| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
 Posted: 10/15/05 8:51 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
Well, obviously the federal prosecutor thought this was a weird thing to say as well. This is from Judy Miller's NYTimes article regarding her testimony before the GJ.
Mr. Fitzgerald also focused on the letter's closing lines. "Out West, where you vacation, the aspens will already be turning," Mr. Libby wrote. "They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them."
How did I interpret that? Mr. Fitzgerald asked._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
Carol Anne
Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 1739
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/15/05 9:55 pm ::: Re: Was it a code? |
Reply |
|
[quote="Carol Anne"]jammerbirdi: some folks on the Randi Rhodes Show message board have some cool conspiracy theories about that letter. "wnbawife" (!) starts it off. 
lol! I got to tell you, Randi Rhodes gets on my nerves big time. After listening to Pacifica Radio for 15 or so years, this isn't what I thought Air America would be like. And Randi Rhodes' show, her particular talents and approach and voice is all virtually unlistenable for me. It's an ugly job, I guess, being the exact counter to right wing radio. But them stooping to doing exactly what the RWers do but only from a different ideology fouls me out.
If any of you live in major cities and can get Pacifica Radio on FM give that a listen. 100% removed from this others stuff... and NO commmercials._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
Carol Anne
Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 1739
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/16/05 7:17 am ::: Re: Was it a code? |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi: I just want to make one thing perfectly clear: the only show I listen to on Air America is The Rachel Maddow Show! (She's a Rhodes Scholar, out lesbian, articulate, and intelligent. No commercials when streamed.) http://shows.airamericaradio.com/maddow/bio
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/16/05 1:31 pm ::: Re: Was it a code? |
Reply |
|
| Carol Anne wrote: |
| jammerbirdi: I just want to make one thing perfectly clear: the only show I listen to on Air America is The Rachel Maddow Show! (She's a Rhodes Scholar, out lesbian, articulate, and intelligent. No commercials when streamed.) http://shows.airamericaradio.com/maddow/bio |
Yes. I like her too. I like Al Franken but I never seem to catch him. Only the late night replays and I always seem to land right in the middle of Randi Rhodes. Love her politics and what she's saying and all... but like I said... it's a dirty job and she certainly does a dirty job of it._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
caune
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 17919
Location: Valley of the Bun
Back to top |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/17/05 6:03 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Well I have to eat my words, sort of. I listened to Randi Rhodes tonight for about 2 hours while I was working on something. She was great. But... I'm sure it was because it was an edited 'Best of' compilation from the week. They cut out ALL the bad stuff and she was sticking it to the economics of the corporate and very rich and all the changes the Bush administration and Delay's Congress have made in areas like tax laws, etc.
Couldn't have been any better._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/17/05 7:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Okay now I feel like a fool. Not necessarily because of the negative opinion of Randi Rhodes but that I posted a negative opinion of her just days before my opinion of her has been overhauled. So now I need to explain or else, if someone, for instance, tuned into her show today and heard how good it is they might think my opinion isn't to be trusted. Well... 
So... probably someone who is a steady listener of hers might confirm this. I hadn't listened to her show in a while. Maybe three weeks, maybe a month. I absolutely have spent MANY miserable hours listening to her show in the past year or so. There were sound effects. A sidekick. Lots of gimmicks. Relatively few callers. This woman and that harping Yonkers whine just behaving in a way that I would call twisted.
Incredibly talented and smart and informed and articulating my political viewpoint exactly... but nevertheless a very unattractive counter to the right wing attack dogs. Sort of like proving the notion that they have bad guys and we have bad guys too. Well, my opinion, that's not really the way to go with trying to win back the hearts and minds of all the little people who have fallen for the right wing agenda since people like Rush Limbaugh came along.
Anyway, listened to her again this afternoon while I was bathing and shaving and all that.  Coudn't turn the show off and it seems that everything about it has changed except for the Yonkers whine. No sound effects. No sidekick. About 10 callers in 45 minutes. Randi was spewing substantive and biting content like Ralph Nadar in his prime. Hitting the target every time. This opposed to her shows in the past where you wondered why anyone would put such a person on the radio to talk politics at such a critical moment in the country's political history.
Anyway, either she and her show has changed or I just happened to catch her only at her worst the probably 60 hours of her show I'd previously listened to._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
caune
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 17919
Location: Valley of the Bun
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/17/05 8:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
Okay now I feel like a fool. Not necessarily because of the negative opinion of Randi Rhodes but that I posted a negative opinion of her just days before my opinion of her has been overhauled. So now I need to explain or else, if someone, for instance, tuned into her show today and heard how good it is they might think my opinion isn't to be trusted. Well...
So... probably someone who is a steady listener of hers might confirm this. I hadn't listened to her show in a while. Maybe three weeks, maybe a month. I absolutely have spent MANY miserable hours listening to her show in the past year or so. There were sound effects. A sidekick. Lots of gimmicks. Relatively few callers. This woman and that harping Yonkers whine just behaving in a way that I would call twisted.
Incredibly talented and smart and informed and articulating my political viewpoint exactly... but nevertheless a very unattractive counter to the right wing attack dogs. Sort of like proving the notion that they have bad guys and we have bad guys too. Well, my opinion, that's not really the way to go with trying to win back the hearts and minds of all the little people who have fallen for the right wing agenda since people like Rush Limbaugh came along.
