Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Silat on July 02, 2007, 05:10:03 PM
-
Guess lying is only bad if you are a dem. So much for integrity.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19570081/
-
libby's lawyers asked for the judge to allow libby to stay out of jail until the appeal process was over, judge said "no, go to jail now", bush said "my club is bigger then yours".
-
Originally posted by john9001
libby's lawyers asked for the judge to allow libby to stay out of jail until the appeal process was over, judge said "no, go to jail now", bush said "my club is bigger then yours".
Why do you hate America? Why don't you support the troops?
Ripsnort, feel free to include some other Bushboi catch phrases here....
-
He learned how to do it from his daddy..
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/07/bush.pardon/index.html
-
Originally posted by President Boooosh
“The reputation he gained...is forever damaged,” Bush said. “His wife and young children have also suffered immensely.
Well if that's the standard we measure legal sentences for convicts now we should open the flood gates for convicts. I'm sure their families and childern also suffered immensely. Not to mention their reputation.
-
Originally posted by crockett
He learned how to do it from his daddy..
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/07/bush.pardon/index.html
Another difference between the Cox and Rich cases is that while Rich fled the country and was never prosecuted for the crimes of which he was accused, Cox admitted making false statements about collateral to back his loans, and served time in prison and paid fines for his crimes. --------Last paragraph of your link.
-
libby's sentence is on appeal, but libby is stupid, he should have used Hillary's whitewater answer of "i don't recall".
-
Originally posted by Speed55
Another difference between the Cox and Rich cases is that while Rich fled the country and was never prosecuted for the crimes of which he was accused, Cox admitted making false statements about collateral to back his loans, and served time in prison and paid fines for his crimes. --------Last paragraph of your link.
So as long as you're rich you don't have to serve your jail time?
Specially if your daddy is a big oil guy whom donates to $200,000 to the Bush family's campaigns and then another $100,000 to the George Bush Presidential Library.
I guess that makes up for time served..
-
tis good to be king ;)
Pull!
-
Originally posted by john9001
libby's sentence is on appeal, but libby is stupid, he should have used Hillary's whitewater answer of "i don't recall".
Humm seems "I do not recall" has become the new campaign slogan for the Republican party. It's the line all the trendy Republicans are using these days.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IBvZlRqOTw
-
Originally posted by crockett
So as long as you're rich you don't have to serve your jail time?
Specially if your daddy is a big oil guy whom donates to $200,000 to the Bush family's campaigns and then another $100,000 to the George Bush Presidential Library.
I guess that makes up for time served..
"On Jan. 20, President Clinton gave Rich a chance for a third "do-over." Clinton wiped all the criminal charges off of Rich's record with a presidential pardon on his last day in power. The Rich pardon has received special attention because Denise Rich raised and donated more than $1 million to the Democratic Party in recent years and also provided the Clintons directly with a $10,000 contribution to their legal defense fund and $7,300 worth of furniture."
get you facts straight.
-
Originally posted by john9001
"On Jan. 20, President Clinton gave Rich a chance for a third "do-over." Clinton wiped all the criminal charges off of Rich's record with a presidential pardon on his last day in power. The Rich pardon has received special attention because Denise Rich raised and donated more than $1 million to the Democratic Party in recent years and also provided the Clintons directly with a $10,000 contribution to their legal defense fund and $7,300 worth of furniture."
get you facts straight.
What facts are you talking about? I never said anything about Clinton not doing it. I'm just pointing out that all you guys that like to act as if Clinton was the only one to ever do it.
My facts are very correct that George Bush Sr. pardoned a convicted criminal on his 2nd to last day in power. It was pretty much the exact same BS that Clinton did. I just get sick of seeing right wingers flabbier at the mouth over what Clinton did.
Yet the very same ones ignore the fact Bush Sr did the exact same thing, prior to Clinton ever doing it. Now Jr has done it as well. Go figure..
So now it goes back to the same olé.. well Bill Clinton did it so it's ok Jr does it too? I understand you right wingers can't remember anything .. so lucky enough there are guys like me are around to help you out. :lol
-
Originally posted by john9001
libby's sentence is on appeal, but libby is stupid, he should have used Hillary's whitewater answer of "i don't recall".
Actually, I think it's the "I don't recall" that got libby in trouble. He was asked something early on in the investigation, and he answered it.
Later on, they asked the same question, and he answered "I don't recall."
And since the democrats were searching deep for ANYTHING with which to put someone behind bars even if they did nothing wrong, they automatically assumed the discrepancy meant that Libby was lying.
No one has 2 IQ points to rub together really believe that Libby committed a crime.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
tis good to be king ;)
Pull!
Mel Brooks, History of the World......:rofl
-
Originally posted by rpm
Well if that's the standard we measure legal sentences for convicts now we should open the flood gates for convicts. I'm sure their families and childern also suffered immensely. Not to mention their reputation.
But, but.. the rules only apply to us commoner serf scum, if you're a FOB (Friend of Bush) these rules are "excessive". Federal sentence guidelines called for the sentence Scooter received, so apparently Fed sentence guidelines suck? will the Bush commute sentences for all those "excessively" sentenced?? (nope)
Neo-clowns are special, and sensitive, a prison time you or I would get... is just too excessive for them, it makes them go poopy, its all scary'n stuff. Plus they wouldn't let Scooter wear his propeller beanie cap in prison, or let him have his blankie... Bush can relate to that.
-
Bush didn't give a full pardon, he just commuted the prison time and left the fine and probation intact. Scooter Libby will still have a conviction on his record also.
I'm not sure how this equates to it being ok to lie unless you are a democrat. /shrug
-
The original investigation by the special prosecutor was supposed to be about tracking down the source of the leak about Valerie Plame's CIA "covert" operatiave status to the press. (Remember the outrage of the left about Kenneth Starr's abuse of his power as special prosecutor during the Whitewater investigation? Remember the calls for the abolishment of the law allowing the creation of special prosecutors? Wonder what the left's stand is on this issue now?)
Rober Novak originally released the information about Valerie Plame, the non-covert covert agent. Novak originally got the information from Richard Armitage, the number two man in the State Department behind Colin Powell. Called to testify in the investigation, Scooter Libby could not correctly recall a conversation he supposedly had with some journalists years prior to the case.
The special prosecutor, Pat Fitzgerald, knows full well that the the "outing" of Plame wasn't actually a crime. Even though he knew that Armitage had outed her, and that Bob Woodward claimed to have had a conversation with Walter Pincus about Plame's CIA status, a conversation that Pincus denied, the only person indicted for lying was Scooter Libby.
Why Libby? Because Fitzgerald had to have a conviction on something in order to satisfy those on the left screaming for blood, and to salvage his own reputation. Libby was an obvious target because of his ties to the hated Dick Cheney.
Armitage was not indicted. Pincus wasn't indicted. The outing of Plame turned out not to have been a crime.
Scooter Libby, a man with the respect of many sensible politicos on both sides of the aisle, and a spotless record was indicted for nothing more than having a faulty memory.
-
I sure am glad that the Bush administration isn't slimy like previous one was.
