re: #32 lawhawk

What better way to impugn the OWS movement than to claim that someone attacked the WH and was involved in OWS - even though all evidence (you know - what lawyers and law enforcement look for) points to the contrary.

This is like throwing the proverbial “everything and the kitchen sink” to attack the OWS movement.

And it’s completely bogus.

It seems like an odd one—surely if they could write the narrative, one of the OWSers would attack a banker or a right-wing politico. It seems weird that they would try to shoehorn in a personal attack on the Socialist-In-Chief himself.

But I guess they have to twist what they can get.