Gonzo goes down in flames
Nebuchadnezzar II
XTS
"Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebucha...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
> As expected.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
>
>
He showed what deplorable condition our justice dept. is in. There is no
such thing as honesty or competence in the entire bush administration.
Alberto shows America another example of exactly how bad it is.
Gandalf Grey
J. Carroll
Could be worse.
"I think it's important to bring somebody from outside the system, the
judicial system, somebody that hasn't been on the bench and, therefore,
there's not a lot of opinions for people to look at." -George W. Bush, on
the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, Washington, D.C.,
October 4, 2005
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
Babs, Identity Thief, Liar, Moron, Drunk.
$31812$a82e...@reader.athenanews.com:
>
>
>
Glug, glug, glug. Good booze, eh Babs. Too drunk to type?
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Sid9
I aint over until bush,jr says he supports Gonzales....then watch the news
the day after.
XTS
"J. Carroll" <no...@haha.cam> wrote in message
news:kHTVh.1314$H_....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
> XTS wrote:
> > "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebucha...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
> >> As expected.
> >>
> >> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
> >>
> >>
> >
> > He showed what deplorable condition our justice dept. is in. There is
> > no such thing as honesty or competence in the entire bush
> > administration. Alberto shows America another example of exactly how
> > bad it is.
>
> Could be worse.
>
> "I think it's important to bring somebody from outside the system, the
> judicial system, somebody that hasn't been on the bench and, therefore,
> there's not a lot of opinions for people to look at." -George W. Bush, on
> the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, Washington, D.C.,
> October 4, 2005
Thats a classic moment in bush ineptitude.
abelincoln
been a justice of the supreme court is goddamned scary...
we already got a couple of nazis and the porno pervert clarence long
dong thomas....
J. Carroll
> "J. Carroll" <no...@haha.cam> wrote in message
> news:kHTVh.1314$H_....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>> XTS wrote:
>>> "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebucha...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>> news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
>>>> As expected.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> He showed what deplorable condition our justice dept. is in. There
>>> is no such thing as honesty or competence in the entire bush
>>> administration. Alberto shows America another example of exactly how
>>> bad it is.
>>
>> Could be worse.
>>
>> "I think it's important to bring somebody from outside the system,
>> the judicial system, somebody that hasn't been on the bench and,
>> therefore, there's not a lot of opinions for people to look at."
>> -George W. Bush, on the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme
>> Court, Washington, D.C., October 4, 2005
>
> Thats a classic moment in bush ineptitude.
>
horatioclaytracepukieorionchildmolestors
> XTS wrote:
> > "J. Carroll" <n...@haha.cam> wrote in message
> >news:kHTVh.1314$H_....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
> >> XTS wrote:
> >>> "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebuchadnez...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
> >>>> As expected.
>
> >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
>
> >>> He showed what deplorable condition our justice dept. is in. There
> >>> is no such thing as honesty or competence in the entire bush
> >>> administration. Alberto shows America another example of exactly how
> >>> bad it is.
>
> >> Could be worse.
>
> >> "I think it's important to bring somebody from outside the system,
> >> the judicial system, somebody that hasn't been on the bench and,
> >> therefore, there's not a lot of opinions for people to look at."
> >> -George W. Bush, on the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme
> >> Court, Washington, D.C., October 4, 2005
>
> > Thats a classic moment in bush ineptitude.
>
> Goober better build himself a big LIEbrary. He's been a busy little boy.
>
> --
>
> John R. Carroll
> Machining Solution Software, Inc.
> Los Angeles San Francisco
>
> - Show quoted text -
featured book every week my pet goat
J. Carroll
> On Apr 19, 7:09 pm, "J. Carroll" <n...@haha.cam> wrote:
>> XTS wrote:
>>> "J. Carroll" <n...@haha.cam> wrote in message
>>> news:kHTVh.1314$H_....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>>>> XTS wrote:
>>>>> "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebuchadnez...@microsoft.com> wrote in
>>>>> message news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
>>>>>> As expected.
>>
>>>>>> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
>>
>>>>> He showed what deplorable condition our justice dept. is in. There
>>>>> is no such thing as honesty or competence in the entire bush
>>>>> administration. Alberto shows America another example of exactly
>>>>> how bad it is.
>>
>>>> Could be worse.
>>
>>>> "I think it's important to bring somebody from outside the system,
>>>> the judicial system, somebody that hasn't been on the bench and,
>>>> therefore, there's not a lot of opinions for people to look at."
