Karl Rove possibly tried for perjury?

[Tab]

If he gets impeached I am so throwing a party.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Dasm. I hadn't looked at the article yet and now you've spoiled all the fun. Shucks!

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: shurato

Whether or not Rove is guilty is not the point here.

Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball.

Way to take a single statement out of my post, and out of context, and murder it, purely to utter an ad hom.

First of all, I'm agnostic. So way to take one swing and miss.

Second of all, I'm addressing the commentary from the regular loonie peanut gallery who just have to immediately ASSume and make the normal left look like idiots by mere association. I am not a right-winger and the vast majority of my views are liberal and lefty.

Third, if you have the need to call me names, save it for when you're standing directly in front of me. Let's see if your eStones are as big then.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

But remember, the Cons on here and going to call for original tapes of the telephone calls. A simple transcription will not do.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: shurato

Whether or not Rove is guilty is not the point here.

Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball.

Way to take a single statement out of my post, and out of context, and murder it, purely to utter an ad hom.

First of all, I'm agnostic. So way to take one swing and miss.

Second of all, I'm addressing the commentary from the regular loonie peanut gallery who just have to immediately ASSume and make the normal left look like idiots by mere association. I am not a right-winger and the vast majority of my views are liberal and lefty.

Third, if you have the need to call me names, save it for when you're standing directly in front of me. Let's see if your eStones are as big then.

Oh please. Your idea of arguing and debate is mostly personal attacks. I see no reason why you should expect better from other people when you yourself have problems.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

You really should spank the monkey and get it out of the way.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

But remember, the Cons on here and going to call for original tapes of the telephone calls. A simple transcription will not do.

Prior to reading that article, I had never heard of any confirmation that Bush knew BEFOREHAND. That was news to me. It doesn't surprise me in the least, but it was news to me. That testimony will have a significant impact once it's officially announced that Rove was the outer.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

You really should spank the monkey and get it out of the way.

So, instead of personal attacks... answer me these simple questions. They are straightforward and have no political leaning whatsoever....

1) Do you feel that outing a covert CIA agent is a bad thing?

2) Do you feel that such action is worthy of full investigation?

3) Do you feel that anyone that is found guilty of such action should be punished with the full extent of the law?

4) If a President or Vice President had knowledge beforehand or ordered the outing of a CIA agent, do you feel it is a impeachable offense?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

LOL. Talk about jumping the gun. Now they're doing it from the future.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

LOL. Talk about jumping the gun. Now they're doing it from the future.

So, instead of connecting dots, you're just going to insult. Typical.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

You really should spank the monkey and get it out of the way.

So, instead of personal attacks... answer me these simple questions. They are straightforward and have no political leaning whatsoever....

1) Do you feel that outing a covert CIA agent is a bad thing?

2) Do you feel that such action is worthy of full investigation?

3) Do you feel that anyone that is found guilty of such action should be punished with the full extent of the law?

4) If a President or Vice President had knowledge beforehand or ordered the outing of a CIA agent, do you feel it is a impeachable offense?

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4a. No
4b. Yes

But let's not put the cart before the horse. You guys have already convicted Dubbya and Rove before anyone else has even has a chance to fall on their sword.

My prediction: Someone in the administration (not Rove, Bush or Cheney) will be found to be the leaker. He/She will swear that they did it on their own. "It was wrong and I'm sorry." The case will drag on for a couple years and in the end they will be pardoned when Dubbya leaves office.

That's why in my previous post I said not to get too excited about this if you're looking for a Dubbya Admin blood-bath. Wait till the "facts" come out.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

You really should spank the monkey and get it out of the way.

So, instead of personal attacks... answer me these simple questions. They are straightforward and have no political leaning whatsoever....

1) Do you feel that outing a covert CIA agent is a bad thing?

2) Do you feel that such action is worthy of full investigation?

3) Do you feel that anyone that is found guilty of such action should be punished with the full extent of the law?

4) If a President or Vice President had knowledge beforehand or ordered the outing of a CIA agent, do you feel it is a impeachable offense?

