Cheney - drunk?

[SonomaCat]

This is a thought that didn't occur to me at first, but when I finally read through the timeline of what happened with the hunting incident/shooting/accident/whatever, it raised some questions.

Local law enforcement wasn't allowed to interview Cheney until 14 hours after the shooting. Why not? Is there a chance that Cheney had enough alcohol in his system to be worried (which would also explain the accident itself)?

I've already heard the right-wing talk show hosts scream that this suggestion is stupid because "the secret service was there, so 'law enforcement' was there the whole time so the local yokels weren't needed, grrrrr!"

Yeah, but ... the secret service works for the V.P. They aren't exactly an independent law enforcement group that would pursue charges against their boss ... any more so than the secret service agents in the past have testified against their bosses (Clinton, etc.). That's just not their job.

I'm not saying that Cheney was drunk, but the whole timeline is very strange and does suggest that the whole truth isn't being told. This could either mean that he really is hiding something, or that he simply played the PR game very poorly in this situation.

And in the bigger picture, the administration looks bad either way because this whole thing is simply embarrassing and wasn't handled in a open way that suggests that Cheney was being completely forthright. Looking at the polls (which are important as they are a gauge of how effective one can be as a leader), this episode was a bigger deal than I first thought.

[rtb]

I say, who care's? If you are the Vice President and have access to the quick medical attention of the secret service, etc. your first instinct wouldn't be to call the sheriff, it would be to worry about the guy you just shot.

Secondly, does it matter when the VP told people he shot a friend? In any other hunting accident do we expect the shooter to call the media right away and inform them they just shot their good friend?

I just don't understand the media's outrage at the timing of telling the media, etc. It was a hunting accident among friends. Sometimes I think everyone is grasping at straws to make every issued a bigger deal. But when someone shoots someone else I think that is a big enough issue.

[SonomaCat]

If any of us shot someone else while hunting and refused to the speak to local law enforcement until the next day ... it would be a very big deal (not to the press, but certainly to us on a criminal level).

I'm now seeing that's why it is a big deal in many respects. Not so much on the press side (although being a VP does mean that you have to be worried about the press for PR purposes), but certainly on the side of everybody going silent right after it happened and restricting the flow of information about the accident.

There are a couple times that I would have loved to get a 14 hour mulligan after I did something stupid to keep the police at bay ... but most of us don't have that luxury. Most people would assert the VP shouldn't, either.

If we was drunk, it would be a very, very big deal. If he wasn't ... speaking to local law enforcement and (for PR purposes) the media right away would have eliminated any suggestion of that possibility.

[Ponycat]

Law enforcement has already ruled out alcohol and or any wrong doing. Cheney admitted to having one beer at lunch and this was a late afternoon hunt. This is the media's baby and only the media's. No body else cares. The media is making it personal and not even reporting the facts of the case.

[Ponycat]

If any of us shot someone else while hunting and refused to the speak to local law enforcement until the next day

Where are you getting that he refused to do anything. Law enforcement has cleared him of any wrong doing. It isn't like he refused to let the FBI investigate a suspicious suicide.

[SonomaCat]

Law enforcement has already ruled out alcohol and or any wrong doing. Cheney admitted to having one beer at lunch and this was a late afternoon hunt. This is the media's baby and only the media's. No body else cares. The media is making it personal and not even reporting the facts of the case.

The locals did say that alcohol wasn't involved, but what are they basing that on? They didn't see him until the next day, and there was no alcohol test administered. Apparently they based their report on interviews they took the next day ... meaning they took his word for it.

Cheney also said that the guy was 30 yards away at the time, but that appears to defy physics in terms of the penetration of the pellets into his body.

The more I read, the curiouser and curiouser it gets ... and I am beginning to see why the press is interested.

[SonomaCat]

If any of us shot someone else while hunting and refused to the speak to local law enforcement until the next day

Where are you getting that he refused to do anything. Law enforcement has cleared him of any wrong doing. It isn't like he refused to let the FBI investigate a suspicious suicide.

Well, maybe it is kind of like that:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20060 ... N1YmNhdA--

[rtb]

I haven't heard any reports of him refusing to speak with law enforcement either. This is really just a bird hunting accident that could have happened anywhere, anytime.

I hope someday we see the media get a grip on themselves and try to report important information and not make everything into a huge drama, but I don't think it will happen.

[SonomaCat]

I haven't heard any reports of him refusing to speak with law enforcement either. This is really just a bird hunting accident that could have happened anywhere, anytime.

I hope someday we see the media get a grip on themselves and try to report important information and not make everything into a huge drama, but I don't think it will happen.

If the media didn't ask any questions, and this turns out to be a case where Cheney was trying to bury a drunk shooting incident, then the truth would never be known.

He is the V.P. of the United States ... making sure that the whole story is told when she shoots somebody in the face (and nearly kills the guy, incidentally) isn't exactly a non-issue. If it turns out that it was simply an innocent accident, that information is important to know as well.

[rtb]

Well, maybe it is kind of like that:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20060 ... N1YmNhdA--

Can I point out that is an opinion article written by a guy who also has a book out about Cheney? Do you think he has an incentives to keep this theory going?

I guess when it comes down to it I see this was an accident. Accident's happen to people, even the VP, and we learn from them and move on. The positive thing is the guy is alive and will hopefully recover soon!

