Boxer's Bare-faced Lie to Condi

[Overpaid Slacker]

I heard this asinine quote on 1010 this morning, said by Babs Boxer to Condi yesterday:

BOXER: Well, you should read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not, but most of my colleagues did. It was WMD, period. That was the reason and the causation for that, you know, particular vote.

... and I thought, hmmm, I think I'll look that up today. Well, someone beat me to it.

Hey -- everybody do me a favor, watch your usual TV news, listen to your usual radio broadcasts, and read your usual papers/periodicals and report back all the certain-to-be thousands of instances of our media calling "Bullshyt" on this latest Boxer LIE!!!!!

I mean, a Rep. would be slaughtered for such a statement, no?

JP

[juanbenae]

you mean it was not WMD's?

[Overpaid Slacker]

it was not only WMDs -- which is what Boxer said -- "period".
click the link, read the text of the resolution -- 7 reasons the Senate set forth, not "only" WMD.


How's the not smoking going?

JP

[SteveStromberg]

Barbra Boxer commited a felony and should go to jail.
After all this is what happened Marth Stewart.


Title 18 of the U.S. Code Section 1001, which states that: “(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any judicial matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years or both.”[17]

Under this statute it is a crime to knowingly and willfully make any materially false statement concerning any matter within the jurisdiction of the United States. The falsehood must be material; but this requirement is met if the statement has the “natural tendency to influence or [is] capable of influencing the decision of the decision making body” which receives the false statement.[18] This statute has an extraordinarily wide scope. Unlike perjury, the false statement need not be given under oath. Any statement, whether made orally or in writing, can violate this law.

http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/043/lying.html

[juanbenae]

still doing a pipe now and again, but remain off the cigs. thanx for asking.

did that guys post above say anything?

[Overpaid Slacker]

Congrats.

I'm not so taken by the guy's prefatory rants, but he does post the text of the Senate resolution to which Boxer refers, and synopsizes it below, setting forth 7 distinct reasons -- which is SIX more than "just" WMD.

I'd add that this is not some paper the White House drafted and sent to the Senate to approve. The Senate drafted the resolution and ratified its entire contents.

JP

[Overpaid Slacker]

Another Boxer LIE!!!!!!?

You never even mention indirectly the 1,366 American troops that have died. . . . And 25 percent of those dead are from my home state.

According to Casualties.org, the number of California servicemen who've died is 157, which is about 11.5% of the total, less than half the proportion Boxer claimed.

[SteveStromberg]

I just emailed Boxers office with the Statue and the transcript.
I also emailed the same to the DOJ.
I am filing a complaint against her.

[SteveStromberg]

Here is the DOJ contact

Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov

[turbocarrera]

Best file a complaint against Powell and Condi too..

Pre 9/11
- “He(Saddam) has not developed any significant capabilities with regards to weapons of mass destruction and he is unable to project conventional powers against his neighbors.” - Colin Powell (Jan 2001)
- “We are able to keep weapons of mass destruction from him(Saddam) and his military forces have not been rebuilt.” - Condoleeza Rice (Jun 2001)

Were they lying then or now?

[david c.]

An elected official enjoys protection called legislative immunity which would almost undoubtedly apply here, assuming someone had standing to bring a complaint or action (also, no).

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Just a question - were you one of the same people that criticized Bill Clinton for overuse of semantics in HIS testimony?





I thought so.

[azasadny]

from CNN online today...

Boxer denounced Rice for what she said was making Americans believe that the war in Iraq was part of the United States' response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and convincing the public that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction when he didn't.

Rice responded: "It was a question of an attitude about terrorism" that justified the war in Iraq, she said.

[rrpjr]

Boxer must have stayed up all night figuring out how she could slander Rice with the patina of Senatorial dignity. She failed on both counts. What a child. What a hack.

Steve: Good going. I also emailed her.