re: "Democrats overplay hand in Libby indictment"

“Libby was known to have been part of a group of White House officials that included Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove, Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, and Press Secretary Scott McClellan who were charged with selling the Bush Administration's rationale for the Iraq war to the American people.”

Huh? Rove, Hadley, Card and McClellan have been “charged” with something? How did I miss this?

I can't believe you don't understand that different people have different interpretations of these statements.

1) The entire subject matter of the DNC offering is "legal" indictments of Bush Administration officials. It is more than reasonable to interpret that the statements made in that context regarding the same subject, "legal" proceedings, are used in that context. The word "charged" is a very common "legal" term for someone "legally" accused of a crime.

2) The headline of the piece is "Worse than Watergate". The text of the piece then goes on to describe how Plame-gate is worse than Watergate, in the twisted minds of democrats, who clearly use a multitude of untrue statements intended to mislead the reader into believing their new campaign mantra about some DNC invented "culture of corruption". Surely you are not saying that Dean was suggesting Libby's mis-statements about dates to reporters is an act "worse the Watergate", are you? So why would someone interpret their words in any other context than that which they clearly intended? Dean tried to paint a picture of a "culture of corruption" and used a bunch of outright lies in that effort. No?

3) I didn't put a single word in their mouths and it wasn't just Dean. You have not commented at all about Reid's call for a Rove (who was accused of no wrong doing at all by the two year old investigation team) resignation. Nor did you comment about Dodd's idiot comment about how criminal investigations shouldn't be limited to investigating criminal activity....??? (You were at least smart enough to leave these two alone)

However, you have put several words in their mouths and made several assumptions and liberal interpretations of what you think they "meant to say". So who is doing the distorting here??? Who has a comprehension problem? Which of us is having trouble with the English language?

But let me tell you what I find most entertaining......

Like Dean, Reid and Dodd, and millions of other liberals, you read or heard these following words and "interpreted" that Bush was trying to blame Hussein and Iraq for the events of 9/11.... thereby, lying the American people into war in Iraq...

"Americans have many questions tonight. Americans are asking, "Who attacked our country?" The evidence we have gathered all points to a collection of loosely affiliated terrorist organizations known as al Qaeda. They are some of the murderers indicted for bombing American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya and responsible for bombing the USS Cole. Al Qaeda is to terror what the Mafia is to crime. But its goal is not making money, its goal is remaking the world and imposing its radical beliefs on people everywhere."

These are the actual words of George W. Bush in the joint session of congress on September 20, 2001. Does this sound like a man desperate to connect Iraq to the events of 9/11???

I can go on through every Administration statement, one by one and completely disprove every allegation that the Bush Administration lied us into Iraq. But would that change your "interpretation" of what they said?

You liberals are the ones who believe in "broad liberal interpretations" that suit your agenda. My interpretation of these words in questions were not broad at all really, taken pretty much at face value. Yet you accuse me of misinterpreting those words....

Interesting!


JB Williams
Political Writer
www.JB-Williams.com