Rule of law? What about it?

Only Democrats should be punished for breaking the law. A ****Republican's*** ass is on the way to jail, you see.

Heh.

Of course, in Bush's defense, a lack of jail time for Libby is probably the best way to keep him singing, and the rest of the crew joining him there.

Powerful men with nothing to hide need pardon nobody, and need fear nothing from the courts. From those fact, let you all draw your own conclusions.

Those aren't fireworks going off outside. It's the sound of liberal heads exploding.

Jim
Libby was not pardoned.

Hey Jim, how much time did Sandy Berger spend for stealing documents that may have effected how the United States responded to terrorist attacks from the national archives? It was a phoney trial conducted by a witch hunter who could not find a witch and settled for Libby. The prosecuter suborned perjury from Tim Russert to gain a conviction and the Judge denied Libby's defense to present evidence necessary for acquital. Ask Juanita Broderick about Democrats getting away with crimes, you puke.

Jim,
Your honesty really shows. Why the liars Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame have not been prosecuted? Why the dems have been behind these liars? Is that the honesty of the progressive left?

Of course, in Bush's defense, a lack of jail time for Libby is probably the best way to keep him singing

So, you're saying Libby was ratting out the gang and Bush wants him to continue it?

Mistyping in above, due to agitation - it should read "keep him ***from*** singing."

Jon Stewart totally called this weeks ago.

http://reddit.com/info/1wii1/comments

"Some speculate president Bush will pardon Libby just before he serves jail time, while others...****know**** he will."

But I somehow still believed even the Bush admin wouldn't have the balls to pardon a convicted criminal with over a year left in office.

Somehow the floor of my expectations continues to be plunged through.

I wonder why the progressive left has been promoting their liars like Wilson and Plame. Wilson was an advisor for Kerry campaign. Why Wilson and Plame can lie to Congress and not been prosecuted?

Bush had to. Otherwise Scooter was gonna rat out the whole crew.

Bush couldn't been seen as more of a total fxxxup if he was found with kiddie porn so why not.

All you Bush submissives get down on your knees.."All hail King George"

This commutation does not represent justice.

A full pardon and apology from the Justice Dept. for this Stalinist show trial over no crime whatsoever would represent justice.

However, if the President wishes to wait for the completion of the Appeals Process, in hopes that the justice system itself will remedy the evils committed against Libby, then I can live with that.

But, if the appellate process does not result in true justice, then I want a full pardon, and I want the Government to make good any and all legal fees and other expenses Libby incurred in defending himself from these fraudulent charges.

The dishonest progressive left was fully behind Clinton when he lied to a grand jury. Now they want Libby to go to jail.

Hey Jim, how much time did Sandy Berger spend for stealing documents that may have effected how the United States responded to terrorist attacks from the national archives?

a) I refer you to the many, many freaking times I have pointed that Sandy Berger paid all fines for everything he was actually charged with.

b) I point out to you that the Bush administration themselves have not charged Berger with any of the further crimes conservatives like to blame him for

c) finally, and most importantly I say:
let's say for a second you're right, and Berger **did** get away with something terrible.

Why does one guy getting off with somethign terrible, excuse someone else with getting out of punishment?

Because OJ Simpson wasn't jailed for murder, does that mean if I kill someone I shouldn't be jailed for murder? Obviously not.

PS: you're a puke. And a poopyhead poopypants. And you have cootie-pukes too.

I may have to visit DU and Kos tonight just to sample the renting of garments and knashing of teeth.

The local loonbats are already giving me a trailer of the show. :}

Hey, Jim, how about all those Clinton pardons? Like for convicted fALN terrorists, convicted cocaine trafficker Carlos Vignali, Almon Braswell, convicted of mail fraud, and the fugitive from justice Marc Rich, who was also involved in the Iraqi Oil-For-Food scandal?

Pardoning Libby for remembering a conversation differently than someone else does pales in comparison.

Libby was not pardoned.

Oh, pardon me (pun unintended). He'll just never serve a day in jail, and have to pay a fine that he can probably easily afford.

Whoop to do.

Clinton when he lied to a grand jury. Now they want Libby to go to jail.

LAI, please point out anything Clinton was convicted of which he did not pay the full penalty for.

Jim, calm down. The adults are talking. Let me say it again- Libby was not pardoned. Do you know the difference? I think not.

Kim, where are you? We need some insider info. ww

Why does one guy getting off with somethign terrible, excuse someone else with getting out of punishment?
-------------------------------------------------
Libby still has to pay $250K fine and on probation. Clinton lied to a grand jury and the progressive left didn't want him to have the punishment of being impeached. We didn't even talk about jail for Clinton. Now they want Libby to go to jail.

My question is the big liars Wilson and his wife Plame. Why have they not been prosecuted and cross-examined in courts? Where is the progressive left wrt these liars?

a) I refer you to the many, many freaking times I have pointed that Sandy Berger paid all fines for everything he was actually charged with.

And now, we can refer you Jim, many freaking times, to the fines that Libby will pay in full.

c) finally, and most importantly I say:
let's say for a second you're right, and Berger **did** get away with something terrible.

Why does one guy getting off with somethign terrible, excuse someone else with getting out of punishment?

How many freaking times do we have to point you to the fines Libby will be paying in full.

Your honesty really shows.

Thank you, LAI. I try to be very honest.

Why the liars Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame have not been prosecuted?

Maybe because they didn't blow a CIA agent's cover because they couldn't counteract an embarassing argument on it's merits?

Oh, wait, that's what the Bush administration did.

Finally a breath of fresh air. I have hope again for the border patrol agents Compean, and Ramos.
Jennifer

Oh yeah. The libs are losing it all over the country. Gawd, this is hilarious.

AT the end of the day, one can only hope Chuck Schumer is tried, covicted and executed for treason. His is behind most of this. Libby will be exonerated when this matter gets to the appeals court. Idiots like Jim, Dr. Balava and the rest will rant on, but in reality their double standard with come back to bite them. It should be interesting reading the wild rants from idiots on the left. I'll bet they are going crazy at the Daily Kos.

Oh, pardon me (pun unintended). He'll just never serve a day in jail, and have to pay a fine that he can probably easily afford.

Whoop to do.

You are showing your back side here Jim.

Libby still a convicted felon. That's forever Jim. He will lose his lisence to practice law.
He is on Probation and must report weekly or monthly to a probation officer
He can not vote.
This list is long...

And now, we can refer you Jim, many freaking times, to the fines that Libby will pay in full.

Cool. Maybe you can also tell me what jail time Berger was sentenced to?

(crickets)

Hey, have your fun and be happy with your President. Just don't have any illusions that he is any way lawful. Or that your joy in a convicted felon getting out of serving his due time, shows ***you*** to be lawful.

Guess what?

Your boys in office are now officially a gang of criminals covering up for each other.

Jim, calm down. The adults are talking.

Bwahahahahahahaha!

LAI, please point out anything Clinton was convicted of which he did not pay the full penalty for.

.....marrying Hillary?