Anyway, listened to her again this afternoon while I was bathing and shaving and all that. Coudn't turn the show off and it seems that everything about it has changed except for the Yonkers whine. No sound effects. No sidekick. About 10 callers in 45 minutes. Randi was spewing substantive and biting content like Ralph Nadar in his prime. Hitting the target every time. This opposed to her shows in the past where you wondered why anyone would put such a person on the radio to talk politics at such a critical moment in the country's political history.
Anyway, either she and her show has changed or I just happened to catch her only at her worst the probably 60 hours of her show I'd previously listened to. |
hmm, I've never heard a sidekick on the show but I've on;y listened for about 6 months.
Fridays are a must listen...the show always starts with Rusty Warren singing "Bounce your Boobies" a very very catchy tune 
Back to Judy Miller...isn't it against the rules to discuss, let alone write an articleabout, your grand jury testimony?
_________________
Because there is only one Diana Taurasi.
@Phoenix Mercury
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/17/05 9:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| caune wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
Okay now I feel like a fool. Not necessarily because of the negative opinion of Randi Rhodes but that I posted a negative opinion of her just days before my opinion of her has been overhauled. So now I need to explain or else, if someone, for instance, tuned into her show today and heard how good it is they might think my opinion isn't to be trusted. Well...
So... probably someone who is a steady listener of hers might confirm this. I hadn't listened to her show in a while. Maybe three weeks, maybe a month. I absolutely have spent MANY miserable hours listening to her show in the past year or so. There were sound effects. A sidekick. Lots of gimmicks. Relatively few callers. This woman and that harping Yonkers whine just behaving in a way that I would call twisted.
Incredibly talented and smart and informed and articulating my political viewpoint exactly... but nevertheless a very unattractive counter to the right wing attack dogs. Sort of like proving the notion that they have bad guys and we have bad guys too. Well, my opinion, that's not really the way to go with trying to win back the hearts and minds of all the little people who have fallen for the right wing agenda since people like Rush Limbaugh came along.
Anyway, listened to her again this afternoon while I was bathing and shaving and all that. Coudn't turn the show off and it seems that everything about it has changed except for the Yonkers whine. No sound effects. No sidekick. About 10 callers in 45 minutes. Randi was spewing substantive and biting content like Ralph Nadar in his prime. Hitting the target every time. This opposed to her shows in the past where you wondered why anyone would put such a person on the radio to talk politics at such a critical moment in the country's political history.
Anyway, either she and her show has changed or I just happened to catch her only at her worst the probably 60 hours of her show I'd previously listened to. |
hmm, I've never heard a sidekick on the show but I've on;y listened for about 6 months.
Fridays are a must listen...the show always starts with Rusty Warren singing "Bounce your Boobies" a very very catchy tune
Back to Judy Miller...isn't it against the rules to discuss, let alone write an articleabout, your grand jury testimony? |
Actually no. Lot of restrictions in place at the time of your appearance but you do, in most cases, retain the right to speak freely afterwards about your testimony. (From what I hear, what do I know?)
About Judy Miller. Hmmm. (I forget how many 'm's' bibb, sorry.) She made a deal with Scooter Libby to do the unnamed source ID as, get this, a 'former congressional staffer' because that's what he is. As opposed to identifying him as a top adminstration official or as a source inside the administration.
Now I've always liked Judy Miller. But this is not proper. It's misleading and it's conspiring with a source to mislead the readers of the New York Times, her employer, in order to secure access or whatever. (We don't really know.) But hello, NYTimes. GET RID OF HER. Dump her on the trashpile with Jason Blair. Where is the guts of this paper? We are left to wonder how many of these little deals has she made in her long career and how many other times has the public been misled regarding sources or whatever?
And then she claims she doesn't remember where she got the name Valerie Flame (Plame). Um... how many possible sources did you have for this CLASSIFIED NSC information? These guys are saying they heard it from the media and now the media is saying they don't know where they heard it from. For me this is beyond the limits of what reasonable people can believe. I think the last person who can't 'remember' in this case should go to jail for contempt or whatever.
Everytime I heard that one of these officials said they heard about Wilson's wife from the press I thought, well... WHO did the press hear it from? Did they hear it from the press also? Look, there was an NSC memo circulated to the White House while Bush was on a trip, to Europe I think, which provided the information about Wilson's wife and marked that information as classified. Only a few KNOWN individuals in the administration had the clearance to even know the information in that message.
If Fitzgerald doesn't take down someone he's not the prosecutor he's purported to be._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 10/19/05 5:14 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Quote: |
| Before she finally agreed to testify to the grand jury, according to The New York Times, her lawyer Edward Bennett assured special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald that Ms. Miller had only one meaningful source. |
As my mother used to say, now wait one fucking minute.
Her attorney procured an agreement with Fitz that she would only speak of Libby specifically because of the above.
Yet she says in her "explanation" (cough, choke) in the Times that she can't recall who gave her the name Valerie Flame, the most meaningful of meaningfuls.
your jammer, always at work on this stuff with smoke coming out of his ears, has just hadeth an epiphanous.
With an assist from this cat at Newsweek.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9742110/site/newsweek/
.......
...
..
.
She absolutely should be a target of this investigation, given that she a) claims that Libby was her only subsantive source and yet b) can't remember who COMMITTED THE FUCKING CRIME by being the most important 'source' since Deep Throat, the person in the administration who gave her the name, Valerie Flame. (Plame)
That's IT.
She's the last person lying, at this point. We now know she doesn't like jail. Threaten her with 25 in the slammer and she'll be yodelling the truth in the middle of Times Square._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
|
|
to testify before a grand jury convened to look AT HIS ASS among others and this mother fucker includes THAT creeped out