The respect shown for the legal system by them is quite refreshing.
shamus
-
seems like a lot of teeth gnashing over a President using his lawful, discretionary power to commute or reduce punishment in a case where minutia reigned, and absolutely nothing got resolved because it was a political fishing expedition from the git-go.
.02
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Armitage was not indicted. Pincus wasn't indicted. The outing of Plame turned out not to have been a crime.
Not being a smartarse (but maybe a dumbarse), but why wasn't 'outing' Plame a crime? I missed this amid all the other controversy in the news...
-
Originally posted by crockett
So as long as you're rich you don't have to serve your jail time?
Specially if your daddy is a big oil guy whom donates to $200,000 to the Bush family's campaigns and then another $100,000 to the George Bush Presidential Library.
I guess that makes up for time served..
I'll answer to the first part only.. sometimes. Which is wrong. Ask o.j. and he'll say it's cool though.
-
If outing Plame had been a crime, which it was not because she had no active covert status, Fitzgerald would have surely indicted Armitage for it.
After two years of investigation he had egg all over his face. There was no evidence that a crime had been committed when Plame's association with the CIA had been outed. Fitzgerald's reputation was on the line. Somebody had to go down. Libby was indicted because the testimony he gave to the same question over a two year period supposedly contradicted itself. The second time he answered questions about his conversation with some reporters about Plame he responded "I don't recall."
I'm 53 years old and have had thousands of personal and political and job-related conversations over the last two years. I shudder to think that my increasingly faulty memory was the only thing standing between me and two years in prison for "committing perjury."
The original purpose of the investigation by the special prosecutor was to determine who outed Valerie Plame. Libby didn't do it. That has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Armitage did do it. That is also beyond question. Outing Plame broke no laws, because she was no longer a covert operative.
The original purpose was abandoned when it's original investigation turned up no proof of wrongdoing. So a target was conveniently found to salvage Fitzgerald's reputation.
-
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/02/libby.sentence/index.html
get outa jail free cards!
-
Hey Shuckins...remember that post you made two years ago? Yeah...neither do I. :aok
-
Originally posted by Silat
Guess lying is only bad if you are a dem. So much for integrity.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19570081/
How quickly and conveniently you forget about all of Clintons pardons.. want a refresher?
If you're a dem, lying is considered grade school stuff. If you really want to earn dem respect, you have to shove secret documents down your pants and in your socks, then have the balls to call it, and I quote: "...an honest mistake."
-
Originally posted by crockett
left wing babble
It seems pretty much every president does it. We just domn't want you left wing nutjobs making hay over it because you love to forget that is occurs on both side of the aisle.
-
Ah...Gee Mace...ya got me.
Who are you? What were we talking about?
For that matter...who am I?
I'm SOOO CONFUSED!!!
:confused:
Regards, Shuckins
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Actually, I think it's the "I don't recall" that got libby in trouble. He was asked something early on in the investigation, and he answered it.
Later on, they asked the same question, and he answered "I don't recall."
And since the democrats were searching deep for ANYTHING with which to put someone behind bars even if they did nothing wrong, they automatically assumed the discrepancy meant that Libby was lying.
No one has 2 IQ points to rub together really believe that Libby committed a crime.
Actually it was the lying. Actually this has nothing to do with dems. It was a rep prosecutor and judge. So stop blaming dems.
He lied to a fed prosecuter during an investigation. There was no discrepancy. The REPUBLICAN prosecutor was lied to. He proved it in court. The only people who believe as you are republicans who think its ok for reps to lie to a federal prosecutor. I venture to say that you would be calling for a hanging if a dem lied under oath. Oh yeah, you did with Clinton:)
And for more of your leaders integrity.
Remember this:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/wilson.cia/
"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.
"I welcome the investigation. I am absolutely confident the Justice Department will do a good job.
"I want to know the truth," the president continued. "Leaks of classified information are bad things."
He added that he did not know of "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information."
-
Sorry Silat, that won't wash. The investigation was screwed up from the very beginning.
Clinton was being sued for sexual harassment. He gave testimony about his activities and was caught committing perjury. The investigation was about him and him alone.
Fitzgerald's investigation had no direct object other than finding out who had leaked the information about Plame. Subsequent testimony proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Armitage leaked the information. The lawyers defending Libby also proved that the leaking of that information was NOT a violation of the law.
The apparent "contradictions" in Libby's testimony were separated by two years of time. Since he had no part in the outing of Plame, Libby had no reason to lie.
How many of us could honestly say that our memory wouldn't fail us under similar circumstances?
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Neo-clowns are special, and sensitive, a prison time you or I would get... is just too excessive for them, it makes them go poopy, its all scary'n stuff. Plus they wouldn't let Scooter wear his propeller beanie cap in prison, or let him have his blankie... Bush can relate to that.
Neverbeenamarine, your a complete left wing kook, aren't you?
I bet you think dem presidents were perfectly infallible. Get a clue whackjob, both sides are polluted w/ self serving bureautards.
-
Originally posted by Silat
"I want to know the truth," the president continued. "Leaks of classified information are bad things."
He added that he did not know of "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information."
What information did Libby leak?
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Ah...Gee Mace...ya got me.
Who are you? What were we talking about?
For that matter...who am I?
I'm SOOO CONFUSED!!!
:confused:
Regards, Shuckins
Up against the wall and spread 'em Shuckins. :lol
-
both sides are polluted w/ self serving bureautards.
Ain't that the truth!
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
How quickly and conveniently you forget about all of Clintons pardons.. want a refresher?
If you're a dem, lying is considered grade school stuff. If you really want to earn dem respect, you have to shove secret documents down your pants and in your socks, then have the balls to call it, and I quote: "...an honest mistake."
Once again it's nice to see Right wingers blaming lack of any sort of accountability from this Republican administration on Bill Clinton.
Bush could get caught given Putin a BJ and somehow it would all be Bill Clinton's fault because he had sex in the white house.
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
It seems pretty much every president does it. We just domn't want you left wing nutjobs making hay over it because you love to forget that is occurs on both side of the aisle.
I never said BC didn't do it.. In fact it pissed me off that he did. I just get sick of the right wingers acting like what BC did was something new.
It was all holy hell when he did it and it's the first thing they want to shove in your face. Hence the reason I brought up the fact that Bush Sr.. did the "EXACT" same thing when he left office.
Yet you never hear them *****ing about good ole Bush Sr for giving out a pardon for cash in his last days of office.
Ronald Reagan did it as well but you never see them *****ing about him.. he's like the Holy Jesus to the current Republican party.
-
Originally posted by Silat
Actually it was the lying. Actually this has nothing to do with dems. It was a rep prosecutor and judge. So stop blaming dems.
He lied to a fed prosecuter during an investigation. There was no discrepancy. The REPUBLICAN prosecutor was lied to. He proved it in court. The only people who believe as you are republicans who think its ok for reps to lie to a federal prosecutor. I venture to say that you would be calling for a hanging if a dem lied under oath. Oh yeah, you did with Clinton:)
Oh but they don't want to actually know the real truth, they watch Fox news. It sounds better to blame it all on the Democrats.
Originally posted by Silat [/b]
And for more of your leaders integrity.
Remember this:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/wilson.cia/
"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.
[/B]
Hey what are you complaining about he took care of Scooter boy real good just like he said. No lies there.. lol
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
What information did Libby leak?