>>>> -George W. Bush, on the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme
>>>> Court, Washington, D.C., October 4, 2005
>>
>>> Thats a classic moment in bush ineptitude.
>>
>> Goober better build himself a big LIEbrary. He's been a busy little
>> boy.
>>
>
When asked what was his favorite children's book was when he was growing up,
Bush named "The Very Hungry Catepillar", by Eric Carle. Which was first
published in 1969, a year after Bush graduated from Yale.
John
"J. Carroll" <no...@haha.cam> wrote in message
LOL
Figures something hairy and phallic shaped would be Bush's favorite.......
ffr...@mailandnews.com
wrote:
> As expected.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
He's gonna be ok. He told them he couldn't recall 74 times. So, since
they can't read his mind, they can't prove he lied. Just like Scooter
Libby.
qwerty
"J. Carroll" <no...@haha.cam> wrote in message
> When asked what was his favorite children's book was when he was growing
> up,
> Bush named "The Very Hungry Catepillar", by Eric Carle. Which was first
> published in 1969, a year after Bush graduated from Yale.
To be fair, Bush didn't really grow up until he was in his mid-forties. One
might also argue that he has yet to grow up. That book, "The Very Hungry
Caterpillar" could actually be the first book that he ever read. Which
would make one wonder how he got that Yale degree wouldn't it?
J. Carroll
LMAO.
Jim E
"XTS" <x...@woh.rr.com> wrote in message
news:462803b9$0$19460$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
good for him.
Jim E
XTS
"Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
news:58qsbqF...@mid.individual.net...
No, he did not.
>
> Jim E
>
>
nesta far-i
>
> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
> good for him.
I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where
he told anyone to "stuff it."
I did hear him say he had not been truthful, and I heard him acknowledge
that the responsibility for wrongful actions by his department falls
upon him, and I also heard him explain how he has so many meetings, so
frequently with Karl Rove, that he is unable to even remember if a
particular meeting happened in person.
Now I wonder what kind of trouble Rove must be in, if he has to meet
with the prosecuting attorney for the nation that often.
Jim E
"nesta far-i" <net...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:jDXVh.149048$g24....@newsfe12.phx...
> Jim E wrote:
>
>>
>> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
>> good for him.
>
>
> I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where he
> told anyone to "stuff it."
Figuratively speaking.
He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
Sounds like stuff it to me.
Jim E
nesta far-i
>> I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where he
>> told anyone to "stuff it."
>
> Figuratively speaking.
> He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
> Sounds like stuff it to me.
In his opening statement he acknowledged that he had lied, that mistakes
were made in his department, and that he was willing to accept full
responsibility. During the course of the interview, he was asked
several "yes or no" questions which he very carefully avoided answering
at all.
Jim E
Sounds like your basic politician.
So what.
Jim E
Frank Pittel
: "nesta far-i" <net...@cox.net> wrote in message
: news:jDXVh.149048$g24....@newsfe12.phx...
: > Jim E wrote:
: >
: >>
: >> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
: >> good for him.
: >
: >
: > I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where he
: > told anyone to "stuff it."
: Figuratively speaking.
: He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
: Sounds like stuff it to me.
While I wasn't able to see the looney tune brain dead loser lib dem hate fest
I have noticed that there was a near total lack of coverage of it afterwards
in the leftwing msm. This clearly means that Gonzolas<SP?> did more then hold
his own. It also means that the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems lost
another "scandal".
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
Bokonon
"Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
news:58qsbqF...@mid.individual.net...
> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
He faced a bipartisan panel of legislators - none of whom seemed
particularly enamored of his stammering.
What "liberals" did Gonzales tell to 'stuff it' and when?
What is it with you right-wingers and defending incompetence? Seriously.
--
"History! Read it and weep!"
-Bokonon
_______________________________________________
When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Bokonon
"Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
> He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
They have proven otherwise. Hell - Gonzales himself proved otherwise.
Bokonon
"Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
> Sounds like your basic politician.
> So what.
What is it with you right-wingers and defending incompetence? Seriously.
Sid9
You didn't watch the hearing.
If you did you would have seen
8 of the 9 Republicans on the
committee attack Gonzales
and at least two ask him to resign.
Orrin Hatch was the only one to
give Gonzales tepid support.
Do not forget that bush,jr was
considering Gonzales for the
USSC.
