Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Blitzer goes after McHenry: Asks five times to Provide Evidence

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 02:56 PM
Original message
Blitzer goes after McHenry: Asks five times to Provide Evidence
Edited on Sun Oct-08-06 02:56 PM by cal04
McHenry Speechless When Asked To Provide Evidence That Foley Scandal Was Election Ploy
Freshman Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) has been appearing on television shows all week suggesting that the Foley scandal was engineered by Democrats for electoral advantage. Today on CNNs Late Edition, he said all the fact points lead to one question: whether House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) timed the release of the Foley emails.

In response to his talk of fact points, Wolf Blitzer asked McHenry five separate times whether he had any evidence whatsoever to support his conspiracy theory. McHenry had no answer. Watch it:

video
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/08/mchenry-pelosi/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blitzen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. Repuke to Wolf: "Do you have any evidence that they WEREN"T
involved"?

hope the GOP keeps putting this shit-for-brains front and center
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostInAnomie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
29. He tried that shit on Tweety.
Tweety looked at him like he was an idiot.

I guess he doesn't understand that you can't prove a negative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
36. That's the same logic they use for detaining people without
charges. Guilty until proven innocent. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. why now? blitzer has let republicans tell him lies without challenge for
over 6 years now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Sinking ship, my friend. Sinking ship.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
3. McHenry: "Do you have evidence that they weren't involved?"
You can prove a negative, dumbass.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bad Santa Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
22. Do you have evidence the Cylons weren't involved?
"Those human model cylons can be awful darn sneaky."
------ Gaius W. Baltar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. I wish wolfie had said that brian ross
has already admitted that his sources were all republicans, and that this has been reported extensively elsewhere as well. It's not jut a matter of not having evidence; there is actual evidence to the contrary. It was weird seeing charlie rangel grinning in the background. Was he ever allowed to talk?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
23. Wolf actually said this to the asswipe. He was just ranting this rw bullsh
it. I've seen this sick fuck on three or four shows during the last week. Talking that shit like it was fact. Wolf, I believe, will not have him back on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Reciprocity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. Claims he never knew Foley was gay. He is the only one I heard say this.
Edited on Sun Oct-08-06 03:05 PM by Reciprocity
Wolfie this is your opinion not fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
18. Beside the point...now that ol pat
mchenry knows foley is a child sexual predator..what does think of that shit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. Probably wants to turn him loose on his own children
if he has any. I expect he would like to make some extra money on the side by selling the sexual favors of his children. In fact, I think that alot of Republicans are doing that these days.

At least that's what I feel to be true, and will be saying so every chance I get. The gloves are off now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
6. who approved this guy to be on tv?
was this the only guy anyone could find to answer questions. where`s karl? hiding out?in the closet? i almost feel sorry for this dumb ass to take the assignment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
7. one thing I found interesting, and a bit unsettling, on This Week:
some other android pug was on opposite Emanuel, and kept spewing the same crap, demanding if Rahm, personally KNEW about these emails, and RE said, at least twice, "I never SAW the emails" til after the story broke. when the pug repeated the question, as to whether he KNEW about them, RE said again that he'd never SEEN them.

that creeped me out, because he had every opportunity to deny ANY knowledge, and he didn't; he kept saying only that he hadn't seen the emails

I found this disconcerting, and I'm afraid the pugs are going to hammer on this

not that I think they can make a difference, unless this becomes a big RW talking point, which the M$M may dutifully concentrate upon, to the exclusion of all the other filth gathering about the pugs' knees these days.

interestingly, also, George S. didn't pick up on this bit of parsing, and ask RE about it, but he was PO'd at the guy for bringing him into it, via his Clinton connection (the creep brought up the Lewinsky fiasco, at least by inference, and GS told him that he'd left the oval office by 96, before Lewinsky raised her, uh, head)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. I"m sure some Dems did know something about this.
The problem with that line of questioning though is that even if they did know, they had no power to do anything about it. The repubs have effective control over investigation, subpoena, the ethics committee, and every other outlet in congress that could have been used to get to the bottom of the foley scandal. The repubs wouldn't even let Kildee (the Dem on the pages' panel) know what was going on. What makes anyone think they would let Dems investigate?

Everything comes down to one solitary fact: The repubs, who had complete control over everything, did nothing to stop child molestation within their own ranks even when explicitly warned about it. There is no accusation that can mitigate that statement and I think the voters have finally realized that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lcordero2 Donating Member (832 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. AND CONTROL OVER THE PRESS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Rahm Emanuel Is Not Responsible For Reporting Second Party Heresay
We call that gossip...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StClone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Saw it too parallel thoughts
The RW Points are set and Emanuel was not good at cutting the mental midget McHenry off at the knees. I'd say a Freeper watching the exchange was doing high fives. Though it is pretty apparent that no matter what the spin the Rs can not escape the weight of Foley's Scandal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. righto....and this is an answer to the above posts, as well:
the pugs don't CARE about facts, truth, the law, or anything like that.

