Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

georjec2

Members of Bush Admin Say Cheney Is A Liar !

153 posts in this topic

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is the third senior official from President George W. Bush's administration to accuse **** Cheney of lying in his new memoir, "In My Time."

 

Rice told Reuters in an interview Wednesday that she "kept the president fully and completely informed about every 'in and out' of the negotiations with the North Koreans," countering the former vice president's assertion that Rice misled the president about nuclear diplomacy with North Korea

 

 

Will anyone defend Cheney ? How can anyone believe his book if former colleagues are saying he is liar ?

 

Before this thread fills up with Obama is a liar and the usual tit for tat lets keep this relevant by only including Obama administration members who say Obama is lying. That way we hopefully can stay on topic which is... Cheney is, was and will continue to be a liar. Or he is exhibiting the middle stages of senility.

 

 

How Bush slipped Cheney in on us is a mystery few if any can recall. However I believe that because of Cheney no presidential candidate will be able to slip another like him pass the electorate again.

 

 

Remember...there are more than enough threads here about Obama. Let's see how long we can keep this one about Cheney. Who will be the first to break...will it be you ??? ;)

 

 

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/condoleezza-rice-becomes-third-member-bush-administration-accuse-184246840.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can Cheney's brain possibly be normal?

He hasn't had a real pulse for years, kept alive by the wonders of modern science.

With all due respect to someone who thought for decades he was doing the right thing...

...he's a known liar and a war criminal.

NOTHING he says can be mistaken for "the truth", except by random chance.

Put him on the table under a glass cover; he's done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see, never-right Dave A. versus an insider who knew Cheney for decades. Gosh, let me decide who has more credibility. :rolleyes:

 

Ex-Powell aide: **** Cheney fears prosecution for war crimes '

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44337958/ns/us_news-security/#.Tl_3h5gytJk

"I think he's just trying to, one, assert himself so he's not in some subsequent time period tried for war crimes and, second, so that he somehow vindicates himself because he feels like he needs vindication. That in itself tells you something about him," he added.

 

"He's developed an angst and almost a protective cover, and now he fears being tried as a war criminal so he uses such terminology as 'exploding heads all over Washington' because that's the way someone who's decided he's not going to be prosecuted acts: boldly, let's get out in front of everybody, let's act like we are not concerned and so forth when in fact they are covering up their own fear that somebody will Pinochet him," Wilkerson added.

 

...

 

Wilkerson claimed in the interview that Cheney might be suffering from "angst" as, unlike Wilkerson and others in the administration, he did not serve in Vietnam War, receiving deferments instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's see, never-right Dave A. versus one of Powell's aides from that period. Gosh, let me decide who has more credibility.

 

Ex-Powell aide: **** Cheney fears prosecution for war crimes '

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44337958/ns/us_news-security/#.Tl_3h5gytJk

 

As I said, Cheney isn't a moron, therefore he isn't afraid of being tried for war crimes.

 

Let's see, out of me and this 'aide' only one of us was eviscerated by Cheney in his book.

 

LOL. Good old squiddly and her fallacial arguments. They never get old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, Cheney isn't a moron, therefore he isn't afraid of being tried for war crimes.

 

Let's see, out of me and this 'aide' only one of us was eviscerated by Cheney in his book.

 

LOL. Good old squiddly and her fallacial arguments. They never get old.

 

Fallacial? Know what you mean but fairly sure that isn't a word?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A puzzlement:

 

Bush assigned Cheney the job of vetting various for the job of VP. Cheney, after what I am sure was exhaustive research, recommended himself for the job. Bush took the recommendation.

 

So here's the question: who looks like a bigger **** (no pun intended) in this situation? I really can't decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's so funny to watch righties scramble to defend someone proven as odious as Cheney.

 

They just have no principles.

 

It's so much funnier to listen to lefties screech nonsense in an attempt to distract people from the abject failure of their ideology in practice.

 

They just have no shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, Cheney isn't a moron, therefore he isn't afraid of being tried for war crimes.

 

Let's see, out of me and this 'aide' only one of us was eviscerated by Cheney in his book.

 

LOL. Good old squiddly and her fallacial arguments. They never get old.

 

How was Wilkerson eviscerated by Cheney in his book?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A puzzlement:

 

Bush assigned Cheney the job of vetting various for the job of VP. Cheney, after what I am sure was exhaustive research, recommended himself for the job. Bush took the recommendation.

 

So here's the question: who looks like a bigger **** (no pun intended) in this situation? I really can't decide.

 

Well Cheney claims he was asked and refused to be considered before he became charged with finding nominee, then was convinced to accept the role at the end. But with much of Cheney's (and many people's) memoir I am sure he is going to 'remember' things in a way that is more flattering or less damaging than what actually occurred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How was Wilkerson eviscerated by Cheney in his book?

 

His boss was, and by extension he was.

 

The idea that an unbiased Wilkerson is reading Cheney's mind is a whole lot less believable than the idea that the angry Wilkerson is taking a shot at the evil guy that publicly took a shot at his boss. Regardless, the war crime claim is nonsense, obviously. And even if it weren't, Cheney's supposedly lying 'memoir' wouldn't be any relief from the charges, which makes Wilkerson sound like a bitter idiot (with that specific claim; the rest of what he said is sensible in terms of Cheney's reasons).

 

It isn't like this just started. Wilkerson has called Cheney 'evil' in the past, so I think we know where he stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheney isn't a moron, therefore he has no fear of being prosecuted for war crimes.

 

He has money. Lots of money and political clout. Put it all together and it means he has a "get out of jail free" card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
His boss was, and by extension he was.

 

The idea that an unbiased Wilkerson is reading Cheney's mind is a whole lot less believable than the idea that the angry Wilkerson is taking a shot at the evil guy that publicly took a shot at his boss. Regardless, the war crime claim is nonsense, obviously. And even if it weren't, Cheney's supposedly lying 'memoir' wouldn't be any relief from the charges, which makes Wilkerson sound like a bitter idiot (with that specific claim; the rest of what he said is sensible in terms of Cheney's reasons).

 

It isn't like this just started. Wilkerson has called Cheney 'evil' in the past, so I think we know where he stands.

 

Wilkerson has known Cheney for many years, thinks he is one of the best Defense chiefs we have ever had, and is estranged from Powell. He sounds rather even handed.

 

You, on the other hand...

 

Don't make me laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He has money. Lots of money and political clout. Put it all together and it means he has a "get out of jail free" card.

 

That and he didn't commit any war crimes. Policy differences are not crimes. Despite what unserious people claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That and he didn't commit any war crimes. Policy differences are not crimes. Despite what unserious people claim.

 

We will never know that for sure since the fall guy got off the hook when Bush commuted Libby's sentence. Now Libby can keep his mouth shut and nobody can do anything about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wilkerson has known Cheney for many years, thinks he is one of the best Defense chiefs we have ever had, and is estranged from Powell. He sounds rather even handed.

 

You, on the other hand...

 

Don't make me laugh.

 

Right he called him 'evil' two years ago, and you are going with the Wilkerson likes Cheney so he would never take a shot at him after Cheney took a public shot at his boss.

 

Don't make laugh indeed.

 

And Wilkerson's motivation is beside the point. Arguing that Cheney is doing A to avoid B because C says so, is moronic, especially when A doesn't do a single thing to prevent B.

 

Please stop the nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites