"it never went fully operational" sounds like semantic bullshit, and I believe it had to do with Cheney's "executive assassination rings." Once it's realized what the plan actually was, there's no way to imagine the shit storm that would follow the revelation of its being enacted.
Don't see how Obama's "sympathetically" protecting Dick Cheney. You lost me at the end of that article. Just as the unique nature of Obama's candidacy necessitated that he receive Secret Service protection at an early stage in his run, so Cheney's puppet-mastery demands protection post-office.
Why does there have to be a conspiracy for the Secret Service to protect someone who was, by all accounts, running the show at the White House for eight years? And why does the conspiracy have to involve this scandal instead of others? Gawker's assertions make no sense in this regard.
@kimberlydebarge: To dignify this: former veep's don't receive secret service protection. A presidential candidate is one thing; a guy whose job is (supposed to) essentially act as a backup (and not a policy architect) is another. You used the word "conspiracy," we went with "far stretch to imagine..one of many reasons." But that's projecting for you. Point: made!
@Foster Kamer: What's known is that Cheney's Secret Service protection has been extended, and that Obama had to approve this. You don't know whether he did this sympathetically, reluctantly, resentfully, or with a song in his heart. She called you out on a perfectly valid point: you're putting a lot of English on the facts, and making insinuations that you don't have any valid basis for.
I'm never surprised by anything Dick does because he never bothers to conceal his utter contempt for American values, from "having other priorities" during the Vietnam war when he was called (five times) to fight, to tilting our energy policy to Big Oil for the past near-decade, to engineering a war to enrich the company he headed just before handing himself the job of Vice President. There is nothing in Dick Cheney's career that hasn't been about enriching and aggrandizing Dick Cheney.
In short, he way out-Al Frankened even Al Franken.
Rat Bastards? Wicked wit there chief. You, if_i_only_had_a_heart, have been a troll on this site for so long I think most of the "stars" around here accept your shit without thinking twice.
Go ahead and ban me Gawker and kindly don't single dip on the double standard.
@chelseabill: Eh, I kind of like if_i_only if only for all the lowercase, unpunctuated weirdness he/she brings to the table. But yeah, that was weak. Star revoked.
@Foster Kamer: Funny, I would have promoted a comment from chelseabill just to refute the notion that conservative voices aren't welcome amongst the comments, but this didn't really rise to much more than a personal attack and attempt to start a flame war.
At first I thought this was the big reveal on wholesale domestic interception of phone and internet traffic but the "no domestic" stuff in the story kills that line...
The only other thing I can think of that would "seem OK" right after 9/11 but not far afterward would be some sort of crash project aimed at outright assassination of Al Qaeda or possibly the higher level folks (saudi?) who were responsible for logistics and financing.
If not a hit squad than maybe some sort of program that meant nasty things for US citizens overseas -- that would not fall under the "domestic" umbrella.
Scary stuff - cutting out the "gang of eight" on this stuff cuts right to the heart of a democratic republic.
@chrisdag: That's just about the only thing the CIA haven't done - the outright assassination of suspected terrorists in the modern, urban world. Not even middle east countries, but european and asian countries too. Or people very high up the food chain - original financers like the Saudi Royal family.
Either way whatever this is is pretty intense. The CIA is pretty secretive, and I can imaging these guys have a "we do what we need to do" mentality. And for them to not object when this program was cancelled means it's pretty nasty.
@Pope John Peeps II: I can't say about the CIA, but when my uncle was in Iraq, he sent video of military people lining up suspected terrorists and just gunning them down. They also use them for target practice (let them run then use a sniper rifle to pick them off). No trial or anything, of course. It's an ugly little tidbit you won't hear about in the usual day-to-day war coverage.
@seyswho: That's atrocious. But the kind of atrocious that could be countenanced by the CIA since nobody would really know about it. I wonder what the kind of atrocious that the CIA wouldn't countenance is?
Also, what did you do with those videos? Seems like the kind of thing that's very horrible, and very easily leaked to the media?
@Pope John Peeps II: 20-1 it was some sort of "asset neutralization" directive. A couple of the articles say it was designed to give the CIA a "needed capability".
My guess is that they planned how to kill people but never actually killed people.
the shadiest dick? really? is he really any shadier than dick clark? how do you think that guy maintains the stamina to run rockin' new year every year? thru genetics?
I can only hope that more and more awful stories about Cheney surface before he dies, so he can live to see the backlash against his administration. I honestly think that will be the only thing that would cause his shriveled raisin-like heart an ounce of regret.
07/12/09
07/12/09
07/13/09
07/12/09
Why does there have to be a conspiracy for the Secret Service to protect someone who was, by all accounts, running the show at the White House for eight years? And why does the conspiracy have to involve this scandal instead of others? Gawker's assertions make no sense in this regard.
07/12/09
07/12/09
07/11/09
In short, he way out-Al Frankened even Al Franken.
07/11/09
Rat Bastards? Wicked wit there chief. You, if_i_only_had_a_heart, have been a troll on this site for so long I think most of the "stars" around here accept your shit without thinking twice.
Go ahead and ban me Gawker and kindly don't single dip on the double standard.
07/12/09
07/12/09
07/11/09
The only other thing I can think of that would "seem OK" right after 9/11 but not far afterward would be some sort of crash project aimed at outright assassination of Al Qaeda or possibly the higher level folks (saudi?) who were responsible for logistics and financing.
If not a hit squad than maybe some sort of program that meant nasty things for US citizens overseas -- that would not fall under the "domestic" umbrella.
Scary stuff - cutting out the "gang of eight" on this stuff cuts right to the heart of a democratic republic.
07/11/09
Either way whatever this is is pretty intense. The CIA is pretty secretive, and I can imaging these guys have a "we do what we need to do" mentality. And for them to not object when this program was cancelled means it's pretty nasty.
07/11/09
07/11/09
Also, what did you do with those videos? Seems like the kind of thing that's very horrible, and very easily leaked to the media?
07/11/09
My guess is that they planned how to kill people but never actually killed people.
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
Efforts were made to reach Mr. Cheney through terrestrial channels.
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
07/11/09
Looks like Holder may have the guts to put integrity above politics. Unlike some.
07/11/09