Dave_Schuldt Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 ...until he was well done. Listened to hearings today, he just dug himself a deeper hole. Evan the Republicans were all over him. Dead man walking. ROVE IS NEXT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faster_than_you Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 According to Al Gore, we're all next? The whole prosecutor thing, including Gonzo, is just politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatguy Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 something like 74 times he couldn't remember or didn't know? I think we'd be better off with someone who did know what he was doing. It was a sad display. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 something like 74 times he couldn't remember or didn't know? I think we'd be better off with someone who did know what he was doing. It was a sad display. yeah, we need someone who can once again display that profound, nuanced intellect under questioning with such replies as "it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavote Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 or maybe...."I don't recall senator" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottP Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 you VILL ahnsah ahhrr kveschjohns! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted April 21, 2007 Share Posted April 21, 2007 lolzer, why is that woman reading hiding THE TRUTH??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted April 21, 2007 Share Posted April 21, 2007 she's a cartoon figure, you can tell by the balloon with her thoughts inside. It's just that the Great Noodly Appendaged Cartoonist didn't give her a head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted April 22, 2007 Share Posted April 22, 2007 yeah, we need someone who can once again display that profound, nuanced intellect under questioning with such replies as "it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". DO you have any idea what you are talking about or are you simply repeating what you heard from Rush Limbaugh? The point was whether "is" means "exists," or whether it means "exists or ever did." While I don't suggest he wasn't manipulative when he said this or said "I didn't have sexual relations," at least he didn't say "I don't remember" all day long. Personally, I'll take nuanced intellect over bald faced lies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted April 22, 2007 Share Posted April 22, 2007 Yes, I suppose ingenious disingenuousness and obfuscation can be more entertaining and intellectually satisfying than simple denial of memory, but they are both employed with the same devious objective to obstruct the whole truth from seeing the light of day. Being a skillful liar gives the ego more strokes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 Both were obstructing the truth, for sure, but isn't lying about a blow job in a different category than is lying about using the Justice Department to influence elections or punishing those who declined to do so? And then there is the question of magnitude: the Bush administration officials lie on a daily basis at every level and on every topic from internal politics to global warming and global warfare. Clinton was Honest Abe by comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crux Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 Yes, I suppose ingenious disingenuousness and obfuscation can be more entertaining and intellectually satisfying than simple denial of memory, but they are both employed with the same devious objective to obstruct the whole truth from seeing the light of day. Being a skillful liar gives the ego more strokes. No skill in getting caught with the lie -- maybe some skill in not getting convicted of a felony for it when being persecuted by a pack of Nazis, but no skill to a lie that fails to conceal the truth. Bill got serviced by his intern, and everybody knows it even though he lied to conceal that truth. But those of the adminisration today, on the other hand, they seem to be truly skillful liars, as evidenced by the clueless comparisons made in this thread and by the apparent ignorance the public seems to keep in regard to the unprecedented transgressions against the republic made by this administration. My thought on the Gonzales hearing: The consigliore for the Bush crime family last week esentially told the United States Congress to mind its own business. And well it should, for it seems to have just been made an offer it cannot refuse. Only one question remains. Does Congress have any real power of oversight of the executive? The answer seems clear, and the answer seems to be that once we put someone in that office, he can do pretty much whatever he wants. It took a long time for me to come around to this conclusion, this acceptance that the theory of the unitary executive has emerged to be what will be a longstanding, prevailing, and dominant component in the nature of the American republic for the forseeable future. After believing that Bush was totally out of line from a Constitutional perspective, it took the actual defiance of neocons (or neoliberals, depending on your lexicon) as they now testify before Congress to convince me that what we have now in terms of a corrupted republic is pretty much a done deal, like it or not. In all seriousness, I no longer believe this country is the country I thought it was. Long live the king. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 Both were obstructing the truth, for sure, but isn't lying about a blow job in a different category than is lying about using the Justice Department to influence elections or punishing those who declined to do so? And then there is the question of magnitude: the Bush administration officials lie on a daily basis at every level and on every topic from internal politics to global warming and global warfare. Clinton was Honest Abe by comparison. It doesn't make sense does it? Why would a seemingly brilliant guy jeopardize his presidency by lying under oath about, what appears to be, such trivial matters? Would it be because he was a megalo-egomaniac and believed he could skillfully lie his way out of the situation just for fun inspite of the liabilities? No, I don't think so. Perhaps the man had become so inured by a lifetime of deceit that this pathology disallowed his telling of the truth in spite of the potential costs: disbarment and his presidency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 First of all, you're premise seems flawed, "seemingly brilliant"? Why would he lie about what appear to be trivial matters? Two possibilities: 1. What he is lying about is not trivial. For example, purposefully impeding an ongoing criminal case (Lam vs. Duke Cunningham and co.), and using the justice dept to spur frivolous prosecutions (NM, WA, elsewhere?). 2. Or perhaps, because he thought he could. With no accountability, you might as well have your cake and eat it too. Might as well do whatever you want and tell continue the shine sunshine up everyone's ass while you're doing it. Seems like ol' Alberto just didn't see the writing on the wall. He got lazy and didn't forsee the firestorm in this. He underestimated the public's anger. Now if he really is "brilliant", then it seems like #2 is farfetched since he did some of his best lying after the midterm elections. So we're left with #1. There really was some bad shit that happened! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 Ah, Chuck, I think he was talking about Clinton. And there I agree with DeChristo: by all accounts one of Bill Clinton's downfalls was that he thought he was so smart he could pull it off (lying about Lewinski). The suggestion that he led a "lifetime of deceit" is a little out there, though, and downright ignorant if by that he is implying that Clinton was a worse liar than Bush and the neocons. As to Gonzalez: his testimony leaves two possible conclusions (well three): (1) he is incompetent, (2) he is a liar, or (3) both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crux Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 As an American, yes, he is incompetent. But as a Nazi, he is as shrewd as any ever was. Conclusion number four: Honesty and competency have nothing to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
high_on_rock Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 I think it all comes down to legal ethics. Is gonzo more interested in law and justice or is he interested in helping the guy who put him there? Seems an obvious answer, and not what I would look for in the head of the justice dept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.