Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

pudge (1)

pudge
  (email not shown publicly)
http://pudge.net/
AOL IM: Crimethnk (Add Buddy, Send Message)

I run this joint, see?

Journal of pudge (1)

Wednesday July 19, 2006
01:17 AM

Re: President Fredo Corleone

[ #30334 ]

Heh, so TorgoX says Bush should be impeached for directing Cheney to counter Joe Wilson's statements.

Two problems.

First, even if you disagree with what Bush did, nothing he did in this was remotely impeachable. What was actually done? He released the Iraq NIE -- something that most people wanted released, including antiwar Democrats and the press -- to counteract claims made by Wilson. How is this worthy of impeachment?

Second, what Wilson said was actually false, in a few ways, but most importantly, in that the British intelligence Bush based the "16 words" on in his 2003 State of the Union speech was from completely separate intelligence than anything Wilson had any knowledge about. Wilson kept claiming he showed Bush's WMD claims were false, except that he had no actual knowledge or evidence that this was the case, since the only stuff he knew about wasn't actually being used in the claims.

So how does this amount to impeachment: doing something completely innocuous in order to show that someone who was wrong, was wrong? I can't figure it out. I am blinded by facts.

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • For anyone who is interested, factcheck.org has a pretty good summary of what was said by Bush and Wilson and the associated timeline. Seems reasonable to me.
    • Yeah. Especially the part where Wilson repeatedly, falsely, claims the 16 words in the SOTU were regarding anything Wilson himself knew about it. He called it a lie, but he had no basis whatsoever for calling it a lie, since he was not privy to the British intelligence it was based on.

      Although, I've read the U.S. report, and I am frankly not convinced that the information Wilson provided is reasonably strong "confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger." This seems to be based