Just remember...Watergate brought down one of the most

[sfecap]

popular Presidents of the time. Nixon won by a landslide.

Watergate started with what was then called a "third rate burglary".

Then it got bigger and bigger as all the Presidents men lied and scambled to cover up. Having lived thru the Watergate years, I sure get the feeling that we are seeing the tip of the iceberg here with bushco. The Niger uranium is just the first crack in the wall. The intelligence community won't take the fall for bushco.

There will be major fallout. The regime is going to be severly damaged by this. Watch the "advisors" start to get dumped overboard.

This is going to be fun. It's always nice to see arrogant thugs get their due.

[dawgman]

1. we need to push for a serious investigation of the scandals about to hit

011 and Iraq could discredit the right for years to come.




peace, dawgman

[charlie]

2. What worries me

is that much of what brought Nixon down hinged on a lucky fluke. If a committee attorney hadn't taken a shot in the dark and asked Alexander Butterfield if the Oval Office had a recording system, John Dean might be regarded today as the rat bastard who tried to save his own skin by trying to bring down a president.

[sandnsea]

3. Did Condi Rice take notes?

She was in on any Security Council meeting which is who Tenet said the info was discussed with and I would bet you she took thorough notes. She's just that type of woman. Subpoena Condi's notes!!

[charlie]

5. Condi's already on thin ice

...But U.S. officials told NBC News’ Andrea Mitchell that Tenet himself advised Rice’s top deputy, Steven Hadley, to remove a reference to the uranium report from a speech Bush delivered Oct. 7 in Cincinnati, establishing that the nation’s top intelligence officials suspected that the allegation was false more than three months before they approved Bush’s repeating it in his nationally televised address on Jan. 28.

http://msnbc.com/news/937524.asp

If this pans out, she either knew waaay ahead of time or doesn't talk to her deputies. Still though, she can be cut loose without Dubya being tainted as a liar.

[Prodemsouth]

6. What makes you think Condi is on "thin ice."

Powell and Rice will not be gone before the 2004 election. There has even been rumors of Condi as veep. They need them, to say to African American voters: Even though we denied Blacks the right to vote in FL., were not so Bad, you don't need to worry about voting or if you do vote, vote for us. They are trying to pull away as many voters as possible from the Democrats.

[charlie]

7. She's on thin ice

because if the notion that the administration needlessly sent soldiers into harm's way based on fabricated evidence gains traction, this articles's contention that she likely knew all along makes her the most expendable one in Dubya's circle. And she is expendable to those sharks, her blackness nonwithstanding.

[sfecap]

4. True, but someone would have tipped off the committee

about the recording system. If bushco thinks that the intel pros will roll over for him he's got a big surprise coming.

Watch for the leaks to begin...this is more than a little lie about Niger uranium. I think that the adminstration (and the Blair group) know full well they were completely falsifying the WMD stories. Once that comes out, all hell will break loose.

Once * is shown to be what he is, a callous liar, and once the public finally gets that the result of his lies are Americans dying, * is toast. And they will get it.

This story has legs, and it will only get better. :-)

[kayell]

8. I'm looking forward to a replay of the Nixon fall

especially since this crew is guilty of something far worse. No pardons this time, dammit!

I think it's really important to remember the timing on this. The Watergate burglaries happened right before the election, so no fall out to Nixon at the time, and he beat McGovern devastatingly - creating a legend for the DLC types to use. Nixon resigned in summer of 1974, about a year and a half later. Interestingly enough, we're about a year and a half from the elections. Georgie boy should be nicely cooked by then.

To me this means that we can forget the old McGovern comparisons. By the 2004 elections, the public will be eagar to vote for someone REALLY different from *. We should not be concentrating on who is "electable" now, because that may have no relevance to who will be electable in the conditions of November 2004.

[no_hypocrisy]

9. Not to be a spoiler, but . . .

What if the lies led to a condemnation of this administration? And the public support withered? And an election was not guaranteed?

And what if, were you to equate this situation to a landlord-tenant deal, you won the right to evict but the tenant won't leave the premises?

Meaning, as long as * has access to confidential information and dealings, he can arrange for just about anything to happen that would allow him to stay longer than January 2005, in the name of "America's security".

Even were he to leave, he's the head of the monster, leaving the huge, brutish torso and extremities intact. The Repukes are well entrenched in the federal, state, regional, and local political systems. As with his usual pattern, * is just the frontman, like a con game.

I agree that he has got to go, but I also remind everyone that "Plan B" needs to be formulated for dealing with the rest of them.

Nixon had to be evicted because of a lie, but a movement wasn't in place to keep things going until a new Nixon could be installed.

[Le Taz Hot]

10. I am TRULY trying to be optimistic here

but there are a few differences:
1) We didn't have state-run media.
2) We had many more statesmen (I purposely typed "men" because women in the Congress and Senate were very few in numbers at that time) who were willing to do the right thing for the country.
3) We didn't have the internet.

I believe 1 and 3 can counter each other; however, I've noticed that when I start talking about one of these topics (this particularly happens with the "Black Box Voting") I often get responses such as, "Oh, the internet. The internet is dubious at best." I can counter all day long that these are from legitimate news sources that just happen to be gathered together in once place, but once I say "the internet," the listener has already tuned out and chalked me up as a conspiracy theorist.

And #2. Everytime I think of the great Senator Byrd up there, ALL ALONE on the floor of the Senate (I STILL want to know where the HELL the Democrats were), it makes me sick to my stomach. Watergate was a TRUE bi-partisan investigation. There is no such thing in today's adversarial political climate. "Yer either with us or agin' us." Yes, there were the hard-core Republicans who simply refused to believe (until the end) that Nixon was a crook, but they were the exception. A significant number of Republicans were at least open-minded about the possibility that wrongdoing was committed, especially as the mountain of evidence made it impossible to believe anything else.

I SO WANT to believe that this story has legs and will begin leading to the HUNDREDS of as-of-yet unreported (in the U.S. press) Bush* Junta stories. I've just been so disappointed and disgusted with the state-run media in the past. I would love for someone to convince me that I'm wrong about this.