Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-18-2019 11:31 AM
22 online now:
PaulK, PurpleYouko, Tanypteryx, Taq (4 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,012 Year: 9,048/19,786 Month: 1,470/2,119 Week: 230/576 Day: 33/98 Hour: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Karl Rove: Traitor?
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 229 of 271 (285709)
02-10-2006 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by Omnivorous
02-10-2006 1:52 PM


Re: Hotdiggity! Cheney ordered leak of classified info?!
It appears Richardson has not identified a crime being committed other than the cover-up. So if Cheney or someone else ordered the release of Plame's name, then it doesn't appear to be a crime as she was no longer working undercover.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Omnivorous, posted 02-10-2006 1:52 PM Omnivorous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by macaroniandcheese, posted 02-10-2006 6:51 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 231 by Omnivorous, posted 02-10-2006 7:24 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 232 by Silent H, posted 02-11-2006 5:42 AM randman has not yet responded
 Message 233 by Peal, posted 02-11-2006 6:30 PM randman has responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 238 of 271 (286513)
02-14-2006 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Peal
02-11-2006 6:30 PM


Re: Hotdiggity! Cheney ordered leak of classified info?!
Peal, because regardless if it was a crime or not, and that seems to still be something fuzzy, it was a politically a major problem.

Do loyal lieutenants ever go down for covering up for their actions with the boss (his boss being Cheney)?

Yep.

Personally, I don't know what's up and what's not up with Cheney, but he wields a lot of power for a Vice President.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Peal, posted 02-11-2006 6:30 PM Peal has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 239 of 271 (286516)
02-14-2006 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by Omnivorous
02-13-2006 3:11 PM


Re: Hotdiggity! Cheney ordered leak of classified info?!
Omni, Tal is correct. This is probably not a crime or he would have charged him with that. This gives the administration a lot of cover actually because they can say it's just political, lying to investigators maybe, but not covering up a crime.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Omnivorous, posted 02-13-2006 3:11 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 240 of 271 (286521)
02-14-2006 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by Omnivorous
02-13-2006 4:18 PM


Re: Hotdiggity! Cheney ordered leak of classified info?!
Also, there has never been a totally honest administration in my lifetime, and there may never be. But on the whole, Bush is one of the most honest president's there has been. Most politicians, for example, that are running for president don't really tell you what they are thinking and what they want to do. They spin it, and make false promises like Bill C. did when he campaigned on "the middle class tax cut."

Bush, on the other hand, has been remakably honest about what he wants to do, and he has basically tried to do exactly what he campaigned on, and that's refreshingly honest, which makes it all the more bizarre to hear liberals slam him as dishonest. Bush is as honest a president as you are ever likely to see, and way more honest than most of his predecessors in the modern era.

Now, let's get to this point. Members of the CIA were leaking classified reports to the media to undermine the administration's drive to war in Iraq. They felt they were doing the patriotic thing undermining the president because they felt a duty to the nation.

Others in the CIA and elsewhere felt it was very dangerous for the CIA to be intervening in executive policy, and that it is not the role of the nation's intelligence agencies to act in that manner. That's the context of what was occurring.

Plame and her husband seemed to come down on the side undermining the administration. I say "seemed" because it could all be murkier. Wilson seemed particularly over the line because he really didn't even seem to do much investigation on his trip, and seemed to feed disinformation to the public.

So the administration started leaking something like members of the CIA were doing, but the media is jumping on the Plame name being leaked.

Hmmm...who is at fault here? I think insubordination within the CIA is a dangerous thing all on it's own since they are not elected to form policy. The president and Congress are. On the other hand, I can see where someone would feel their first loyalty is to the nation, but then again, the CIA has done a lot of things that are over the line.

So maybe both are at fault. Both camps leaked classified info, assuming leaking Plame's name is classified, but I suppose we still don't know that yet.

Is this the big deal the media and dems are making it out to be?

I don't think so. It's political jockeying between elected officials (the VP), and a government agency during a time of strong disputes about what's best for the nation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by Omnivorous, posted 02-13-2006 4:18 PM Omnivorous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by crashfrog, posted 02-14-2006 2:30 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 243 by Omnivorous, posted 02-14-2006 3:31 PM randman has responded
 Message 244 by Silent H, posted 02-14-2006 5:32 PM randman has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 249 of 271 (287385)
02-16-2006 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by Omnivorous
02-14-2006 3:31 PM


Re: Hotdiggity! Cheney ordered leak of classified info?!
A growing majority do not feel Bush is dishonest, etc,..as you guys say, which is a large reason why the dems cannnot get much traction from Bush's failures.

