So, Bush testifying with Cheney...

Alfredo! · 04-28-2004, 08:10 AM

Did he ever give a reason why he wouldn't go in front of the 9/11 commission by himself?

ORKO · 04-28-2004, 08:26 AM

I believe his response was that Cheney is too much of a friend to leave at home, so that's why.

Oh, i forgot to mention that Cheney had his hand up Bush's ass while he was saying this.

sleeper · 04-28-2004, 08:38 AM

http://www.theonion.com/images/380/i...48_160x118.jpg
Cheney Wows Sept. 11 Commission By Drinking Glass Of Water While Bush Speaks

dean moriaty · 04-28-2004, 08:45 AM

in that pic it's easy to believe that bush does have chaneys hand in his ass

BlueStar · 04-28-2004, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alfredo!
Did he ever give a reason why he wouldn't go in front of the 9/11 commission by himself?

He needs Cheney to whisper the answers to him.

DeviousJ · 04-28-2004, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sleeper
http://www.theonion.com/images/380/i...48_160x118.jpg
Cheney Wows Sept. 11 Commission By Drinking Glass Of Water While Bush Speaks

Haha, I didn't get that at first

machinaddict · 04-28-2004, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sleeper
http://www.theonion.com/images/380/i...48_160x118.jpg
Cheney Wows Sept. 11 Commission By Drinking Glass Of Water While Bush Blathers On About Bullshit

I_was_aborted · 04-28-2004, 10:54 AM

I think his answer for insisting on appearing together was:

"Uhhhh well they have uhhhhh some questions to ask us and uhhhhh we wan to answer them uhhhhh"

sppunk · 04-28-2004, 11:13 AM

Because he's a bumbling fool.

Future Boy · 04-28-2004, 11:19 AM

Who else is supposed to explain the big words to him?

homechicago · 04-28-2004, 12:39 PM

is pointless.

they aren't going to be under oath, because they don't want to be, so say whatever ya want.

also, they don't want their session taped either. bill talking about sex, YES tape that, make it under oath. but security issues? big deal. why would the public want to hear what their leader has to say on some non-issue like an attack?

yeah, this doesn't seem suspicious at all.

Quiet CD · 04-28-2004, 01:01 PM

getting your dick sucked is an impeachable offense worthy of near crucifixion, but letting two airplanes crash into two skyscrappers killing over 3,000 americans to push your own agenda for oil and construction contracts for your buddies overseas, psssh just tell us whatever you want....

WAKE UP AMERICA!

homechicago · 04-28-2004, 01:15 PM

Quote:

psssh just tell us whatever you want....

and they most assuredly will. maybe we'll get a scoop on how hillary destroyed weapons plants from NYC just to cover up that she is sleeping with a WOMAN! she's evil! wonder what chelsea thinks of this? and who will feed the cat while the rest are at play?

oh, yeah, that's right, this was about w, not hillary - me so easily mislead by pretty smoke and mirror shows.

I_was_aborted · 04-28-2004, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Quiet CD
getting your dick sucked is an impeachable offense worthy of near crucifixion, but letting two airplanes crash into two skyscrappers killing over 3,000 americans to push your own agenda for oil and construction contracts for your buddies overseas, psssh just tell us whatever you want....

WAKE UP AMERICA!

I hate Bush and I thought Clinton was a decent president but PLEASE GOD STOP SAYING HE GOT IMPEACHED FOR GETTING HIS DICK SUCKED! He was impeached for lying under oath. The precedent of purgery was on trial here, not the subject matter which Clinton lied about.

I do not think he should have been asked about his sexual relations with Lewinski but he shouldn't have lied about it either. It was just one big stupid fucking incident that should have been avoided.

homechicago · 04-28-2004, 02:25 PM

it's creepy how his personal affairs faced a publicized grand jury inquisition. how is it that he was railroaded into court over a sex act? why didn't he invoke executive privilage? why was THAT lie worthy of grand jury time? for as smart as he is, he was dumb to let himself get hauled into court over that. he was dumb for letting that overshadow his presidency.

why isn't w's commission hearing under oath like the other people? why does god boy have a problem with a bible oath?

i'm sorry, but if you refuse to be under oath, then i can only deduce you plan to lie and not tell the truth. cool thing about god though, he knows if your lying whether you swear on the bible or not. you can lie to people and fool some of them, but god knows the truth either way.

Quiet CD · 04-28-2004, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by I_was_aborted

I hate Bush and I thought Clinton was a decent president but PLEASE GOD STOP SAYING HE GOT IMPEACHED FOR GETTING HIS DICK SUCKED! He was impeached for lying under oath. The precedent of purgery was on trial here, not the subject matter which Clinton lied about.

I do not think he should have been asked about his sexual relations with Lewinski but he shouldn't have lied about it either. It was just one big stupid fucking incident that should have been avoided.

your completely right, but the act of getting his dick sucked is what started the whole ordeal... completely ridiculous and was unnecessary...

what i meant to allude to that its ridiculous that clinton had to be under oath for getting his dick sucked and bush doesnt have to for possibly being responsible for the deaths of 3000 americans (not to mention the hundreds that have died in Iraq and Afghanistan).

check out the documentary called the Truth and Lies of 9/11 by Mike Ruppert

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/index.html

its $25 US (and worth it) but you could probably renti it somewhere, and i've seen it places for download as well... regardless i recommend everyone watch it, gives a great history of our nation over the last 60 or so years and the legacy of the Bush family, really interesting and all documented facts, no ann coulter style ranting and raving.

Alfredo! · 04-28-2004, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Quiet CD
getting your dick sucked is an impeachable offense worthy of near crucifixion, but letting two airplanes crash into two skyscrappers killing over 3,000 americans to push your own agenda for oil and construction contracts for your buddies overseas, psssh just tell us whatever you want....

WAKE UP AMERICA!

HE DIDN'T GET IMPEACHED FOR GETTING HIS DICK SUCKED, HE GOT IMPEACHED FOR LYING UNDER OATH

I hate Bush as much as the next Bush Hater, but at least get your facts straight before you start your arguements. Shit.

Edit: I know it was already said, but I'm reiterating. In fact, I'm making a thread about it so people will shut the fuck up.

Quiet CD · 04-28-2004, 06:18 PM

i already said he was completely right, i was just trying to make a point, yes he didn't get impeached for getting his dick sucked but lying about it.

homechicago · 04-28-2004, 07:20 PM

i think what most people are talking about with the clinton thing is that he wasn't there for lying under oath about war-related, but personal, sex-related stuff.

i know it wasn't THAT he had sex, but that he LIED about it. it's just a pathetic technicality that he was in court for lying under oath about something that was no one's business.

spend 40 mil on w and i bet you might find some not so wonderful things. but that won't happen. he doesn't sleep around, so he'll never have to testify about anything. he won't have to lie about sleeping around because he probably doesn't. and even if he did, no one would dare get to ask him in or out of a court setting.

i think it's wrong he was ever asked about his sex life under oath. it wasn't anyone's business. stupid clinton - he didn't do anything that put the nation at risk, but he let himself get caught under oath falsely answering a question about having sex because the prosecution had nothing important, but counted heavily that they'd "nail" him on that sensational tryst.

tweedyburd · 04-29-2004, 09:13 PM

I love how no one here is even aware (or at least not mentioning) that Clinton didn't testify to the commission alone either--he had his national security advisor right there with him, in private nonetheless, off the record, no cameras.

I think I heard on the news this evening the panel itself admitted that Bush was asked and answered 99% of the questions, and that he answered their questions to their satifaction. I don't like it all that much either, but seriously, think if Bush and Cheney had gone into it separately and had even one tiny detail of their testimony seem inconsistent or vague, imagine the new hole the media would've torn in them for that.