All they care about are OPENINGS, and Emanuel gave them a huge one

just wait

watch the pugs seize on that "didn't see any emails statement" and redouble their demands to know "what the dems knew and when they knew it"....and watch the media bend over like like limp pages to help them spread this fertilizer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. the dems need to start saying, no we didn't, but so what if we did,
it takes nothing away from what they did!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
10. The GOP owns this scandal, lock, stock, and barrel
Edited on Sun Oct-08-06 03:35 PM by Erika
Their efforts to blame the democrats and avoid accountability only make them look weaker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyRingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
14. McHenry wants key Dems to swear under oath that they didn't have anything
to do with the release of evidence.
Then maybe he can get all the Green Party members under oath.
Then everyone at the NY Times....
Reporters at The Post
All the pages
Maybe the House cafeteria workers

Don't ever let a Republican hand near a bible though, unless they're pandering for votes.

All this crap from McHenry sounds like Repub ethics revolve around who catches them, not the act itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy M Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. And what purpose would that serve....
it's a good thing this is finally out in the open and should have been done a long time ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
driver8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #14
32. Who was the comedian who said, "Oh, Republicans just love the bible...
until you ask them to testify under oath. 'I'm not touching that book -- no way.'"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #14
33. This is the textbook definition of a fishing expedition
"McHenry wants key Dems to swear under oath that they didn't have anything to do with the release of evidence."

Shoot, we could play that game all day...while we're at it, make every key Repuke swear under oath that they didn't have anything to do with 9/11.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinymontgomery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
19. I'm in this ass wipes district
some folks I've spoken with think he's gay also. I personnel think the DEMS should look at them and demand THEY go under oath about what they knew and when and then ask them under oath if they are gay. Dems need to get back on the offense as soon as asked.

Mcshit also needs to go join the military since he's only 30 or 31 years old. Guys a pure chicken shit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Postman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
20. I think Harvey the invisible rabbit did it because he hasn't denied it...
what an a-hole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
21. E-mails aren't the problem.
I've read them, or at least some of them (so hard to know if I've read them all). Annoying, irritating, but I'm unconvinced I'd have done anything about them.

The IMs ... different story.

"The source who provided the e-mails that ABC News first reported on its blog, denied sharing the more explicit IMs." (From your link.)

Was McHenry really so much of a twit as to focus on the e-mails?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. The E-Mails are a HUGE Problem.
If you read them, and don't see a problem, then I hope you don't work with children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
25. So A Democrat Learns Of A Repugnican Predator...Then What?
Let's test this stupid talking point and what would have happened.

Let's say Emanuel did have these emails...protocol would have been for him to take this matter to the head of the Page board and his superior...in this caes it wouldn't just be Pelosi, but to Hastert's office. The buck stops there. Now knowing these goons like we do, what action would Hastert have taken? Gone to the ethics committee that he, personally, defanged? Have his buddy Reynolds give Foley one of those "cool it will ya" and then take the $100G check and wish his re-election campaign well. Where would Emmanuel go then?

Personally, I hope a Democrat learned of these emails and may be helped to blow the whistle. The bottom line is there's oe less predator in the House of Representatives today than there was two weeks ago...and if it had been it had been left to McHenry or Putnman or any of these young fascists, Foley's predatory antics would still be tolerated.

Maybe these screws can tap dance around a double-negative, but Democrats are being smart by not doing anything more than rubbing the highlights of this scandal right back into their faces.

The game here for Putnam and McHenry is like the mafia neophyte who has to kill someone to prove their value, this is somehow earning their wings in wingnutland.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 11:14 PM
Response to Original message
26. That smarmy little fuck is exactly the type whose face I'd want tor ip off
Join the fucking army, you little dweeby asswipe.

Oh I forgot, you can't, if my gaydar is properly calibrated .... and I think it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. he was a kute kid, tho
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
27. That was a smackdown
From an unexpected source.

Thank you, Mr. Blitzer. You've done a good deed today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
31. McHenry gets his info from Rush Limpwad, he don't need no stinkin' proof.
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
34. Ironically, it would be an improvement if Dems timed this release
But I don't think they have the cajones.

Parking ticket scandal? Maybe.

Something that gets to the heart of the duplicity and rape of America by the GOP? No.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
35. contrast this with Kristol: "Bush can't act on Iraq until AFTER election"


In this video, Smith says maybe we need to put more troops in Iraq, and Kristol says Bush can't do that until after the election.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

So if GOP theory about Dems is true, they timed the revelation of this perv's tendencies to coincide with the election--so what?

By contrast, Kristol admits that Bush might be putting off action that could save troops lives (at least in some minds) to avoid losing votes for GOP in November.

Outing perv vs. letting troops die.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerry-is-my-prez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
37. If anyone wants to contact him here's the info:
I sent him an e-mail asking why he's so involved in covering up for pedophiles.

http://mchenry.house.gov/Contact/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Sep 17th 2014, 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC