Skip to comments.
White House Ducks Prewar Intel Questions
AP ^
| 11/2/5
| LIZ SIDOTI
Posted on 11/02/2005 12:41:36 PM PST by SmithL
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
AP biased headline alert.
1
posted on
11/02/2005 12:41:37 PM PST
by
SmithL
To: SmithL
This will echo outside the realm of no one cares.
2
posted on
11/02/2005 12:44:45 PM PST
by
new yorker 77
(FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!)
To: SmithL
let's investigate where the forged documents discrediting the Niger yellowcake claim came from.
3
posted on
11/02/2005 12:44:58 PM PST
by
oceanview
To: SmithL
Th White House ducks have returned.
4
posted on
11/02/2005 12:45:19 PM PST
by
GSWarrior
To: SmithL
AP DUCKS TRUTH (As Usual)
5
posted on
11/02/2005 12:46:03 PM PST
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: SmithL
White House Ducks what?
The article does not even mention the white house. Who Scott answering some stupid question about why dems had another walk out tantrum? What was he ducking?
Nice Catch!
6
posted on
11/02/2005 12:46:11 PM PST
by
Tenacious 1
(Dems: "It can't be done" Reps. "Move, we'll find a way or make a way. It has to be done!")
To: SmithL
To: SmithL
There's not much difference these days between an AP story and a DNC press release.
To: SmithL
The Democrats looked at the same intel the Administration did and came to the same conclusion. They weren't misled about anything and Harry "Dingy" Reid and Dick "Turban" Durbin know it.
("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")
9
posted on
11/02/2005 12:47:35 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: SmithL
If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.
I like the NEW thinking, time to start running the rats to ground. No more Mr. Nice Guy. Bring it on Baby.
10
posted on
11/02/2005 12:48:21 PM PST
by
marty60
To: SmithL
"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.The previous administration was full of corrupt liars who would say anything to further their agenda.
If I didn't believe what they said then, why on earth would I believe them now?
11
posted on
11/02/2005 12:50:42 PM PST
by
Ol' Dan Tucker
(Karen Ryan reporting...)
To: SmithL
"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.
Doesn't sound like ducking to me. Sounds like line drive into center field.
12
posted on
11/02/2005 12:51:18 PM PST
by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: SmithL
"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "
This is the most huevos I've seen Scotty show - ever. Time for the offensive, guys!
13
posted on
11/02/2005 12:51:24 PM PST
by
texas_mrs
(The left are the enablers of terrorists.)
To: SmithL
"AP Ducks Charges of Liberal Bias"
14
posted on
11/02/2005 12:53:43 PM PST
by
NewMediaFan
(Fake but accurate)
To: SmithL
The move allowed Democrats to refocus attention on the Iraq war at a time when Bush's nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court has taken the spotlight And the AP admits what the stunt was all about in the first place.
15
posted on
11/02/2005 12:55:31 PM PST
by
carlr
To: carlr
Let me focus the Iraq War.
Democrats pushed the threat of Saddam Hussein and WMD in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 before the war.
We debated the Iraq War in 2002. WE WON! THEY LOST!
We debated the Iraq War in 2004. WE WON! THEY LOST!
We'll debate the Iraq War in 2006. WE WIN! THEY LOSE!
16
posted on
11/02/2005 1:02:06 PM PST
by
new yorker 77
(FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!)
To: SmithL
As was said on TV last night, they are just mad that they didn't get the indictments they wanted. Speaking of
ducks...
Fred Rustmann [co-worker of Valerie Plame]: "Well, I don't know that everybody knew. I do know that her cover began to erode the moment she started dating Joe Wilson. The thing that I said was that, you know, when you walk like a duck and quack like a duck and look like a duck, you're probably a duck.
Geez...why can't the Dems take their own advice and Moveon.org.
To: NewMediaFan
AP DUCKS ANY PRETENSE OF INTEGRITY
To: San Jacinto
Let's see if the surgeon and the first Harvard MBA pres are mad enough to start playing hardball.
The frustration I feel at lack of response by the pubs makes me gnash my teeth sometimes.
19
posted on
11/02/2005 1:32:18 PM PST
by
MonroeDNA
(Look for the union label--on the bat crashing through your windshield!)
To: goldstategop
The Democrats looked at the same intel the Administration did and came to the same conclusionLook, I'm as supportive of this war as anyone, but the Democratic talking points are that this intelligence was manipulated before they looked at it. You need to get you canned responses ready for that line of attack.
20
posted on
11/02/2005 1:53:10 PM PST
by
KayEyeDoubleDee
(const tag& constTagPassedByReference)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 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