Terry_Herrington
New Member
hillclimber1 said:
Yea there is, lock the criminal Libby up!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Libby Injustice
- Thread starter carpro
- Start date
Yea there is, lock the criminal Libby up!
The Galatian
Active Member
Barbarian observes:
Nevertheless, if he lied, he committed a crime, and there will be consequences.
That's the way the law works.
Clinton lied about his sex life under oath, and was disbarred. Could have been a lot worse, except that the Senate didn't think lying about sex constituted "high crimes and misdemeanors." Go figure.
Libby lied about official corruption at the highest level, apparently to protect his bosses. I figure that deserves at least a little time in the cooler.
But the jury and the judge will have the final say on that. As they should.
Nevertheless, if he lied, he committed a crime, and there will be consequences.
That's the way the law works.
Clinton lied about his sex life under oath, and was disbarred. Could have been a lot worse, except that the Senate didn't think lying about sex constituted "high crimes and misdemeanors." Go figure.
Libby lied about official corruption at the highest level, apparently to protect his bosses. I figure that deserves at least a little time in the cooler.
But the jury and the judge will have the final say on that. As they should.
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
The Galatian said:
That is what perplexes me, Galatian.
Not to take away from what Clinton did or what Libby allegedly did, why are there not charges against the despicable Bob Novak, and what he did on CNN after he wrote that article that started the whole ordeal? IMO, Novak is guilty of treason.
Regards, hope you are well,
BiR
The Galatian
Active Member
Novak is a republican apologist, and was trying to help the administration. The fact that he put an unknown number of CIA intelligence sources in danger thereby was apparently of little or no concern to him.
It's not quite treason, but it's disloyal and cowardly.
It's not quite treason, but it's disloyal and cowardly.
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
The Galatian said:
He compromised a whole operation with his despicable behavior.
To quote former President George H. W. Bush:
https://www.odci.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/1999/bush_speech_042699.html
Regards to you and yours,
BiR
What was teh corruption? Turns out that apparently, the leak came from Richard Armitage, not the administration. And apparently, Fitzgerald knew that beforehand.
So why don't you comment on that Galatian?
It seems to me that the corruption is that Fitzgerald pursued an investigation in which he knew the outcome.
The Galatian
Active Member
The question remains: "Did Libby lie under oath, or did he not?"
If yes, he's guilty and needs some consequences. If not he's innocent.
The state of mind of others doesn't enter into it at all. He did it or he didn't do it. I'm pleased that Clinton was disbarred for lying under oath. Not because I hate him, but because he deserved it.
Libby, if he lied under oath, will also have to fact the consequences. That's the way it works, even if you personally approve of what he did.
If yes, he's guilty and needs some consequences. If not he's innocent.
The state of mind of others doesn't enter into it at all. He did it or he didn't do it. I'm pleased that Clinton was disbarred for lying under oath. Not because I hate him, but because he deserved it.
Libby, if he lied under oath, will also have to fact the consequences. That's the way it works, even if you personally approve of what he did.
The Galatian
Active Member
Yep. Everything else is irrelevant. Likewise, Clinton's sex life had nothing whatever to do with Whitewater, but he still lied under oath, even if the proseuter was exceeding his mandate. Still a crime.
If Libby lied under oath, he needs to face the consequences.
If Libby lied under oath, he needs to face the consequences.
Galatian,
You said Libby lied about corruption at the highest level. What was the corruption at the highest level, given the fact that the "leak" came from Richard Armitage, and Fitzgerald knew that at the beginning?
Secondly, do you think it was proper for Fitzgerald to continue an investigation in which he already knew the answer? Did he bait Libby?
You said Libby lied about corruption at the highest level. What was the corruption at the highest level, given the fact that the "leak" came from Richard Armitage, and Fitzgerald knew that at the beginning?
Secondly, do you think it was proper for Fitzgerald to continue an investigation in which he already knew the answer? Did he bait Libby?
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
<I deleted my comment - might take us off topic>
Hope you are well, Pastory Larry,
BiR
Hope you are well, Pastory Larry,
BiR
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not sure they did know. Do you know if they knew that Armitage was the leak? I think it entirely conceiveable that they did not know who the leak was and were geniunely concerned it was somebody in the building. I honestly don't know ... don't have any idea.
I find it hard to say that investigating an issue that you already have an answer to is either professional or discreet. I just think that is wierd.