Funny it's was all about the fact that Clinton "lied" under oath when you Repubs were trying to lynch him.
Now soon as it's your own, who cares if they lie under oath right?
-
Originally posted by Speed55
Another difference between the Cox and Rich cases is that while Rich fled the country and was never prosecuted for the crimes of which he was accused, Cox admitted making false statements about collateral to back his loans, and served time in prison and paid fines for his crimes. --------Last paragraph of your link.
Btw since you want to bring Mark Rich into this.. maybe you should look into this..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardons_controversy
Marc Rich, a fugitive, was pardoned of tax evasion, after clemency pleas from Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, among many other international luminaries. Denise Rich, Marc's former wife, was a close friend of the Clintons and had made substantial donations to both Clinton's library and Hillary's Senate campaign.
Several months after her last donation, emails reveal Republican attorney "Scooter" Libby asked her to approach Clinton about pardoning Marc Rich. Clinton agreed to a pardon that required Marc Rich to pay a $100,000,000 fine before he could return to the United States.
According to Paul Volcker's independent investigation of Iraqi Oil-for-Food kickback schemes, Marc Rich was a middleman for several suspect Iraqi oil deals involving over 4 million barrels of oil"
-
Thank you, Shuckins, for your posts.
Its not an all out pardon...it keeps the guy out of jail while, one hopes, he can get a decent appeal.
-
Let's see...we have 16 years', or two two-term admin.'s worth of lies uncovered right here in this thread.
Between the blowjobs' and the bombs, aren't you guys' ready to vote third party yet? :lol ;)
We can probably sit here in front of our PC's for the next 8 years, pointing fingers at ourselves, and complaining across the aisle, posting and posting and posting...
When do we hold ourselves accountable, as voters?
You don't think a third party stands a chance? That all it does is take votes away from a Repub. or a Dem.?
THAT's why this country's in the shape it's in. In 20-30 years, at this rate, we'll be about ready for another Civil war. I'd like to fix the problem now, with a vote, before my children get faced with this problem, which by then will be overwhelming.
Both parties are corrupt to the core. They've both betrayed the values that this country used to hold dear. They've BOTH gotten used to lying to the american people, to achieve their own personal goals. They only accept the Presidency to use and abuse it, Not to serve the american people.
(Steps off of Soapbox....)
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Let's see...we have 16 years', or two two-term admin.'s worth of lies uncovered right here in this thread.
Between the blowjobs' and the bombs, aren't you guys' ready to vote third party yet? :lol ;)
I am, if we can get a valid 3rd party going. Heck, I'd start voting again. :)
-
I am, if we can get a valid 3rd party going. Heck, I'd start voting again.
If it has the core values that people want(Gov't. adhereing to the constitution as it was written is a bigge for me),We need to vote for it, and make it valid.
I mean, It's a helluva mess in D.C. now...It's going to take awhile to clean up, But it'll never get started at this rate, with two overwhelming Prima-Donna parties passing us from one disaster into another.
-
Originally posted by john9001
libby's sentence is on appeal, but libby is stupid, he should have used Hillary's whitewater answer of "i don't recall".
LOL, like she's the only one.
Perhaps she learned from Reagan's "I don't recall" testimony in both Iran-Contra and the MCA scandal.
-
Originally posted by crockett
who cares if they lie under oath right?
I care.
-
Originally posted by crockett
Once again it's nice to see Right wingers blaming lack of any sort of accountability from this Republican administration on Bill Clinton.
Bush could get caught given Putin a BJ and somehow it would all be Bill Clinton's fault because he had sex in the white house.
Your attempt to twist my words is DENIED.
I didn't blame anything on Bill Clinton. You far left wingers want to lynch Bush for Scooter Libby not leaking anything but have no problem w/ Clinton's embarrassment of the US as a result of his actions. When I mentioned Sandy Berger's criminal actions I noticed you completely ignored them. He got a total pass.. honest mistake?
Two things I said in this thread that should give you a clue that I do not approve of some of the current administration's actions:
both sides are polluted w/ self serving bureautards.
It seems pretty much every president does it...... that it occurs on both side of the aisle.
so don't give me any of your crap about me blaming things on Clinton. At least I have the integrity to face that what was once my party is probably just as corrupt as the left.
-
Originally posted by crockett
Funny it's was all about the fact that Clinton "lied" under oath when you Repubs were trying to lynch him.
Now soon as it's your own, who cares if they lie under oath right?
Tit for tat. Some tend to ignore their "own" side's transgressions all the while pointing at every opportunity, the "other" side's transgressions.
"Liberal" and "Conservative" alike.
Politician's are liars, those that make it to the highest level tend to lie the most.
-
Frode gets it.
-
silat is a frothing at the mouth liberal. go set up a pink tent and camp out in crawford tx. to demonstrate your anger.
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
Neverbeenamarine, your a complete left wing kook, aren't you?
I bet you think dem presidents were perfectly infallible. Get a clue whackjob, both sides are polluted w/ self serving bureautards.
"Dem" presidents are just as lame, born from the same steaming pile of feces as "Reps".. but that's not the point.
Scooter was convicted, period.. but hey, us commoners are the only ones who live under the rule of law, friends of the Bush get to walk.
How many lives as Scooter saved? I know guys with more than a few saves who have also risked their lives daily putting some seriously bad guys in prison and actually made a difference.. one went to prison for violating an illegal aliens civil rights, the other to jail for nailing a 16 year old who used her sisters ID. I didn't see Bush jump to their aid or call their sentences excessive.. maybe they should have helped start a BS war and licked planet Chenys toe-jam.. rather than save lives.
Bush thinks Federal sentence guidelines are "excessive" when they apply to his friends, but just fine for you and I.. the dude is a bad joke.
Then again Bushs approval is below freezing because he sucks at his job, he's already disliked by his own country and pretty much hated around the world... he can pardon all his slimy friends and just laugh about it, he knows the loyal party clones who cant form an independent though to save their lives, will morph into attack parrots on his behalf.
-
Originally posted by crockett
Btw since you want to bring Mark Rich into this.. maybe you should look into this..
[/i]
rich was mentioned in the link YOU provided, in a comparison to cox. i was just pointing it out.
My personal view is i trust the republicans in power, much more than any democrat. They both have their good guys, and their total loons, but from what i've seen, while the republicans may have a few bad apples on the tree, the democrats only have a few good ones on theres.
You probably feel the complete opposite.
So me trying to convince you, or you trying to convince me that one side is better than the other, would be like either of us yelling at a brick wall.
:D
-
If I follow the line of reasoning of some of you guys, you're stating that Libby was convicted therefore he must be guilty.
That conclusion only holds water if there had never been innocent people convicted of crimes within the continental United States.
Libby was the victim of a witch hunt. While the purpose of the special prosecutors investigation was to determine who had leaked the information about Valerie Plame, that purpose was abandoned when it became apparent that no law had been broken.
The investigations did reveal who had leaked the information: Richard .... Armitage ... leaked ... the ... information ... about ... Plame. NOT ... Libby.
A lot of wild, unsubstantiated accusations had been made against Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, who became the targets of a witch hunt merely because of their association with the office of the hated Dick Cheney.
