Capitol hill blue, reliable-yes or no?

[AlCzervik]

i don't know so thats why i'm asking, i've seen conflicting opinions here before about them. Please and thank you.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Yes

[smbolisnch]

2. No has always been the popular opinion, until this.

I still say NO.

[SmokingJacket]

3. well... I choose to believe it.

Just as some of us choose to believe in the flying spaghetti monster. It makes me happy to believe in it.

But as for independent confirmation of their stories? Er, no.

I believe it's a rumor rag. Some rumors may be true, but others certainly aren't. Take it for what it's worth.

[Renew Deal]

4. No

They're stories are very sensational, but not very credible. They are the only ones reporting the same story (Bush is nuts) over and over and over. Although I think he's whacked, I don't trust CHB.

[jonnyblitz]

6. yep, that seems to be the consensus. nt

[seemslikeadream]

5. Good enough for LBN

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=602189




DO THE MATH

THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A MILITARY ORDER
http://www.bushflash.com/buddy.html

[NMDemDist2]

10. I don't think it's usually allowed in LBN, sometimes things

do slip through the cracks though :shrug:

[sattahipdeep]

16. A little off topic....

Looks like it's going to be a long 48 hours
....
On Saturday, the population of Crawford
is expected to swell by thousands.

The intense heat and the possibility of clashes between pro-war and
anti-war supporters may make Saturday a dangerous day. Caution
is being urged and people are instructed to keep their tempers at
bay.

http://198.65.14.85/News/2005/31-40/34news15.htm

....
Thousands: Crawford or Bust

By Deborah Mathews
ICONOCLAST REPORTER

CRAWFORD Move America Forward is heading the movement themed
"You Don’t Speak For Me Cindy" which has involved a trip from
California to Crawford. The organization has been involved in
organizing a rally to be held in Crawford at Pirate Field on
Saturday, Aug. 27.

http://198.65.14.85/News/2005/31-40/34news16.htm

:hug: seemslikeadream :pals:

With all the information coming out it's information overload
so....we are each being selective as to what we focus on.

[jfxgillis]

7. No. But that doesn't mean ...

... it's not fun to read.

[donheld]

8. IMHO Yes or No answers not good enough

What are the reasons for voting one way or the other?

[Boredtodeath]

9. No, Thompson was a freeper

Until he told one too many truths about the Bush Administration and they banned him.

Do a search on FR for him.
on edit:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?name=doug+thompson

He's just trying to play the left now for funding.

more:
If anybody wanted to contact me they could have done it here. I've been a member of Free Republic almost since the beginning.

I'm not surprised you didn't turn anything up on Google. People in certain lines of work don't have web sites and don't get quoted in the paper that often. I've known Terry Wilkinson for 20+ years and his decision to go public was a painful one that I'm sure will bring recriminations. But he loves his country a lot more than any political party or politician. I've received some emails today regarding his comments and have forwarded them on to him. It's his decision as to whether or not he wishes to respond.

But I don't feed anyone's desire for a witch hunt. When we ran the stories about Bill Clinton's sexual assaults on women, we identified a number of the women and the stories were widely discussed here. I don't recall anyone at Free Republic demanding "proof" of their identity although I did have a number of liberal media types hounding me for more information. I didn't share additional information with them on Bill Clinton's victims and I won't to anyone else on Terry Wilkinson.

It has been said here that I hate George Bush. I don't. I do have problems with some of the actions of his administration and I feel he was wrong to use undocumented information to justify the war with Iraq -- a war that Capitol Hill Blue supported without hesitation in a strong editorial on our home page.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/942488/posts?q=1&&page=80

[MadisonProgressive]

11. I findit very reliable. Credible? That's another story!

[orpupilofnature57]

12. The proof is in the Iraq,If we/they don't stop them/Shrub who TFW ?

NO!

[aquart]

13. George being George, I think it will turn out to be

More true than not.

But with no confirmation? Nuh uh.

Come on, folks, can we not find one other source for this?

[NYCGirl]

14. Check out this post for more info on CHB:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4467476

The guy who runs it (and writes ALL of it, notice that there are no bylines on any articles) was a GOP operative...seems he wrote the same kinds of "going batty" articles about Clinton during the Monica stuff.