Your boys in office are now officially a gang of criminals covering up for each other.
-------------------------------------------------
Why are you defending your criminals Clinton and Sandy Berger? Why are you still defending the known liars Wilson and Plame?

Oh, poor poor Scooter Libby. Now never to serve a day in jail for obstructing justice into the investigation of a ****violating of national security****, that resulted in the outing of an ****entire operation into WMD's****, including WMD's in Iran...not to mention the smaller little details of ruining a dedicated woman's career in the CIA....

...all because the Bush administration couldn't counteract Wilson's claims on their merits, and instead took the cowardly route of going after his wife.

Nice bunch of brave, stand-up guys full of integrity you all support.

Jim, your honesty is second, only to Lee Ward. Your intellect is second only to Bryand. Your logic is second only to BarneyG2000. You are truly in good company. You are in the minority. Who give a big fat f**k what you think? Certainly no one posting here. Entertaining though. The demented thoughts of a radical leftist.

Got to love the way the repulicans protect their convicted felons!

Just goes to prove that conservatives don't value the rule of law.

Oh, Richard Armitage, why has thy leaking name been forgotten.

LAI, please point out anything Clinton was convicted of which he did not pay the full penalty for.
---------------------------------------------------
He was lying in court. So progressive left is fully behind the pres of the US lying in court. Your honesty is a parody. Officially the progressive left supported pres of the US lying in court.

Zeldorf is a moron who supports criminals.

Hey, Jim, you still haven't commented on Clinton's pardons of fugitives, drug dealers, terrorists and plain old con men.

Oh, but since Clinton is a good lefty, I presume those are all OK with you.

Again, Wilson and Plame should be invesitigated and put under oath. Until that happens, all the talk from the left is their typical dishonest spin.

OK, I've said my piece. You can all dance your happy dance now, as I'm sure you will.

Bush is clearly covering his own butt, by commuting the sentence of someone who went to jail who was convicted of covering up for his administration.

The law is the law, whether Republicans or Democrats have been found guilty.

If you support the Bush administration in this commutation of the only part of Libby's sentence that would actually hurt him, you are against law and order. Period.

My silver lining is, how this action by the Bush administration, and the inexplicable widespread GOP joy over Bush's plain CYA, will disgust the voters even further. And you conservatives who plainly think Bush should get away with anything he wants, will only have yourselves to blame.

So mote it be.

Maybe because they didn't blow a CIA agent's cover

Jim
That raises an interesting point: why isn't Armitage in jail?
Tell us why Armitage should not be frogged marched off to the clinger?

Zeldorf is a moron who supports criminals.
--------------------------------------------
So Jim is a moron who supports criminals (eg. Sandy and Clinton).

Cool. Maybe you can also tell me what jail time Berger was sentenced to?

(crickets)

What does Berger not being sentence to jail have anything to do with it? The court gave Berger his punishment. And the court gave Libby his. Both will have complied with the remaining portions of their sentence, fines and probation.

Hey, have your fun and be happy with your President. Just don't have any illusions that he is any way lawful. Or that your joy in a convicted felon getting out of serving his due time, shows ***you*** to be lawful.

Do I take joy in a wronfully convicted man not spending time in prison? Yep. Quite a bit in fact, I like to see the wrongfully convicted not get railroaded into prison.

If we assume that Libby actually comitted a crime, as the courts rules, and as everyone keeps repeating, Libby still has his conviction, still has a felony record. The vast majority of people who get popped for perjury don't get 2 1/2 years. Most get probation. Handing out someones sentence based on political motives is not justice.

Woo-hoo, the liberals heads are exploding and I must confess, I am enjoying it.

My fellow conservatives, why would the founding fathers find it necessary to give the President the power of commuting and/or pardoning people? According to the lefties, they think this is against the law. Isn't it in the constitution? Yeah! I think so. Anyway, the President has every legal right to commute/pardon anybody any time. Like your Clinton did for Rich, and others. Selective memory I believe. Anyway, good for Libby and his family. Shove it in the face of the liberals who are more motivated by hate then facts. ww

C-C-G, I was waiting for someone to bring Clinton into this. Why ***should**** I mention Clinton?

The logic this sort of point comes from, is actually pretty funny:

a) Clinton did something bad.
b) Bush did something bad.
c) therefore, Bush is really good.

As I pointed out to the improbably named Zeldorf - what does one person possibly doing wrong, have to do with someone else doing something wrong?

Nothing but an excuse, so you can keep your eyes closed.

Your boys in office are now officially a gang of criminals covering up for each other.

He probably doesn't want to discuss Almon Glenn Braswell, does he? Braswell was pardoned of his mail fraud and perjury convictions, even while a federal investigation was underway regarding additional money laundering and tax evasion charges. Braswell and Carlos Vignali each paid approximately $200,000 to Hillary Clinton's brother, Hugh Rodham, to represent their respective cases for clemency. Hugh Rodham returned the payments after they were disclosed to the public. Braswell would later invoke the Fifth Amendment at a Senate Committee hearing in 2001, when questioned about allegations of his having systematically defrauded senior citizens of millions of dollars.

Hypocrite.

Jim,
You suppored Clinton 's lying in court as the pres of the US. No way around it. That 's the progressive left 's respect for the law. Typcial double standard.

If you support the Bush administration in this commutation of the only part of Libby's sentence that would actually hurt him, you are against law and order. Period.
--------------------------------------------------
What is against the law here? Bush has the constitutional right to commute the sentence of Libby. Compare that to Clinton 's pardon of Marc Rich, a criminal who was knee deep in the oil-for-food corruption. You were so upset with Clinton that now Hillary is a front-runner for the dem primary.

And the court gave Libby his

And the President is now overruling the court, to make sure that Libby will ****not**** serve the only part of his sentence that would actually be painful to him.

You understand this, right?

No, Jim, I'm just saying that your double standard is showing quite clearly. Where's your outrage at Clinton's pardons?

Quick, go to your blog and back-date a post showing that you were really really mad at Clinton for doing that! It might convince Mixti, Leeward, bD, and the rest of the lefties here.

That woman was dedicated alright. Dedicated to lying to congress to hide her part is misleading the country into believing her lying ass fuck of a husband. Which of the three stories do you believe Jim? All of them, no doubt. This is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. No one was charged for outing a undercover agent, because she did not meet the laws definition of covert. That is a fact Jim, get over it. The rest is all BS, concocted by the treasonous bastard Schumer. You are still and idiot Jim, but who knew. Your parents?

Excellent. He spared a partriot jail time, but not the fine and probation.

Worse than Sandy Berger got, but much less damage to the country in Libby's case.

That raises an interesting point: why isn't Armitage in jail?
Tell us why Armitage should not be frogged marched off to the clinger?

Because Libby obstructed justice and perjured in a certain investigation. Which made it impossible to get to the bottom of who conspired to leak the info. Which Bush then got him out of jail for.

Of course, Bush could actually have Armitage brought up on charges, if he actually gave a rat's ass.