So Libby was called to testify....over...and over...and over again. And in the course of answering one of those dangerous "When did you stop beating your wife" questions, they caught him.
"I don't recall."
My friends, if I were a special prosecutor with a lot of time to prepare, and the power to keep you coming back to the dock to give testimony, over the course of a two year time period, and I could wear you down and exhaust you....I could catch you in a "lie."
-
Yes she was covert at the time, the CIA says so..
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070529_Unclassified_Plame_employement.pdf
Yes Libby also leaked Plame. He leaked it to Tim Russet and others, just not to Novak.
-
Most outgoing Presidents do a flurry of commutes and pardons before leaving office. It's nothing new and crosses party lines.
Apparently Presidents have the legal power to commute or pardon anyone they want, for any reason at all (kind of like how they can fire AGs at will without having to give a reason).
Having the power doesn't excuse using it. I'm a closet Bushboi, but I don't agree with the lame reasoning he gave. IMHO no reason at all is better than the one he gave. If he wants to save the fall guy, he might as well have just pardoned him.
I voted Clinton into office via Perot for one reason: Sr's 'read my lips'. I'm probably going to end up voting Hillbama into office by voting for whatever Independant runs.
Junior should have commuted Paris Hilton...now that would have been fun and made just as much sense to me.
~Fury, average Joe lacking the finesse to get into OC political arguments. All IMHO based on my news input from: CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and The O' Club.
[edit: courtesy CNN because I'm too lazy to do my own research]
PARDONS AND COMMUTATIONS
George W. Bush (2001 - )
Pardons -- 13
Commutations -- 4
Bill Clinton (1993-2001)
Pardons -- 396
Commutations -- 61
George H.W. Bush (1989-1993)
Pardons -- 74
Commutations: 3
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
Pardons -- 393
Commutations -- 13
Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)
Pardons -- 534
Commutations -- 29
Gerald Ford (1974-1977)
Pardons -- 382
Commutations -- 22
Richard Nixon (1969-1974)
Pardons -- 863
Commutations -- 60
Lyndon Johnson (1963-1969)
Pardons -- 960
Commutations -- 226
John F. Kennedy (1961-1963)
Pardons -- 472
Commutations -- 100
Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961)
Pardons -- 1,110
Commutations -- 47
Harry Truman (1945-1953)
Pardons -- 1,913
Commutations -- 118
-
" accordingly, the CIA lifted and rolled back Ms. Wilsons cover effective 1 January 2002 and declassified the fact of her CIA employment and cover status from that date forward"
so, the CIA retroactively changes her status at will from cover to non cover back to cover then back again to non cover?
-
I guess "most americans" are upset about this. I just cannot get excited about this whole valarie plame thing.........the whole thing reeks of politics.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
I guess "most americans" are upset about this. I just cannot get excited about this whole valarie plame thing.........the whole thing reeks of politics.
clearly
-
Originally posted by Fury
Most outgoing Presidents do a flurry of commutes and pardons before leaving office. It's nothing new and crosses party lines.
Apparently Presidents have the legal power to commute or pardon anyone they want, for any reason at all (kind of like how they can fire AGs at will without having to give a reason).
Having the power doesn't excuse using it. I'm a closet Bushboi, but I don't agree with the lame reasoning he gave. IMHO no reason at all is better than the one he gave. If he wants to save the fall guy, he might as well have just pardoned him.
I voted Clinton into office via Perot for one reason: Sr's 'read my lips'. I'm probably going to end up voting Hillbama into office by voting for whatever Independant runs.
Junior should have commuted Paris Hilton...now that would have been fun and made just as much sense to me.
~Fury, average Joe lacking the finesse to get into OC political arguments. All IMHO based on my news input from: CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and The O' Club.
[edit: courtesy CNN because I'm too lazy to do my own research]
PARDONS AND COMMUTATIONS
George W. Bush (2001 - )
Pardons -- 13
Commutations -- 4
Bill Clinton (1993-2001)
Pardons -- 396
Commutations -- 61
George H.W. Bush (1989-1993)
Pardons -- 74
Commutations: 3
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
Pardons -- 393
Commutations -- 13
Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)
Pardons -- 534
Commutations -- 29
Gerald Ford (1974-1977)
Pardons -- 382
Commutations -- 22
Richard Nixon (1969-1974)
Pardons -- 863
Commutations -- 60
Lyndon Johnson (1963-1969)
Pardons -- 960
Commutations -- 226
John F. Kennedy (1961-1963)
Pardons -- 472
Commutations -- 100
Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961)
Pardons -- 1,110
Commutations -- 47
Harry Truman (1945-1953)
Pardons -- 1,913
Commutations -- 118
Actually your numbers are way flawed..
I'm not going to say I supported some of Clinton pardons.. But your list is extremely biased on it's number counts.
It has Clinton listed @ 396(?) as "last days" pardons.. When in fact the number was 140.. His total amount of pardons for both his terms was 396(??). (maybe see bottom)
Then your list has George H.W. Bush as only 12 pardons.. Which was in fact the amount of his "last days" pardons.
However his entire term George H.W. Bush had 75 full pardons in his 4 years.
I didn't get into any of the others , I just noticed the H.W. Bush and Clinton's numbers were way flawed.
As a side note to date.. George W. Bush has pardons 76 people. Many for the same thing Republicans bashed Clinton about.
Also I didn't feel like counting them.. but this is the full list of Bill Clinton's pardons for the entire time he was in office.. might be 396.. but seems like a lot less to me..
If I were to guess with out looking I'd say it's closer to 200.. (again that's a guess with out counting them)
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm#april171995
-
Originally posted by Speed55
rich was mentioned in the link YOU provided, in a comparison to cox. i was just pointing it out.
My personal view is i trust the republicans in power, much more than any democrat. They both have their good guys, and their total loons, but from what i've seen, while the republicans may have a few bad apples on the tree, the democrats only have a few good ones on theres.
You probably feel the complete opposite.
So me trying to convince you, or you trying to convince me that one side is better than the other, would be like either of us yelling at a brick wall.
:D
It's your right to think what you like.. but I recall the biggest scandal under Clinton was him getting a BJ..
You didn't have half of his admin under investigation of fraud and everything else under the sun.
I'll agree both sides might have there good and their bad.. but I honestly don't see how you could sit there with a stright face and claim the Repubs are more on the up and up than Dems at this point.
Specially after all the crap this current crop has been busted with.
I'm still waiting for them to bing in the "honesty and integrity to the White House " that they promised..
-
Originally posted by john9001
" accordingly, the CIA lifted and rolled back Ms. Wilsons cover effective 1 January 2002 and declassified the fact of her CIA employment and cover status from that date forward"
so, the CIA retroactively changes her status at will from cover to non cover back to cover then back again to non cover?
That's not how I read it, but the point is that she was indeed covert....regardless of all the misinformation out there.
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
How quickly and conveniently you forget about all of Clintons pardons.. want a refresher?
If you're a dem, lying is considered grade school stuff. If you really want to earn dem respect, you have to shove secret documents down your pants and in your socks, then have the balls to call it, and I quote: "...an honest mistake."
Well there is no comparison to the people with the reins of power and a marc rich.
