Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Bush media machine has started on Fitzgerald

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:50 AM
Original message
The Bush media machine has started on Fitzgerald
Check out these headlines:

http://www.drudgereport.com/ - FITZGERALD FUMBLE: Prosecutor in CIA Leak Case Corrects Part of Court Filing...

http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4866 - The NYT ignores a big story. - The legion of liberals who get their news from the New York Times (and still consider it a reliable news source) remain untroubled by the shocking news that Patrick Fitzgerald has admitted misleading a federal judge in a filing that he has had to officially correct.

http://www.jeffgannon.com/ - Did Fitzgerald Flub or Did Facts Get in the Way?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/4/12/94619.shtml - Patrick Fitzgerald: Leakgate Filing was False
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. Some top notch media sources, especially JimmyJeff
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Sadly, republicans believe what they read in these tabloids.
Heck, half of them believe what they read in the National Enquirer - which may actually be a more accurate source of information than the links posted in the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
2. Good grief *lol*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
3. Those must be the "alternative sources" Bush spoke of
for people to get their IN-FERmation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUHandle Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
4. The Legion of Liberals
are simply nattering nabobs of negativism!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
5. the New York Sun had the same type article today
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
6. Gee, W illegally signs legislation that did not pass either
the Senate or the House and was doctored to add something that is downright unconstitutional, and all you hear from the media is chirping crickets . . .

Patrick Fitzgerald has to change a period from a comma and it's the end of the world . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walkon Donating Member (919 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
7. None of those are news sources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. No, they are not but they are successful at spreading the word to the
Bush bots out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtbymark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
8. they make it sound like, Oh the case is dead, no more to see
let's all go home now.

These idiots are pathetic. Fitz put something in that he couldn't quite prove yet and he had to retract it, FOR NOW. It doesn't mean this case is over by a long shot. The idiots will latch on to anything negative and run it as if it was the end all be all, that's their mentality. Good thing a person like Fitz doesn't listen to any of this crap (from them or us). Sit back and enjoy the implosion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jrw14125 Donating Member (378 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
10. still says the same thing - learn English, cons!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
11. jeffgannon.com
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. "Pillow talk, delivered fresh to your PC."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
13. "Bush media machine?" Those are just a bunch of crappy little blogs. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
14. So?
What does that change?



Actually, once I read it again...it indicates to me that there were other key items Scooter was to tell Miller, not just that Iraq was trying to buy uranium....could mean that he was to tell Miller about Plame too, which is worse than the original filing....(for Scooter, Chaney and ** anyway...)


Original: "that a key judgment of the NIE held that Iraq was ‘vigorously trying to procure’ uranium.”


Correction: "some of the key judgments of the NIE, and that the NIE stated that Iraq was ‘vigorously trying to procure’ uranium.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
15. I know these are mostly blogs and such but the point is...
They are wasting no time to get the false impression out there that Fitzgerald screwed up. And they are successful at it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Your point is valid.
They are attempting to plant the seeds of doubt. These are not the larger corporate puppets, but that isn't the significant point. The administration is attempting to assure their base that Fitzgerald is the issue in the case. Expect much more of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Too bad this doesn't add up to a hill a beans in this case,
try as they might, but truth and justice will come out of the dark to shine in the light
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. So true, so true.
Think how pathetic it is that they have to have Michelle Malkinites out quoting Christopher Hitchins or some of the other fully discredited nonsense that they are resorting to? Get out of here with that weak shit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
18. Get a load of this asinine comment from a freeper about Fitz:
Libby's lawyers should press for a Bar disciplinary hearing and possible criminal referral for... and here's the irony... perjury.
50 posted on 04/12/2006 9:47:16 AM PDT by kevkrom

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I thought that perjury could only happen under oath,
is Fitz always under oath or something??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-12-06 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
22. Fitz admitted misleading a federal judge?
More like he just changed the wording of a sentence so that it more accurately reflected what happened. I rather doubt the judge was misled or that Fitz was admitting to anything other than that his phrasing the first time could have been attacked as incorrect by the defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 06:27 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC