[PhiKapMom]

Looks like the clinton press release machine was busy in time for the Sunday newspapers! What a crock!

[gaspar]

This article is the quintessence of crass. It offers no real names, no verifiable sources in the Republican Party to buttress the argument. The journalist is so determined to make his case that he does not ever understand that the NYTimes and Washington Post were urging Cheney, nay demanding, that he sell his stock to reduce the implication of impropriety. He sells, makes a profit, and then is blamed for it. Double standard? It could once be said of journalists that they were drunken sots easily bought; nowadays they are ideologues drunk on the power of the pen. Either way, it is a profession that has sunk to the level of street panhandling.

[Recovering_Democrat]

wow. those brits are all over the politics here in the USA. BWA HA HA HA HA!

[habaes corpussel]

Electronic Telegraph? Some source. I rather believe UPI before this rag. If Cheney doesn't run in 04 it is because Bush wants someone who can follow in his footsteps in 08. Cheney already said that he did not want a Presidential run. But if the economy tanks and stays tanked Bush may not have to worry about 08.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

officials privately admitted that investigations into the American vice-president's past business dealings have turned him into a political problem.

Uncited officials. No statement like this has come from the Republicans.

Last week's stock market plunges gave rise to unprecedented speculation among Republicans that Mr Cheney, seen until recently as the steadying hand on the tiller, may have to be sacrificed as Mr Bush's running mate for the 2004 election.

Uncited speculation. I never heard this before this article.

A Republican congressional official said:"Any of those would have at least one big advantage over Cheney."

He said: "They have not made personal fortunes in big business. In the last election it seemed to be an advantage that both names on the ticket had track records in business. Next time, unless something changes, it will be a liability."

Uncited republican. Sounds like s/he has an axe to grind.

Democrats, who are already demanding the resignation of Harvey Pitt, the SEC chairman who was appointed by Mr Bush, said that the president's reply indicated that the financial watchdog was now under pressure from the White House to clear Mr Cheney.

Naturally democrats demand this; they're trying to hurt Bush.

One Democratic official said:"One minute Mr Bush is defending Mr Pitt from criticism, the next minute he is saying what he expects Mr Pitt's people will find. The implication is obvious."

No obvious implication to me. Mr. Bush is confident Mr. Cheney is innocent. This is not a statement of what Mr. Pitt should find. Only a crass politician could construe it so.

Zero substance in this article. I condemn it as a smear piece.

[TADSLOS]

These clowns still don't understand the depth of GW's loyalty. They try and take the Clinton persona and template it to Bush. It won't work.

[IamZman]

didnt cheney make a bunch of money off iraq. hmm

[jumpstartme]

The article is garbage.

[tubebender]

The writer got one thing right..."He (Powell) would be a controversial choice with conservative Republicans, however, because they regard him as too liberal."

[Admin Moderator]

this duplicate thread is now locked. post comments here