General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCould Bachmann be the "leaker?"
<snip>
Bachmann may have justified Boehners faith in her abilities, but he wasnt always so confident. When he appointed her to the committee last December, he made a special point of sitting Bachmann down to warn her that she could not let national secrets slip.
Which is why I find it interesting that Bachmann is the surrogate who pointed the finger in a direction away from her. It is far more likely that she or one of her staff would leak information like this, knowing it would infuriate people and embarrass the White House. From a timing standpoint, the pieces easily point to Bachmann as the leaker in the room, not the administration.
Crickets from George, of course. For him, it was all about pinning Axelrod down and casting doubt on President Obama's denial Friday.
<snip>
This from Axelrod on Steffy's show this morning... More at: http://crooksandliars.com/
calimary
(81,612 posts)Put it out there! Keep asking about it. Talk is cheap. And should always be followed by an "innocent" shrug and the comment "...hey, I'm just SAYING..."
Wounded Bear
(58,799 posts)that she isn't smart enough to leak information.
That actually has the support of the fact that most people know it's true.
monmouth
(21,078 posts)malaise
(269,365 posts)We can assume that one of them is the leaker
The way McCain and his toadies are carrying on about it makes it look even more apparent. And, given that Crazy Eyes its on the House committee dealing with national security, I wouldn't put it past her to leak information. It's another in an infinitely long string of GOP dirty tricks.
malaise
(269,365 posts)She is a raving lunatic ReTHUG
mercuryblues
(14,564 posts)from the beginning. During a debate she leaked info about Pakistan's nuclear sites. Didn't King have loose lips a while back? I can't find anything on the google about it because of this new leak.
SunSeeker
(51,827 posts)cynatnite
(31,011 posts)I can't stand her one bit, but she didn't get where she's at by being politically stupid.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Maybe she does not realize it takes more than one night to raise a kid. And the Bush administration outted Valery Plame and didn't w fire them.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Maybe she does not realize it takes more than one night to raise a kid. And the Bush administration outted Valery Plame and didn't w fire them.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)Her brain is incontinent!
demwing
(16,916 posts)that outta be a Birther term..."Obama isn't an incontinent citizen, but Mitt Romney was born incontinent...vote Romney 2012. Paid for by Americans for the Incontinent."
meow2u3
(24,779 posts)HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)jillan
(39,451 posts)is suspicious to me.
But Bachmann - she is stupid enough to do it.
GoCubsGo
(32,103 posts)That's why he's screaming for a grand jury, rather than letting the Justice Dept. handle it. I can't help but be reminded of Ken Starr, Lucianne Goldberg and Linda Tripp about now.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)McCain also turned a blind eye to corruption in the savings and loan market.
It would fit the pattern if McCain did have a hand in this leak.
bleever
(20,616 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)So it seems logical that plenty would leak out.
GoCubsGo
(32,103 posts)SaB2012
(101 posts)Besides, how would a member of Congress who isn't all that powerful get a hold of such sensitive information?
pacalo
(24,722 posts)Did you read the article?
A few snippets that address your points:
For nearly three years, national security leaks were few and far between. There were leaks from the White House, but most of them centered around domestic policy. Then John Boehner appointed Michele Bachmann to the House Select Committee on Intelligence. Please, no snickering. For 2011, Bachmann was preoccupied with her primary run at the GOP nomination. Few national security leaks occurred, and none of consequence.
Now we come to 2012, and since Mitt Romney won the nomination for President, there have been several major national security leaks, which the press questioned President Obama about at last week's press conference, and to which Michele Bachmann has responded.
But if you look at these articles that were in The New York Times, on both the Stuxnet worm that went after the Iranian nuclear program, and the president's going over this so-called "kill list" for drones, in both cases they quote members of the president's national security team who were in the room.
(...)
Stephanopoulos: So somebody who was in the room with the president was giving out some of this information or at least discussing classified information.
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/micheles-mendacity-national-security-editio
SaB2012
(101 posts)I wouldn't believe that for either a Repub or Democratic administration.
pacalo
(24,722 posts)you seem to be dismissing too easily the fact that Bachman, a beacon of nutwingery & vicious political bias, would not be the least worthy of suspicion.
I agree with the writer of the C&L article:
Isn't this accusation that Bachmann may be the leaker also based on pure assumption? Just asking. To mangle a well-known cliché, two assumptions don't make a confirmation. This is shades of George II -- i.e. that he is too dumb to tie his own shoes and read anything beyond "My Pet Goat," but gets credited for masterminding vast political intrigues. I think some are giving too much credit where it's due.