-=jd=- wrote:

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 08:33:11a, dxAce wrote in
message :



dxAce wrote:

AIR Thiruvananthapuram heard here at 1215 on 5010 with talks and
interesting flute instrumentals in between.

News in English at 1230. A very nice signal this morning!

dxAce
Michigan
USA


Speaking of news, it appears to be eerily quiet from the left side of RRS...

Yeah, I think they've all gone into total shock as Rove was not indicted, and
Libby will probably go free after a trial. That prosecutor sure is a 'tard boy
and he's probably the one that needs to be indicted.


Did Thiruvananthapuram mention any foreign (to them) news?

I didn't make any note of any foreign news, but they did of course mention the
train wreck they had over there.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

From: dxAce
Organization: The Listener at the Gates of Dawn
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:55:18 -0400
Subject: AIR Thiruvananthapuram



-=jd=- wrote:

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 08:33:11a, dxAce wrote in
message :



dxAce wrote:

AIR Thiruvananthapuram heard here at 1215 on 5010 with talks and
interesting flute instrumentals in between.

News in English at 1230. A very nice signal this morning!

dxAce
Michigan
USA


Speaking of news, it appears to be eerily quiet from the left side of RRS...

Yeah, I think they've all gone into total shock as Rove was not indicted, and
Libby will probably go free after a trial. That prosecutor sure is a 'tard boy
and he's probably the one that needs to be indicted.

You think so? I know a lot of liberals and none of them are in shock.
Personally, I worry that if Rove were indicted and had to step down, who
does that leave to run the country? Cheney? That's really scarey.

As for Libby, I'm betting he will serve time in prison. (I realize this is
contrary to the maxim that when a liberal is indicted it's because all
liberals are evil criminals but when a conservative is indicted it's
because the prosecutor is a criminal.)

Greg

Greg wrote:

From: dxAce
Organization: The Listener at the Gates of Dawn
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:55:18 -0400
Subject: AIR Thiruvananthapuram



-=jd=- wrote:

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 08:33:11a, dxAce wrote in
message :



dxAce wrote:

AIR Thiruvananthapuram heard here at 1215 on 5010 with talks and
interesting flute instrumentals in between.

News in English at 1230. A very nice signal this morning!

dxAce
Michigan
USA


Speaking of news, it appears to be eerily quiet from the left side of RRS...

Yeah, I think they've all gone into total shock as Rove was not indicted, and
Libby will probably go free after a trial. That prosecutor sure is a 'tard boy
and he's probably the one that needs to be indicted.

You think so? I know a lot of liberals and none of them are in shock.
Personally, I worry that if Rove were indicted and had to step down, who
does that leave to run the country? Cheney? That's really scarey.

As for Libby, I'm betting he will serve time in prison. (I realize this is
contrary to the maxim that when a liberal is indicted it's because all
liberals are evil criminals but when a conservative is indicted it's
because the prosecutor is a criminal.)

Your momma!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:52:21 GMT
Subject: AIR Thiruvananthapuram

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 11:05:27a, Greg wrote in
message :

Shock may be too strong of a word. Frustrated and/or dissappointed might be
more accurate, considering that the basis for the entire "Fitzmas"
investigation remins unfounded

....I think that remains to be seen.

and Bush, Cheney and Rove remain unscathed.

Cheney lost his chief of staff, possibly because he committed perjury,
thinking he was protecting Cheney; Rove is still under investigation and
came very close to being indicted - he still could be; Bush's approval
rating continues to fall. I consider them all scathed.

Personally, I worry that if Rove were indicted and had to step down, who
does that leave to run the country? Cheney? That's really scarey.


Especially scary to the islamofascists.



As for Libby, I'm betting he will serve time in prison.


As well he should! He raised his right hand and swore an oath to tell the
truth. Apparently he thought he could cross his fingers when he lied. Shame
on him. To pour salt in his wound, it seems he had no need to lie as he
wouldn't, or couldn't, have been charged with "outing" an agency NOC. This
would be in stark contrast to the Clinton administration after showing both
Bill and Hillary either committed "purjury under oath" *and/or* "made false
statements" during various investigations (Jones, Lewinski, Rose Law Firm,
Travelgate, Whitewater, etc). Though, Bill did lose his law license for a
bit...


(I realize this is contrary to the maxim that when a liberal is indicted
it's because all liberals are evil criminals. but when a conservative is
indicted it's because the prosecutor is a criminal.)


I wouldn't say there's anything wrong with the prosecutor at all. He's just
doing his job just like Ken Starr did his; unless you consider Ken Starr a
criminal...