Next question?

It is appropriate that King George pisses on the rule of law on the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

And the President is now overruling the court, to make sure that Libby will ****not**** serve the only part of his sentence that would actually be painful to him.
--------------------------------------------------
Jim,
You are now spinning. The pres has the constitutional right to pardon anyone. This commutation is small compared to Clinton 's pardon of the criminal fugitive Marc Rich. Progressives like you have so much respect for the law that Hillary is still the front runner for the Dem nomination. It is a shame that you can only recite the Dem talking points.

It's fun watching the lefties melt down in this thread. Thanks for posting it, Jay!

Awesome. Can we commute blowjobs, too?

OK, C-C-G.

So I'm a hypocrite, because you're not seeing my outrage at pardons that occurred 6 years ago...

But you're ***not*** a hypocrite, by saying Bush is good for commuting sentences while Clinton clinton is bad for doing the same.

That actually makes sense to you? Really?

LAI, please show how in any way, shape or form I have ever supported Clinton's lying.

You are now spinning.

No, LAI. You are spinning.

The pres has the constitutional right to pardon anyone.

Of course he has the Constitutional right to.

That doesn't mean it isn't what it clearly is: a cover up. Which the Congress has the Constitutional right to impeach him for.

This commutation is small compared to Clinton 's pardon of the criminal fugitive Marc Rich.

So what, even if true?

How does Clinton doing something bad, justify Bush doing something bad?

Please answer that essential question.

You should condemn the dems for not impeaching Clinton for lying in court as a pres. We didn't even ask for Clinton to go to jail as you are doing wrt Libby. CLinton was the pres, so the standard shyould be higher, right?

So can we agree that the liberals didn't respect the law wrt Clinton?

Jim, tell me you don't really believe that a sentence for perjury is equivalent to drug dealing or terrorism.

Cause if you do, you will show yourself to be even stoopider (misspelled intentionally, Leeward!) than previously believed, and that is truly scary.

I think the commutation was the right thing to do - as much as I abhor the policies and practices of this administration, it was a just and humanitarian thing. What is most important to me is that the conviction stand. Let it play out in the judicial system and let Libby pursue all the appeals he is entitled to. If the conviction stands, the point is made and the principles of our judicial system are upheld.

I disagree with everything Libby stands for but he never deserved to go to jail. A judge and jury say the facts were overwhelming and if not over turned he will rightfully carry the disgrace forever. That would be just. It the appeals process over turns his conviction so be it.

And the President is now overruling the court, to make sure that Libby will ****not**** serve the only part of his sentence that would actually be painful to him.

You understand this, right?

A-yep. I got that part down pat. I also got a handle on Article II, Section 2 of Ye Old Constitution. Libbys sentence is commuted, by his conviction stands. So. Whats more important to you Jim, the fact that Libby was convicted and shall remain a felon, or the fact that he is not being punished to the extent you feel is right and proper?

C-C-G, nice way to continue to evade the point.

Clinton's circumstances and actions do not in any way have anything to do with Bush's.

Let's say your right, and Clinton's actions are much worse. That ***still**** has nothing to do with Bush's actions.

Any more than OJ Simpson not serving jail time for murder, justifies me not serving jail time for stealing a car.

Do you understand this?

So what, even if true?

How does Clinton doing something bad, justify Bush doing something bad?
---------------------------------------------------
Bush didn't PARDON Libby. Clinton pardon Marc Rich. Even honest liberals know that Libby 's sentence is excessive. Only partisan radical progressive like you are determined to send Libby to jail. WHy don't you call for the known liars Wilson and Plame to tell the truth under oath? These people have been making millions of dollars of their lies.

It is appropriate that King George pisses on the rule of law on the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

Thanks for proving your stupidity, Barney.

The Declaration was adopted and signed on July 4, not July 2.

Let's say your right, and Clinton's actions are much worse.
-------------------------------------------------
Then can we agree that the liberals have been hypocritial dishonest for their support of Clinton?

James T, what bothers me is that Libby will not serve his full sentence.

And this in because of the full circumstances of this situation:

- Libby perjures and obstructs justice, in a federal investigation of the Bush administration.

- Libby has the only part of his sentence that will actually hurt him, jail time, commuted by the Bush administration.

Bush really knows how to pad that legacy.

And the President is now overruling the court, to make sure that Libby will ****not**** serve the only part of his sentence that would actually be painful to him.

You understand this, right?

Uh, no. I don't. You obviously have no experience with the rammifications of felony convictions. (and on the hand, good for you).

Libtards like jim only approve of pardoning Puerto Rican terrrorists and members of the Clinton family apparently.

LAI, I am officially done responding to you. It is an absolute and total waste of time, because you are addicted to a false moral equivalency.

Whatever Clinton's actions, they are, as I have point out many times, completely irrelevant to the morality of Bush's actions.

Please think about this.

That is all.

how about all those Clinton pardons? Like for convicted fALN terrorists, convicted cocaine trafficker Carlos Vignali, Almon Braswell, convicted of mail fraud, and the fugitive from justice Marc Rich, who was also involved in the Iraqi Oil-For-Food scandal?

I'll take this opportunity to again point out a revealing bit of trivia. Does anyone know who was Marc Rich's lawyer until after his pardon? Who was the man who said this,

"There are no facts that I know of that support the criminality of the client based on the tax returns."

And that the prosecution had, ""misconstrued the facts and the law," and that Rich had "not violated the tax laws," for which he was convicted?

Times up. That's right, it was Irv Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Jr.! The very man President Bush is now gracing with presidential clemency.

The question that arises here is this: Does this tell you something about how Washington really works? It should.

Oh, sure Hugh. That $250,000 fine is really going to hurt him, after he goes on to strings of $250,000 speakings gigs.

Whatever. If it's no big deal, then why are you all so happy this felon's getting off?

Mantis,

That's the kind of stuff you say when you're a lawyer defending someone. You know, doing your job?

Oh my,you liberal loons are hilarious,hey jim,you're right,we shouldn't mention Clinton,the MSM sure doesn't,idiots,you libs act like this is the first commuted sentence in history.

Mantis:

A lawyer doesn't have to believe his client's story to defend him.

Nice try, no cigar.

Another White House Lie:
"... But given the fact that the judge has set up a process for appeal and given the way that the President has handled this for the past year or so, he's not going to intervene."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/06/20070605-13.html

finally this non-conspiracy will be behind us and the kook left will have to find something else.

As I pointed out previously, other presidents' actions are irrelevant to the morality of Bush's actions.

But, just so you don't think Clinton and Bush are the only controversial pardoners, here's some other great GOP hits:

GHWB pardons a terrorist who killed over 70 people, to get the Cuban vote in Florida:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,851913,00.html

GWHB pardons 6 in the Iran-Contra affair. You know, that thing Republicans always want to forget happened.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/06/29/reviews/iran-pardon.html

Reagan pardons FBI officials for the Watergate breakins, and pardons a bank robber for no known reason, who then is convicted again of killing his wife and hacking her up:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/pardons/pardon.history.html

Ford pre-emptively pardons Nixon. 'nuff said.

What took so long?

For those critical of President Bush's (inevitable) decision, let's remember President Clinton's craven pardon of Mark Rich.

The Libby prosecution was an unambiguous political charade and it reflects poorly on those who would defend it as a legitimate use of tax payer funds.

Phil Mella
ClearCommentary.com

Nutshell:

It's bad if Clinton does it. It's good if Bush does it.

IOKIYAR.

PS - this shows a complete and total lack of integrity. Just so you know.

Jim
You don't have any idea what his financial situation is and to think he is on his way to six figure speaking engagements is ludricrous.

You focus on the fine and are blind to the iceberg: he is a felon.

You need to take a deep breath here: you're beginning to resemble Madame Defarge.

HughS, let's revisit this in 6 months and see who's right. I'll bet you 100 pushups that, just like Paris Hilton, Libby makes this money up and then some. Either in speaking gigs, thinktank grants, or some other workaround.

Bet?

YEEE HAAAWWW. Don't you just love the way all the LLL are crying today. One thing to say to them. STICK THAT UP YOUR HYPOCRITICAL ASSES. P.S. He will get his pardon when Your President leaves office. Ye Haw.

I repeat: if not going to jail is no big deal, why are you all so happy that he's getting out of it?

BarneyG2000

Another White House Lie:
"... But given the fact that the judge has set up a process for appeal and given the way that the President has handled this for the past year or so, he's not going to intervene."

That is no proof of a lie. That is, though, an excellent example of how, why and when a President can change his mind.

I guess 30-months in club Fed is excessive punishment but the death penalty? Not so bad:

"My responsibility is to ensure our laws are enforced fairly and evenly without preference or special treatment," he said. "I have concluded judgments about the heart and soul of an individual on death row are best left to a higher authority."

Lim:

Jon Stewart totally called this weeks ago.

"Some speculate president Bush will pardon Libby just before he serves jail time, while others...****know**** he will."

Just a little "vocabulary challenged" aren't you Jim?

Pardon - a release from the penalty of an offense; a remission of penalty, as by a governor.

Can we nominate this as The Troll Bait post of the day?

Love Yahoo's headline: "Bush spares Libby"

Like he saved him from the executioner. What hyperbole.

This "news" is not a surprise. Anyone who expected anything different has simply not been paying attention.

dr lave:

Bush had to. Otherwise Scooter was gonna rat out the whole crew.

More "logic" from the left.

So... if YOU were Libby and you "had the goods" on admin officials up to and including ChimpyMcBushCo would it not be to your advantage to spill your guts BEFORE a verdict is handed down?

Of course that would take just a bit more logic than your capable of and a cure for BDS.

Sure, Marc; I have no objection. I can see why you'd like that - it allows nitpicking.

I mean, we all know that this is basically a pardon. Libby's a wealthy man, backed by wealthy men; jail is the only thing that could really put him under any pressure.

But you can plaster over the obviousness of Bush's cler cover-up with nitpicking, if you want to. Your choice.

As for me, my favorite comment of my own remains:

Nutshell:

It's bad if Clinton does it. It's good if Bush does it.

IOKIYAR.

PS - this shows a complete and total lack of integrity. Just so you know.

I really think that says it best.

Yes... Jon Stewart... The comedian the leftards get their "news" from.

LOL... I love the smell of DU anneurisms in the evening.

"Hey, Jim, how about all those Clinton pardons? Like for convicted fALN terrorists, convicted cocaine trafficker Carlos Vignali, Almon Braswell, convicted of mail fraud, and the fugitive from justice Marc Rich, who was also involved in the Iraqi Oil-For-Food scandal?_C-C-G"

Don't you robots know that Scooter "Lepke" Libby was Marc Rich's consigliere for 20(!) years throughout the Oil For Food scam? (No, REALLY! He WAS!)

Marc Rich was Scooter's last client before becoming Cheney's lawyer. It was he (Libby) who influenced the Clintons to pardon him.

There are Libby's fingerprints on the Berger cover-up, too.

Here's an interesting backgrounder: http://isteve.blogspot.com/2005/10/scooter-libby-marc-rich-connection.html

So... if YOU were Libby and you "had the goods" on admin officials up to and including ChimpyMcBushCo would it not be to your advantage to spill your guts BEFORE a verdict is handed down?

No, not at all. Why would you do that - when you know you're going to get pardoned - oh, pardon me, have your jail sentence commuted - and retire to sweet paid gigs for the rest of your natural life? With the gratitude of one of the richest, most powerful gangs in the world to pad your pocket?

HughS, let's revisit this in 6 months and see who's right. I'll bet you 100 pushups that, just like Paris Hilton, Libby makes this money up and then some. Either in speaking gigs, thinktank grants, or some other workaround.

Bet?

I like your sense of humor on the bet, Jim. I think Libby will land on his feet and put his and his family's life back together.

There's no way to prove who will win the bet unless you can convince Libby to produce some certified financial statements. Given that he won't be holding public office I don't think they will ever see the light of day.

But I'll take your bet on one condition: if he wins his appeal, you owe me 100 push ups. If he loses and still makes big money in six months I'll do the 100.

Nutshell:

It's bad if Clinton does it. It's good if Bush does it.

Nutshell:

Yes, it's BAD when Clinton pardons criminals. Yes, it's GOOD when Bush commutes the sentence of the innocent.

Any more questions? HA!

Doesn't Scooter's law practice just disprove the charge that Libby is some diehard Republican? He was a lawyer who defended crooks. Show me one who never did that. He doesn't care if they were Democrats or Republicans. He is actually more bipartisan than most lefties.

Publicus, you're absolutely right. I really am naive some times.

I just didn't think the Bush administration would have the nerve to be ***this*** blatant in their cover-ups.

Looking back, it is quite logical. It's their track record.

As I said earlier, they just keep someone breaking throw the bottom of my lowest expectations.

I understand, Son of the Godfather.

- anyone Clinton pardoned is guilty.

- anyone in the Bush administration is innocent.

Hughs, there must hundreds of citations from the President where he has said that he would not comment on an on going .... (investigation, trial, appeal) or that he would let justice take its course before commenting or taking action and now he commutes Libby sentence while the appeal process is just getting started.

Sounds like a lying sack of crap to me.

Bush on Libby:

"I'm pretty much going to stay out of it until the course -- the case has finally run its final -- the course it's going to take," W 3/8/07

--hands Jim a towel--

Wipe the froth off your mouth.

Dim Jim, there is no shame in being stupid and knowing it. You are stupid and don't know it.
Bush did not pardon Libby he commuted the sentence. Have an adult explain the difference to you. Now pay attention closely lest you miss this. The left and other communist democrats failed to show outrage when Clinton gave full pardons to actual criminals. Get a dictionary to look up the meanings of each of those words, it will help edify you in this matter. What LAI was trying to point out to you was the hypocracy you and your ilk are capable of. Every time I read your posts Jim I am reminded of the failure of the American educational system.

Barney, still no comment on your blatant historical error above?

The Declaration was adopted and signed on July 4, not July 2.

At least I sure don't see any "Happy 2nd of July" banners around town. Maybe they celebrate it on a different day in Barney-land. Maybe time runs differently in Barney-land.

bryanD
That was an interesting link and may explain why Bush commuted the sentence and stopped short of a pardon.

Libtards are scared of Scooter Libby roaming the streets. Hillbilly conmen and international crooks who donate to Dems don't concern them.

Craig Crawford just made the point in all this criminal behavior,[ of the most odious kind,] only a reporter will spend time in jail.

Jimj:

Oh, sure Hugh. That $250,000 fine is really going to hurt him, after he goes on to strings of $250,000 speakings gigs.

Hmmm, where have I seen something VERY similar?

Oh yeah... it was Plame who Jim claims had a "career ruined" yet signs multi-million dollar book deals.

BTW Jim you have also claimed you defend the rule of law would you also support the jurys much publicized contention that Libby was the scapegoat?

Would you also concede that what Libby was awarded as punishment was TWICE with Fitzmas requested?

Hmmm, curiously, Wizbang Classic posted this and a bit over an hour and a half later has 100+ comments.

At wizblues, they posted on this subject, and over an hour later there are four comments. All of them from wizblues contributors commiserating with each other.

Just noting it for historical reference.

...forget Valerie...as in all cases the prosecution presented their case. The Defense presented their case. A jury convicted. A Republican judge deemed a conviction of lying to a federal grand jury is a serious offense made the sentence...

a simple question....If this was extreme what should be the sentence for a conviction for lying to a Federal grand Jury? Was Martha Stewart's sentence more in line?

My head is not exploding...it was expected...

That's the kind of stuff you say when you're a lawyer defending someone. You know, doing your job?

Those quotes are from after he was no longer Rich's lawyer, when he testified before the House in March, 2001.

CCC the Declaration was passed by the congress on the 2nd.

Happy Fitzmas, asshats!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Let' see. Libby's total fine is ... what fraction of the amount of bucks pissed away to "convict" him?

SS

Gee, Mantis, you don't expect a defense lawyer, after having successfully won a case, to testify later, "Yes, he is guilty," do you?

I guess you do. Pity you live in a fantasy world.

You didn't say passed, Barney, you said SIGNED.

Nice try at spin, tho. 8.5 out of 10.

It's real fun reading the comics (news) and listening to the members of the American Communist Party (ACP), aka Democrats, whine about Libby. Wasn't it just last week that they were all hot under the collar to pardon 12-20 million criminal Mexicans? There was no Amnesty nor Immigration plan, it was a plain pardon of millions of foreign criminals. Slick issued hundreds of pardons to hardened criminals and fired all of the federal prosecurtors and the ACP cheered, President Bush frees one man (not a pardon) and fired less than ten worthless procesutors and they go nuts (a short trip from normal). I'm ashamed to admit anyone I know would vote for a member of the ACP.
It's going to be fun watching the ACP when the next terrorists attack hits America. Will they blame the leadership of the ACP (Clinton, Piglooshi, Reid and their ilk) that have put severe limits on intel (like the wall that led to 9-11), and provided aide and comfort to the enemy for years thinking it will help them gain power. Millions of truther fools (all that vote democrat) follow them like a mistreated puppy follows his new friend.

Jim, I think you are envious of powerful men. You bring that up a lot. I have always known there are powerful men in Washington, D.C., on both sides of the isle. As O'Reilly says, the Powerful protects the powerful.

Why we conservatives are happy is that this sham of an investigation shouldn't have happened. GW caved in to the pressure from the left and appointed a special prosecutor. You know, the kind the democrats wanted to stop after 2000, but now find it is okay. Well, there is nothing, never was anything, and a smart powerful man was having his life ruined by people like you who just want someone in the White House to suffer. Maybe because of your own lacking of character.

This is a good day for justice. A good day for conservatives and a really terrible day for Jim and his friends. ww

Libby's liberty isn't a win for any party, just the neocons who like to cover their ass. I pity the guy, to have spent time in jail would have been good for his conscience.

A good day for conservatives and a really terrible day for Jim and his friends.

A little redundant there, WW. LOL!

The killers struck on a warm, clear and pleasant winter's day. My dad, a 33-year-old officer of Morgan Guaranty Trust, was having lunch with clients. The bomb killed him and three others in unspeakably gruesome ways. One of his colleagues was decapitated; silverware from the table was lodged in the torsos of the others. This is the grotesque reality of terrorism.

Remember folks; these are terrorists attacking innocent people having lunch in NY. Decapitation, silverware in torsos and the families of the victims lives destroyed by the random nature of terrorism.

We are driven by never letting my father's memory down. Not to overcome the obstacle of his death would have diminished the meaning of his life and we loved him far too much for that

At least these families knew the perpetrators were jail and could not carry out any more attacks thus having others suffer as they did.

But wait......

We put the notion of terrorism aside -- until August 1999, when the wound was reopened.

That's when President Bill Clinton offered executive clemency to 16 core members of the FALN

But why would President Clinton give clemency to terrorists who used bombs on American soil that killed innocent Americans? It's hard to actually believe that an American President would do that.

But now you know:

Hillary Clinton was then eyeing the Senate seat soon to open up in New York, and pardons for the FALN were a longtime priority for many prominent city Democrats

Despicable isn't it?

While the lefties in this country whine that Libby isn't going to jail for a crime where the real perpetrator was never pursued they had ZERO problem with terrorists receiving clemency after BLOWING THE HEADS OFF OF INNOCENT AMERICANS WITH BOMBS ON AMERICAN SOIL IN EXCHANGE FOR VOTES.

Now you all know since the media wasn't very persistent in getting to the bottom of this outrageous act.

Now the lefties want the more of the same with Hillary leading the pack of frauds and crooks in the Democratic Party.

LIFE AFTER TERROR

I hope this sheds some light on the extreme hypocrisy the lefties, Democrats and "regressives" are truly capable of.

Thanks for reading and learning.

And so this is Fitzmas...

Jumpinjoe,

No way, Hillary doesn't represent democrats and probably won't even get the dem ticket, thanks to Obama. All corruption and knocking away at America's integrity and honor ought to be considered serious. Think rather as an American patriot before party lines.

Or perhaps more fitting...

I'll have a Blue Fitzmas without you.

Gee, Mantis, you don't expect a defense lawyer, after having successfully won a case, to testify later, "Yes, he is guilty," do you?

No I do not. You are missing my point. It was not that he should have testified that his former client was guilty. If you're not getting the point, I pity you.

(Hint: it has nothing to do with that testimony)

Investigated by an administration appointed prosecutor.
Convicted by a jury of his peers
Sentenced by a bush appointed judge.
Reviewed and denied by judges appointed by bush

Sorry to admit I skipped some of the posts above, but might the commuting be a way to allow Libby to appeal and have his conviction overturned? I'm no lawyer, but wouldn't some of the statements after the trial by the jury be grounds for appeal? I also think the refusal to allow the information that Plame was not covered under the act (and therefore no crime committed by anyone discussing her job) to be used by the defense, but allowed during sentencing was pretty low down. Libby was a smart guy and most likely knew that Plame was not covered. There was no motive. Reasonable doubt allways existed in this case.

Nice catch, mantis -- BTW, I found Libby's House testimony interesting, especially his comment about not "advising" or ":condoning" Rich's tactics -- I would wonder how this testimony squares with the attorney-client priviledge.

RicardoVerde,

Plame was unquestionably a undercover agent and all her contacts could be in great danger.

Jumpinjoe

I had forgotten that episode and thanks for posting it.
Looks like a lot of folks are ignoring it.

Plame was unquestionably a undercover agent and all her contacts could be in great danger

The run, don't walk, to Fitzgerald's office and tell him to have Armitage arrested.

All corruption and knocking away at America's integrity and honor ought to be considered serious

I don't disagree, however one can measure another's extreme hypocrisy when you consider clemency for terrorists that blew the heads off Americans and the suffering the families of the victims endured verses.... Well...er....suffering a Vanity Fair photo spread and movie deal.

Yet lefties seem to see a parallel. Sorry I don't.

Sorry to admit I skipped some of the posts above, but might the commuting be a way to allow Libby to appeal and have his conviction overturned? I'm no lawyer

The appeals process continues, the only thing Bush's action takes is suspension of the jail sentence.

And if you think this thread is full of BDS sufferers wait and watch one fill up twice as fast if Libby's conviction is overturned.

The right move, which allows the process of appeal to work its way out without Libby in jail.

Bonus: the Left is in an uproar!! Of course, since the Left is ALWAYS in an uproar about something this won't matter much.

Good job, Mr. President. Now build the fence, and let our military finish the war they are WINNING!!

Bonus: securing our border AND stabilizing Iraq would ALSO get the Left in an uproar!!

BTW Jim you have also claimed you defend the rule of law would you also support the jurys much publicized contention that Libby was the scapegoat?

Sure - because the Jury's contention is that Libby was covering up for someone else in the Bush administration.

Do **you** support this contention?

You realize this also means the Jury agrees that Plame was covert. As the facts clearly show, and as no one in the Bush administration has ever denied.

Do you support that contention also?

If that's the case, why do you support that no one else in the Bush administration has actually been disciplined or fired by Bush for leaking this classified, National Security information? That derailed a CIA investigation into WMD?

Bush is a man of his word. At least in this case. He 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.'"

He found out who leaked, and he took care of him.

You realize this also means the Jury agrees that Plame was covert. As the facts clearly show, and as no one in the Bush administration has ever denied.
Do you support that contention also?

Why should I support a falsity? She was outed by Aldrich Ames long ago and was sent back to the States because of it never to return in an overseas covert status.

Jim, I think you are envious of powerful men. You bring that up a lot.

You could have something there, ww. I do wish I could get out of a speeding ticket they way these guys can get out of putting our nation at risk by revealing a WMD investigation program, a CIA front company and a covert agent in one fell swoop.

As O'Reilly says, the Powerful protects the powerful.

Glad you admit this, at least.

Why does this bother me? Oh, I thought we were supposed to be a nation of equal rights before the law. you know, that silly ideals our fathers have fought and died for, for the past 200+ years.

Why we conservatives are happy is that this sham of an investigation shouldn't have happened. GW caved in to the pressure from the left and appointed a special prosecutor. You know, the kind the democrats wanted to stop after 2000, but now find it is okay.

You do understand thh flip side of this:

A special prosecutor is fine for Clinton. But for a ***Republican*** administration, that's simply unnacceptable.

Well, there is nothing, never was anything,

Really?

There was no front CIA front company called Brewster Jennings & Associates? & They weren't investigating WMD's?

Someone should tell them, they seem to think they existed.

and a smart powerful man was having his life ruined by people like you who just want someone in the White House to suffer.

It's so terrible that a smart powerful man can break the law, and might even pay for it.

Thank goodness Bush can save smart powerful men from having to answer for their convicted felonies with jail time. They're too good for jail time. Just like Paris Hilton.

Maybe because of your own lacking of character.

Hey, I guess it is my fault.

This is a good day for justice. A good day for conservatives and a really terrible day for Jim and his friends. ww

Actually, I think it is none of the above. I think this reveals the lack of actual interest in accountability before the law, of what currently passes for conservatism. But hey, your ideology.

Publicus:

He found out who leaked, and he took care of him.

Funny I thought the Libby conviction was for obstruction of justice and perjury.

Funny I have never seen a story stating Armitage was ever "taken care of" by Bush.

The run, don't walk, to Fitzgerald's office and tell him to have Armitage arrested.

It's a shame that investigation was obstructed by some convicted perjurer, and now the real people who caused it won't be caught.

What was the name of that convicted perjurer and obstructor of justice in a Federal investigation into a matter of National security?

And who commuted this perjurer's sentence, rather than investigate his own White House and fire who actually violated national security?

He found out who leaked, and he took care of him.

He found out who leaked: Richard Armitage.

As for taking care of him... well, that's another one Bush has failed at.

Jim:

It's a shame that investigation was obstructed by some convicted perjurer, and now the real people who caused it won't be caught.

But.... Fitzmas by ALL accounts knew Armitage leaked the name long before Libby was called as a witness.

Yeah, Jim, the investigation was soooooooooo obstructed that it only took a few weeks to figure out that Richard Armitage was the leaker.

Wipe the froth off your chin again, Jim.

Actually, I think it is none of the above. I think this reveals the lack of actual interest in accountability before the law, of what currently passes for conservatism. But hey, your ideology.
-------------------------------------------------
Look at yourself in the mirror. The progressive left has been supporting corrupt prosecutors like Nifong, Earle, etc... They could support Clinton lying in the court. They didn't want Clinton impeached (not even going to jail). Now they want Libby to go to jail while the real leaker is known 2 years ago.

Why the progressive left is still supporting Hillary Clinton given their corrupt past? SO much for caring about the law. What a joke. Using Jim's terminology, the liberals are officially for criminals, cronyism, and corruption. THat 's why they still support Reid/Pelosi and Hillary clinton.

Here is the corruption that liberals like Jim is willing to support

http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_5997.shtml

On the last day of his presidency in 2000, Bill Clinton granted 140 pardons and commuted 36 sentences. Many of the pardoned parties were convicted felons who allegedly paid large fees to Clinton family members and associates. Judicial Watch launched an investigation of the controversial Clinton pardons in January 2001. Senator Clinton's other brother, Hugh Rodham, has also been suspected of receiving illicit funds in return for pardons from former President Clinton. Hugh received $400,000 in payments from two convicted felons who received pardons.

Why should I support a falsity?

OK, I understand.