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4a. No
4b. Yes

So in this situation, if Rove told the President... "Hey George, I'm going to get that Plame bitch"

And if George either said nothing or did nothing to stop him, that's ok?

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4a. No
4b. Yes

[/quote]

So in this situation, if Rove told the President... "Hey George, I'm going to get that Plame bitch"

And if George either said nothing or did nothing to stop him, that's ok?
[/quote]

How is Dubbya supposed to know what he plans on doing?
(Hypothetical debates will drive ya nuts... Why not wait to see what's really goin on before you get so worked up about it?)

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: shurato

Whether or not Rove is guilty is not the point here.

Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball.

Way to take a single statement out of my post, and out of context, and murder it, purely to utter an ad hom.

First of all, I'm agnostic. So way to take one swing and miss.

Second of all, I'm addressing the commentary from the regular loonie peanut gallery who just have to immediately ASSume and make the normal left look like idiots by mere association. I am not a right-winger and the vast majority of my views are liberal and lefty.

Third, if you have the need to call me names, save it for when you're standing directly in front of me. Let's see if your eStones are as big then.

Oh please. Your idea of arguing and debate is mostly personal attacks. I see no reason why you should expect better from other people when you yourself have problems.

I call out the loonie left, just like people in here hammer on the religious right. What do I get in return?

From Harvey:

"If you don't have facts to disprove any of the above, and the best you can come up with is petty name calling, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, and you should STFU until you have something to contribute to the planet better than TasetslikeChickensh8. "

From Darkhawk:

"I'm thinking the latter, for you don't give a crap about treason, pergury or the like because you sir, are a hack of the very worst kind."

But wait, I'm the flamebaiter according to Loki:

"nothing to do with liberal/conservative, despite your best attempts at flamebait."

Harvey just has to chime in again:

"Until you can legitimize any of the vapid crap you post, you should start by pointing that finger at yourself. Careful -- It might go off, and you'd let all the hot air out of that empty skull."

shurato adds:

"Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball. "

And what kind of comments does TC have to add?:

"But remember, the Cons on here and going to call for original tapes of the telephone calls. A simple transcription will not do. "

But people get all bent out of shape when I dis the libruhls.

So I think you need to get your facts stright here. Of course, facts are generally kryptonite to the liberal supermen around here.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4a. No
4b. Yes

So in this situation, if Rove told the President... "Hey George, I'm going to get that Plame bitch"

And if George either said nothing or did nothing to stop him, that's ok?
[/quote]

How is Dubbya supposed to know what he plans on doing?
(Hypothetical debates will drive ya nuts... Why not wait to see what's really goin on before you get so worked up about it?)

[/quote]

Frankly, I'm looking at this in a very pointed way. I'm connecting dots on who knew what, when they knew it and why nothing was done to stop it and why was it done to begin with.

Plus, if Bush knew beforehand that Plame was going to be leaked and knew who did it, then he lied when he said that he would have an extensive WH investigation.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: shurato

Whether or not Rove is guilty is not the point here.

Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball.

Way to take a single statement out of my post, and out of context, and murder it, purely to utter an ad hom.

First of all, I'm agnostic. So way to take one swing and miss.

Second of all, I'm addressing the commentary from the regular loonie peanut gallery who just have to immediately ASSume and make the normal left look like idiots by mere association. I am not a right-winger and the vast majority of my views are liberal and lefty.

Third, if you have the need to call me names, save it for when you're standing directly in front of me. Let's see if your eStones are as big then.

Oh please. Your idea of arguing and debate is mostly personal attacks. I see no reason why you should expect better from other people when you yourself have problems.

I call out the loonie left, just like people in here hammer on the religious right. What do I get in return?

From Harvey:

"If you don't have facts to disprove any of the above, and the best you can come up with is petty name calling, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, and you should STFU until you have something to contribute to the planet better than TasetslikeChickensh8. "

From Darkhawk:

"I'm thinking the latter, for you don't give a crap about treason, pergury or the like because you sir, are a hack of the very worst kind."

But wait, I'm the flamebaiter according to Loki:

"nothing to do with liberal/conservative, despite your best attempts at flamebait."