The public is upset by a couple of things:

1. the horrible handling of the Katrina disaster
2. the war in Iraq, specifically the lack of vision, planning, etc,...

Those are the issues. Unfortunately for the dems, they have not convinced the American public they would be more competent or have any better ideas.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Omnivorous, posted 02-14-2006 3:31 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by crashfrog, posted 02-16-2006 6:32 PM randman has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 250 of 271 (287387)
02-16-2006 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
02-14-2006 2:57 PM


Re: Hotdiggity! Cheney ordered leak of classified info?!
If you think moving left will help, you are sadly mistaken. Bush's problem is not he is too right wing, conservative, etc,...It's that he is not very conservative at all in many ways. He is really a centrist.

He is conservative on some social issues and tax cuts, but other than that?

He is for Big Gov spending; said he was during the campaign; ran on dem ideas of expanding education spending and programs, a prescription drug benefit, etc,...and he did all that.

He also cut taxes. Maybe you are now for tax increases?

What a lot of people do not realize is that deciding to go to war in Iraq is not a conservative issue. It is a judgment call. Clinton, if he had the backing of Congress, probably would have done the same thing, as evidenced by him getting us into all sorts of smaller wars.

Imo, the biggest issue with Bush is his trusting that he can use the government to solve problems, and along with that comes big spending, which is my primary concern. The Iraq thing also stems from believing the government can be used to change the world instead of relying on people to do that all on their own.

Perhaps all of us have some liberalism in us (trust of using government), but I would think someone that was "right wing" would just be even more right wing looking at Bush since the areas most consider failings directly relate to his liberal side, trusting Big Government as an effective tool. Keep in mind the new Homeland Security idea was also a dem idea, and it ruined our ability to respond to disasters.

This message has been edited by randman, 02-16-2006 04:25 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 02-14-2006 2:57 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Silent H, posted 02-17-2006 6:10 AM randman has responded
 Message 257 by FliesOnly, posted 02-17-2006 12:15 PM randman has responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 260 of 271 (287743)
02-17-2006 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by FliesOnly
02-17-2006 12:15 PM


Re: Hotdiggity! Cheney ordered leak of classified info?!
Are you trying to deny the dems were the first to push for the Dept of Homeland security?

What's your beef? It's a factual claim, and as any conservative would have predicted, a larger beaurocracy is not necessarily more effective, and as we saw with Katrina, putting FEMA under Homeland Security did not work out well.

Bigger is not better when it comes to government.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by FliesOnly, posted 02-17-2006 12:15 PM FliesOnly has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by FliesOnly, posted 02-17-2006 3:56 PM randman has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3063 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 261 of 271 (287746)
02-17-2006 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by Silent H
02-17-2006 6:10 AM


Re: Consistency and Honesty and integrity lacking in Bush administration
What's interesting is that a republican congress refused to give Clinton such permission and derided his military activities in Kosovo as well as his attempts to kill OBL using missile strikes. But then with a Rep in charge it is a-okay?

There's a reason for that. First, there was the uncanny timing of the Clinton war attacks that just happened to deflect off of impeachment proceedings and things like that. Secondly, the simple fact is the GOP was reluctant to get into nation-building prior to 911, but after 911, it was war and typically everyone defers to the president in such times, and Bush was persuaded by the neocons that democratizing Iraq could change the equation in the Middle East.

I want to see the quote for that one... and I want to see it from his 2000 campaign as well.

You never heard "No Child Left Behind" and other campaign promises.

Liberals do not just "trust big gov't"

We have to agree to disagree there because I think they do.

Heck Bush specifically addressed an Iraq War-type hypothetical in his first campaign and used it to differentiate himself from Gore, and democrats, by stating he would not engage in such campaigns and criticized Clinton and Gore for having done so.

I sure remember that as I agreed and it is was one of the things which helped me decide I'd prefer Bush over Gore. Where did that guy go?

911 freaked them out because hardcore Islamicists like the nuclear scientist in Pakistan had the bomb, backed the Taliban, and they thought maybe some American cities would be taken out, and so they began a whole lot of overt and covert military ops to change the situation. Iraq is part of that strategy, right or wrong.

I love how it was a Rep idea until it started failing, and now its back to being a dem idea.

It was a dem idea as was campaign finance reform despite McCain backing it as a Rep. Both have failed miserably, imo.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Silent H, posted 02-17-2006 6:10 AM Silent H has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 02-17-2006 3:54 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 264 by FliesOnly, posted 02-17-2006 4:02 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 265 by Silent H, posted 02-17-2006 4:59 PM randman has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019