Libby Found Guilty On 4 of 5 Counts

[johnk48]

Furthermore, I too wonder how you cover up a crime that doesn't exist? If Fitzgerald knew ahead of time who revealed it (as it appears he did), and that there was no crime (which is evident by the lack of charges), then why did the investigation go on? I am no defender of Libby's. I don't know the facts, but he shouldn't have lied to teh grand jury. But it seems, based on the actual facts, that he never should have been there to start with.

Perzakly!

This was nothing more or less than libs hating conservatives and using anything they could grasp onto to turn their hate into action.

 

[carpro]

What is really sad is that Fitzgerald has known from almost day 1 who the source of the leak was , but continued his "investigation" by setting perjury traps for most of the people he questioned. Libby fell into the trap.

 

[Daisy]

This was nothing more or less than libs hating conservatives and using anything they could grasp onto to turn their hate into action.

Who are the "libs" and "conservatives" in your scenario?

Is the CIA a "lib" or a "conservative" organization? They were the ones who first demanded to know who leaked.

The Republican controlled Senate called for the investigation. Are they the "libs" or the "conservatives"?

Republican President Bush ("lib" or a "conservative"?) appointed Fitzgerald (don't know his party affiliation, but he has a solid reputation of integrity).

Republicans Armitage, Rove & Libby all leaked to various journalists - are they "lib" or a "conservative"? Conservative Novak was the first to actually publish the information, with most the others declining. Uber-Republican Cheney was obsessed with discrediting Wilson and Plame (are they your "libs"?)

Who is putting the hate on whom here?

 

[ASLANSPAL]

The truth scales have been brought out once again

Who are the "libs" and "conservatives" in your scenario?

Is the CIA a "lib" or a "conservative" organization? They were the ones who first demanded to know who leaked.

The Republican controlled Senate called for the investigation. Are they the "libs" or the "conservatives"?

Republican President Bush ("lib" or a "conservative"?) appointed Fitzgerald (don't know his party affiliation, but he has a solid reputation of integrity).

Republicans Armitage, Rove & Libby all leaked to various journalists - are they "lib" or a "conservative"? Conservative Novak was the first to actually publish the information, with most the others declining. Uber-Republican Cheney was obsessed with discrediting Wilson and Plame (are they your "libs"?)

Who is putting the hate on whom here?

truth is balanced and the other is truthiness...but I prefer balance and evidence for the discerning eye.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

 

[hillclimber1]

It is disappointing to see Libby become the fall guy for Cheney.

The real disappointment is that Plame and Wilson didn't get justice. I see they are trying to leave to avoid any more scrutiny. They are of bad character.

 

[Daisy]

The real disappointment is that Plame and Wilson didn't get justice. I see they are trying to leave to avoid any more scrutiny. They are of bad character.

You're blaming Plame for Libby's lying and obstructing justice. That's a spin and a twist!

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Nobody has been charged with intentionally identifying Plame, the wife of former ambassador Joseph Wilson.

How can there be obstruction of justice when there was no justice to obstruct?

 

[NiteShift]

"The fall of this skilled and long-respected public servant is particularly sobering because it arose from a Washington scandal remarkable for its lack of substance. It was propelled not by actual wrongdoing but by inflated and frequently false claims......

"Mr. Wilson was embraced by many because he was early in publicly charging that the Bush administration had "twisted," if not invented, facts in making the case for war against Iraq...he claimed to have debunked evidence that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger; suggested that he had been dispatched by Mr. Cheney to look into the matter; and alleged that his report had circulated at the highest levels of the administration.

"A bipartisan investigation by the Senate intelligence committee subsequently established that all of these claims were false -- and that Mr. Wilson was recommended for the Niger trip by Ms. Plame, his wife. When this fact, along with Ms. Plame's name, was disclosed in a column by Robert D. Novak, Mr. Wilson advanced yet another sensational charge: that his wife was a covert CIA operative and that senior White House officials had orchestrated the leak of her name to destroy her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson....

"The partisan furor over this allegation led to the appointment of special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald. Yet after two years of investigation, Mr. Fitzgerald charged no one with a crime for leaking Ms. Plame's name. In fact, he learned early on that Mr. Novak's primary source was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage, an unlikely tool of the White House. The trial has provided convincing evidence that there was no conspiracy to punish Mr. Wilson by leaking Ms. Plame's identity -- and no evidence that she was, in fact, covert....

"It would have been sensible for Mr. Fitzgerald to end his investigation after learning about Mr. Armitage. Instead, like many Washington special prosecutors before him, he pressed on, pursuing every tangent in the case...."

LINK

 

[777]

And Armitage? Wilson?

How can there be obstruction of justice when there was no justice to obstruct?

Somebody had to be sacrificed. What I'd like to know is how this woman, "juror #10" can possibly be an attorney?:

MSNBC host Chris Matthews spoke with Libby juror Ann Redington on HARDBALL. Juror [#10] says she would support a Bush pardon for Libby.