Harvey just has to chime in again:

"Until you can legitimize any of the vapid crap you post, you should start by pointing that finger at yourself. Careful -- It might go off, and you'd let all the hot air out of that empty skull."

shurato adds:

"Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball. "

And what kind of comments does TC have to add?:

"But remember, the Cons on here and going to call for original tapes of the telephone calls. A simple transcription will not do. "

But people get all bent out of shape when I dis the libruhls.

So I think you need to get your facts stright here. Of course, facts are generally kryptonite to the liberal supermen around here.

So are you actually going to say anything constructive in this thread or are you just going to be like you usually are?

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

You really should spank the monkey and get it out of the way.

So, instead of personal attacks... answer me these simple questions. They are straightforward and have no political leaning whatsoever....

1) Do you feel that outing a covert CIA agent is a bad thing?

2) Do you feel that such action is worthy of full investigation?

3) Do you feel that anyone that is found guilty of such action should be punished with the full extent of the law?

4) If a President or Vice President had knowledge beforehand or ordered the outing of a CIA agent, do you feel it is a impeachable offense?

Well, it wasn't personal attacks, Being amused as I was, I was just playfully pointing out what seemed rather obvious, that in all of your excitement that you posted an article that is over a year old. If it was personal attacks I would have called you a dumbass or a dumbfvck or a liberal dip sh!t or or something along those lines. I will try to be more sensitive to your feelings in the future


1.) yes
2.) yes
3.) yes
4.) yes

HOWEVER What I feel is not very important in the big picture. The only thing that matters is what the laws on the subject are, and the due process that takes place to conclude the issue/s.

Now, I don't want this to get to ugly quickly, but you do got to realize, that I can see what you are made of, in all of this...... Heh heh...

 

[shurato]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: shurato

Whether or not Rove is guilty is not the point here.

Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball.

Way to take a single statement out of my post, and out of context, and murder it, purely to utter an ad hom.

First of all, I'm agnostic. So way to take one swing and miss.

Second of all, I'm addressing the commentary from the regular loonie peanut gallery who just have to immediately ASSume and make the normal left look like idiots by mere association. I am not a right-winger and the vast majority of my views are liberal and lefty.

Third, if you have the need to call me names, save it for when you're standing directly in front of me. Let's see if your eStones are as big then.

1st Trust me...don't assume that we're all geeks or old men on this board. Don't even attempt to make any subtle idle threat at me. Don't even go there. And if you do, I'd be happy to oblige. My e-stones are just as big as my real ones. You don't want to find out. Not that you'd believe me anyway.

2nd...i call you a slimeball because I rather use that short term to describe you then go in lengths detail in describing how much of a slimeball you are.

3rd I'm glad your an agnostic...so am I...your too obtuse to even recognize what I'm saying because your blinded by your own prejudice. It was merely a reference to the people you so defend so dearly at every moment in a facetious manner.. it has nothing to do with any religious conotation. You want to assume that because you want to assume im some wacked out liberal because I dare say anything negative in light towards YOUR party.

4th You can continue to deny your not a right winger when all your posts say otherwise.
I guess if your not a right winger like you say and have mainly liberal and lefty views, I guess than that makes you George Bush's B!TCH by the way you defend pretty much anything he does. The man can't do no wrong can he. But but clinton!

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Bush Retains Lawyer

It seems that Bush is worried enough to hire a lawyer after two witnesses have testified in front of a grand jury that Bush himself knew about the outing BEFOREHAND and did nothing to stop it.

Uh oh. This could get ugly quickly.

Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

So, how long does "ugly quickly" take?

Well, now that it's being confirmed that Rove was the outer, then it should pick up in speed. But yes, it is a wait and see thing.

You really should spank the monkey and get it out of the way.

So, instead of personal attacks... answer me these simple questions. They are straightforward and have no political leaning whatsoever....

1) Do you feel that outing a covert CIA agent is a bad thing?

2) Do you feel that such action is worthy of full investigation?

3) Do you feel that anyone that is found guilty of such action should be punished with the full extent of the law?

4) If a President or Vice President had knowledge beforehand or ordered the outing of a CIA agent, do you feel it is a impeachable offense?

