They were essentially caught trying to frame the Senator as having solicited under age sex in the Dominican Republic. All totally untrue - paying for the accusations - put out right before the election.

I am disappointed that Grayson is using that source. I wonder if he is bothering to go to the classified hearings to get that information.

Does he have really bad judgement, and frequently, or is he playing some kind of dirty games here?

for saying what he thinks the True Progressives TM will respond to - and will open their wallets for. He is shameless in his self-serving fundraising.

His "judgement" is never a matter of being good or bad - it is always a matter of being on the side that he thinks will cause people to fill his coffers. That's the "dirty game" being played here - and he plays it extremely well.

He had a very conservative opponent, who he likely could have beaten - but, he made a very deceitful ad that took a sentence his opponent said and chopped off the beginning of it - changing the meaning 180 degrees. He, of course, was caught when his opponent went to the media with the original source with the full sentence. The really annoying point was that the ad - without that clip - was pretty good on an important issue - his opponent's view of women's rights. Getting got with this sleazy ad basically took that issue away - and his opponent was radical enough that it should have been a powerful issue. In addition, it made him look unethical.

Many here defended the ad - saying that it was mostly true, but you don't quote your opponent out of context -especially not by taking part of a sentence.)

the issue of a possible military action. I would be angrier if I agreed with him because that should diminish him.

He has really been sinking to low levels, with using stuff from the Daily Caller, and worse the raising money off of this issue with Syria. I for one don't buy into his BS. Seem like he is against this for all the wrong reasons.

a jury can lock you out just by saying what you did there, just now.

It's already happened.

Dems should just fucking well *take notice* of this.
Consider how *low* this makes it be.

Realize that when one RW source reports something, it usually turns up all over the place. Not to mention, if this were true - that Assad's troops did this by mistake, Assad should have admitted it and helped people - rather than heavily shelling them for the next 4 days.

then there should be SOME @#$%(*& evidence to attack Assad for doing it.

That's the most elementary reasoning that humankind is capable of!
So do it!

but you ignore the intelligence of the US, Britain and France.

But what the hell, I should accept this classified "intelligence" even though I'm not privy to it, because karynnj says I should be a believer.
As if the US, Britain and France aren't proven liars when it comes to drumming up the war propaganda.

He listed the reasons they had high confidence that it was Assad.

But karynnj says that because Kerry claims to have "high confidence that it was Assad", so it must be true. Because karynnj hasn't learned even one lesson from the destructive illegal wars of the so recent past, including the basic lesson that the US *lies through its teeth* in the run up to one of it's "wars for freedom and democracy and all things holy".

chemical weapons without the required delivery systems would have meant two things, first the people setting off the weapons would be assured dead. Second, setting off weapons without delivery systems would have impacted small areas, not the extensive strike area seen. Chemical warfare is inefficient and even more inefficient without the required delivery systems.

Its pretty easy to mix the gas and build a delivery system.

"Many hoaxes contain some fact, which is why they can appear attractive to the naive. Facts, however, do not always lead to the right conclusion. Abraham Lincoln illustrated this very point during a trial when he told the jury the story of a young boy who came running up to his father excited and out of breath.

'Pa, you gotta come quick. Sis and the new farmhand are up in the hayloft and she¹s a gotta her skirt up and he¹s a gotta his pants down and they's gettin' ready to pee all over your new hay.' The farmer looked down at the excited boy and said, 'O Son, you got your facts right, its your conclusion that¹s wrong.' It would be well to remember this little parable before falling victim to a hoax."

Shame...

We all know that posting from "The Daily Caller", from an unknown source is always the honest thing to do, because we all know that Tucker would "never" lie about things, now would he? Geez how can anyone use The Daily Caller as a source and expect anyone in their right mind to believe it?

So yes, thank you Alan Grayson for sinking so low as to site this right wing piece of shit as a reliable source for anything!

As as a source of any kind of legitimate reporting is really hitting the bottom of the barrel. I men Tucker Carlson! If you really think this clown has got "real" information, or that his sources, that are never mentioned, are legitimate, then I have a bridge I can sell you in New York for only $19.99!

to show that this action has to be taken against Syria so I'll hit a rec because maybe the The Daily Caller just hit on something.

I love the outrage among the pro-war crowd that Grayson would dare make reference to Caller. I could give a shit... I don't care what it takes to stop the warmaniacs, who by the way have no room to talk being in the company of Madman McCain and his true love Graham.

He's been wrapped around the axle of the bus that right-wing DU'ers cruise around in for years now.