Nope. I have faith in the system, though I am aware that there are abuses
in the system.
-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)

From: dxAce
Organization: The Listener at the Gates of Dawn
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 12:00:07 -0400
Subject: AIR Thiruvananthapuram



Greg wrote:

From: dxAce
Organization: The Listener at the Gates of Dawn
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:55:18 -0400
Subject: AIR Thiruvananthapuram



-=jd=- wrote:

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 08:33:11a, dxAce wrote in
message :



dxAce wrote:

AIR Thiruvananthapuram heard here at 1215 on 5010 with talks and
interesting flute instrumentals in between.

News in English at 1230. A very nice signal this morning!

dxAce
Michigan
USA


Speaking of news, it appears to be eerily quiet from the left side of
RRS...

Yeah, I think they've all gone into total shock as Rove was not indicted,
and
Libby will probably go free after a trial. That prosecutor sure is a 'tard
boy
and he's probably the one that needs to be indicted.

You think so? I know a lot of liberals and none of them are in shock.
Personally, I worry that if Rove were indicted and had to step down, who
does that leave to run the country? Cheney? That's really scarey.

As for Libby, I'm betting he will serve time in prison. (I realize this is
contrary to the maxim that when a liberal is indicted it's because all
liberals are evil criminals but when a conservative is indicted it's
because the prosecutor is a criminal.)

Your momma!

dxAce
Michigan
USA


Neener neener neener.

Greg

From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 03:37:34 GMT
Subject: (OT) The Plame-Blame-Game

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 09:34:31p, Greg wrote in
message :



From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:52:21 GMT
Subject: AIR Thiruvananthapuram

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 11:05:27a, Greg wrote in
message :

Shock may be too strong of a word. Frustrated and/or dissappointed
might be more accurate, considering that the basis for the entire
"Fitzmas" investigation remins unfounded

...I think that remains to be seen.

From what I can gather she had not been covert in over 5 years; she was one
of the agents "outed" by Aldrich Ames; and her cover had also been blown in
some transaction between the Swiss and Cubans. If Fitz is considering
leaking classified info (the Wilson Report) then Joe Wilson, while
contracted as an advisor to the Gore campaign, wrote an Op-Ed piece about
it. He would need to be considered as revealing the same classified info.
Presuming there's no surprise info, "Fitzmas" has turned into "Fitzween".

And I think the whole purpose of the investigation was to determine if
anyone committed a crime. "Fitzmas" and "Fitzween" are cynical terms
reflecting partisan points of view. I don't think the investigation was
party-driven, although, clearly, the two opposing parties stand to "win" or
"lose".


and Bush, Cheney and Rove remain unscathed.

Cheney lost his chief of staff, possibly because he committed perjury,
thinking he was protecting Cheney;

I believe Fitz has indicated he has no interest in Cheney and Libby had no
need to protect Cheney. Cheney and Libby can talk about all the classified
info they want, as they both have clearances. Libby purjured himself in an
effort to try and minimize his culpability. It's almost funny that he
didn't even need to panick. He could have told the truth without penalty.

Funny is when a stupid bank robber writes the robbery note on the back of
his own deposit slip with his name & address printed on the front. Libby's
(alleged) actions, are pathetic for a high-paid government official. Whether
he "needed" to protect Cheney is moot; it looks as though that may have been
his purpose. And not necessarily to cover an illegal act, but maybe just to
cover the fact that Cheney sought to do harm to Wilson.

Rove is still under investigation and
came very close to being indicted - he still could be;


For the limited remaining lifespan of the investigation, it's not very
likely. If Fitz could base perjury, obstruction and false-claims against
Libby based on two-party conversations with no other witnesses,

....and other evidence...

*certainly* he could have found similar circumstances to indict Rove.

....IF evidence existed.

I'd say the reason he didn't is because he's driven more by the facts,
rather than the politics and the content of Rove's testimony didn't indicate
an indictment was reasonable.

Agreed. All I said is that "Rove is still under investigation". That's not
good for the administration, that's bad.

Bush's approval rating continues to fall.

Considering it's better or close to his second-term predecessors, he's
pretty much shooting par for a second-term president.

I don't know the numbers for other presidents, but I find that hard to
believe.

I consider them all scathed.


Opinions vary...


Personally, I worry that if Rove were indicted and had to step down,
who does that leave to run the country? Cheney? That's really scarey.


Especially scary to the islamofascists.



As for Libby, I'm betting he will serve time in prison.


As well he should! He raised his right hand and swore an oath to tell
the truth. Apparently he thought he could cross his fingers when he
lied. Shame on him. To pour salt in his wound, it seems he had no need
to lie as he wouldn't, or couldn't, have been charged with "outing" an
agency NOC. This would be in stark contrast to the Clinton
administration after showing both Bill and Hillary either committed
"purjury under oath" *and/or* "made false statements" during various
investigations (Jones, Lewinski, Rose Law Firm, Travelgate, Whitewater,
etc). Though, Bill did lose his law license for a bit...


