• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush calls NY Times editor to the Oval office

The Times witheld the story for a year out of patriotism. When it became apparent that Bush was continuing to break the law and when it could do no harm to the country the Times published it.
All in all we should give a big thanks to the New York Times.
btw the nonsense about how revealing this helps Al-Qaeda is just that, nonsense. Do you think any Al-Qaeda members were going around thinking the government was NOT wiretapping them?
 
Originally posted by: Sysbuilder05
Topic Title: Bush calls NY Times editor to the Oval office
Topic Summary: He wanted him to kill the wiretapping story Gawd,whats next?

Moving one step closer to Nazi America....
Click to expand...

Heil Bush & the Republicans!!!
 
Maybe he didn't want to be misunderestimated, or have the editor break down the polysyllabic words for him. Or maybe he is just a control freak without a leash.
 
Yet another example of how GWB is singularly unsuited for the job. Bush just doesn't get it. "The Rule of Law"? That's for other people, not him. He's a spoiled, amoral rich kid who's spent his entire life skirting responsibility and taking whatever he can from others. Republicans made a grave mistake nominating GWB, both for America, and for the Republican party. I think he will cost them dearly before he finishes careening through his second term.

This isn't a conservative vs. liberal issue. There are many fine conservatives who can be great leaders for America. Bush is not and never was one of them. The whole concept of serving the public is incomprehensible to Bush. He cannot even grasp the concept, let alone faithfully execute the role. Bush is bad for America, plain and simple.
 
Soon he is going to use the sorry washed out executive priveledge excuse to justify his actions. And just like Nixon he will be exposed as the traitor that he is. Abraham Lincoln my ASS, you can not compare the war on terror to the bloodshed of the civil war, thus executive powers must remain within the realm of law.
 
Originally posted by: Thump553
I think it was irresponsible for the Times to withhold this story for a year.
Click to expand...


Huh..you got that right. They didn't hold the Lewinsky/Clenis story for a freakin MINUTE. Watch how all the usual suspects try and put a GOP spin on this story on Cable News.

FOX
MSGOP
CNN-Chicken Noodle News

I'll be surprised if ANY of them really report on this fairly and with accuracy.
 
Originally posted by: Sysbuilder05
Originally posted by: Thump553
I think it was irresponsible for the Times to withhold this story for a year.
Click to expand...


Huh..you got that right. They didn't hold the Lewinsky/Clenis story for a freakin MINUTE. Watch how all the usual suspects try and put a GOP spin on this story on Cable News.

FOX
MSGOP
CNN-Chicken Noodle News

I'll be surprised if ANY of them really report on this fairly and with accuracy.
Click to expand...
It's funny how the Bush faithful rail on the NYT as ultra-liberal and anti-Bush, yet by sitting on this story, the Times let Bush and many other Republicans get reelected. More evidence that the "liberal media" is just a myth. America would be a different place today had the Times lived up to its journalistic responsibilities.
 
Bush and the Editor of the NY times in the same room. Imagine the conversation....

Ow wait, there was none since the Editor couldn't understand a single word of Bush's gibberish.
 
Originally posted by: Hacp
Bush and the Editor of the NY times in the same room. Imagine the conversation....

Ow wait, there was none since the Editor couldn't understand a single word of Bush's gibberish.
Click to expand...

Wow, how creative.
 
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: Hacp
Bush and the Editor of the NY times in the same room. Imagine the conversation....

Ow wait, there was none since the Editor couldn't understand a single word of Bush's gibberish.
Click to expand...

Wow, how creative.
Click to expand...

I wonder if Condi was there to translate? She seems to know the most words, and can read without moving her lips...

Future Shock
 
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Originally posted by: her209
What happened to the First Amendment?
Click to expand...

Election 2000 and 2004
Click to expand...
The worst part is this appears to be self-imposed. As I understand it, the government didn't prohibit the NYT from running the story. The Times voluntarily suppressed it for a year, denying the American public information we should know about government malfeasance. All BushCo did was request that the Times continue to suppress it.
 
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: Hacp
Bush and the Editor of the NY times in the same room. Imagine the conversation....

Ow wait, there was none since the Editor couldn't understand a single word of Bush's gibberish.
Click to expand...

Wow, how creative.
Click to expand...


Quite the collection of brain surgeons and rocket scientists aren' t they.

Here's the keyy quote from this "article"

The Times will not comment on the meeting, but one can only imagine the president?s desperation.
Click to expand...

and imagine is all he did because the hack who wrote this gossip piece didn't have a quote from anyone, no source inside the WH or at the NYT or anywhere else but went on to write a coulmn full of nothing more than half-witted hyperbole which of course is immediately and obediently lapped up and swallowed whole by the faithful.

For those of us who are still objective and interested in the facts here's the only pertinent quote about why the NYT didn't publish the story:

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted.
Click to expand...


 
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: Hacp
Bush and the Editor of the NY times in the same room. Imagine the conversation....

Ow wait, there was none since the Editor couldn't understand a single word of Bush's gibberish.
Click to expand...

Wow, how creative.
Click to expand...

creative is the way retards still defend the worthless fvcks in power. now that's freaking creative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top