Skip to comments.
BREAKING: Conned big time "CIA Witness" to White House Lying about Intel story found to be FRAUD
Capitol Hill Blue ^
| July 9, 2003
| Doug Thompson
Posted on 07/09/2003 4:04:00 PM PDT by Doug Thompson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 1,321-1,340 next last
To: rwfromkansas
You have FR Mail
81
posted on
07/09/2003 4:46:27 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: Dog
You have mail
82
posted on
07/09/2003 4:46:32 PM PDT
by
Mo1
To: Dog
"William good job......the story here is who went to all this trouble to accuse the President of lieing.." Certainly NOT the Democrats....
They LOVE Presidents who lie under oath, lie when not under oath, -- telling big lies, little lies, useless lies, cover his ass lies, puff up his caved in chest lies, white lies, black lies, even lies about his pitiful whimpy and twisted little winky.............you get my drift?
So it couldn't be those a$$holes....
Semper Fi
83
posted on
07/09/2003 4:46:38 PM PDT
by
river rat
(War works......It brings Peace... Give war a chance to destroy Jihadists...)
To: Doug Thompson; Wordsmith; pokerbuddy0; RaceBannon; harpseal; riri; Badabing Badaboom; Princeton; ...
Hey, Doug!
What does he look like? Age, height, eye color, etc? Any distinguishing features? The more details the better...
Put out a Freeper APB!
(Could he have been a spook, BTW?)
84
posted on
07/09/2003 4:47:21 PM PDT
by
TaxRelief
(Welcome to the #1 discussion board dedicated to the sustenance of a free republic.)
To: William McKinley
On Tuesday, we ran a story headlined "White House admits Bush wrong about Iraqi nukes."
__________________________
That is not entirely the case. Now what was the original title of this article? "White House admits Bush lied about Iraqi nukes"
I think this apology by Doug is a tad weak in the sense that Bush has been slimed in a big way and his character questioned. Now we see the story was picked up and printed elsewhere. Not to mention all those lame-brains over at DU and such that will parrot this article for the next decade after swallowing this article hook, line and s(t)inker.
85
posted on
07/09/2003 4:47:26 PM PDT
by
Registered
(77% of the mentally ill live in poverty, that leaves 23% doing quite well!)
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
Ping
86
posted on
07/09/2003 4:47:58 PM PDT
by
Pan_Yans Wife
(Lurking since 2000.)
To: unspun
LOL...
Are we sure this is the real Doug Thompson?
87
posted on
07/09/2003 4:49:05 PM PDT
by
piasa
(Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
To: Dog
I agree. This smells.
The original story was based on a phony source. Now it is exposed by another (unnamed) source?
I was born in the morning, but it wasn't this morning!
88
posted on
07/09/2003 4:49:09 PM PDT
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(It'll take more than 100 years to evolve a better human.)
.
89
posted on
07/09/2003 4:49:28 PM PDT
by
firewalk
To: Pan_Yans Wife
Wow!! Thanks for the ping!
To: Registered
You have FR Mail
91
posted on
07/09/2003 4:50:52 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: Doug Thompson
Well, Doug, you must feel pretty bad having the world see that you made a very public and big mistake.
If it makes you feel any better, you're not alone. In November of 2002, I walked out of a voting booth. I. J. Hudson of the local television station happened to be there, and asked me who I voted for. I proudly told millions of people that I voted for Bill Clinton, and even explained why.
Man, I've never lived that one down. I'm of course a conservative now.
To: deport
Thank you for the ping, my friend. Reading through now.
To: MJY1288
If he has been sourced for the past 20 years, why is it that his name comes up nowhere in every search engine He did cover it in the article. Whoever this guy is he always wanted to be anonymous, until this time. He also says that he got a second source for early stories and was satisfied that the guy was genuine based on those confirmations. It's a classic intelligence op. A long term one. A well financed one.
Someone has been actively twisting "anonymous" source information for at least 20 years to news media in Washington. They've done it in a slow, patient and very expensive way. Who might do that? Ask who benefits, particularly from this latest attack on Bush. It ain't Republicans (John McCain excepted).
Anyone got a queen of hearts handy?
94
posted on
07/09/2003 4:53:28 PM PDT
by
Phsstpok
To: TLBSHOW
Hey, where are you on this one you LoOSer!?
95
posted on
07/09/2003 4:53:48 PM PDT
by
Registered
(77% of the mentally ill live in poverty, that leaves 23% doing quite well!)
To: Registered
He's banned, by JimRob HIMSELF (reverent bow towards Fresno).
96
posted on
07/09/2003 4:54:31 PM PDT
by
Poohbah
(Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
To: Poohbah
I knew that! lol
97
posted on
07/09/2003 4:55:20 PM PDT
by
Registered
(77% of the mentally ill live in poverty, that leaves 23% doing quite well!)
To: Our man in washington
you mean 1992.....:)
98
posted on
07/09/2003 4:55:27 PM PDT
by
rwfromkansas
("There is dust enough on some of your Bibles to write 'damnation' with your fingers." C.H. Spurgeon)
To: piasa; Doug Thompson
Are we sure this is the real Doug Thompson? Doug:
Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the Packer Fan Club?
99
posted on
07/09/2003 4:56:06 PM PDT
by
unspun
("Do everything in love." - No I don't look anything like her but I do like to hear "Unspun w/ AnnaZ")
To: Registered
He got banned...:-)
100
posted on
07/09/2003 4:56:46 PM PDT
by
Dog
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 1,321-1,340 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