(I realize this is contrary to the maxim that when a liberal is
indicted it's because all liberals are evil criminals. but when a
conservative is indicted it's because the prosecutor is a criminal.)


I wouldn't say there's anything wrong with the prosecutor at all. He's
just doing his job just like Ken Starr did his; unless you consider Ken
Starr a criminal...


Nope. I have faith in the system, though I am aware that there are
abuses in the system.


I don't believe there's any "Ronnie Earle" type shenanigans to be worried
about with Fitzgerald...

Agreed.

See, we're so agreeable!

Greg

From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:08:41 GMT
Subject: (OT) The Plame-Blame-Game

On Sun 30 Oct 2005 12:23:24p, Greg wrote in
message :



From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 03:37:34 GMT
Subject: (OT) The Plame-Blame-Game

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 09:34:31p, Greg wrote in
message :



From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:52:21 GMT
Subject: AIR Thiruvananthapuram

On Sat 29 Oct 2005 11:05:27a, Greg wrote in
message :

Shock may be too strong of a word. Frustrated and/or dissappointed
might be more accurate, considering that the basis for the entire
"Fitzmas" investigation remins unfounded

...I think that remains to be seen.

From what I can gather she had not been covert in over 5 years; she was
one of the agents "outed" by Aldrich Ames; and her cover had also been
blown in some transaction between the Swiss and Cubans. If Fitz is
considering leaking classified info (the Wilson Report) then Joe
Wilson, while contracted as an advisor to the Gore campaign, wrote an
Op-Ed piece about it. He would need to be considered as revealing the
same classified info. Presuming there's no surprise info, "Fitzmas" has
turned into "Fitzween".

And I think the whole purpose of the investigation was to determine if
anyone committed a crime.

And here I thought the basis for the investigation was whether anyone
illegally revealed the identity of an agency NOC. Once it was determined
Plame was no longer under NOC status for the "outing" alleged, I have no
idea what the focus of the investigation may have morphed into.


"Fitzmas" and "Fitzween" are cynical terms
reflecting partisan points of view. I don't think the investigation was
party-driven, although, clearly, the two opposing parties stand to "win"
or "lose".


and Bush, Cheney and Rove remain unscathed.

Cheney lost his chief of staff, possibly because he committed perjury,
thinking he was protecting Cheney;

I believe Fitz has indicated he has no interest in Cheney and Libby had
no need to protect Cheney. Cheney and Libby can talk about all the
classified info they want, as they both have clearances. Libby purjured
himself in an effort to try and minimize his culpability. It's almost
funny that he didn't even need to panick. He could have told the truth
without penalty.

Funny is when a stupid bank robber writes the robbery note on the back
of his own deposit slip with his name & address printed on the front.
Libby's (alleged) actions, are pathetic for a high-paid government
official.


Laughable as well, considering that it appears he could have told the
unvarnished truth without penalty.


Whether he "needed" to protect Cheney is moot; it looks as
though that may have been his purpose. And not necessarily to cover an
illegal act, but maybe just to cover the fact that Cheney sought to do
harm to Wilson.

There was no need to protect Cheney from any criminal investigation at all
since he hadn't done anything illegal. Even before Libby started the "he
said, she said" spinning and fabricating that was described in the
indictments, there was no need to protect Cheney. That being said, for
Cheney to refute the fabrications in Wilson's report is hard-ball politics,
but not illegal. If it was illegal to "out" Plame, then Libby was the
primary suspect, above all others. Apparently, it *wasn't* illegal to
"out" Plame.

True, but he may have wanted to hide Cheney's role in outing Plame, even tho
it wasn't illegal. But I think he didn't know it wasn't illegal.

Rove is still under investigation and
came very close to being indicted - he still could be;


For the limited remaining lifespan of the investigation, it's not very
likely. If Fitz could base perjury, obstruction and false-claims
against Libby based on two-party conversations with no other witnesses,

...and other evidence...

The only things mentioned in the indictments are the various conversations
and personal-notes between Libby and a given reporter -- two-person
conversations with no other witnesses. The notes even stem from the same
two-person conversations. Fitz will need "other evidence" if he doesn't
want to be painted with the "Ronnie Earle" brush by his detractors...

Okay, there were the notes and also, I think, conflicting testimony from
other witnesses, the journalists.

*certainly* he could have found similar circumstances to indict Rove.

...IF evidence existed.

With Rove correcting his testimony, that precluded Fitz's ability to bring
any ancillary charges.



I'd say the reason he didn't is because he's driven more by the
facts, rather than the politics and the content of Rove's testimony
didn't indicate an indictment was reasonable.

Agreed. All I said is that "Rove is still under investigation". That's
not good for the administration, that's bad.


It's certainly manageable and there's no "show-stopper" in view. With the
normal microscope that the left and MSM keeps trained on the Bush
administrations every move, I doubt this is much of a nuisance to the WH.



