Cheney Shoots Friend. Digby Smells Rat.

by hilzoy

From the AP:

"The shooting was first reported by the Corpus Christi Caller-Times. The vice president's office did not disclose the accident until the day after it happened."

I wasn't going to write about this at first, but something about this story kept niggling away in the back of my mind. I couldn't quite put my finger on it until I read Digby:

"OK, folks, I think I got enough information here to tell you about the contents of this fax that I got. Brace yourselves. This fax contains information that I have just been told will appear in a newsletter to Morgan Stanley sales personnel this afternoon... What it is is a bit of news which says... there's a Washington consulting firm that has scheduled the release of a report that will appear, it will be published, that claims that this shooting took place in an apartment owned by Lynn Cheney, and the body was then taken to the ranch.

This needs to be looked into. And if it's determined to be an accident it needs to be looked into again. And again."

I'm not a rumor-monger. And I know that a lot of commenters -- some disguised as pediatricians from Memphis -- will write in objecting to what I have to say. I know about them; they've been given their marching orders. They'll say that there's no evidence that this was anything but a hunting accident. But what would you expect? These people are very good at hiding or destroying evidence. But anyone who thinks this was just an ordinary hunting accident, when the only people who have investigated it are law enforcement officers -- and we know how thoroughly they have been politicized -- probably thinks that you could blast your way into an airline cockpit with a pair of exploding sneakers.

There were an awful lot of black helicopters flying over southern Texas yesterday. There's a Masonic Temple in Corpus Christi. Sex offenders roam free there. And only a few hundred miles away, hundreds of women have been killed and abducted, and no one knows why. Coincidence? I don't think so.

But you won't find this anywhere in the mainstream press. You just don't do this. You don't call out Dick Cheney. You don't call out the Vice President like this. Not, not when you're supposedly on his side.

Mark my words, though: the Harry Whittington hunting accident was not a hunting accident. Sure, it will never be "proved". What would you expect? If Patrick Fitzgerald or James Comey or anyone else tries to do anything about it, someone will just take them aside and ask them one little question: "Do the words 'the Armstrong Ranch' mean anything to you?" And simple as that, their investigations will just disappear. That's the way these guys operate, folks. Welcome to their world.

***

If anyone is wondering why I'm writing this, three short words: click the links.

Comments

[Gary Farber]

"Why were two men on a hunting weekend at a remote Texas ranch..."

Not clear what you mean by "remote." Are there many urban 50,000-acre Texas ranches? It's a pretty prominent place, the Armstrong Ranch, as I posted about on Sunday afternoon.

"...with two women not their wives?"

Which two women? The owner, Katherine Armstrong (who hardly needs an excuse to know Cheney or Bush), and Lea Anne McBride? I'm not quite clear if the latter was on the scene or not. And reportedly there are various unspecified others in the hunting party (which would be usual for that sort of thing). Is it your understanding that lots of 64-year-old">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne+Cheney">64-year-old wives tend to accompany their 65-year-old husbands on bird-hunting excursions? Is it unusual for them not to?

If you wish to suggest a sekrit rendez-vous, there would certainly be plenty of other opportunities for Cheney to engage in such, so singling out this one for such suspicion, if that's what you're doing, seems to me fairly arbitrary, absent some specific thought you're not yet offering.

It's, of course, possible, but I tend to favor Ockham.

[Paul]

Gary, FWIW, personally I believe that you are never anything less than "indispensable." Annoying--sometimes. But always indispensable.

[Gary Farber]

Ugh: "No cite, just speculation (probably should have said "rather obvious to me")."

Ah.

Will:

"Do you have a cite for your assertion that the quail in question in this incident were "captive birds"? "

Gary:

I wasnt referring to this incident but the other ones.

Ah.

Faintly more detail on the hunting party, and Armstrong's lobbying, in the update I just added to the (current) bottom of this post.

Paul: "Annoying--sometimes. But always indispensable."

I'll take it. Please now use mind-control satellite rays on Big Name Bloggers to see that the world properly recognizes this great truth, hokay?

[bob mcmanus]

Just read over at Rozen's place that Mr Willeford was at the ranch, so much more likely some kind of threesome thing.

Looking forward to having this 20 word joke demolished with a thousand. Including an accurate word-count.