The Arrow is Pointed Down
One of the more poignant moments during the John Fitzgerald news conference came while explaining why the investigation had taken two years. Fitzgerald responded by saying if certain reporters had not been less than forthcoming (or completely stonewalled) regarding where they got their information about Valerie Plame, "this investigation would have been completed in October 2004 instead of October 2005."
Think about that a moment, and then look at these latest polls:
A new CBS News poll shows Bush's approval rating dropping to a shockingly low 35 percent -- with 51 percent of those polled saying they consider the leak case a matter of great importance to the nation.
Cheney's favorable rating is down nine points this year to just 19 percent. Hell, you wonder why it's even that high!
John Roberts reports on the CBS Evening News: "The plunging poll numbers is another dose of bad news for a White House mired in it. The only recent president lower at this point in their term was Richard Nixon."
The poll shows the public considers this the most important political scandal since Watergate, surpassing Clinton-Lewinsky, Whitewater and even Iran-Contra.
It also shows that only 32 percent of Americans think that before the war, the Bush administration was telling all or most of what they knew about weapons in Iraq, compared to 38 percent who feel they were hiding important elements and 26 percent who think they were "mostly lying."
Now, back to the question at hand: if the New York Times had insisted that they review their reporters notes, and if they had insisted that they know who told her what, when and where . . . . and if the Times had insisted that she accept Scooter's "OK" to testify, then what would have happened?
Possible answer: John Kerry would have been president of the United States and we would be having a REAL investigation about how this Administration manipulated intelligence to draw us into a war.
Bush and Cheney: War Criminals. It has a nice ring to it.
Think about that a moment, and then look at these latest polls:
A new CBS News poll shows Bush's approval rating dropping to a shockingly low 35 percent -- with 51 percent of those polled saying they consider the leak case a matter of great importance to the nation.
Cheney's favorable rating is down nine points this year to just 19 percent. Hell, you wonder why it's even that high!
John Roberts reports on the CBS Evening News: "The plunging poll numbers is another dose of bad news for a White House mired in it. The only recent president lower at this point in their term was Richard Nixon."
The poll shows the public considers this the most important political scandal since Watergate, surpassing Clinton-Lewinsky, Whitewater and even Iran-Contra.
It also shows that only 32 percent of Americans think that before the war, the Bush administration was telling all or most of what they knew about weapons in Iraq, compared to 38 percent who feel they were hiding important elements and 26 percent who think they were "mostly lying."
Now, back to the question at hand: if the New York Times had insisted that they review their reporters notes, and if they had insisted that they know who told her what, when and where . . . . and if the Times had insisted that she accept Scooter's "OK" to testify, then what would have happened?
Possible answer: John Kerry would have been president of the United States and we would be having a REAL investigation about how this Administration manipulated intelligence to draw us into a war.
Bush and Cheney: War Criminals. It has a nice ring to it.
posted by Robert | 4:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home