Using the one of the most unreputable right wing hacks talking points, pure made up BS, is OK with you as long as it fits your view on things? Sinking to this level by you are Grayson is simply pathetic. A year ago you would have been laughed off the board if you had post this, and Grayson would have been laughed off also. I guess this just goes to show how low people can go in order to try and get others to think the way they do.

There are legitimate reason why we should not get involved in Syria's civil war, but using right wing bullshit from Tucker Carlson's website is not one of them.

That's his source?

of the True Progressives (TM) will be defended and revered no matter what utter bullshit he quotes as a source.

And the fact that he is using this issue to raise money for himself doesn't even register among the true believers.

In all likelihood, he'll eventually wind up as a FOX-News contributor - and will continue to be hailed as a true progressive despite all evidence to the contrary.

phrased it without looking like callous, isolationist.

for a long time - especially when he ran in 2010, and 'edited' his opponent's statement for an ad, which had the opponent supposedly saying the exact opposite of what he actually did say.

That's right out of the RW playbook.

The stuff he's posted here on DU is so garbled and poorly-written, it is appalling. I remember one a few months ago where he rambled on about Americans having to eat spaghetti with their bare hands because their knives and forks will be gone, or some such drivel that the true believers scooped up with a spoon (in anticipation of their other utensils being confiscated, I suppose).

The "it's none of our business" comment is classic Alan "Clueless" Grayson - but he knows how easily duped his supporters are, and realizes that no matter what he says, his sheeple will swallow it whole. Not only are they defending his using The Daily Caller as a source - they're actually suggesting that it should be recognized as a "legitimate" source, merely because their Current Darling has quoted its content as reliable.

Amusing to watch all of the True Progressives TM being suckered by a man who stoops to making the situation in Syria a source of fundraising to further his own political career.

He might actually decide to use "Glen Beck" as his next "reliable" source of information, you never know.

the Grayson contingent will start posting OPs about what a great intellect Beck has been all along - and why didn't they recognize it sooner!!!

The Daily Caller?



what.an.idiot.

And just think, 18 people actually have recommended a pure bullshit post using Tucker Carlson's right wing bullshit website to prove a point. It's bad enough it got posted on DU, but Grayson should have more sense than to use the Daily Caller as any kind of legitimate reporting!

Gareth Porter


Secretary of State John Kerry assured the public that the Obama administration's summary of the intelligence on which it is basing the case for military action to punish the Assad regime for an alleged use of chemical weapons was put together with an acute awareness of the fiasco of the 2002 Iraq WMD intelligence estimate.

Nevertheless, the unclassified summary of the intelligence assessment made public August 30, 2013, utilizes misleading language evocative of the infamous Iraq estimate's deceptive phrasing. The summary cites signals, geospatial and human source intelligence that purportedly show that the Syrian government prepared, carried out and "confirmed" a chemical weapons attack on August 21. And it claims visual evidence "consistent with" a nerve gas attack.

But a careful examination of those claims reveals a series of convolutedly worded characterizations of the intelligence that don't really mean what they appear to say at first glance.

The document displays multiple indications that the integrity of the assessment process was seriously compromised by using language that distorted the intelligence in ways that would justify an attack on Syria.

Spinning the Secret Intelligence

That pattern was particularly clear in the case of the intelligence gathered by covert means. The summary claims, "We intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime on August 21 and was concerned with the U.N. inspectors obtaining evidence."

That seems to indicate that U.S. intelligence intercepted such communiations. But former British Ambassador Craig Murray has pointed out on his blog August 31 that the Mount Troodos listening post in Cyprus is used by British and U.S. intelligence to monitor “all radio, satellite and microwave traffic across the Middle East … ” and that “almost all landline telephone communications in this region is routed through microwave links at some stage [and] picked up on Troodos.”

http://truth-out.org/news/item/18559-how-intelligence-was-twisted-to-support-an-attack-on-syria

Bio:Gareth Porter (born June 18, 1942) is an American historian, investigative journalist, author and policy analyst specializing in U.S. national security policy. He was active as a Vietnam specialist and anti-war activist during the Vietnam War, serving as Saigon Bureau Chief for Dispatch News Service International from 1970-1971, and later, as co-director of the Indochina Resource Center. He was widely criticized for his enthusiasm for the Khmer Rouge government in Cambodia. He has written several books about the potential for peaceful conflict resolution in Southeast Asia and the Middle East,[1] the most recent of which is Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam, an analysis of how and why the United States went to war in Vietnam.[2] Porter has also written for Al Jazeera English, The Nation, Inter Press Service, The Huffington Post, and Truthout, and he was the 2012 winner of the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, which is awarded annually by the Frontline Club in London to acknowledge reporting that exposes propaganda.[3]

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