quade 4 #1 November 19, 2004 Is OJ Simpson helping the President? The reason I ask is because as I recall GWB said that he was going to find the person that leaked the name of an under cover CIA agent to Robert Novak and so far . . . no dice. Kinda like when OJ said he was looking for the real killer. So, you might be thinking, "Hey, it's not that easy to get journalists to turn over the names of sources. They'd probably have to arrest Novak and make him sweat it out for awhile." and I have a tendancy to believe that you're right and that sort of thing -shouldn't- be done. BUT! Check out what happens when instead of helping the Administration "get even" at a guy by outing his under cover CIA agent wife, you instead piss off a CITY official. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/11/18/mum.reporter.ap/index.html (Ok, so yes this is a tripple whammy I'm putting out here OJ, the leak and this recent arrest.) I'm tellin' ya, we're living in dangerous times. There are some politicians out there that are playing both sides of the fence when it comes to enforcing the laws of the land.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #2 November 19, 2004 So now you are trying to imply that GWB gave the identity of the CIA agent to the press? What happend to innocent to proven guilty?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #3 November 19, 2004 QuoteWhat happend to innocent to proven guilty? Tied to a post at the gates of gitmo. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #4 November 19, 2004 QuoteSo now you are trying to imply that GWB gave the identity of the CIA agent to the press? What happend to innocent to proven guilty? As I pointed out in another thread. There's no such thing. Just a presumption by the courts. I didn't see Bill meting out punishment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #5 November 19, 2004 > So now you are trying to imply that GWB gave the identity of the >CIA agent to the press? He, or one of his people, did. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #6 November 19, 2004 Quote> So now you are trying to imply that GWB gave the identity of the >CIA agent to the press? He, or one of his people, did. Define "his people" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #7 November 19, 2004 Quote So now you are trying to imply that GWB gave the identity of the CIA agent to the press? I'm not implying it -- I'm saying it straight up. Somebody in the Administration leaked the name of a current and working under cover CIA agent to the press. Robert Novak knows who that person is and said it was a member of the Administration. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/02/bush.leak/quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #8 November 19, 2004 >Define "his people" Someone in the Bush administration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #9 November 19, 2004 Quote>Define "his people" Someone in the Bush administration. Would you include bureaucrats in your definition? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #10 November 19, 2004 Quote Would you include bureaucrats in your definition? By definition isn't everyone in government a bureaucrat?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #11 November 19, 2004 QuoteQuote Would you include bureaucrats in your definition? By definition isn't everyone in government a bureaucrat? No they aren't. Bureaucrats are career govt. employees whose jobs are guaranteed regardless of which political party is in power. In fact, they cannot be fired. These are they people who hold the real power in DC. Political parties come and go but these people are the real fiber of our govt. Now back to my question. Are you blaming the bureaucrats or the Bush Administration? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #12 November 19, 2004 It was Robert Novak that said it was someone in the Adminsitration and since he got the information from the person you pretty much have to take his word for it that he knows who the person is and knows where the person works. Novak is a well known supporter of GWB and his Administration. There would be nothing for him to gain in saying it was someone in the Administration if it wasn't.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shark 0 #13 November 20, 2004 QuoteKinda like when OJ said he was looking for the real killer. Even someone as bright as you could have come up with a better analogy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #14 November 20, 2004 I dunno . . . for him to disingenuously say he looking for the perpetrator when people believe he already knows . . . seems like a pretty good analogy to me.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #15 November 22, 2004 QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So now you are trying to imply that GWB gave the identity of the CIA agent to the press? What happend to innocent to proven guilty? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As I pointed out in another thread. There's no such thing. Just a presumption by the courts. I didn't see Bill meting out punishment. You might not want to answer for other people: Bill: Quotehttp://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1352979#1352979 He, or one of his people, did. Quade: Quote http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1353054#1353054 I'm not implying it -- I'm saying it straight up. You may remove your foot now. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #16 November 22, 2004 Uhmmm Ron, in those posts they are still not meting out punishment..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #17 November 22, 2004 QuoteUhmmm Ron, in those posts they are still not meting out punishment..... And my question was if they were accusing him....And they are."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #18 November 22, 2004 And my response was, the rule of the land is that courts must treat defendents with a presumption of innocence. Not that every guy on the street can't have an opinion. Weren't you the guy arguing that if someone is caught on video tape robbing a store there shouldn't even be a trial? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #19 November 22, 2004 QuoteAnd my response was, the rule of the land is that courts must treat defendents with a presumption of innocence. Not that every guy on the street can't have an opinion. Hey you can accuse all you want. I just asked if he was accusing the President of breaking the law...You said he was not, and he said he was. You spoke for him and were wrong. QuoteWeren't you the guy arguing that if someone is caught on video tape robbing a store there shouldn't even be a trial? With witnesses, and DNA evidence? Why bother?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