Well, it wasn't personal attacks, Being amused as I was, I was just playfully pointing out what seemed rather obvious, that in all of your excitement that you posted an article that is over a year old. If it was personal attacks I would have called you a dumbass or a dumbfvck or a liberal dip sh!t or or something along those lines. I will try to be more sensitive to your feelings in the future


1.) yes
2.) yes
3.) yes
4.) yes

HOWEVER What I feel is not very important in the big picture. The only thing that matters is what the laws on the subject are, and the due process that takes place to conclude the issue/s.

Now, I don't want this to get to ugly quickly, but you do got to realize, that I can see what you are made of, in all of this...... Heh heh...

Well insulting comments are personal attacks, but that matters not and I have zero need for your "sensitivity". But nonetheless, thank you for answering my questions.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
So are you actually going to say anything constructive in this thread or are you just going to be like you usually are?

What constructive can be said about allegations that have yet to be confirmed?

If you want constructive then I'll use a favorite phrase of the liberals - "Innocent until proven guilty."

Do you care to discuss that?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: shurato

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: shurato

Whether or not Rove is guilty is not the point here.

Tastelikechicken, that's precisely the point here..you just want to divert the attention away from something possibly damaging to your right wing gods. Get a life man, don't come into a thread that you know what kinds of comments will be in here and then whine about it and stray from the actual topic at hand you slimeball.

Way to take a single statement out of my post, and out of context, and murder it, purely to utter an ad hom.

First of all, I'm agnostic. So way to take one swing and miss.

Second of all, I'm addressing the commentary from the regular loonie peanut gallery who just have to immediately ASSume and make the normal left look like idiots by mere association. I am not a right-winger and the vast majority of my views are liberal and lefty.

Third, if you have the need to call me names, save it for when you're standing directly in front of me. Let's see if your eStones are as big then.

1st Trust me...don't assume that we're all geeks or old men on this board. Don't even attempt to make any subtle idle threat at me. Don't even go there. And if you do, I'd be happy to oblige. My e-stones are just as big as my real ones. You don't want to find out. Not that you'd believe me anyway.

2nd...i call you a slimeball because I rather use that short term to describe you then go in lengths detail in describing how much of a slimeball you are.

3rd I'm glad your an agnostic...so am I...your too obtuse to even recognize what I'm saying because your blinded by your own prejudice. It was merely a reference to the people you so defend so dearly at every moment in a facetious manner.. it has nothing to do with any religious conotation. You want to assume that because you want to assume im some wacked out liberal because I dare say anything negative in light towards YOUR party.

4th You can continue to deny your not a right winger when all your posts say otherwise.
I guess if your not a right winger like you say and have mainly liberal and lefty views, I guess than that makes you George Bush's B!TCH by the way you defend pretty much anything he does. The man can't do no wrong can he. But but clinton!

Blah blah blah.

Talk is cheap, pal.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
So are you actually going to say anything constructive in this thread or are you just going to be like you usually are?

What constructive can be said about allegations that have yet to be confirmed?

If you want constructive then I'll use a favorite phrase of the liberals - "Innocent until proven guilty."

Do you care to discuss that?

Since when does that stop anybody from speculating the ramifications if something were to be true? Why should it?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I call out the loonie left, just like people in here hammer on the religious right. What do I get in return?

From Harvey:

"If you don't have facts to disprove any of the above, and the best you can come up with is petty name calling, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, and you should STFU until you have something to contribute to the planet better than TasetslikeChickensh8."

Aww... Is the little boy going to throw a little pissy fit? :roll:

When you quoted my question, I think you forgot to include my entire post that preceded the statement, including FACTS and links that blew your idiotic assertions and childish name calling into the dust. I even took the time to highlight the word, FACT so even an intentionally self deluded blowhard like you could see where I blew.

The question, itself, was at the end of my post and simply suggested that, if you can't reply with FACTS (Darn -- There's that nasty old word again) on the subject, you aren't saying anything, and you really should STFU, if for no other reason than because you're embarrassing yourself. :Q

Don't worry about your credibility. It's already shot. :laugh: