Posted by Tina
The story in the Daily Mail attempts to smear George W. Bush and Tony Blair. The laughable, misleading headline screams: “Smoking gun emails reveal Blair’s ‘deal in blood’ with George Bush over Iraq war was forged a YEAR before the invasion had even started”
Oh the drama! I mean, really, “deal in blood?” And, “A YEAR before the invasion?”
Give me a break.
The obviously partisan Daily Mail is counting on the headline to do damage to the former leaders but the real news is that Hillary Clinton, who said her emails were not marked “classified,” did have emails marked classified on her server.
The memo, written by Collin Powell, was sent to Bush during the planning stages of the Iraq war. In it Powell relays the message to the President that Tony Blair, “…will be with us should military operations be necessary.” (emphasis mine) Government’s wisely plan long before committing to war…duh! The memo offers no “smoking gun” other than the fact that Hillary lied…which is the bloody truth.
Tina: “The obviously partisan Daily Mail”
Oh, this is delightful.
This blog and its commenters have cited the Daily Mail as a source more times than I can count, usually to poo-poo climate change, and almost always to advance some kind of right-wing cause. I’ve told you for years that the Daily Mail is nothing but a dishonest, sensationalist tabloid, and not to be trusted, and your response has always been “Don’t attack the source!”
But the moment they go after one of yours, you immediately attack the source. All of a sudden they’re not to be trusted.
Does this mean you (hopefully) won’t be linking to the Daily Mail again?
(For the record, I won’t be reading their story on Bush, since I find it unlikely it’s any more true than any of their other stories.)
I once cited a Daily Mail article. Who else has? Chris dived right in and attacked the Daily Mail and not the article itself which he miserably failed to debunk.
Typical Chris. As is his nature, Chris exaggerates grotesquely. He and Dewey are the most intelligent men on earth. Without them all of us clueless folks would be completely lost. They are God’s gift to mankind.
The New York Times isn’t anymore accurate or “trustworthy” as the Daily Mail.
Or CBS or…
It might be wise to stop relying on Known Propaganda Blogs for these so called stories.
Bottom line until there are facts and witnesses it is all “Trumped”up blah blah blah.
Rep. Trey Gowdy and other Republicans regularly claim that they have evidence that Hillary Clinton did something wrong. Yet, they never produce this evidence and show it to the public.
If Republicans had any real evidence of wrongdoing by Clinton, they would be on every television station screaming it from the mountaintops. Reality is that they spend their time parsing testimony of witnesses and leaking it to the public to create a perception of guilt all in hope it will sway voters next November. That is how they roll on our tax dollars.
Republican behavior is sad, disgusting, appalling and a criminal abuse of power.
And I am not a Hilliary Supporter. Until there is one actual fact of evil wrongdoing this remains a GOP Game.
Chris: “But the moment they go after one of yours, you immediately attack the source. All of a sudden they’re not to be trusted.”
Thank you Chris. I should have discredited the writer of the article rather than the Daily Mail, although the Mail did run the headline.
You shouldn’t be too concerned about reading the article it does contain a photo of the document in question. I would think that would at least mildly interest you.
Anyhoo…my post was meant to illustrate how the media often deceives the public with their headlines and I think I did that quite well.
Buyer beware is a good rule of thumb for any source or individual article. I don’t know that dismissing a paper or TV network out of hand, as you seem to want to do, is productive. I post from liberal sources, conservative sources, and sources that include both POV. I’ve even been known to post from an undesirable white supremacist cite (without realizing it) because I saw something in it that made sense, as you well know.
The Daily Mail has run many stories that debunk global warming theories…but we can’t have that, right Chris. My question is, why not? Don’t you think we’re better off reading from many points of view? The alternative amounts to being brainwashed, doesn’t it?
Dewey you focus is distorted and biased.
Trey Gowdy, being a professional litigator, a serious representative of the people, and a man of integrity has managed to keep the preliminary findings of his inquiry confidential…because they are incomplete until the work is done.
It is the job of journalists to try to discover what is going on and to speculate about possible results and consequences if any. That is what we have been discussing so far. Opinions are also welcome on a blog and should be understood to be opinions.
The evidence that Hillary might have done something wrong is based on leaked information or information gathered by sources other than Gowdy’s House hearings and the law as it applies. I have posted the statutes that are under consideration. Also the FBI is investigating, it isn’t just Gowdy.
Hillary Clinton wasn’t working for a private business. The work she did at State was the people’s business. Her records are supposed to remain with the government as a permanent record. Hillary chose to work outside the system on a personal email server. Once her records were subpoenaed she decided what she would allow the government to retain. Her server was wiped clean (she hoped?). For awhile we thought there was no way for the people to know what was in emails she didn’t turn over. Now we know there were emails pertaining to State business she didn’t give the committee. She deliberately kept them from the committee. She deliberately chose not to retain some emails for the national archives. We now know some emails were recoverable and did contain secret information that could compromise national security. There are laws and statutes pertaining to all of this and that is why she is being investigated not only by a House committee but also by the FBI. The consequences for her actions, if she is found guilty are up to 10 years in prison. These are serious matters that require investigation.
This is not a GOP game and if you are going to state such an opinion you should at least have informed yourself to some degree on the facts.
Tina nails it again. It is time for me to apologize and retire. Jack Lee and Tina Grazier are wonderful people. Intelligent people worth listening to. That f0lks like Chris, Dewey, and Libby constantly attack them is a merit to their endeavors.
Pie, there are probably a number of good reasons for not reading post scripts, we’re biased for conservatives, we’re often judgmental, we’re definitely provocative, etc., however please never let a critical commenter cause you to leave! There’s an inherent value with their input. You know it’s free speech when you have pros and cons.
One more thing, not to embarrass you, but you are an incredibly intelligent, informative conservative and you have a heck of a great sense of humor! This adds a lot to PS and we really appreciate you. We hope you will stick around to read our articles and take part. Oh, and feel free to ignore those who might annoy you!
PS I think you are an extremely talented writer too!
DITTO, Jack!
I’d say more but it’s time for me to retire…to bed. I hope this is what Pie was saying as well.
Tina sorry but you will be eating these words. Gowdy is far from a respectable dude. He is a hired hack. Why not come out here to DC and get to know the place? I’ll buy you lunch!
Pretending these are such honorable people does not play out even here! It is a tank full of Lobbyists and their elected paid sharks. Sorry but the world is not quite as you see it.
I just hope There is a real Ethics investigation. Heck even Republicans here chuckle. Everybody is just too use to the corruption and has given up.
Will Gowdy recuse himself from his own case? Probably not unless pressured by the power of the people.
Buying me lunch wouldn’t convince me that Gowdy is “a hired hack” any more than your empty accusation does. If you are going to allege something at least give us a clue. Generic, ad hoc statements are bogus spin.
And weren’t you just in Utah?
Who subsidizes all that travel? Or are you one of the rich guys you so vociferously denounce all the time?