And you need to go back to your parties statements about hanging Clinton for lying. Like Fred the Fake Thompson.
A man with power lied to a fed prosecutor.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Sorry Silat, that won't wash. The investigation was screwed up from the very beginning.
Clinton was being sued for sexual harassment. He gave testimony about his activities and was caught committing perjury. The investigation was about him and him alone.
Fitzgerald's investigation had no direct object other than finding out who had leaked the information about Plame. Subsequent testimony proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Armitage leaked the information. The lawyers defending Libby also proved that the leaking of that information was NOT a violation of the law.
The apparent "contradictions" in Libby's testimony were separated by two years of time. Since he had no part in the outing of Plame, Libby had no reason to lie.
How many of us could honestly say that our memory wouldn't fail us under similar circumstances?
I weep for this country when you think "I dont remember" and lying and getting caught is ok. There was lying that was proved. Contradictions is your talking point word of the day.
The prosecutor charged him with lying and obstruction based on the evidence. Is a republican ever guilty of anything?
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
Your attempt to twist my words is DENIED.
I didn't blame anything on Bill Clinton. You far left wingers want to lynch Bush for Scooter Libby not leaking anything but have no problem w/ Clinton's embarrassment of the US as a result of his actions. When I mentioned Sandy Berger's criminal actions I noticed you completely ignored them. He got a total pass.. honest mistake?
Two things I said in this thread that should give you a clue that I do not approve of some of the current administration's actions:
so don't give me any of your crap about me blaming things on Clinton. At least I have the integrity to face that what was once my party is probably just as corrupt as the left.
Republican investigations handled the Berger affair. Its got nothing to with Dems.
-
my memory is not too good, i don't recall clinton serving 30 months in jail for perjury.
-
Originally posted by storch
silat is a frothing at the mouth liberal. go set up a pink tent and camp out in crawford tx. to demonstrate your anger.
Three of every four people convicted of obstruction of justice have been sent to prison over the past two years, a total of 283 people, according to federal judiciary data. The average term was more than five years. The largest group of defendants were sentenced to between 13 and 31 months in prison, exactly where Libby would have fallen on the charts.
-
Originally posted by crockett
but I honestly don't see how you could sit there with a stright face and claim the Repubs are more on the up and up than Dems at this point.
1995 washington square park: watching a bunch of democrats/liberals calling a marine fom the gulf war a baby killer like they were in vietnam, frothing at the mouth, when it was 20-1 like they wanted to kill him.
2004 Having some wierd looking woman with a face like a pin cushion hand me a free mumia flyer, which i crumpled up and threw on the floor and said i hope he gets the chair. Then almost getting jumped by 5 brothermen for it.
2006 Having a girl tell me, she can't wait for the next 9/11 to happen because bush deserves it.
200? Having crazy gun nut men and women try to hand me flyers telling me how guns are the root of all evil, not the people that wield them.
Those are people that i identify as liberals and democrats, therefore i have no respect at all for them or their party affiliations.
It is what it is, and through many experiences other than the ones mentioned, i can't be convinced otherwise. So yes i sit here straight faced and say that i believe that more republicans from the one high up in office, to the working class man/woman are who i'd rather call a friend or put my trust in anyday over a dem/liberal.
I have a few lib aquainances, but i would never call them a true friend.
Edit: might have the dates wrong, but all those incedents happened.
You have your opinion and i have mine.
-
Anyone remember then Gov. Bush's statement when he declined to even give the now dead Karla Faye Tucker a 30 day stay of her execution?:
"When I was sworn in as the governor of Texas I took an oath of office to uphold the laws of our state, including the death penalty. My responsibility is to ensure our laws are enforced fairly and evenly without preference or special treatment . . . . She was convicted and sentenced by a jury of her peers. The role of the state is to enforce our laws and to make sure all individuals are treated fairly under those laws.
(Thanks to a local lawyer for reminding me of that.) I'm sure God will remind Dubya right before he pulls the lever on the trapdoor to Hell.
-
was Karla Faye Tucker innocent? What did she do?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
let me refresh your memory.
"In 1984, Tucker was convicted of the brutal murders of her ex-lover, Jerry Lynn Dean, and his companion, Deborah Thornton and sentenced to the death penalty. During her trial, Tucker admitted that on June 13, 1983, she and her boyfriend at the time, Daniel Ryan Garrett, took a pickax and hacked Dean and Thornton to death while they were sleeping. (Garrett was also convicted of murder and sentenced to the death penalty. However, he died of liver disease while in prison in 1994.)
Karla Faye Tucker: Executed by lethal injection on February 3, 1998
At the murder scene, investigators found the pickax still embedded in Thornton's chest. Tucker even boasted at her trial that she experienced an orgasm each time she plunged the ax down upon her victims. Back then, Tucker was a drug addict and prostitute who seemed unrepentant, and even proud, of her actions. "
-
Nice attempt at a derail. What does Tucker's guilt or innocence have to do with this?
I do see this in common:
seemed unrepentant, and even proud, of her actions.
-
rpm, you are suffering from terminal bushhate.
-
RPM, you cite poor examples.
You're so bent on hating Bush that to you its a religious conviction. You do not seem to be able to have a political *discussion* because to you, hating Bush is kneejerk.
I've watched your various arguments and Bush blasts in the past. On this example, you cite a murderer in a super-vague attempt to back up your already-very thin point.
Get a grip
-
Originally posted by Speed55
1995 washington square park: watching a bunch of democrats/liberals calling a marine fom the gulf war a baby killer like they were in vietnam, frothing at the mouth, when it was 20-1 like they wanted to kill him.
2004 Having some wierd looking woman with a face like a pin cushion hand me a free mumia flyer, which i crumpled up and threw on the floor and said i hope he gets the chair. Then almost getting jumped by 5 brothermen for it.
2006 Having a girl tell me, she can't wait for the next 9/11 to happen because bush deserves it.
200? Having crazy gun nut men and women try to hand me flyers telling me how guns are the root of all evil, not the people that wield them.
Those are people that i identify as liberals and democrats, therefore i have no respect at all for them or their party affiliations.
It is what it is, and through many experiences other than the ones mentioned, i can't be convinced otherwise. So yes i sit here straight faced and say that i believe that more republicans from the one high up in office, to the working class man/woman are who i'd rather call a friend or put my trust in anyday over a dem/liberal.
I have a few lib aquainances, but i would never call them a true friend.
Edit: might have the dates wrong, but all those incedents happened.
You have your opinion and i have mine.
So your opinion on Democrat leaders is based on dealing with a few nut jobs?
That's kinda like me saying all republicans are nut jobs and can't be trusted, because some of their conservative base supporters likes to blow up abortion clinics.
lol yea your right you can have your own opinion.. just kinda funny that yours is based off a few fruit loops that have nothing to do with any sort of political power.
-
The Two Party system has long failed. But, most wish to have the same debate on which is "right" or "better". Therein lies the problem.
-
Originally posted by crockett
lol yea your right you can have your own opinion.. just kinda funny that yours is based off a few fruit loops that have nothing to do with any sort of political power.
see it as you wish.
-
Here's the thing.. and this is where my take on it is.