You think the Jury's contention that Libby was a fall guy for someone else is accurate...but you think the Jury's contention that LIbby was a fall guy for the White House is innacurate.

How fascinatingly selective.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17485067/

"It was said a number of times: 'What are we doing with this guy here? Where's Rove? Where are these other guys?' " Collins said...

Testimony during the trial revealed that Cheney had taken a close personal role in monitoring the effort to discredit Wilson..."

..."The belief of the jury was [Libby] was tasked by the vice president to talk to reporters," said Collins,

If she was undercover and Fitzgerald knew who leaked the name, that being Richard Armitage. Why is it he was not prosecuted? Dim Jim, why don't you get this one? Novak revealed it was Armiltage that told him, therefore it was he who leaked the information. These are not opinions they are facts, something Jim and his loony cohorts lack. The left loses again. Get use to it.

I believe I watched the woman who put together the framework for the act testify before congress that Plame was not covert under the act. If she were covert Fitz would have prosecuted for that, and I believe he said so when issuing the indictment. Russert was the only witness I know of that had his facts contrary to written records. Why not prosecute him?

C-C-G, feel free to read the post I just made, with the statements about who the Jury thought was responsible, and who they thought Libby was covering up for.

Jim
Are you claiming Fitzgerald did not know Armitage was the leaker when he BEGAN the investigation?

And Marc, your statement that 'Fitzmas by ALL accounts knew Armitage leaked', obviously doesn't include the Jury you otherwise like to selectively quote.

But whatever.

Frothing Jim, if Fitzgerald thought Libby was responsible for the leak, why not prosecute him for that?

Hmmm?

Wipe the froth off your mouth before answering, please.

Jim
with the statements about who the Jury thought was responsible, and who they thought Libby was covering up for.

Was the Jury told by Fitzgerald that Armitage was the leaker? Yes or no?

LAI, you're trying the false equivalency thing again. I refer you to my post at 6:57 .

Zeldorf, go my comment at 6:57 too.

Hugh S: THX for reading.

mantis : good link. I'd not seen that one before.

All anti-Libbyites: don't dilute the Best Case:

Scoo-ter-Libby-MARC RICH!

Scoo-ter-Libby-MARC RICH!

*Tempo a Cha-Cha*

Was the Jury told by Fitzgerald that Armitage was the leaker? Yes or no?

Probably no. Which is probably because Fitzgerald hadn't concluded that Armitage was the leaker.

This is because you can't tell a jury someone has done something without proof....and this incident couldn't be investigated, because Libby perjured himself and obstructed justice.

Hey Dirk, I fixed your comment.

Rightards like Dirk only approve of pardoning Cuban terrrorists and members of the Bush crime family apparently.

C-C-G, read my statement at 8:45 for your answer.

Don't get confused with the Armitage thing. There were two leaks, one to Judith Miller and, one via Armitage to Novak.

Posted by: Jumpinjoe,

A fair response, the whole business makes one's head spin.

Jim, you just continue to prove your savy on this issue do you not? Novak told Fitzgerald who told him about Wilson's wife. If you, and it is obvious that you do not, have a complete grasp of the facts of this case, why the fuck are you arguing when you know so very little about it? I know, you are a lying troll. Could that be it?

The one to Judith Miller was not published in a newpaper.

Jim, you're now deliberately lying, and you know it.

Even CBS admits that Armitage had admitted to being the leaker to both Secretary of State Colin Powell and the FBI prior to the investigation.

Armitage also says that Fitzgerald told him to keep quiet! Therefore, Fitzgerald knew who the leaker was and still pursued a purely partisan investigation in order to send some member of the Bush Administration to jail.

You're a lying sack of Donkey manure, Jim.

jim,

you're right when you point out that one wrong doesn't support another. But two big holes in that argument.

The obvious one. You weren't in ANY way upset with the criminal Marc Rich pardon. So all your ranting is that of a partisan hack, not one who is concerned about right and wrong.

Second, the Libby pardon was correct and justified.

CCG, thank you for pointing that out about Jim. I thought he was just a typical democrat. Ooops, I guess he is. Sorry. Try not to confuse them with the truth of the matter. Jim's mind, if that is the correct term is made up. He is wrong, but that does not matter to the really demented.

True, Zeldorf... I pointed that out not primarily for Jim's benefit but so that everyone else could see what a lying sack of Donkey manure he is.

Isn't it Grand: The Republicn Rule of Law!!!!

This commutation from a Governor who has more blood in death warrants on his hands than any governor in the history of the US>

This commutation after a US Appelate Court, w/ a Reagn appointee and a Bush 41 appointee, refused a stray of execution.

This commutation praised by a TN P.O.S. hypocrite from Law & Order, who voted for the Clinton impeachment for similar infractions.

This commutation, lauded by a hypocritical party that campaigns as a party of Law & Order.

This commutation for a convicted FELON from the highest level of the US government while this nation has more convicts imprisoned than any other nation in the world, 2.25 million.

This commutation for a FELON who conspired w/ the war criminal, Cheney, to fraudulewntly corral this nation into a war and both of whom have the blood of 3575+ American soldiers on their lying hands.

What a great day for American Justice in the eyes of the world!

--hands Bustem a towel--

Wipe the froth from your mouth, please, it's disgusting.

jim...WOW! You are one deranged MF'er.

You have blown the Libby "thing" into the greatest national security peril since the Rosenburgs!! Yikes!!

Please do NOT handle any sharp objects for a while...you would certainly hurt yourself.

Should you ever visit a place called R-E-A-L-I-T-Y you would find that any "security" implications associated with the non-"outing" of a non-undercover desk-jockey were NOT the subject of the Libby trial.

Get some rest...you'll need it when his conviction is overturned!

This is good news. No pardon, but no jail time either. I agree with Bush that the sentence was just too harsh. He's under probation and has to pay a fine. I am perfectly okay with that.

Jim
Probably no. Which is probably because Fitzgerald hadn't concluded that Armitage was the leaker.

This is because you can't tell a jury someone has done something without proof....and this incident couldn't be investigated, because Libby perjured himself and obstructed justice.

Well now we are getting somewhere. What did Fitzgerald know and when did he know it? If he knew it before Libby's testimony, his claim of obstruction (by Libby, who had not yet obstructed justice) was a pretense to set a trap for Libby. No?

----hands Bustem delousing spray and quarrantine order----

Go back to DU.

This will skim 10% off of Bush's poll ratings.

This will skim 10% off of Bush's poll ratings.

I'm sure he's not sleeping at night about that too. Last time I looked the ratings were around 38%...so now he's at 34%. What's changed?

Hello20%ers: "This will skim 10% off of Bush's poll ratings."

Wow, that would mean Bush's ratings would almost be as low as the dem-led Congress!!!

Well now we are getting somewhere. What did Fitzgerald know and when did he know it?

He knew Plame's cover was blown, and he knew it had come from at least one person in the White House.

We all know that - whether not some of us choose to acknowledge this reality.

The question is, proving who did it. That's where an investigation comes in.