Nimrod's Son · 04-30-2004, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by homechicago
is pointless.

they aren't going to be under oath, because they don't want to be, so say whatever ya want.

also, they don't want their session taped either. bill talking about sex, YES tape that, make it under oath. but security issues? big deal. why would the public want to hear what their leader has to say on some non-issue like an attack?

yeah, this doesn't seem suspicious at all.

Uh, none of Clinton's testimony in any way affected classified information or national security.

sppunk · 04-30-2004, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
Uh, none of Clinton's testimony in any way affected classified information or national security.

Right. It didn't affect anything except his personal life. And I couldn't give a flying fuck about that.

BeautifulLoser · 04-30-2004, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tweedyburd
I don't like it all that much either, but seriously, think if Bush and Cheney had gone into it separately and had even one tiny detail of their testimony seem inconsistent or vague, imagine the new hole the media would've torn in them for that.

If they said something so inconsistant that it was actually relevant, then they deserve to get crap from the press. The more I see from this administration, the more I think some shady shit is going on.

tweedyburd · 04-30-2004, 09:49 AM

Of course, but what I'm saying is the media would've probably blown it completely out of proportion regardless if it was irrelevant, just like they're blowing every Kerry pseudo-scandal out of proportion.

Alfredo! · 04-30-2004, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tweedyburd
Of course, but what I'm saying is the media would've probably blown it completely out of proportion regardless if it was irrelevant, just like they're blowing every Kerry pseudo-scandal out of proportion.

Yes.

I hate how much sway the media has these days.

Pudge · 04-30-2004, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alfredo!
Did he ever give a reason why he wouldn't go in front of the 9/11 commission by himself?

He said yesterday that he wanted to show how Cheney and him worked as a team after the attacks.

I guess by team he meant being told what to do by a old and new defense morons and "not negotiating with himself" afterwards, even if there was evidence to the contrary.

homechicago · 04-30-2004, 01:29 PM

"worked as a team", "wanted to keep our stories straight"

no one else needed a puppet master, but whew, what a relief the big guys cannot operate alone. they use the buddy system! why didn't condi have a pal too?

the whole thing was a waste of time.

04-28-2004, 08:10 AM	#1
Alfredo! Pledge Location: My other alias was "Guest", in case anyone wonders... Posts: 126	So, Bush testifying with Cheney... Did he ever give a reason why he wouldn't go in front of the 9/11 commission by himself?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-28-2004, 08:26 AM	#2
ORKO Amish Rake Fighter Location: Iowa Posts: 4	I believe his response was that Cheney is too much of a friend to leave at home, so that's why. Oh, i forgot to mention that Cheney had his hand up Bush's ass while he was saying this.

04-28-2004, 08:38 AM	#3
sleeper Minion of Satan Posts: 8,799	http://www.theonion.com/images/380/i...48_160x118.jpg Cheney Wows Sept. 11 Commission By Drinking Glass Of Water While Bush Speaks

04-28-2004, 08:45 AM	#4
dean moriaty lion of saloons Location: ^ Posts: 7,370	in that pic it's easy to believe that bush does have chaneys hand in his ass

04-28-2004, 10:54 AM	#8
I_was_aborted Minion of Satan Location: chicago Posts: 5,440	I think his answer for insisting on appearing together was: "Uhhhh well they have uhhhhh some questions to ask us and uhhhhh we wan to answer them uhhhhh"

04-28-2004, 11:13 AM	#9
sppunk Netphoria's George Will Location: Fenway Park Posts: 37,109	Because he's a bumbling fool.

04-28-2004, 11:19 AM	#10
Future Boy The Man of Tomorrow Posts: 26,965	Who else is supposed to explain the big words to him?