And...Meiers, too
Bokonon
"Frank Pittel" <f...@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
news:McidnanRxuX6XbXb...@giganews.com...
> While I wasn't able to see the looney tune brain dead loser lib dem hate
> fest
> I have noticed that there was a near total lack of coverage of it
> afterwards
> in the leftwing msm. This clearly means that Gonzolas<SP?> did more then
> hold
> his own. It also means that the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems lost
> another "scandal".
What is it with you right-wingers and defending incompetence? Seriously.
Sid9
A lawyer with a bad memeory is not much of a lawyer and certainly should not
be leading one of the most important departments in our government.....but,
then again, neother should bush,jr be president
John
"Bokonon" <seattled...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:132hhau...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Frank Pittel" <f...@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
> news:McidnanRxuX6XbXb...@giganews.com...
>
>> While I wasn't able to see the looney tune brain dead loser lib dem hate
>> fest
>> I have noticed that there was a near total lack of coverage of it
>> afterwards
>> in the leftwing msm. This clearly means that Gonzolas<SP?> did more then
>> hold
>> his own. It also means that the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems
>> lost
>> another "scandal".
>
> What is it with you right-wingers and defending incompetence? Seriously.
>
In another group there is guy who's attitude is that as long as there is at
least one crooked democrat, it completely justifies the republicans looting
the treasury, massive giveaways to the rich, no-bid contracts to supporters,
helicopters full of cash that disappear into Iraq and the total distruction
of SS.
They more than just defend incompetence, they defend right wing
criminals....
Lamont Cranston
"Frank Pittel" <f...@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote in message
news:McidnanRxuX6XbXb...@giganews.com...
It was featured in every conservative MSM broadcast. The fact that
Republicans have demanded his resignation means that Democrats have
successfully exposed another example of Bush incompetence and cronyism.
Lamont Cranston
"Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
>
> "nesta far-i" <net...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:jDXVh.149048$g24....@newsfe12.phx...
>> Jim E wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
>>> good for him.
>>
>>
>> I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where he
>> told anyone to "stuff it."
>
> Figuratively speaking.
> He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
In other words, he lied.
WF Peifer
news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
> As expected.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
>
How the hell can somebody spend weeks practicing and rehearsing their
testimony, and include "I don't recall" in that testimony 71 times?
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"This is an impressive crowd - the haves and the have-mores. Some people
call you the elites; I call you my base." - George W. Bush
Frank Pittel
Like when the whore hillary testified before congress? Did she even
remember her name while being questioned?
Frank Pittel
: "Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
: news:58r0a6F...@mid.individual.net...
: >
: > "nesta far-i" <net...@cox.net> wrote in message
: > news:jDXVh.149048$g24....@newsfe12.phx...
: >> Jim E wrote:
: >>
: >>>
: >>> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
: >>> good for him.
: >>
: >>
: >> I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where he
: >> told anyone to "stuff it."
: >
: > Figuratively speaking.
: > He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
: In other words, he lied.
About what?
Sid9
Monica II hasn't testified yet
Sid9
He swore to tell the whole truth.
He did not.
Lamont Cranston
> In alt.politics.usa.republican Sid9 <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> : ffr...@mailandnews.com wrote:
> : > On Apr 19, 4:56 pm, "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebuchadnez...@microsoft.com>
> : > wrote:
> : >> As expected.
> : >>
> : >> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
> : >
> : > He's gonna be ok. He told them he couldn't recall 74 times. So, since
> : > they can't read his mind, they can't prove he lied. Just like Scooter
> : > Libby.
>
> : A lawyer with a bad memeory is not much of a lawyer and certainly should
> not
> : be leading one of the most important departments in our
> government.....but,
> : then again, neother should bush,jr be president
>
> Like when the whore hillary testified before congress?
Cite that Hillary is a whore?
> Did she even remember her name while being questioned?
Yep.
Lamont Cranston
That he did nothing wrong.
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
Pittel, instead of being on the defensive, why not extoll the vitrues of
Gonzales? Surely, there must be SOME reason why you support that asshole.
--
There are only two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and fools.
toast...@yahoo.com
> "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebuchadnez...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
>
> > As expected.
>
> >http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
>
> How the hell can somebody spend weeks practicing and rehearsing their
> testimony, and include "I don't recall" in that testimony 71 times?
I suggest you ask your buddy clintoon. During his Jan. 17 deposition
in the Paula Jones case he claimed memory failure 267 times.
John
<toast...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177087273.2...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Paula Jones - LOL - you mean the lady that got a total body cosmetic redo
and a fat bank account because she ACCUSED Clinton....... She was PAID to
make those accusations....
Frank Pittel
His ugly whore wife had the same problem when she testified to congress
and she's the smartest woman in the world!!
Frank Pittel
What does have to do with the whore hillary?
Frank Pittel
: Frank Pittel wrote:
I see you don't know either.
Lamont Cranston
"But, ... but, Clinton... Clinton... but, Clinton ...."
ROTFLMAO
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
> In alt.politics.usa.republican GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
> <g...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> : Frank Pittel wrote:
>
> : > In alt.politics.usa.republican Lamont Cranston
> : > <lamont.cranston@evillurksinthewhitehouse> wrote:
> : >
> : > : "Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
> : > : news:58r0a6F...@mid.individual.net...
> : > : >
> : > : > "nesta far-i" <net...@cox.net> wrote in message
> : > : > news:jDXVh.149048$g24....@newsfe12.phx...
> : > : >> Jim E wrote:
> : > : >>
> : > : >>>
> : > : >>> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
> : > : >>> good for him.
> : > : >>
> : > : >>
> : > : >> I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part
> : > : >> where he told anyone to "stuff it."
> : > : >
> : > : > Figuratively speaking.
> : > : > He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove
> : > : > otherwise.
> : >
> : > : In other words, he lied.
> : >
> : >
> : > About what?
> : >
> : Pittel, instead of being on the defensive, why not extoll the vitrues of
> : Gonzales? Surely, there must be SOME reason why you support that asshole.
>
> I see you don't know either.
I note that you still cannot come to the defense of Abu Gonzales.
wrab
> "J. Carroll" <n...@haha.cam> wrote in message
>
> news:SUVVh.5340$H_5....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
>
> > When asked what was his favorite children's book was when he was growing
> > up,
> > Bush named "The Very Hungry Catepillar", by Eric Carle. Which was first
> > published in 1969, a year after Bush graduated from Yale.
>
> To be fair, Bush didn't really grow up until he was in his mid-forties. One
> might also argue that he has yet to grow up. That book, "The Very Hungry
> Caterpillar" could actually be the first book that he ever read. Which
> would make one wonder how he got that Yale degree wouldn't it?
No need to wonder about that Yale degree. Young Mr. Bush, like many
other "legacy babies," was assured of admission without competition
and a degree without necessary class attendance or examinations.
Sid9
Pittel does and excellent job of duck and weave.
(Gonzales fell on his sword for someone else...bush,jr himself? Rove? who?)
Sid9
If you were treated like Imus, you'd be gone.
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
I think it was Rove who came up with the names of US Attorneys to fire. I think
Gonzales was/is an obedient figurehead. Rove runs the whole show.
Lamont Cranston
Whore? Cite?
Lamont Cranston
Whore? Cite?
Sid9
He fears Monica II....who when granted immunity she will be required to
testify free of any danger of criminal charges.
toast...@yahoo.com
<lamont.cranston@EvilLurksInTheWhiteHouse> wrote:
> <toastmil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Just as I thought. Being reminded of Clintoon's pathetic antics leaves
you libtards stuttering and rolling on the floor laughing. Good.
toast...@yahoo.com
> <toastmil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Yup, she was PAID a cool $850,000 by pResident BJ Clintoon himself.
How do you like them apples, gomer?
Sid9
Paula Jones got fucked by her Republican mentors.
She had a better deal and turned it down so Republicans could keep up the
drum beat.
In the end she got a divorce and a nose job
qwerty
<toast...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177100977....@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Actually, Clinton's insurance paid that amount. Why did she accept this
offer when she turned down the identical offer a year before? Didn't Jones
say when she first brought about her suit that she wasn't in it for the
money? That any money she received would be donated to charity? That all
she wanted was to restore her good name? So what charity did she donate her
share of that settlement? Did she recover her good name when she
subsequently posed nude for Penthouse?
> How do you like them apples, gomer?
Indeed.
toast...@yahoo.com
I'm sure that will be in the history books right under the line about
clintoon being the only elected president in history to have been
impeached.
> - Show quoted text -
James Of Tucson
> : > Figuratively speaking.
> : > He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
>
> : In other words, he lied.
>
> About what?
Nobody has actually said Gonzales did anything wrong. That's not what
this investigation is about.
