''We Have to Get Bush''

American Prowler ^ | 5/20/02 | The Prowler

[stands2reason]

You gotta point there. Now the Dims can't complain about Bush "politicizing" the WOT (ala photographs, etc)--they've opened the door for that themselves. Now the Repubs can use the issue all they want this fall, ESPECIALLY about how Dims in congress can't be trusted with highly sensitive WOT information without spilling it for some perceived political advantage. Now, will any R. use that talking point though?

[r9etb]

As a result, classified material shared with the Intelligence committees should be presumed to be compromised.

GMTA.

What'd be really fun would be for Bush to call for a re-investigation of all staffers who had access to the information, not to mention a full investigation of the leak. Heck, make it bipartisan.

The D's couldn't make a peep -- how could they? -- and it would probably shut down the leaks, too.

[RetiredArmy]

I'm with you. Great minds are thinking alike here!!! :>)

[section9]

Cut me a break willya? I didn't specify any memo in my first post, I didn't even refer to the article. Sure, there were democrat allegations and grandstanding speeches from Wednesday through Thursday, but the second shoe - the "bombshell" - dropped on Friday afternoon. That's what I was referring to. Man you guys sure are hyper-sensitive about anything that could be interpreted as the least bit Bush-negative.

Well, all of us were referring to August 6th, 2001. Sort of hard to draw the conclusion you made from your original post, n'est pas?

Besides, the "bombshell memo" turned out to be a little less than the Dims had hoped for. Look, I'm not trying to get personal, it's just that the Dims are, and I do mean are trying to get Bush for their own partisan purposes in time of war, on the subject of the war. They hope to cripple his presidency. For them, it's all about picking up seats in Congress and taking the White House in 2004. And they would make up stories out of whole cloth to do it. And it stinks to high heaven, especially this part....

It's not clear whether Daschle was aware of the potentially explosive information prior to its being put in the hands of Washington reporters. "I'd be surprised if he did," says a senior Democratic leadership aide. "It isn't the kind of thing he's want to really see or know about beforehand. But we know someone friendly to our side did the leaking. We knew if we could get something out there, the media wouldn't try to put the leak into political perspective for the public, just the potential for a 'Briefing-gate.' And, as usual, the press did our job for us."

We're dealing with people who are trying to get their hands on nuclear f*#king weapons so that they can vaporize about 700,000 to a million of us in an instant of time. And all these ass-clowns in the other party can think of is how to jack up an erzatz scandal.

There isn't time for this kind of clown-car stuff...

I'm all for accountability, and I know that the Government can do infinitely better even now than it has been doing up to now, but please, no bogus Bozo stuff!

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[stands2reason]

Thanks, Chris, nice save. I can (for the most part) handle the Bush-bashers; when they misrepresent the facts I start smelling a rat. Or maybe some other small furry creature, one that digs underground, perhaps?

[rockfish59]

Hey stupid....

NO SMOKING IN THE LIBRARY!

[exmarine]

Feel free to use whatever phrase you wish. My humble posts are not copyright protected.

[A Citizen Reporter]

He is standing next to Harry Reid.

[Harrison Bergeron]

The democrat attacks are transparent attempts to take the spotlight off of Clinton era failures and treasons and put it on Bush. No matter how much crap they throw at Bush in the press, people are going to read it and ask "What did Clinton know and when did he know it?" This issue, like "gun control" will be put forward zealously by a one-track media that will be blind to the damage it does to democrats. Still, the Bush administration has some egg on its face for its (specifically Cheney's) vehement denials of foreknowledge by the cognizent intelligence communities.

[nutmeg]

bump

[dalebert]

Thats what I would like to know.

[alnick]

Gephardt had no choice. When confronted with the facts, he had no choice but to admit that Bush is not culpable. Did you see his face on Fox New Sunday? He was white as a ghost. All the blood had drained from his face. He seemed to be scared to death. The SOB.

[colorado tanker]

Bush has to be real careful how he exploits the Dims' mistake here, but I suspect we'll see a lot of photos of him presiding over NSC meetings and even that Air Force One photo you mentioned.

It seems to me, however, that the gloves are off for the Pubbies in this fall's congressional elections. "I stand united with all Americans in support of our Commander in Chief in waging the war on terror, in contrast to my opponent's leadership who seek division and cheap political advantage on the issue." Oh yeah.

[bert]

I know its late in the day for proper argument, but perhaps there is another possibility for who leaked the story.....

What if you were a Republican Strategist knowing all the Clinton sins about failure to properly fight terropism. How would you get the public to react? How would you get the press to do the story? How would you get all the talking heads on TV to tell the truth. You can't go after an ex president, and you can't go after a sitting Senator. How do you do it??

What if the issue is raised about GWB knowing but not acting? What will the press and the RATS do with that hunk of red meat? After they pounce it can be shown with absolute certainty that the charge is not only false but blatently partisan, and in a time of war, yada, yada,yada.

I know.... Republicans are good guys and such chicanery is beneath them.... but what if it's so?

[section9]

The democrat attacks are transparent attempts to take the spotlight off of Clinton era failures and treasons and put it on Bush. No matter how much crap they throw at Bush in the press, people are going to read it and ask "What did Clinton know and when did he know it?" This issue, like "gun control" will be put forward zealously by a one-track media that will be blind to the damage it does to democrats. Still, the Bush administration has some egg on its face for its (specifically Cheney's) vehement denials of foreknowledge by the cognizent intelligence communities.

Oh, your point is definitely taken here. And a good one. Notice that the Democratic "source" indicated that he believed that the press would do their job for them. There's a reason for this: a wide ranging study along the lines of the commission that studied the Pearl Harbor attack would find a reckless negligent disregard for the security of this country during the Clinton years.

That's why Hillary was so manic on Thursday morning in the Senate. She knows.

Surely intelligence dropped the ball before September 11th, but it has always been thus. We were a nation at peace, and the strategic initiative and the tactical element of surprise lay with the enemy, just as it had lay with Admiral Yamamato decades before. Towards the end of ratcheting up our security, looking for holes, and trying to "outgame and outthink" the enemy, any constructive criticism will be welcome.

But what is more, a constant military offensive must be maintained. You can never give them breathing room. Passive defense, no matter how redundant, can never fully defend the country.

Which makes the dereliction of duty of the Clinton Administration so shameful.

But then why should we be surprised? Anyone who is obsessed with leaving a legacy will end up leaving town with an obsession, but no legacy.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[auggy]

Looks like a Homo to me. Dasshole's high school picture, that is.

[Eva]

What are you talking about? Cheney told Tim Russert, the week following the attack that there was plenty of warning, but no specific details that would have prevented the attacks. It has been played and replayed so many times this past week, that no one could have missed it.

[mewzilla]

Points taken. But what I want to know is: Are clearances issued WITHOUT proper backround checks being done?

[Harrison Bergeron]

Heh heh... RAT poison.

[anniegetyourgun]

Agreed.