Bush's approval rating continues to fall.

Considering it's better or close to his second-term predecessors, he's
pretty much shooting par for a second-term president.

I don't know the numbers for other presidents, but I find that hard to
believe.


Last I looked, Bush's low was still higher than Clinton's low, and Reagan's
low in their 2nd terms. Not that we should place significant faith in any
poll past, present or future...



{snippage}


-=jd=-
Okay jd, it looks a though we continue to view the same facts from opposite
angles. Gotta run - I have a hot thread going with DXace over
dingleberries. I LOVE shortwave radio!

Greg

From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 21:55:07 GMT
Subject: (OT) The Plame-Blame-Game

On Sun 30 Oct 2005 05:30:32p, Greg wrote in
message :



From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...

{snippage}

There was no need to protect Cheney from any criminal investigation at
all since he hadn't done anything illegal. Even before Libby started
the "he said, she said" spinning and fabricating that was described in
the indictments, there was no need to protect Cheney. That being said,
for Cheney to refute the fabrications in Wilson's report is hard-ball
politics, but not illegal. If it was illegal to "out" Plame, then Libby
was the primary suspect, above all others. Apparently, it *wasn't*
illegal to "out" Plame.

True, but he may have wanted to hide Cheney's role in outing Plame, even
tho it wasn't illegal. But I think he didn't know it wasn't illegal.


Libby may have tried to mitigate political fall-out, but I can't recall
Cheney ever shying away from bare-knuckle politics.



{snippage}

The only things mentioned in the indictments are the various
conversations and personal-notes between Libby and a given reporter --
two-person conversations with no other witnesses. The notes even stem
from the same two-person conversations. Fitz will need "other evidence"
if he doesn't want to be painted with the "Ronnie Earle" brush by his
detractors...

Okay, there were the notes and also, I think, conflicting testimony from
other witnesses, the journalists.


That's the two-person conversations -- Each conversation was between Libby
and a reporter. Libby's statements conflicting with a reporter and a
reporter's statement conflicting with Libby's. If it goes to trial, Libby
will likely assert "He-Said/She-Said", even though the reporter's accounts
will likely agree -- and not in Libby's favor...




Okay jd, it looks a though we continue to view the same facts from
opposite angles.


Shocked! Shocked, I Am!!


Gotta run - I have a hot thread going with DXace over
dingleberries.


Our topical preferences differ in ways I had not considered!



I LOVE shortwave radio!



When the ionosphere cooperates, I do too! Well, I wouldn't say *love*, but
I am deeply in "like" with SWL...


-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)

With a little work you might make a good liberal.

Greg

Greg wrote:

From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 21:55:07 GMT
Subject: (OT) The Plame-Blame-Game

On Sun 30 Oct 2005 05:30:32p, Greg wrote in
message :



From: "-=jd=-"
Organization: Little... If any...

{snippage}

There was no need to protect Cheney from any criminal investigation at
all since he hadn't done anything illegal. Even before Libby started
the "he said, she said" spinning and fabricating that was described in
the indictments, there was no need to protect Cheney. That being said,
for Cheney to refute the fabrications in Wilson's report is hard-ball
politics, but not illegal. If it was illegal to "out" Plame, then Libby
was the primary suspect, above all others. Apparently, it *wasn't*
illegal to "out" Plame.

True, but he may have wanted to hide Cheney's role in outing Plame, even
tho it wasn't illegal. But I think he didn't know it wasn't illegal.


Libby may have tried to mitigate political fall-out, but I can't recall
Cheney ever shying away from bare-knuckle politics.



{snippage}

The only things mentioned in the indictments are the various
conversations and personal-notes between Libby and a given reporter --
two-person conversations with no other witnesses. The notes even stem
from the same two-person conversations. Fitz will need "other evidence"
if he doesn't want to be painted with the "Ronnie Earle" brush by his
detractors...

Okay, there were the notes and also, I think, conflicting testimony from
other witnesses, the journalists.


That's the two-person conversations -- Each conversation was between Libby
and a reporter. Libby's statements conflicting with a reporter and a
reporter's statement conflicting with Libby's. If it goes to trial, Libby
will likely assert "He-Said/She-Said", even though the reporter's accounts
will likely agree -- and not in Libby's favor...




Okay jd, it looks a though we continue to view the same facts from
opposite angles.


Shocked! Shocked, I Am!!


Gotta run - I have a hot thread going with DXace over
dingleberries.


Our topical preferences differ in ways I had not considered!



I LOVE shortwave radio!



When the ionosphere cooperates, I do too! Well, I wouldn't say *love*, but
I am deeply in "like" with SWL...


-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)

With a little work you might make a good liberal.

There is no such thing as a good liberal.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

DX Ace - Yes there is . . .
Go Visit a Cemetery ! ) ~ RHF