04-28-2004, 12:39 PM	#11
homechicago Apocalyptic Poster Location: THIS IS IT! Posts: 2,921	is pointless. they aren't going to be under oath, because they don't want to be, so say whatever ya want. also, they don't want their session taped either. bill talking about sex, YES tape that, make it under oath. but security issues? big deal. why would the public want to hear what their leader has to say on some non-issue like an attack? yeah, this doesn't seem suspicious at all.

04-28-2004, 01:01 PM	#12
Quiet CD Apocalyptic Poster Location: wherever you aren't Posts: 3,239	getting your dick sucked is an impeachable offense worthy of near crucifixion, but letting two airplanes crash into two skyscrappers killing over 3,000 americans to push your own agenda for oil and construction contracts for your buddies overseas, psssh just tell us whatever you want.... WAKE UP AMERICA!

04-28-2004, 02:25 PM	#15
homechicago Apocalyptic Poster Location: THIS IS IT! Posts: 2,921	it's creepy how his personal affairs faced a publicized grand jury inquisition. how is it that he was railroaded into court over a sex act? why didn't he invoke executive privilage? why was THAT lie worthy of grand jury time? for as smart as he is, he was dumb to let himself get hauled into court over that. he was dumb for letting that overshadow his presidency. why isn't w's commission hearing under oath like the other people? why does god boy have a problem with a bible oath? i'm sorry, but if you refuse to be under oath, then i can only deduce you plan to lie and not tell the truth. cool thing about god though, he knows if your lying whether you swear on the bible or not. you can lie to people and fool some of them, but god knows the truth either way.

04-28-2004, 06:18 PM	#18
Quiet CD Apocalyptic Poster Location: wherever you aren't Posts: 3,239	i already said he was completely right, i was just trying to make a point, yes he didn't get impeached for getting his dick sucked but lying about it.

04-28-2004, 07:20 PM	#19
homechicago Apocalyptic Poster Location: THIS IS IT! Posts: 2,921	i think what most people are talking about with the clinton thing is that he wasn't there for lying under oath about war-related, but personal, sex-related stuff. i know it wasn't THAT he had sex, but that he LIED about it. it's just a pathetic technicality that he was in court for lying under oath about something that was no one's business. spend 40 mil on w and i bet you might find some not so wonderful things. but that won't happen. he doesn't sleep around, so he'll never have to testify about anything. he won't have to lie about sleeping around because he probably doesn't. and even if he did, no one would dare get to ask him in or out of a court setting. i think it's wrong he was ever asked about his sex life under oath. it wasn't anyone's business. stupid clinton - he didn't do anything that put the nation at risk, but he let himself get caught under oath falsely answering a question about having sex because the prosecution had nothing important, but counted heavily that they'd "nail" him on that sensational tryst.

04-29-2004, 09:13 PM	#20
tweedyburd Ownz Location: greensboro, nc U.S. Posts: 720	I love how no one here is even aware (or at least not mentioning) that Clinton didn't testify to the commission alone either--he had his national security advisor right there with him, in private nonetheless, off the record, no cameras. I think I heard on the news this evening the panel itself admitted that Bush was asked and answered 99% of the questions, and that he answered their questions to their satifaction. I don't like it all that much either, but seriously, think if Bush and Cheney had gone into it separately and had even one tiny detail of their testimony seem inconsistent or vague, imagine the new hole the media would've torn in them for that.

04-30-2004, 09:49 AM	#24
tweedyburd Ownz Location: greensboro, nc U.S. Posts: 720	Of course, but what I'm saying is the media would've probably blown it completely out of proportion regardless if it was irrelevant, just like they're blowing every Kerry pseudo-scandal out of proportion.

04-30-2004, 01:29 PM	#27
homechicago Apocalyptic Poster Location: THIS IS IT! Posts: 2,921	"worked as a team", "wanted to keep our stories straight" no one else needed a puppet master, but whew, what a relief the big guys cannot operate alone. they use the buddy system! why didn't condi have a pal too? the whole thing was a waste of time.