[Ponycat]

Well, maybe it is kind of like that:

That's an opinion piece from a guy who obviously doesn't like the VP. Not exactly Chapaquetic(sp?) or Watergate.

[Grizlaw]

I have to admit, this wasn't something I had thought about on my own. Just off the cuff, here are my thoughts:

1. If Cheney was impaired when he shot his friend, then it's a huge deal, and he should be prosecuted just like any of us would be.

2. If he used the power of his office to prevent an investigation that would have proven that he was impaired, then that's an even bigger deal, IMO. That would be an aggregious abuse of his office. However...

3. If none of the above can be proven, then I hope there isn't too much public speculation about it. The thing about allegations like this is that they're easy to make, difficult to prove, and equally difficult to disprove. I do hope this is investigated and every effort is made by the proper authorities to learn the truth, but if no actual evidence of wrongdoing exists, then I'd hate to see him get skewered by the press.

--GL

[G.W.Bush]

Local law enforcement wasn't allowed to interview Cheney until 14 hours after the shooting. Why not? Is there a chance that Cheney had enough alcohol in his system to be worried (which would also explain the accident itself)?

Why not? Maybe he wanted to visit with his public relation people to make an appropriate political response to any questions that he would be asked. The press would get a hold of the statements issued to the police, so he want to make sure all the information could not be misconstrued.

[rtb]

GL and BAC - Will you just get off your horses and agree with me?!?!

Just kidding, I do agree that IF Cheney covered up being drunk then he should be prosecuted, but I just don't see that as the case. I think the media is having a hey-day speculating when from my perspective it was an accident.

I have already devoted way too much time to the topic. We will see how it all shakes out.

[go_catz!]

I think everyone is making way to big of a deal out of this. I'm not trying to defend Cheney at all, as I've said before, it is inexcusable to ever shoot another person while hunting. That being said, it happens all the time.

I'm not too sure where the allegations of him being drunk originated because I've been tuning out all of the attention this incident has been getting. If it were true that he was intoxicated, I'd like to think that his hunting companions new this. I for one, am not stupid enough to go out jump shooting with a drunk person, fishing yes, but not if shotguns are involved.

Cheney also said that the guy was 30 yards away at the time, but that appears to defy physics in terms of the penetration of the pellets into his body.

Could you explain this further? I haven't seen any analysis on this so I may be missing something, but I am pretty sure pellets from a 12 gauge wouldn't have much trouble penetrating at 30 yards.

[Ponycat]

Did anybody see this earlier this week.

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Arc ... oduct=GFTB

Burns shot in similar accident 15 years ago
Staff
Great Falls Tribune

By Tribune Staff

Vice President Dick Cheney's accidental shooting of a hunting partner over the weekend reminded some Montanans - certainly U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns - of a similar bird-hunting mishap that happened to the Montana Republican 15 years ago.

As Burns recalled Monday, he was pheasant hunting in Montana's Big Horn County in the early 1990s when it happened.

A 14-year-old boy was hunting down on along a river and Burns was up on a high bank.

"A pheasant flushed straight up, the kid turned, fired at the bird, but Conrad also happened to be in the shot pattern," Burns relayed through spokesman James Pendleton.

"He took a few very small number six pellets in the face but was not hurt badly enough to be hospitalized. Conrad says he still has a few pellets in his forehead."

Burns said hunters try to keep track of where other members of their party are, but sometimes there is a breakdown in communication and mishaps occur.

[SonomaCat]

Could you explain this further? I haven't seen any analysis on this so I may be missing something, but I am pretty sure pellets from a 12 gauge wouldn't have much trouble penetrating at 30 yards.

I read that it wasn't a 12 gauge, and was something much smaller (higher gauge, if I am remembering my shotgun stuff correctly). I could maybe dig something up via google, but I am unfortunately swamped right now.

[SonomaCat]

Local law enforcement wasn't allowed to interview Cheney until 14 hours after the shooting. Why not? Is there a chance that Cheney had enough alcohol in his system to be worried (which would also explain the accident itself)?

Why not? Maybe he wanted to visit with his public relation people to make an appropriate political response to any questions that he would be asked. The press would get a hold of the statements issued to the police, so he want to make sure all the information could not be misconstrued.

Again, I have had a case where I would have loved to have a chance to "talk to my PR people" for, say, 14 hours after a reportable incident before talking to law enforcement. Most of us aren't granted that luxury.

[SonomaCat]

Well, maybe it is kind of like that:

That's an opinion piece from a guy who obviously doesn't like the VP. Not exactly Chapaquetic(sp?) or Watergate.

Absolutely agree ... this guy ain't Switzerland. But he raises interesting questions and presents some assertions that happened to jive with the google search I did when I found it.

If everything he suggests turns out to be false, I am more than fine with that, and would love to see the story die. If Cheney had only handled the situation better from the start, it would have completely eliminated all of these questions. And that in itself begs questions as to why he didn't do so ... he knows the PR game as well as anyone, and knows how bad it looks to be anything but transparent as soon as possible.

So if the press continues to beat a dead horse even when the story proves to have no legs, shame on them. But in the meantime, Cheney's own lack of upfront disclosure is a large part of what is causing the speculation we have now.

I'd just like to be sure of the truth, good or bad.

[Ponycat]

This reminds my of an old joke.

Cheney shot his buddy hunting Quail

Bush, the first, shot himself (in the foot) when he chose Quayle.