"Scooter" Libby lied. How or what that lie was, is completely inconsequential. He was found in a court of law to be guilty, by jury of his peers, prosecuted by a republican, he was sentenced by a judge WHOM WAS APPOINTED BY the president, to a term that is straight down the sentencing guidelines. End of story. All of this is still not good enough for the more leniant of republicans...all pointing fingers.."but Mom, look at what Bill did..." Give me a break and grow up. No wonder our kids are so screwed up. Now his sentence is commuted, and his pardon is only a few short months away.
Libby was not directly involved in the Plame affair... he just tried to help out his political allies, Rove and Fitzgerald, and throw off the dogs a little. Therefore, his lie directly affected a Federal Investigation. This commutation again shows, that money has it's priviledges. 245,000 to this man means nothing.
If you want to commute someone's sentence, Mr. Bush, how bout the 18 year old kid in Georgia that got a BJ from his 17 year old consenting girlfriend at a party, that happened to be taped without his knowledge. (oral sex with an under 18 year old was a felony in Georgia until recently.) Honor student and was admitted to a good college with a full ride scholarship. He got 10 years in a state prison, in a case that was prosecuted without any party's wishes...and got the maximum sentence to boot. The MOTHER of the girl begged for there to be no charges. He has no money and, in this country, therefore has no rights.
And for the record, publically outing any agent who has or will be under cover is a FELONY. It has to do with their safety. Libby, had nothing to do with Rove and Fitzgerald outing Plame. I feel Bush had a whole lot to do with all of it... and alot will surface after his term ends. The administration was on the brink of war when William Plame reported, after he was sent to investigate yellow cake uranium and Iraq, that bush was full of crap in his state of the union on the eve of the Iraq War...Bush got pissed and outed his wife who was UNDER COVER at the time. In any case.. He will pardon Libby, and of course Rove, Fitzgerald and Gonzalez (who will eventually be served, sooner or later, and whose memory is surprisingly good suddenly) when all is said and done.
I'm not a frothing at the mouth liberal. I am an american who feels the system is mocking it's citizenry. Our rule of law should not be for sale, in any party or administration.
-
Originally posted by Speed55
1995 washington square park: watching a bunch of democrats/liberals calling a marine fom the gulf war a baby killer like they were in vietnam, frothing at the mouth, when it was 20-1 like they wanted to kill him.
2004 Having some wierd looking woman with a face like a pin cushion hand me a free mumia flyer, which i crumpled up and threw on the floor and said i hope he gets the chair. Then almost getting jumped by 5 brothermen for it.
2006 Having a girl tell me, she can't wait for the next 9/11 to happen because bush deserves it.
200? Having crazy gun nut men and women try to hand me flyers telling me how guns are the root of all evil, not the people that wield them.
Those are people that i identify as liberals and democrats, therefore i have no respect at all for them or their party affiliations.
It is what it is, and through many experiences other than the ones mentioned, i can't be convinced otherwise. So yes i sit here straight faced and say that i believe that more republicans from the one high up in office, to the working class man/woman are who i'd rather call a friend or put my trust in anyday over a dem/liberal.
I have a few lib aquainances, but i would never call them a true friend.
Edit: might have the dates wrong, but all those incedents happened.
You have your opinion and i have mine.
I would not have a good opinion of those types of people as well. They serve as signposts of irrationality. But, saying that, I have less opinion of those who tend to base their opinion of a broad range of people by only a few incidents or individuals. It's irresponsibly and disrespectful. It sounds of narrow minded, opinionated propaganda. You know, the kinda thing the conservative base in America loves to do... associate anything they can bad with anyone who doesn't think EXACTLY like they do. The Nazi party did much the same in early 1930's Germany.... as well as the Socialist Reform in China.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
The Two Party system has long failed. But, most wish to have the same debate on which is "right" or "better". Therein lies the problem.
And THAT, ladies and gentleman, is the most genuine thing on this board. masher... hitting the nail upon it's head.
-
Plame outed herself by thinking that wangling her unqualified, political hack husband to a 'spy mission', in truth, a thinly veiled attack on the administration, would go unresponded to because she had the cover of CIA headquaters behind her. (She was...wrong)
Found interesting tidbit yesterday: Lewis Libby acted as lawyer (pro-bono) for Mark Rich, for whom he secured a pardon---prosecutor was.......................... .........Patrick Fitzgerald
As it happens, Messrs. Fitzgerald and Libby had crossed legal paths before. Before he joined the Bush Administration, Mr. Libby had, for a number of years in the 1980s and 1990s, been a lawyer for Marc Rich. Mr. Rich is the oil trader and financier who fled to Switzerland in 1983, just ahead of his indictment for tax-evasion by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Bill Clinton pardoned Mr. Rich in 2001, and so the feds never did get their man. The pardon so infuriated Justice lawyers who had worked on the case that the Southern District promptly launched an investigation into whether the pardon had been "proper." One former prosecutor we spoke to described the Rich case as "the single most rancorous case in the history of the Southern District."
Two of the prosecutors who worked on the Rich case over the years were none other than Mr. Fitzgerald and James Comey, who while Deputy Attorney General appointed Mr. Fitzgerald to investigate the Plame leak. Mr. Fitzgerald worked in the Southern District for five years starting in 1988, at the same time that Mr. Libby was developing a legal theory of Mr. Rich's innocence in a bid to get the charges dropped. The prosecutors never did accept the argument, but Leonard Garment, who brought Mr. Libby onto the case in 1985, says that he believes Mr. Libby's legal work helped set the stage for Mr. Rich's eventual pardon.
link (http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/01/the_pending_mar.html)
-
Which raises these questions" "Was Libby the target of a vendetta by Fitzgerald? Had Libby's work on behalf of Marc Rich stuck in Fitzgerald's craw, since Fitzgerald was the prosecutor in the Rich case?"
-
Libby WAS convicted of perjury, for not having same recollection of conversations as did Tim Russert and Judith Miller. Can't get around that, but the circumstances are so odd--within a few WEEKS of starting the investigation, Fitz ascertained that (A) Armitage was the source, and (B) it wasn't a crime. 3 years later he was done:huh
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Which raises these questions" "Was Libby the target of a vendetta by Fitzgerald? Had Libby's work on behalf of Marc Rich stuck in Fitzgerald's craw, since Fitzgerald was the prosecutor in the Rich case?"
It certainly makes one wonder.
And with the release of info showing others revealed Plame's line of work, it just reeks of a rush to convict SOMEBODY. Since Cheney isn't quite popular these days, let's nail his #1 guy.
I think calling this case a class one cluster (colorful metaphor) would be saying it lightly
-
Post on AGW by Pakrat.
"On September 30, 2003, just after the investigation into the outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson began, President George Bush said:
"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is . . . If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of."
We now know exactly what he meant. (And someone needs to make sure the video of Bush saying that gets in the hands of every TV network news producer -- as well as every Democratic presidential campaign.)
Here's a few talking points (hopefully concise enough for use with friends and family) that may help convey why Libby was the only person prosecuted in the Plame investigation -- and why Dubya's act yesterday aided and abetted Libby's obstruction of justice:
Bogus Spin #1: Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald went after Libby even after learning that Richard Armitage had been Bob Novak's "primary source" for his column outing Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA employee.
