Jump to content

For Dems only.


Texsox

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 12, 2006 -> 06:25 PM)
So, Here's an update on that Truthout.org "Karl Rove to be indicted" article from a month ago. Now the author is saying that the day Fitzgerald met with the Grand Jury, an indictment was returned, but it has remained sealed for a month, with the parties remaining unnamed. He's saying the indictmment is currently read as "Sealed v. Sealed".

 

So, if the original article was taken with a grain of salt, this one should probably be taken with one of those water softener salt blocks.

 

 

LOL!

 

Nothing needs to be added to that........you've said it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 12, 2006 -> 06:25 PM)
So, Here's an update on that Truthout.org "Karl Rove to be indicted" article from a month ago. Now the author is saying that the day Fitzgerald met with the Grand Jury, an indictment was returned, but it has remained sealed for a month, with the parties remaining unnamed. He's saying the indictmment is currently read as "Sealed v. Sealed".

 

So, if the original article was taken with a grain of salt, this one should probably be taken with one of those water softener salt blocks.

 

 

This guy should find a new career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 07:17 AM)
In light of the NYT story today, yeah, I'd say Leopold's stock just plummeted.

So the question now is, assuming nothing changes in the near future, will Leopold burn his sources as punishment for burning him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Peter. Are you going to ask that question with shades on?

 

Q I can take them off.

 

THE PRESIDENT: I’m interested in the shade look, seriously.

 

Q All right, I’ll keep it, then.

 

THE PRESIDENT: For the viewers, there’s no sun. (Laughter.)

 

Q I guess it depends on your perspective. (Laughter.)

 

THE PRESIDENT: Touche. (Laughter.)

 

Q Following up on the other Peter’s question about Karl Rove…

 

Exchange this morning between George W. Bush and a legally blind reporter for the LA Times. (The reporter later said he didn't mind, he'd never actually informed the President he was blind)

Edited by Balta1701
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fascinating look at the DHS from the NYT...according to their report, over 90 of the guys who originally started off as officials within the DHS when it was created have now gone on to careers in private industry where they're doing billions of dollars of business with that department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 05:26 PM)
Fascinating look at the DHS from the NYT...according to their report, over 90 of the guys who originally started off as officials within the DHS when it was created have now gone on to careers in private industry where they're doing billions of dollars of business with that department.

 

 

That kind of thing has been going on with the military for years and years. Troops get out, then take a high paying contractor job doing the same job they did as a soldier for twice the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 03:33 PM)
That kind of thing has been going on with the military for years and years. Troops get out, then take a high paying contractor job doing the same job they did as a soldier for twice the money.

Yup, it's been going on throughout most of our government. Just interesting to see the test case of a brand new department and how rapidly the supply of "Former DHS Employees getting rich working with the DHS" has appeared.

 

By the way, this was supposed to be a 2nd post, since it's on a totally different topic, but it seems that the system decided to combine them, so don't blame me for the rapid topic shifts.

 

PBS Interview with new top White House Domestic policy advisor Karl Zinsmeister (i.e. the guy with the President's ear about any domestic policy):

WATTENBERG: Do you want to have laws that prevent people from having abortions?

 

ZINSMEISTER: You know, personally I would vote in favor of that.

 

WATTENBERG: So you would feel comfortable putting a doctor in jail for performing a procedure that a woman wants? And not just on-demand, but it could be rape, incest, life of the mother.

 

ZINSMEISTER: Sure. No, again, I have a definition that had some exceptions for rape and incest where there could be real psychological damage to the mother. But yeah, Ben, I mean, you know, if a Ghanan immigrant wants to have a clitorectomy done by a doctor on his daughter, I would also send him to jail for that. (Emphasis added.)

Edited by Balta1701
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 05:43 PM)
Yup, it's been going on throughout most of our government. Just interesting to see the test case of a brand new department and how rapidly the supply of "Former DHS Employees getting rich working with the DHS" has appeared.

 

If only the media were so efficent when it really needed to be...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy, here's a shocker...it appears now to be pretty likely that the 2nd part of the WMD investigation in the Senate, the part supposedly looking into the ways the Administration used the intelligence they had and whether or not they were appropriate...will probalby never be completed. Pat Roberts is already 2.5 months late on a deadline he set to release some information, and now it's being suggested it'll never be finished. This investigation, btw, was the reason Harry Reid shut down the Senate late last year. Good to know that did nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jun 29, 2006 -> 08:47 PM)

"The Republican party has become masters of cut and run –- cutting from the issues so that they can run for re-election in november.

--Rep. Carolyn Maloney D-NY:

 

:notworthy

 

Sure because the party in charge has never looked at poll numbers and dumped an issue right?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 30, 2006 -> 08:32 AM)
Sure because the party in charge has never looked at poll numbers and dumped an issue right?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan

 

Sure they have. I just liked the way she turned the hyperbolic rhetoric of the hawks and particularly the Murtha-bashers on its ear and threw it back at them. The hawks continue to try to get mileage out of "cut and run," and their success has been marginal at best. Hopefully it will cost Jean Schmidt her office for her stunt last year.

 

So it's always good to see the rhetoric turned on them. There has been good recent penetration in the use of the term as describing the GOP Congress as "cutting and running" on the President before the issues. Now, Maloney gives us another useful reformulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...