The investigation has come about because Congress wants to exercise
its oversight authority -- which it has whether or not anything has
been done "wrong", and the Bush Administration has automatically
responded to that oversight initiative as though they are being
accused of crimes and put on trial. They insist on forcing the hand
of Congress, so that in order to ask their questions, they must issue
subpoenas and compel testimony as though they are dealing with hostile
witnesses in a trial.
By approaching this whole thing as though they are somehow being
tormented, they create the general impression that they are indeed
trying to hide things from Congress. Certain members of Congress
(Republicans!) want to make sure they find out what that is. The more
cynical partisans need to know, because they don't want that
information to come as a surprise next time they are campaigning for
office. The more moderate members are sick and tired of dealing with
an administration that refuses to cooperate with them, refusing to
rightly treat Congress as a co-equal branch of government. And this,
after they faithfully gave Bush everything he ever asked for.
Kindly show us when anyone accused Gonzales of "doing anything
wrong?" Why does he whine like a school kid who has been sent to the
principal's office for some mundane administrative task, but who
believes he's been caught doing something he knows he did, but doesn't
realize that the principal neither knows nor cares about it? However,
when that kid starts on the defensive, it's going to make the
principal pretty suspicious!
And if you listen to the testimony, you will understand that the "kid
in the office" is a bit more than just a metaphor!
He really does come across as a whining schoolkid more than a mature
statesman.
James Of Tucson
<g...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I think it was Rove who came up with the names of US Attorneys to fire. I think
> Gonzales was/is an obedient figurehead. Rove runs the whole show.
I think it will not be lost on the Senators, that Gonzales has had so
many meetings with Rove that he has trouble remembering them.
This is very interesting as Karl Rove is not a Justice Department
official, and his legitimate involvement in Justice Department
business will be a matter of record. The mere fact that Gonzales was
unable to answer questions concerning such meetings, is sufficient
cause for them to seek his testimony.
If both these men show that they are able to remember all kinds of
mundane details, but not remember meetings with each other, AND when
it is obvious that they have kept meticulous records EXCEPT for the
records that would help them fill the uncannily coincidental gaps in
their memories, it's going to hit the fan. Having received no
answers from anyone else who should know, they will seek answers from
Bush himself, not for these original questions, but for new questions
regarding whether or not these men were ordered to forget those
things.
Sid9
He's a bush,jr crony and as incompetent as all the rest of them....including
bush,jr himself
qwerty
<toast...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177105185....@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> I'm sure that will be in the history books right under the line about
> clintoon being the only elected president in history to have been
> impeached.
Only in right-winger pseudo "history" books.
Rich Travsky
> In alt.politics.usa.republican GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia <g...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> : Frank Pittel wrote:
> : > In alt.politics.usa.republican Lamont Cranston
> : >
> : > : >>>
> : > : >>> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
> : > : >>> good for him.
> : > : >>
> : > : >>
> : > : >> I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where he
> : > : >> told anyone to "stuff it."
> : > : >
> : > : > Figuratively speaking.
> : > : > He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove otherwise.
> : >
> : > : In other words, he lied.
> : >
> : > About what?
> : >
> : Pittel, instead of being on the defensive, why not extoll the vitrues of
> : Gonzales? Surely, there must be SOME reason why you support that asshole.
>
> I see you don't know either.
Doesn't know of any virtues of Gonzales' to extoll? Agreed.
RT
Rich Travsky
> > : "nesta far-i" <net...@cox.net> wrote in message
> > : > Jim E wrote:
> > : >
> > : >>
> > : >> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
> > : >> good for him.
> > : >
> > : >
> > : > I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where
> > he
> > : > told anyone to "stuff it."
> >
> > : Figuratively speaking.
> > : He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove
> > otherwise.
> >
> >
> > While I wasn't able to see the looney tune brain dead loser lib dem hate
> > fest
> > I have noticed that there was a near total lack of coverage of it
> > afterwards
> > in the leftwing msm. This clearly means that Gonzolas<SP?> did more then
> > hold
> > his own. It also means that the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems lost
> > another "scandal".
>
> It was featured in every conservative MSM broadcast. The fact that
> Republicans have demanded his resignation means that Democrats have
> successfully exposed another example of Bush incompetence and cronyism.
Looney tune brain dead loser Piddle only gets one station over that coat
hanger antenna in his trailer park.
