Frist's Charge Of Perjury Against Clarke

[ThomWV]

When the book was put out that relied heavily (I have no idea how to spell Suskine's name so please excuse me) on interfiews with Paul O'Neil you'll remember quite correctly that within days the administration charged that he had unlawfully disclosed classified material. Of course that is a charge that can never be proven to the public because by its very nature the evidence can not be disclosed.

Now we have charges of perjury by Frist against Clarke, and once again its a claim that classified testimony is not in accord with public testimony. Of course the classified side of it can not be disclosed so there will never actually be a charge. An alligation that in itself is damming but which can never be supported.

Is anyone seeing a pattern here?


Those filthy swine.

[ET Awful]

1. My honest opinion?

The classified testimony is NOTHING.

Frist is doing this at the request of Bushco in order to delay the final findings of the Commission until after the election.

It's just more delaying tactics. If they couldn't get the report early by not allowing the Commission extra time, they'll get the report late instead.

[asjr]

2. There are far too many

Repukes willing to bear false witness for the administration. It seems most pukes are innately mean. Our Democratic leaders are going to have to go one on one with these hardasses. None of them have an ounce of integrity. And Bill Frist should be in our sights as the sleeziest of them all.

[Old and In the Way]

10. No, just a bunch of cowards.

They are acting like the Communist Party in the 80s, just before it imploded. Rubber stamp anything the premier says, question nothing.

I hope this dawns on the american electorate by November. Real change will only occur when Democrats take back the majority in the House and Senate.

[asjr]

3. Forgot to add--

That is a beautiful kitty.

[ET Awful]

12. Thanks!

He's my buddy :)

[snappydresser]

4. Clarke comes across as a righteous, apolitical civil servant...

...with mucho fortitudado testicularo, if you know what I mean. For the sake of the truth, he's willing to stand in the breech and take their fire. People admire and respect that kind of thing.

I think his biggest sin in the Bushies' eyes is basically blaming them for keeping Clinton from doing his job.

[aquart]

5. This is crap. Also, the bluff has been called.

Someone who has seen the testimony (or was there?) has already asked that all of it be declassified to show there is no conflict.

O'Neil was cleared, btw. (Naturally, since he backed down, gutless baby that he turned out to be.)

But O'Neil didn't write a book. He had a book written that included interviews with him. Clarke wrote the book. The bestseller. He ain't backing down and he doesn't have to.

Frist has simply made himself look weak, lapdoggy, puppetish. For a man who thinks he's going to be President, not a great impression to leave on the populace. Tee hee.

[leftchick]

9. That was Sen. Bob Grahm who heard Clarke's testimony...

He has asked that it ALL be released and not "cherry picked" for the parts bushco* wants. He also asked that they declassify those 28 pages from the first 9/11 analysis! Go Senator!!

:)

[Burma Jones]

6. What are they going to "get" Clarke on?

That he had a supportive opinion while he was on the Bush team and that he is critical now? Is that perjury? Is it perjury to change your opinion? Is this their nasty little followup to Thompson's questioning?

What they really want to do is to declassify only those parts of the testimony that will make Clarke look the most weaseliest. These are disgusting people, BUT they do represent their constituents, if you get my drift.

[Old and In the Way]

11. Clarke: guilty of trying to cover the naked emperor.

nt.

[remfan]

7. Actually the charge didn't originate with Frist

I finally got a chance to watch the hearing this morning, and Lehman made the charge initially. Thompson made the charge about the backgrounder, but it was Lehman that brought up the Congressional Joint Inquiry testimony.

Frist has apparently backed down, claiming he didn't know if there were actual discrepancies, which tells me that he was parrotting Lehman's charge. Plus we have Powell out there trying to clean some of the shit off the fan.

Yes, I'd say there's a clear pattern of behavior here.

[leesa]

8. Wasn't O'Neill cleared of those charges over the last couple of weeks?

Of course the major news didn't carry the exoneration story, as usual, but it was determined that he did not obtaion the documents unlawfully.
They use the same tactic every time, and every time they are aided and abetted by our corrupt media. The retraction will be on page 27 of the sports section.

[mrdmk]

13. Actually happened within the week n/t

[mmonk]

14. The open attacks are effective

in that the person being attacked can't prove to the listeners that the attacks are false or politically motivated.

[Unknown Known]

15. Clarke wants all the testimony made public

Clarke said he supported having that testimony declassified and also wanted testimony given in private to the commission by Bush's national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) made public.


He said he wanted everything out in the open. "The White House is selectively now finding my e-mails, which I would have assumed were covered by some privacy regulations, and selectively leaking them to the press.


"Let's take all of my e-mails and all of the memos that I sent to the national security adviser and her deputy from January 20th to September 11th, and let's declassify all of it," he said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&ncid=716&e=11&u=/nm/20040328/pl_nm/security_rice_clarke_dc

BTW - Rate this a 5!!