Wrong. Armitage made his admission in early October 2003, nearly three months before Fitzgerald was appointed. So it should be clear that Fitzgerald wasn't appointed just to find out who leaked to Novak. In fact, this means that -- even with Armitage's confession in hand -- there was so much evidence of wrongdoing that a longtime GOP loyalist like John Ashcroft felt he had no choice but to recuse himself and allow the appointment of a special counsel.
Bogus Spin #2: Even so, Libby wasn't the only one who leaked about Plame.
Maybe not, but it turns out that every other Bush administration who leaked did so with information they got as a result of Libby's actions. Ari Fleischer testified during Scooter's trial that Libby told him over lunch about Plame working for the CIA, and Karl Rove reportedly told a similar story to the grand jury that indicted Libby. Meanwhile, Armitage and Bu****e press flack Dan Bartlett both found out through a State Department memo that was produced in response to questions that Libby had asked a top department official about Wilson's trip to Niger. If Libby (and his boss, Dick Cheney) had been content to reply to Wilson's criticisms on their merits rather than by rattling cages in search of fodder for personal attacks, none of the other officials would ever have been able to leak about Plame.
Bogus Spin #3: The trial was just Libby's word against that of a bunch of reporters.
Although three reporters did testify, they were preceded on the stand by six different government officials who each testified to having conversations with Libby about Joe Wilson's wife before the date when Libby first claimed to have heard it from a reporter. It was these officials' testimony, more than that of the reporters, that convicted Libby.
Bogus Spin #4: Libby was convicted for having a faulty memory.
It's never mentioned in the mainstream media, but Scooter didn't just "forget" telling reporters about Joe Wilson's wife working for the CIA, and deny it when he really had told them.
No, Libby's "faulty memory" caused him not only to deny where he had learned about Plame -- a note produced in the trial showed Vice President Cheney had told him she worked in the Counterproliferation Department of the CIA (where the majority of employees are covert) -- but to invent stories saying he HAD leaked to reporters when he hadn't. He claimed to have been the first to tell Matt Cooper about Wilson's wife, thereby covering up the fact that Karl Rove had done so. And he shielded Fleischer by falsely claiming to have told the Post's Glenn Kessler as well, apparently trying to cover for the Post's October 12, 2003 report that a journalist for the Post (who turned out to be Walter Pincus) had been leaked to -- a news story that was found, with key passages underlined, in Libby's files.
Thus Libby was convicted not just of perjury but of intentionally lying in order to obstruct the investigation. And what George Bush did yesterday was intended to make sure he got away with it."
-
Thrawn is absolutely right, libby is guilty and should get the same punishment as other people that lie under oath, just like bill clinton.
impeach libby.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Post on AGW by Pakrat.
"On September 30, 2003, just after the investigation into the outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson began, President George Bush said:
"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is . . . If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of."
We now know exactly what he meant. (And someone needs to make sure the video of Bush saying that gets in the hands of every TV network news producer -- as well as every Democratic presidential campaign.)
Here's a few talking points (hopefully concise enough for use with friends and family) that may help convey why Libby was the only person prosecuted in the Plame investigation -- and why Dubya's act yesterday aided and abetted Libby's obstruction of justice:
Bogus Spin #1: Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald went after Libby even after learning that Richard Armitage had been Bob Novak's "primary source" for his column outing Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA employee.
Wrong. Armitage made his admission in early October 2003, nearly three months before Fitzgerald was appointed. So it should be clear that Fitzgerald wasn't appointed just to find out who leaked to Novak. In fact, this means that -- even with Armitage's confession in hand -- there was so much evidence of wrongdoing that a longtime GOP loyalist like John Ashcroft felt he had no choice but to recuse himself and allow the appointment of a special counsel.
Bogus Spin #2: Even so, Libby wasn't the only one who leaked about Plame.
Maybe not, but it turns out that every other Bush administration who leaked did so with information they got as a result of Libby's actions. Ari Fleischer testified during Scooter's trial that Libby told him over lunch about Plame working for the CIA, and Karl Rove reportedly told a similar story to the grand jury that indicted Libby. Meanwhile, Armitage and Bu****e press flack Dan Bartlett both found out through a State Department memo that was produced in response to questions that Libby had asked a top department official about Wilson's trip to Niger. If Libby (and his boss, Dick Cheney) had been content to reply to Wilson's criticisms on their merits rather than by rattling cages in search of fodder for personal attacks, none of the other officials would ever have been able to leak about Plame.
Bogus Spin #3: The trial was just Libby's word against that of a bunch of reporters.
Although three reporters did testify, they were preceded on the stand by six different government officials who each testified to having conversations with Libby about Joe Wilson's wife before the date when Libby first claimed to have heard it from a reporter. It was these officials' testimony, more than that of the reporters, that convicted Libby.
Bogus Spin #4: Libby was convicted for having a faulty memory.
It's never mentioned in the mainstream media, but Scooter didn't just "forget" telling reporters about Joe Wilson's wife working for the CIA, and deny it when he really had told them.
No, Libby's "faulty memory" caused him not only to deny where he had learned about Plame -- a note produced in the trial showed Vice President Cheney had told him she worked in the Counterproliferation Department of the CIA (where the majority of employees are covert) -- but to invent stories saying he HAD leaked to reporters when he hadn't. He claimed to have been the first to tell Matt Cooper about Wilson's wife, thereby covering up the fact that Karl Rove had done so. And he shielded Fleischer by falsely claiming to have told the Post's Glenn Kessler as well, apparently trying to cover for the Post's October 12, 2003 report that a journalist for the Post (who turned out to be Walter Pincus) had been leaked to -- a news story that was found, with key passages underlined, in Libby's files.
Thus Libby was convicted not just of perjury but of intentionally lying in order to obstruct the investigation. And what George Bush did yesterday was intended to make sure he got away with it."
Thrawn its sad but facts never get in the way of good republiCON talking points. :(
You might as well talk to a brick wall.
Who said this:
As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.
Happy 4th.............
-
"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is . . . If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of."
We now know exactly what he meant. (And someone needs to make sure the video of Bush saying that gets in the hands of every TV network news producer -- as well as every Democratic presidential campaign.)
What law was violated? Aside from not going to prison, the man still has $4 million+ in legal fees, a half-million dollar fine, and his professional life is over.
Bogus Spin #1: Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald went after Libby even after learning that Richard Armitage had been Bob Novak's "primary source" for his column outing Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA employee.
Wrong. Armitage made his admission in early October 2003, nearly three months before Fitzgerald was appointed. So it should be clear that Fitzgerald wasn't appointed just to find out who leaked to Novak. In fact, this means that -- even with Armitage's confession in hand -- there was so much evidence of wrongdoing that a longtime GOP loyalist like John Ashcroft felt he had no choice but to recuse himself and allow the appointment of a special counsel.
"• Richard Armitage. Mr. Armitage now claims he knew only on Oct. 1, 2003 that he was Mr. Novak's source. We should question that claim in light of Mr. Novak's account this week that Mr. Armitage "made clear he considered [the information about Ms. Plame] especially suited for my column."
