Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Was Goss Appointed Specifically to Protect Rove's Treason?

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 09:41 PM
Original message
Was Goss Appointed Specifically to Protect Rove's Treason?
In retrospect, Bush knew that Rove was the traitor who leaked Plame's identity at the time when he appointed Porter Goss as head of the CIA.

He knew that his chief adviser, his brain, was going to face treason charges...it was only a matter of time. He knew that he was obstructing justice and lying to the American People when he talked about the Plame leak and claimed not to know who did it.

Knowing the Treasongate shit-storm was coming, it is likely that he specifically chose a CIA director that would protect Rove and himself from the charges. If that was not the primary reason Goss was appointed, it must have been at least a (conscious, explicit, deliberate) major factor in his selection.

That is a very disingenuous, very dishonest, very corrupt, and a dirty way to get oneself above the law. Has this notion been discussed anywhere? It seems like a real concern which should be on the agenda of our elected officials and part of the national discussion of Rove's treason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Allenberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Very dishonest, Very corrupt and dirty
describes this whole administration since Jan 20, 2001. Why would we expect anything different concerning Rove?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
2.  the little I remember
Goss was head of some congressional committee that squashed something for the Bush team. I remember it playing out that it worked well for them to then have him at the CIA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. It was the cover-up for the administration's role in 9/11
that was Goss' first assignment - 9/11 damage control. The 9/11 families had fought tooth and nail for an investigation and they had been rebuffed and given a minimal, partisan investigation. The pressure was building for a REAL 9/11 commission (like there could ever be such a thing) and we got Goss and the "9/11 Commission".

I highly recommend David Ray Griffin's books, "The New Pearl Harbor" and "911 Omissions and Distortions". Even hard-core skeptics who read those books with the idea to discredit them will come out stunned.

Much material at the 911Truth site

911 Truth Site
http://www.911truth.org/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 09:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. I said this on another thread when
someone mentioned porter goss..

"bush was getting all his little traitorous ducks in row when he appointed goss."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. Ohhhhhh ..................... probably. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-22-05 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. Waxman wrote Goss calling for an investigation
while he was head of House Intel Committee in 2003-- about the Niger Yellowcake claims, the call to war (Bush, Rice, Powell) and the SOTU speech. Very damning stuff. Waxman called it an orchestrated campaign.

I think somewhere in there Goss (gatekeeper) said he was open only to a limited investigation about the intelligence. Wasn't going to investigate "how the customer used the intelligence". An odd turn of the phrase...


Waxman lays out his case here:
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/iraq/waxmangoss071503ltr.pdf
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 Fri Dec 27th 2024, 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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