RT
WF Peifer
>
> > In his opening statement he acknowledged that he had lied, that mistakes
> > were made in his department, and that he was willing to accept full
> > responsibility. During the course of the interview, he was asked
several
> > "yes or no" questions which he very carefully avoided answering at all.
> >
>
> Sounds like your basic politician.
> So what.
The Attorney General is supposed to be the nation's top law enforcement
officer, and is supposed to be ABOVE basic politics. That's the whole point
of why he should be Gone-zales.
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"This is an impressive crowd - the haves and the have-mores. Some people
call you the elites; I call you my base." - George W. Bush
WF Peifer
> In alt.politics.usa.republican Jim E <YD63...@svn.net> wrote:
>
> : "nesta far-i" <net...@cox.net> wrote in message
> : > Jim E wrote:
> : >
> : >>
> : >> And today he told the liberals to stuff it.
> : >> good for him.
> : >
> : >
> : > I listened to the entire interview, and I did not catch the part where
he
> : > told anyone to "stuff it."
>
> : Figuratively speaking.
> : He told them he did nothing wrong, and challenged them to prove
otherwise.
> : Sounds like stuff it to me.
>
>
> While I wasn't able to see the looney tune brain dead loser lib dem hate
fest
> I have noticed that there was a near total lack of coverage of it
afterwards
> in the leftwing msm. This clearly means that Gonzolas<SP?> did more then
hold
> his own. It also means that the looney tune brain dead loser lib dems lost
> another "scandal".
Near total lack of coverage in the conservative-owned msm is a good
indication that much of what happened made the incompetent boob look like an
idiot, an indication that's fully supported by the transcript of the
hearing.
WF Peifer
news:1177087273.2...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 20, 1:00 pm, "WF Peifer" <WFPei...@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> > "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebuchadnez...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
> >
> > > As expected.
> >
> > >http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
> >
> > How the hell can somebody spend weeks practicing and rehearsing their
> > testimony, and include "I don't recall" in that testimony 71 times?
>
> I suggest you ask your buddy clintoon. During his Jan. 17 deposition
> in the Paula Jones case he claimed memory failure 267 times.
I see you don't understand the difference between a deposition in a civil
case that was later deemed "frivolous" (aren't you right-wingers always
crying about trial lawyers and their frivolous lawsuits?) and "without
merit" and sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. For one
thing, Clinton saying "I don't recall" when asked about events that were
later shown to have never happened makes absolute sense. It's hard to
recall things that never happened. It's quite another thing to not be able
to recall conversations that other witnesses have testified DID happen, and
there is physical evidence to indicate they DID happen. Especially when
you've just spent weeks getting your memory refreshed by pouring over that
testimony and evidence in preparation for your own testimony.
toast...@yahoo.com
> <toastmil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1177087273.2...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 20, 1:00 pm, "WF Peifer" <WFPei...@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> > > "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebuchadnez...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
>
> > > > As expected.
>
> > > >http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
>
> > > How the hell can somebody spend weeks practicing and rehearsing their
> > > testimony, and include "I don't recall" in that testimony 71 times?
>
> > I suggest you ask your buddy clintoon. During his Jan. 17 deposition
> > in the Paula Jones case he claimed memory failure 267 times.
>
> I see you don't understand the difference between a deposition in a civil
> case that was later deemed "frivolous" (aren't you right-wingers always
> crying about trial lawyers and their frivolous lawsuits?) and "without
> merit" and sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
"How the hell can somebody spend weeks practicing and rehearsing their
testimony, and include "I don't recall" in that testimony 71 times?"
Next time try putting your silly qualifiers in first and you might not
end up looking like such an ass. What am I saying...you'll make an ass
of yourself.
> For one
> thing, Clinton saying "I don't recall" when asked about events that were
> later shown to have never happened makes absolute sense. It's hard to
> recall things that never happened.
Which "things" were later shown to have never happened? And why is it
so difficult to say "That never happened" if you know it to be the
case?
> It's quite another thing to not be able
> to recall conversations that other witnesses have testified DID happen, and
> there is physical evidence to indicate they DID happen. Especially when
> you've just spent weeks getting your memory refreshed by pouring over that
> testimony and evidence in preparation for your own testimony.
Really? Every detail of everything you've done over the last two to
three years? Sounds to me like you're just upset he didn't fall for a
perjury trap. Aren't you libtards always crying about perjury traps?
r truth
"WF Peifer" <WFPe...@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> Near total lack of coverage in the conservative-owned msm is a good
> indication that much of what happened made the incompetent boob look like an
> idiot, an indication that's fully supported by the transcript of the
> hearing.
