated 40 million people. Say it as many times as you want. That doesn't make it any more sensible. If someone on the WH staff committed indictable crimes and there is sufficient evidence to prove it, they should be thrown overboard. What their role may have been in anything else is irrelevant. As far as the President pardoning any such individual, the idea is absurd.
124
posted on
10/24/2005 2:30:05 PM PDT
by
paul51
(11 September 2001 - Never forget)
To: churchillbuff
>"He's a vile, detestable, moralistic person with no heart and no conscience who believes he's been tapped by God to do very important things,"
I see no source....again. Rumor, innuendo, speculation, guesses. Great reporting. I hope if there was a crime committed there will be indictments. I just don't see the crime. And apparently the MSM doesn't either. They've gotten completely away from the original reason the counsel was called precisely because there was no crime and they've finally realized it.
v
125
posted on
10/24/2005 2:30:18 PM PDT
by
saleman
To: churchillbuff
I think the turning point was when JR started coming down hard on people who disagreed with Bush in any major point. I remembger that. Now look at the daily zot fest and troll calling. Anyway, hang in there and best wishes.<
126
posted on
10/24/2005 2:31:23 PM PDT
by
bigsigh
To: Howlin
Thank you. I think I have always been honest and straight forward to the best of my ability. However, I smeared many in my day. Now I'm afraid to really cut loose because I'm on the "list."
Always nice to get a post from you, even if we disagree at times.
127
posted on
10/24/2005 2:33:12 PM PDT
by
bigsigh
To: churchillbuff
"He's a vile, detestable, moralistic person with no heart and no conscience who believes he's been tapped by God to do very important things"Simply an editorial mix-up at the Daily News.
This was actually a quote by Congresswoman Pelosi about President Bush and was supposed to be included in a story discussing the crackdown on child pornography by the Bush administration.
Just an honest mistake by a newspaper editor!
To: churchillbuff
Sounds like the authors are making up stories, trying to "tick off" Fitzgerald.
129
posted on
10/24/2005 2:34:30 PM PDT
by
syriacus
(Bush hasn't done a bad job, all things (WOT, vagaries of Nature, Lib lies + obstruction) considered)
To: churchillbuff
Hillary wasn't indicted on perjury charges, genius.
130
posted on
10/24/2005 2:34:31 PM PDT
by
Chunga
(Mock The Left)
To: bigsigh
Aren't we lucky that we're getting old and we forget it when we do disagree? :-)
131
posted on
10/24/2005 2:34:52 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Howlin
132
posted on
10/24/2005 2:35:40 PM PDT
by
bigsigh
To: The Phantom FReeper
Many of the posters here would consider themselves allies of the White House. I don't know that means they speak for the White House.
133
posted on
10/24/2005 2:36:09 PM PDT
by
gogeo
(Often wrong but seldom in doubt.)
To: Chunga
Hillary wasn't indicted on perjury charges, genius."""
A lot of freepers, myself included, wondered why not.
To: bigsigh
JR started coming down hard on people who disagreed with Bush in any major point. """
Actually, JR has been very indulgent toward me -- except when I've broken the rule against vanities (which seems to be enforced against me more consistently than against others).
To: Sir Gawain
It would be interesting to hear the dems cry for a perjury conviction in a case with no underlying crime.
136
posted on
10/24/2005 2:39:11 PM PDT
by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: XJarhead
Pretty much sums it up for me.
137
posted on
10/24/2005 2:39:17 PM PDT
by
gogeo
(Often wrong but seldom in doubt.)
To: churchillbuff
I have one problem with Fitzgerald. Someone, months ago, started leaking to leftist reporter Murray Waas. People who are familiar with this case think the information is so good it is coming from the Prosecutor's Office.
Now the investigation is leaking like crazy and leaking to all left outlets. Someone on his staff has an agenda and someone on his staff is very happy.
Comment #139 Removed by Moderator
To: churchillbuff
140
posted on
10/24/2005 2:43:00 PM PDT
by
bigsigh
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 221-225 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson