It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2 Bad President Needs A Minder

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 01:27 PM
link   
It's outrageous Bush needs Cheney to help him through 9-11 commission questioning.

Or is it Cheney who doesn't want Bush talking to anyone?

It's outrageous that they are not being questioned under oath.

It's outrageous that their testimony will not be recorded. Remember Clinton's grand jury testimony? He never tried to pull this weak shyte. I couldn't stand him either, but at least he faced it like a man. BY HIMSELF.

The 9-11 commission must be a complete sham for this crap to stand.




posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Please all who read this:

Over the next six months until the election....when you consider the strength of a leader....remember today....it proved byond a shadow of a doubt that the Emperor is indeed naked & unfit for the office.
Don't forget this fool had his lawyer there as well!!!!



posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Well Bush could just lie like Clinton did, then he wouldn't need to worry or he could argue what the definition of "is" is. Bush isn't being impeached either, like Clinton was. Nor did Bush lie under oath, as did Clinton.

The 911 commission also has been found to be totally biased by the addition of Gorelick, who was instrumental in part of the problem with intelligence in the first place and the refusal to fire her after the truth became known. She has a vested interest in the outcome. The 911 committee has lost credibility and is no longer to be taken seriously.

washingtontimes.com...



posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Variable
....has lost credibility and is no longer to be taken seriously.



No one, except alcolytes like yourself, ever took Bush seriously.
Regardless of the completely false issue tabled by Ashcroft, it still does not speak to why Bush had to testify:

1) not under oath
2) with Cheney
3) with Counsel Gonzalez
4) without recorded transcript
5) without public scrutiny

THis is a 'strong leader' to you?



posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Does seem kinda wishy washy to me. But, he understands that the 911 commision is completely biased and out to get him so he brought a long some homey's. No biggie. He's the President being questioned by a partisan group during an election year. Looks like a set up to me. If I wanted back up though, Cheney wouldn't be my first choice.



posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 04:23 PM
link   
I think the 9-11 commission is a diversion to keep us all guessing as to what really happened so the Illuminati can continue with their work on the New World Order. Notice how we are still being told different stories as to what truly happened on and before 9-11. Remember that Bush and Kerry are both part of the Illuminati. So no matter who wins we're screwed either way. Also, keep in mind that some of the 9-11 panel member are or were on the Council of Foreign Relations. www.infowars.com...



posted on Apr, 29 2004 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Variable

The 911 commission also has been found to be totally biased by the addition of Gorelick, who was instrumental in part of the problem with intelligence in the first place and the refusal to fire her after the truth became known. She has a vested interest in the outcome. The 911 committee has lost credibility and is no longer to be taken seriously.

washingtontimes.com...


True. Gorelick should first remove herself from the hearings, then be made to testify in public and under oath. Ben-Veniste should recuse himself; his actions have been very unprofessional and blatantly partisan. I don't see how anyone could take him seriously.

As far as lawyers, I have seen others testify at these hearings with a lawyer sitting beside them. If it is their legal right to have counsel, then what is the issue? I'd be more skeptical of the judgement of someone who had the right but didn't use it.




new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join