Mr. Armitage also knew he had met with Bob Woodward on June 13, 2003, telling him about Mr. Wilson's wife's CIA employment and her role in her husband's trip to Niger. But when the FBI interviewed Mr. Armitage on Oct. 2, he admitted to the Novak conversation only, notably forgetting meeting with one of our country's premier investigative reporters. By attributing his longtime silence to Mr. Fitzgerald's request, Mr. Armitage must have forgotten Mr. Fitzgerald was not appointed until Dec. 30, 2003. If Mr. Armitage had come forward during those three months, there might never have been a special counsel.
link (http://sweetness-light.com/archive/victoria-toensing-on-armitage-and-fitzgerald)
Hmm, you're right--they could have indicted Armitage for lying to the FBI--(Note: Armitage was in the State Dept. "Bush-haters" club--a VERY big club over there)--Also--Ashcroft recused himself due to an apparent conflict of interest--had he NOT done that, we'd all be talking about THAT too
Bogus Spin #2: Even so, Libby wasn't the only one who leaked about Plame.
Maybe not, but it turns out that every other Bush administration who leaked did so with information they got as a result of Libby's actions. Ari Fleischer testified during Scooter's trial that Libby told him over lunch about Plame working for the CIA, and Karl Rove reportedly told a similar story to the grand jury that indicted Libby. Meanwhile, Armitage and Bu****e press flack Dan Bartlett both found out through a State Department memo that was produced in response to questions that Libby had asked a top department official about Wilson's trip to Niger. If Libby (and his boss, Dick Cheney) had been content to reply to Wilson's criticisms on their merits rather than by rattling cages in search of fodder for personal attacks, none of the other officials would ever have been able to leak about Plame.
We don't know WHEN Armitage found out, but it was before Libby--Libby first heard of it from an 'undersecretary of state'--that would be someone BELOW Armitage in state's pecking order link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070702/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_timeline)
Bogus Spin #3: The trial was just Libby's word against that of a bunch of reporters.
Although three reporters did testify, they were preceded on the stand by six different government officials who each testified to having conversations with Libby about Joe Wilson's wife before the date when Libby first claimed to have heard it from a reporter. It was these officials' testimony, more than that of the reporters, that convicted Libby.
.
"And because the jury believed Russert, they tended to discount problems they had with the testimony of other prosecution witnesses. For example, some jurors simply did not trust Ari Fleischer—“Some said, ‘I don’t believe him, he was Slick Willie,’” said Denis Collins—but because they believed Russert, it appears they tended to accept the other accounts that jibed with his story, including Fleischer’s. Fleischer had testified that Libby told him about Mrs. Wilson—“hush-hush, on the QT”—on Monday, July 7, 2003. The conversation with Russert, in which Libby said he was surprised to hear about Mrs. Wilson, was on Thursday, July 10. That led special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, in his opening argument, to utter what was, in retrospect, the line that convicted Libby: “You can’t learn something startling on Thursday that you’re giving out on Monday and Tuesday.” Jurors could only accept that argument if they believed Russert and Fleischer. They did, and it appears that Russert’s credibility helped shore up Fleischer’s less-than-believable performance.
Other witnesses did not receive similarly friendly receptions. In addition to Fleischer, jurors had serious doubts about Judith Miller, the former New York Times reporter. Collins told the press that one juror said of Miller, “I don’t know, her memory was terrible.” At that, according to Collins, another juror shot back, “Yeah, whose isn’t?”
link (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDY1MGY0Mjk1OGVjNmM2YzIxNjdiYjBhZmZiOTM4NmU=)
Bogus Spin #4: Libby was convicted for having a faulty memory.
It's never mentioned in the mainstream media, but Scooter didn't just "forget" telling reporters about Joe Wilson's wife working for the CIA, and deny it when he really had told them.
No, Libby's "faulty memory" caused him not only to deny where he had learned about Plame -- a note produced in the trial showed Vice President Cheney had told him she worked in the Counterproliferation Department of the CIA (where the majority of employees are covert) -- but to invent stories saying he HAD leaked to reporters when he hadn't. He claimed to have been the first to tell Matt Cooper about Wilson's wife, thereby covering up the fact that Karl Rove had done so. And he shielded Fleischer by falsely claiming to have told the Post's Glenn Kessler as well, apparently trying to cover for the Post's October 12, 2003 report that a journalist for the Post (who turned out to be Walter Pincus) had been leaked to -- a news story that was found, with key passages underlined, in Libby's files.
Thus Libby was convicted not just of perjury but of intentionally lying in order to obstruct the investigation. And what George Bush did yesterday was intended to make sure he got away with it."
"Covering up that Rove had done so"? WHERE is there the remotest evidence of that? Rove even volunteered to go BACK to the Grand Jury when he found some of his own notes regarding the matter. Despite the Left's howls, Rove never came close to getting in trouble, because he was, unfortunately, innocent. He (Libby) had NO motive to protect Fleischer, as Fleischer had provided unfavorable testimony--much of this is pure conjecture, and, as I stated before, the man's life is ruined due to an investigation of a crime which never happened. He didn't 'get away' with it
-
Originally posted by LePaul
It certainly makes one wonder.
And with the release of info showing others revealed Plame's line of work, it just reeks of a rush to convict SOMEBODY. Since Cheney isn't quite popular these days, let's nail his #1 guy.
I think calling this case a class one cluster (colorful metaphor) would be saying it lightly
Obstruction of justice charges carry vicarious liability.
If you lie during a murder investigation, even though no murder actually occurred, you're still going to jail / prison for obstructing a murder investigation... that's the legal standard you and I live under, why doesn't it apply to Scooter? hes just another citizen, perhaps the worst kind; a career political hack.
Bushes own Dept of Justice has a "zero leniency" policy regarding obstruction of justice charges AND sentencing... except if you're the presidents friend.
Neither party is adult enough to rise above the petty bickering, they play by the same low down rules while claiming to be above it all. All the more reason to vote Independent.
-
Originally posted by Silat
Thrawn its sad but facts never get in the way of good republiCON talking points. :(
You might as well talk to a brick wall.
Who said this:
As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.
Happy 4th.............
President numero Uno. Do yuo think the term liberal, as far as political meaning, is the same as it was over 200 years ago? I hope you know spanish Lew. If you libs have your way, you are going to need it.
-
A great point was made earlier today on one of the news outlets. Many republicans are defending this action, citing Mr. Clinton's somewhat shady application of a pardon in his waning days in office... to which I do agree.. Clinton did make pardons that are extremely questionable, but that is hindsight. What they fail to mention, is this is the first time a president has EVER commuted a sentence, (which he will eventually pardon, we all know) given to someone WITHIN HIS OWN ADMINISTRATION. Re read that statement..WITHIN HIS OWN ADMINISTRATION. Check it out.. it is the very first time this has been done in 200 years. All other pardons and commutations were handed down by successive administrations to previous ones..ie: Nixon pardoned by Ford.
Even the undeniably slanted, left or right, should appreciate the bad things that this portends....a commutation given to someone in your administration by a president who is NOT a lawyer... (He is a businessman), during an ongoing investigation on violation of various rights and possibly infringement upon your constitutional bill of rights.
I would be extremely vigilant if this was EITHER party doing this. There is a reason that no other president in 200 years has done so.