Previous Next Latest

BREAKING: Rice Called to Testify on Uranium Claims

3/30/07, 12:16 pm EST

Now we get to the juicy stuff.

Henry Waxman — head of the House Oversight Committee — has just called on Condi Rice to come to the Hill to testify about the Bush administration’s Iraq/Niger/Uranium claim, the lie that gave credence to the “mushroom cloud” threat that got us into this damned war in the first place.

Dear Madam Secretary:

… I now request your appearance before the Committee at a hearing on Wednesday, April 18, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building. At this hearing, you will be asked to provide testimony and respond to questions…on the claim that Iraq sought uranium from Niger, White House treatment of classified information, the appointment of Ambassador Jones as “special coordinator” for Iraq, and other subjects….

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman
Chairman


Previous Next Latest

Comments

DeezNutz | 3/30/2007, 2:09 pm EST

Will she even be sworn in? If not, I probably won’t believe a word she says. If so, I still probably won’t believe a word she says. She and those she works for/with have proven that they can not be trusted or taken seriously.

Puremuny | 3/30/2007, 4:08 pm EST

The pot is definitely stirring now. Will Chainey be next?

ray | 3/30/2007, 5:54 pm EST

At least this democratic congress is trying to invsestigate and trying to stop the war lets hope they still got majority when we get the next president.

Jed Clampett | 3/30/2007, 7:27 pm EST

no one can touch the penguin… we can only hope hope that a Deep Vein Trombosis gets his ass. Who knows, he might be dead already.

Jimmy | 3/30/2007, 9:51 pm EST

Could it be, the Democrats have finally grown a ball? After all, we spent the first 100 days hand-wringing over whether flexing our subpoena power would be “divisive.” Well, lookie what happened! Under the threat of subpoena Gonzalez’ top aide decides he’s not going to be thrown under the bus like Libby, and instead he’ll tell the truth. Thus emboldened, our stout friends have now decided to bring Condi The Leg up to The Hill to have it out on this whole damned Niger business.

Hoo-damn-ray! ‘Bout f-ing time. When I read the last chapter in Al Franken’s most recent book, in which he describes an end-of-session impeachment for Shrub, I giggled and cried simultaneously, because it felt so unlikely. I longed for it like a 14-year-old at Vicky’s Secret, but, like that same pimply hormonal mess, I realized it wasn’t going to happen.

Now, I’m not so sure. So go on Condi, get briefed, prepped and coiffed; but realize that you maggots haven’t yet managed to completely strangle this beautiful Republic, and all of these people are going to be held accountable.

I guess I’ve reached an age when my fantasies have veered away from hotties in satin and toward Republicans in orange jumpsuits.

Jed Clampett | 3/30/2007, 10:05 pm EST

second that motion, however I must add I don’t care if they are elephants or donkeys, if you are stealing from the populace, particularly in a time of war, it is treason and they should, at the very least, spend alot of time in jail. Wheather it’s outright stealing or by proxy like the senator in New Jersey.

B.Phillips | 4/1/2007, 11:01 am EST

Will Cheney be next? Will Condi tell the truth? Where’s Karl??
Who cares?! One thing at a time, Grasshopper. The political mechanations of this republic are as slow and as painful as digging to China with a grapefruit spoon, but we will now have hearings; there will be testimony; it will be on public record and that is where we have to begin. Meanwhile, we of faith can form an explotarory committee for the purpose of locating the “itchiest” hanging-rope in existance…

Mark | 4/1/2007, 1:51 pm EST

Is Chris Hitches, who works for your magazine and interviewed the Nigerian official who said that Saddam’s regime DID contact them about urnanium also a liar or do you have to have an “R” next to your name to be called a liar by liberal editors at Rolling Stone?

Also, were the British and Italian intelligence reports “lies” that showed multiple Iraq attempts for uranium?

Do you also think that Joe Wilson is “honest?”

If you say “yes” to this you are nothing more than a Bushhater with little interest in finding the truth and only in going after Republicans.

J.D. | 4/3/2007, 12:41 pm EST

Does this really matter? This is a charade to score political points. We’re already at war.

The Democrats in Congress have the power to cut off funding, but instead they are playing games with spending bills and going on vacation while people are getting blown up every day.

The Democrats have to cut off funding and if they don’t have the votes then they should shut the fuck up and support the troop surge. Anything less than complete funding cut off is craven. Non-binding bills and pork spending attached to war funding is a cowardly way to show their stance against the war…these useless acts are only hurting the troops and the morale of the American people.

If the Dems won’t cut off funding, then they should shut up and sit down. We’re going to kill JIhadists and protect the West and the liberals can come along for the ride. Dems have to stop being pussies when faced with real responsibility in Congress and liberals in America have to stop being scared cowards when faced with the existential crisis we’re in right now.

Jed Clampett | 4/5/2007, 6:56 pm EST

Actually uncle Jed, it’s an attempt at finding the truth in how we were sent into a war and destroyed america’s world standing, made us loose focus of the real threat, gave Iran the country of Iraq, gave terrorism a great recruiting tool and raided the treasury and transferred public wealth to a few well connected companies with as much as a bidding process.

Tinfoil Hat | 4/14/2007, 7:43 pm EST

I have a hard time taking in you Cons’ “live and let live” philosophy about this. Isn’t this the same party that stands for Law and Order, and Accountability? The same party that tirelessly pursued Clinton for the entire 8 years he was in office without a shred of believable evidence of wrongdoing? Don’t you think that hijacking intelligence, discounting the opinion of intellegence experts, and then cherry-picking what the president, congress, and public are exposed to creating a complete disaster of our foreign policy deserves to be looked at? I suppose you think the 9/11 commission did a comprehensive investigation too?

Tinfoil Hat | 4/16/2007, 3:47 am EST

Mark,
I assume you mean Chris Hitchens. He actually doesn’t “work” for RS but is a kind of “public intellectual”. Unfortunately Chris lost his liberal cred when he became an incurable paranoid after 9/11 (sort of like Dennis Miller?). I’m unfamiliar with the article you refer to. Why don’t you find a link for us, huh? The report used by Bush (which had already been discredited by CIA analysts) was a poorly forged fake that came from questionable Italian sources. The CIA refused to vet it, so Cheney had it routed through the British intelligence (tricky Dick II).

Post A Comment

Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

Name:

Comments:



Advertisement

Advertisement