Transcript:

Chris: You're for a pardon out of sympathy for the defendant.

Ann: Yeah, I think in the big picture, um, it kind of bothers me that there was this whole big crime being investigated and he got caught up in the investigation as opposed to in the actual crime that was supposedly committed.

Chris: Which is the leaking of a CIA agents name.

Ann: Exactly.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11260

Convict him one day, pardon him the next day. It wouldn't have mattered to this jury if Scooter Libby had testified on his own behalf, this will teach him not to forget a memo he saw over ten years ago.

 

[Terry_Herrington]

And Armitage? Wilson?



Somebody had to be sacrificed. What I'd like to know is how this woman, "juror #10" can possibly be an attorney?:



http://newsbusters.org/node/11260

Convict him one day, pardon him the next day. It wouldn't have mattered to this jury if Scooter Libby had testified on his own behalf, this will teach him not to forget a memo he saw over ten years ago.

Libby didn't forget, he lied. That's the reason he was convicted.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

This, like the Clinton drama of the nineties and the Martha Steward conviction, was a big waste of taxpayer dollars. That prosecutor spent "how long" investigating this and the best he could do is obstruction of justice? Come on! This is a joke, a farce, and an outrage. It is a perfect example of the many things that are wrong in this country. If Libby is guilty of a crime in the leak issues then charge him. But please don’t insult my intelligence with this joke of a trial.

He is guilty of a crime. He was found guilty on 4 out of 5 charges. Clinton got impeached for less.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I want to know how Denis Collins got on this jury. I think even the most die-hard liberal would have to admit something is very wrong with this guy.


Over on The Corner, Byron York is puzzled over why Libby's lawyers wouldn't choke on the many conflicts of blabby juror Denis Collins, the former Washington Post staffer who worked for Bob Woodward, partied with Walter Pincus, shared a back yard with Tim Russert, not to mention the book-writing about the CIA:

From the day Denis Collins appeared in jury selection, reporters asked themselves one question: How did this guy get on the jury? From his account at the Huffington Post, he recounts telling the court about his many, almost unbelievable, conflicts:

http://newsbusters.org/taxonomy/term/611



​

​

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Libby didn't forget, he lied. That's the reason he was convicted.

The lesson is, if yer a GOPer, don't talk to the media.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

What did Novak do that was so despicable?

He took down an entire CIA operation.

I thought the press couldn't do nything despicable?

Who said that? I didn't.

How is Novak's column less despicable than the wiretapping reports? One affected national security, the other did not. And yet the one that affected national security is a good revelation, while the one that did not affect national security is bad.

Are we really thinking clearly here?

I am not referring to the article as much as I am referring to what the despicable Mr. Novak did in the aftermath of outing a CIA operative. You will recall that he went on CNN and took down an entire CIA operation.

Think about that: if this front company was operating in an intelligence-gathering capacity in a country, anyone associated with that company was outed. That means that the agents and/or analysts were compromised, along with anyone working with them. Remember: they're the good guys in this "War on Terror."

But I guess we will never know the extent of the damage, will we? As far as I know, they never did a damage assessment of Novak's despicable actions.

Furthermore, I too wonder how you cover up a crime that doesn't exist? If Fitzgerald knew ahead of time who revealed it (as it appears he did), and that there was no crime (which is evident by the lack of charges), then why did the investigation go on? I am no defender of Libby's. I don't know the facts, but he shouldn't have lied to teh grand jury. But it seems, based on the actual facts, that he never should have been there to start with.

Sounds a lot like Whitewater, doesn't it? Starr found absolutely nothing, yet went after President Clinton on an unrelated perjury charge. As far as I know, Monica was not involved with Whitewater in any way shape or form.

BTW, does anyone know what Plame's speciality was at the CIA?

Novak is despicable, plain and simple. He is a true enemy of the state.

Regards Pastor Larry, hope all is well.
BiR

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

The real disappointment is that Plame and Wilson didn't get justice. I see they are trying to leave to avoid any more scrutiny. They are of bad character.

Yep, I heard Rush Limbaugh something very close to this. It sure is amazing that I continually see his thoughts/ideas reproduced on this board.

Joseph Wilson is NOT of bad character, and your claim seemingly indicates that you have had your political viewpoints provided for you by those who would have us believe that Scooter Libby is some good guy who has been a victim of the left wing.

From Wikipedia:

"From 1988 to 1991, he was the Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq. He was praised by George H. W. Bush after sheltering more than one hundred Americans at the embassy, despite Saddam Hussein's threats to execute anyone who refused to hand over foreigners. As a result, in 1990, he also became the last American diplomat to meet with Saddam Hussein. When Hussein sent a note to Wilson (along with other embassy heads in Iraq) threatening to execute anyone sheltering foreigners in Iraq, Wilson publicly repudiated the dictator by appearing at a press conference wearing a homemade
noose around his neck and saying "If the choice is to allow American citizens to be taken hostage or to be executed, [I will bring my own rope]." [emphasis in bold is mine]

<Note: I cannot repeat the quote verbatim as it contains an expletive - caution (to those who are easily offended) when following the link>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_wilson

Perhaps you should think for yourself.....