It's good that he won't "just go away" he is a curse on the bushies scam.
Another embarrassment . I'm enjoying him twist in the wind.
--
If you believe that the only tool you have is a hammer,
No wonder you look at all your problems as Nails.
WF Peifer
news:1177260136.6...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 22, 12:26 pm, "WF Peifer" <WFPei...@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> > <toastmil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1177087273.2...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > On Apr 20, 1:00 pm, "WF Peifer" <WFPei...@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> > > > "Nebuchadnezzar II" <Nebuchadnez...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > >news:5lTVh.1847$jR5.1387@trnddc08...
> >
> > > > > As expected.
> >
> > > >
>http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/19/gonzales.testimony/index.html
> >
> > > > How the hell can somebody spend weeks practicing and rehearsing
their
> > > > testimony, and include "I don't recall" in that testimony 71 times?
> >
> > > I suggest you ask your buddy clintoon. During his Jan. 17 deposition
> > > in the Paula Jones case he claimed memory failure 267 times.
> >
> > I see you don't understand the difference between a deposition in a
civil
> > case that was later deemed "frivolous" (aren't you right-wingers always
> > crying about trial lawyers and their frivolous lawsuits?) and "without
> > merit" and sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
>
> "How the hell can somebody spend weeks practicing and rehearsing their
> testimony, and include "I don't recall" in that testimony 71 times?"
>
> Next time try putting your silly qualifiers in first and you might not
> end up looking like such an ass. What am I saying...you'll make an ass
> of yourself.
This comment makes absolutely no sense. Of course, very little that you
post actually DOES.
> > For one
> > thing, Clinton saying "I don't recall" when asked about events that were
> > later shown to have never happened makes absolute sense. It's hard to
> > recall things that never happened.
>
> Which "things" were later shown to have never happened? And why is it
> so difficult to say "That never happened" if you know it to be the
> case?
The incidents of "sexual harrassment" that Paula Jones alleged are the
things that were later shown to have never happened. And it's always safer
to say that you don't recall something happening than to say it never
happened. Especially when you actually don't have much recollection of a
particular date and time.
> > It's quite another thing to not be able
> > to recall conversations that other witnesses have testified DID happen,
and
> > there is physical evidence to indicate they DID happen. Especially when
> > you've just spent weeks getting your memory refreshed by pouring over
that
> > testimony and evidence in preparation for your own testimony.
>
> Really? Every detail of everything you've done over the last two to
> three years? Sounds to me like you're just upset he didn't fall for a
> perjury trap. Aren't you libtards always crying about perjury traps?
They weren't asking him about everything he'd said and done over the last
two to three years. They were asking him about specific things that
occured, for the most part, over a period of less than a year. I don't know
about you, but like every reasonably bright person I know . . . especially
the lawyers I know . . . when I attend a meeting of any importance at all,
or am engaged in an important phone conversation, I take copious notes so
that I can later be clear about who said what at the meeting or during the
call. Gonzales knew ahead of time what he would be asked about, and had
weeks to review his notes. In fact, there was no prohibition placed on him
that would have precluded his bringing his notes with him. Of course, if he
even admitted the existence of such notes, they would have been subpoenaed,
and then Gonzo would have REALLY been up a shit creek with only his hands to
use as oars.
Jim E
"WF Peifer" <WFPe...@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:_umdnTGK0J1q6rbb...@comcast.com...
> "Jim E" <YD63...@SVN.net> wrote in message
> news:58r65oF...@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> > In his opening statement he acknowledged that he had lied, that
>> > mistakes
>> > were made in his department, and that he was willing to accept full
>> > responsibility. During the course of the interview, he was asked
> several
>> > "yes or no" questions which he very carefully avoided answering at all.
>> >
>>
>> Sounds like your basic politician.
>> So what.
>
>
> The Attorney General is supposed to be the nation's top law enforcement
> officer, and is supposed to be ABOVE basic politics. That's the whole
> point
> of why he should be Gone-zales.
>
So you are what , naive or stupid?
Jim E
WF Peifer
Neither. I'm an idealist who believes that the leaders of our nation should
be held to their word, when they swear "to preserve, protect and defend the
Constitution of the United States." I expect them to put the needs of the
nation above the needs of their political party.
toast...@yahoo.com
See if you can find a cogent adult that's willing to explain it to
you. I haven't the patience.