[wtmusic]

15. no no no no no no no

gossip. ignore. Don't we get enough lies out of that *other* party?

[carpetbagger]

17. "democratic porn"

That's how I've heard it described before.

Seems to fit. Maybe, just maybe, some of those Penthouse stories are true.

[punpirate]

18. I'd like to contrast them with...

... say, another writer who depends frequently on necessarily anonymous sources, maybe, Sy Hersh. Hersh's stories are frequently correct. They end up being verified by documentary release (even his warnings last year that the Abu Ghraib scandals would get much worse have been proven to be true, backhandedly, by the DoD's attempts to avoid court-ordered release of more documentation of those scandals).

Thompson was also very badly burned by a single source, whom he had claimed to be previously reliable, about three years ago, on a pretty big story, and had to write an apology. It's still not clear if he and the others at CHB learned a lesson from that. When one wants to write a particular story without adequate evidence, the tone of it changes, and the tone of these stories suggests to me that they're being put on by a single source. Whether or not that's being done explictly by the WH or without their knowledge is yet another question that ought to be answered in some way.

It's not news that Bush demands utter and absolute agreement from those around him, nor is it that Bush has a sudden temper--those facts have been known for decades. These articles mean to suggest that there's something going on way beyond the usual. That would be, even with the media we have, and Washington as it is, a big story--and yet, CHB is the only one pushing it. Even the other notable Washington blogs shy away from this, likely because of a shortage of evidence.

The DSM is a big deal, because there was credible documentation. The same is true of the forged Niger uranium documents.

The obvious problem is that in an era of news stage-managed by the White House, people are hungry for some truth, and when they see something which concurs with their own preconceived notions, they're going to see it as truth, even when it may not be. It's a bit like The Barnes Review's "White House Insider" articles--they may be fun to read, but they don't ring true.

Now, if CHB were to run a series of articles based on several independently corroborated sources attesting to some genuinely aberrant behavior by Bush--rather than breathlessly described temper tantrums--I might take them more seriously.

Cheers.

[Walt Starr]

19. Nope, any story that breaks on CHB has been proven to be bullshit

He's phonier than a Bush 9/11 dollar bill.

[Quixote1818]

21. Could you give us some examples? Thanks nt

[Quixote1818]

20. I think so. Here is why

THE SWARM

There are a multitude of signs that the Bush administration is being "swarmed" in what is becoming a feeding frenzy as opposition is surfacing from many places inside the government, including the military. The signs are not hard to find.

The June 3rd issue of Capitol Hill Blue, the newspaper published for members of Congress, bore the headline "Bush Knew About Leak of CIA Operative's Name". That article virtually guaranteed that the Plame investigation had enough to pursue Bush criminally. The story's lead sentence described a criminal, prosecutable offense: "Witnesses told a federal grand jury President George W. Bush knew about, and took no action to stop, the release of a covert CIA operative's name to a journalist in an attempt to discredit her husband, a critic of administration policy in Iraq."

A day later, on June 4th Capitol Hill Blue took another hard shot at the administration. Titled "Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides", the story's first four paragraphs say everything.

President George W. Bush's increasingly erratic behavior and wide mood swings has the halls of the West Wing buzzing lately as aides privately express growing concern over their leader's state of mind.

In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats and others that he classifies as "enemies of the state."

Worried White House aides paint a portrait of a man on the edge, increasingly wary of those who disagree with him and paranoid of a public that no longer trusts his policies in Iraq or at home.

"It reminds me of the Nixon days," says a longtime GOP political consultant with contacts in the White House. "Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out to get him. That's the mood over there."

The attacks have not stopped. On June 8th, the same paper followed with another story headlined, "Lawyers Told Bush He Could Order Suspects Tortured".



http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060804_coup_detat.html

[Lecky]

22. Newp

[Eric J in MN]

23. No.

Stories about Bush going crazy, based on nothing.

[proud patriot]

24. I remember they were wrong about something before

and it burned many people who put their name/blog
to the story .

I'm not saying they are always wrong , I just remember
an incident when they weren't correct .

[Technowitch]

25. Answer no, Locking

Capitol Hill Blue is as legitimate a news source as Art Bell is a rational scientist.

Or, just pick up a copy of the National Enquirer sometime and imagine it with political DC-related gossip instead.

-Technowitch
DU Moderator