BiR

 

[777]

He lied to Fitzgerald???

Yeah, give him the max! Twenty-five years! That'll show other Americans that they can't get away with lying to a partisan "special" prosecutor.

I want to know how Denis Collins got on this jury. I think even the most die-hard liberal would have to admit something is very wrong with this guy.

​

Oh, the obligatory MSM plant. Who was the DNCer on there?

Great to hear there's other Bob Novaks fans out there! Here's what he has to say:

By Robert D. Novak
Thursday, March 8, 2007; A23

Denis Collins, a Washington journalist on the Scooter Libby jury, described sentiments in the jury room reflecting those in the Senate Democratic cloakroom: "It was said a number of times. . . . Where's Rove? Where are these other guys?" Besides presidential adviser Karl Rove, he surely meant Vice President Cheney and maybe President Bush. Oddly, the jurors appeared uninterested in hearing from Richard Armitage, the source of the CIA leak.

"It's about time," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, rejoicing in the guilty verdicts against Libby, that "someone in the Bush administration has been held accountable for the campaign to manipulate intelligence and discredit war critics." But Libby was found guilty only of lying about how he learned of Valerie Plame's identity. Reid and Democratic colleagues were after much bigger game than Cheney's chief of staff.

Democrats had been slow to react to my column of July 14, 2003, which reported that former diplomat Joseph Wilson's mission to Niger was suggested by his CIA employee wife, Valerie Plame Wilson. By September, when the Justice Department began investigating the CIA leak, Democrats smelled another Iran-contra affair or Watergate. They were wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/07/AR2007030702045_pf.html

I couldn't find "Yellow Cake" Joe's opinion, wonder why?

The last Novak sentence, duh. In the name their of "justice", they cry for a GITMO terrorist:

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=2E2A4850-3048-5C12-00A7B247454E775D

and celebrate this. Verdict won't stand and you'll never get Cheney.​

 

[NiteShift]

I am not referring to the article as much as I am referring to what the despicable Mr. Novak did in the aftermath of outing a CIA operative. You will recall that he went on CNN and took down an entire CIA operation.

Think about that: if this front company was operating in an intelligence-gathering capacity in a country, anyone associated with that company was outed. That means that the agents and/or analysts were compromised, along with anyone working with them. Remember: they're the good guys in this "War on Terror."

What operation? There was no operation. Brewster-Jennings & Associates was nothing more than a mail drop. Plame had not been covert at all.

Now, for a genuine case of bringing down an operation, see the NY Times series wherein they revealed the NSA's terrorist surveillance program in 2005.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

There is no evidence that any thought presented on this board is a direct result of anyone listening to Rush Limbaugh unless he is quoted and givne credit for it. We also hear many thoughts presented on this board that is spued from many left wing wackos from CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Air America etc. It appears that some run out of arguments so the run to "you cant think for yourself" "you got it form someone else" in other words if you are on the right side of politics then you are thoughtless robots.

The left wing elitists continue their mantra that is spoken over and over again. And when they do that they engage in the very same speech that they accuse the right of engaging in. And it is rather immature.

The truth is those of the same mind set are likely to come to many of the same conclusions.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

What operation? There was no operation. Brewster-Jennings & Associates was nothing more than a mail drop. Plame had not been covert at all.

So, you are claiming that there was nothing to this company, that there was nobody working under the cover of this company? If you are, then please provide the proof for such a claim.

Now, for a genuine case of bringing down an operation, see the NY Times series wherein they revealed the NSA's terrorist surveillance program in 2005.

Oh, okay. Was that program legal? Were the obtaining the warrants as outlined by the FISA courts?

Regards,
BiR

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

There is no evidence that any thought presented on this board is a direct result of anyone listening to Rush Limbaugh unless he is quoted and givne credit for it. We also hear many thoughts presented on this board that is spued from many left wing wackos from CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Air America etc. It appears that some run out of arguments so the run to "you cant think for yourself" "you got it form someone else" in other words if you are on the right side of politics then you are thoughtless robots.

The left wing elitists continue their mantra that is spoken over and over again. And when they do that they engage in the very same speech that they accuse the right of engaging in. And it is rather immature.

The truth is those of the same mind set are likely to come to many of the same conclusions.

Don't forget: I willingly admit to listening to Rush Limbaugh - as much as I can stomach. It certainly is amazing that so many of his viewpoints show up on this board after the show is on the radio, in some cases the points are almost verbatim.

For example: you utilized the term "left wing elitists." That is a trademark Rush Limbaugh phrase - everybody knows that. Whereas Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Michael Savage and various other right-wing radio personalities use the word "liberal," and Bill O'Reilly uses the phrase "secular progressive," you opted to use Rush's phrase (in addition, Rush also uses "pointy-headed intellectuals").

Interesting.......

Regards anyway, hope you and yours are doing well,
BiR