> > > For one
> > > thing, Clinton saying "I don't recall" when asked about events that were
> > > later shown to have never happened makes absolute sense. It's hard to
> > > recall things that never happened.
>
> > Which "things" were later shown to have never happened? And why is it
> > so difficult to say "That never happened" if you know it to be the
> > case?
>
> The incidents of "sexual harrassment" that Paula Jones alleged are the
> things that were later shown to have never happened.
Baloney. No judgement was made one way or the other after BJ Cintoon
opted to pay her off.
> And it's always safer
> to say that you don't recall something happening than to say it never
> happened. Especially when you actually don't have much recollection of a
> particular date and time.
I see, but that's a luxury you only see fit to extend to clintoon? How
very libtard of you.
> > > It's quite another thing to not be able
> > > to recall conversations that other witnesses have testified DID happen,
> and
> > > there is physical evidence to indicate they DID happen. Especially when
> > > you've just spent weeks getting your memory refreshed by pouring over
> that
> > > testimony and evidence in preparation for your own testimony.
>
> > Really? Every detail of everything you've done over the last two to
> > three years? Sounds to me like you're just upset he didn't fall for a
> > perjury trap. Aren't you libtards always crying about perjury traps?
>
> They weren't asking him about everything he'd said and done over the last
> two to three years. They were asking him about specific things that
> occured, for the most part, over a period of less than a year. I don't know
> about you, but like every reasonably bright person I know . . . especially
> the lawyers I know . . . when I attend a meeting of any importance at all,
> or am engaged in an important phone conversation, I take copious notes so
> that I can later be clear about who said what at the meeting or during the
> call. Gonzales knew ahead of time what he would be asked about, and had
> weeks to review his notes. In fact, there was no prohibition placed on him
> that would have precluded his bringing his notes with him. Of course, if he
> even admitted the existence of such notes, they would have been subpoenaed,
> and then Gonzo would have REALLY been up a shit creek with only his hands to
> use as oars.
Gonzales has testified he wasn't heavily involved with the process, no
ones proven otherwise and there's been no mention of any "notes" from
the little bit that he was involved with. So now you feel the need to
invent some notes to try and make things look bad? What a fucking
clown shoe you are, Billy. Ya got nothing. Al's going nowhere and it
burns you up to have to admit it. I can't wait until your lib pals in
congress cave in on the troop funding bill. That's sure make your
empty head explode.
Lamont Cranston
<toast...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177345606.3...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Sampson testified otherwise. Monica II will also testify otherwise.
> the little bit that he was involved with. So now you feel the need to
> invent some notes to try and make things look bad? What a fucking
> clown shoe you are, Billy. Ya got nothing. Al's going nowhere and it
Al has already gone somewhere -- to the list of incompetent Bush cronies
right below "Heckofajob" Brownie. He has become a caricature of the Bush
administration's blatant incompetence and corruption.
> burns you up to have to admit it. I can't wait until your lib pals in
> congress cave in on the troop funding bill. That's sure make your
> empty head explode.
I can't wait for Bush to veto a bill providing more money for the troops
than he asked for.
WF Peifer
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"This is an impressive crowd - the haves and the have-mores. Some people
call you the elites; I call you my base." - George W. Bush
<toast...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177345606.3...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"Paula Jones agreed to drop her sexual harassment lawsuit against President
Clinton on Nov. 13 in return for $850,000 - but no apology or admission of
guilt from the president. Two weeks later, when the 8th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals dismissed the suit, it marked the conclusive end of Clinton's
battle against Jones and her conservative backers. Seven months earlier, the
case was dismissed by a district-court judge as having no merit, but Jones
appealed."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/pjones/pjones.htm
In other words, as I said, the District Court threw the case out "as having
no merit". But, thanks to the virtually bottomless pockets of the GOP
gadflies that were paying Jones' legal bills and living expenses, she was
able to file an appeal. Clinton paid the bitch $850,000 to just go away,
because he had better things to deal with than who was going to pay for her
next nose job. But she had already lost her case because it had no merit.
It was one of those "frivolous lawsuits" that people and corporations
routinely pay to have go away, even though they'd done nothing wrong.
Sid9
*Who done it*?
*Who runs his department*?
*We have no answers except, "I don't recall*"
Jim E
"WF Peifer" <WFPe...@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
Idealist?
That covers both the above categories.
Pragmatists rule.
Jim E