If he knew it before Libby's testimony, his claim of obstruction (by Libby, who had not yet obstructed justice) was a pretense to set a trap for Libby. No?

Uh, no.

See, Libby had a very simple way of this "perjury trap" - ***not obstructing justice***, and of ****telling the truth under oath****.

Well there are different laws for the Dick Cheney Branch of Government and Scoo-oooo-ooter-pie qualifies as being a part of that cell.

Should you ever visit a place called R-E-A-L-I-T-Y you would find that any "security" implications associated with the non-"outing" of a non-undercover desk-jockey were NOT the subject of the Libby trial.

hey Justrand - in your visits to this place that you think is reality, do you experience the understanding that Libby was convicted for ****obstructing**** an investigation?

It would be a nice thing if y ou did.

What was the investigation that Libby obstructed again?

Jim

See, Libby had a very simple way of this "perjury trap" - ***not obstructing justice***, and of ****telling the truth under oath****.

I made that point on sentencing day...can't provide the link because I won't go look it up.

My question is this? Did Fitzgerald know who leaked Plame's name before he interviewed Libby? Did he know who leaked Plame's name before he issued the first subpoena?

Some honest liberals know better. Unfortunately, Jim doesn't seem to know anything but the cheap liberal talking points

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/06/19/DI2007061901259.html

Cohen: Why Scooter Shouldn't Do Time

Notice how the liberal yobs pulled down the 5-star ranking on this thread? Hee, hee.

So much wasted effort, so many exploding heads, so little time.

Here is another one.
http://www.slate.com/id/2168642/
Free Scooter Libby

He knew Plame's cover was blown, and he knew it had come from at least one person in the White House....jim

Did you even read C-C-G's link from CBS News.

Armitage came forward as soon as Novak's article came out.

He said this:

He says he was reading Novak's newspaper column again, on Oct. 1, 2003, and "he said he was told by a non-partisan gun slinger."

"I almost immediately called Secretary Powell and said, 'I'm sure that was me,'" Armitage says.

Armitage immediately met with FBI agents investigating the leak.

"I told them that I was the inadvertent leak," Armitage says. He didn't get a lawyer, however.

Then this was pointed out to you:

Armitage says he didn't come forward because "the special counsel, once he was appointed, asked me not to discuss this and I honored his request.

That from the same article.

Personally I would like to know why the "special counsel" asked Armitage not to discuss this.

No inquiring lefty minds on the matter though. Wonder why that is?

And another: Free Scooter!

And another!

My question is this? Did Fitzgerald know who leaked Plame's name before he interviewed Libby? Did he know who leaked Plame's name before he issued the first subpoena?

My answer is this: that is simply and totally not relevant, in any way, shape or form.

Fitzgerald prosecuted, Libby's lawyers defended, the jury convicted, the judge sentenced.

Did the Bush administration overturn the conviction? No. They left it in place.

Well then.

Armitage claimed some responsibility. So?

a) The jury don't think it was just Armitage.

b) more importantly, someone just coming forward and 'confessing' does nothing. There's still this thing that needs to happen called an "investigation".

In an "investigation", people are asked how the bad thing happened. When they lie and obstruct justice, they make it impossible to prove if someone actually did something.

I know you understand this. Come on.

There's nothing "Progressive" about the Left. Stalinist/Commie/Socialists move the world backwards.

Just call them what they are. Commie Bastards.

As per Armitage, I would think that Fitz wanted to investigate people who ****weren't*** coming forward and confessing out of the goodness of their hearts. 'Cause maybe, just maybe someone who comes forward is volunteering to be a fall guy? Gee, could that be a possibility? Nahhhhh....

But that is and remains a side issue.

If Armitage really did it, then all that Libby would have to say is "Yep. Armitage did it."

Instead he perjured and obstructed justice, and was convicted by a jury of his peers in a court of law. And a Bush-appointed judge sentenced him, and refused his appeal.

The Republican Party is now:

Officially Self-Parody! TM

Goodluck.

So, Jim, Libby was prosecuted for lying about something Fitzgerald knew the answer to prior to his even questioning Libby. Someone is guilty of perjury, but it is not Libby. I would like to get Fitzgerald under oath. I know that concept is too deep for Jim, but others with a rudimentry education and abilty to reason will see the point. Poor Dim Jim will be left out in the street, again. Jim, why don't you mosey on over to Wizbang Blew? You lies and fabrications will find a suitable home there.

'Cause maybe, just maybe someone who comes forward is volunteering to be a fall guy? Gee, could that be a possibility? Nahhhhh....

So now Armitage could have possibly been the fall guy for the White House so it had to be further investigated. Wow...just wow.

Well, one thing is for certain, when lefties run out of "points" they always seen to manage to crawl into the minds of those they are discussing and tell us what they were thinking.

Jim has been shown to be wrong over and over again. But he doesn't learn. His mission is to simply spout the cheap liberal talking points. If caught, then move on to the next.

" I agree with Bush that the sentence was just too harsh" LAB

You'd agree w/ Bush if he shit in your mouth.

Fact is LABia, Scoots was given the sentence that was mandated for that category of crime under federal guidelines. The sole reason that you agree w/ Bush is because Republicans like you have ZERO respect for the rule of law.

Jim, you need to take the lefty blinders off.

ARMITAGE CONFESSED!!!!! HE ADMITTED HE DID IT!!!!!

There was no need for an investigation, he told SecState Powell and the FBI!

And Fitzgerald knew this and told him to keep it quiet!!!!!

And you know all this... that's why I call you a lying sack of slimy Donkey manure.

Looks like liberals are fully for overreaching prosecutors, even corrupt one like Nifong (he was supported by 80 liberal professors and elected by the dem constituency?). In other words, liberals are fully for corrupting the law in pursuit of partisan agenda. Their hypocrisy wrt Clinton and Libby is so obvious to smarter liberals like Cohen. But the posters here don't seem to know anything the sew*ge from DU.

Just another forgotten pardon with the support of the liberals at the NYT. These people have more sympathy for the terrorists.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Mjk1ZDQ5YjFhZjEwNGQ2M2YyMzhlOTBmZWQyMTJmMzk=

NYY Flashback [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

What they said about Clinton's clemency to FALN terrorists:

"At the same time, justice demands that sentences fit the crime as proved in a court of law...The cause of justice and mercy may well be served with shortened terms."

-New York Times editorial, September 9, 1999

An Beltwayer asks: Isn't that what President Bush was saying, that the punishment didn't fit the crime, that Libby would still be punished?

"His mission is to simply spout the cheap liberal talking points. If caught, then move on to the next." LAI

Even were that so, LAImmiGRUNT,you'd just move on and spout more of your diarrhea points. You see, LAI, some may have TP's, but you have mainly DP's.

From what I have seen of your comments, you always gobble the big warm pile that falls from the Elephant's ass.

Caution: non-typist Duck Soup question:

If Libby knew he was Not Guilty, why did he let Judith Miller sit in jail for him?

*Now back to regularly scheduled thread in progress...*

Why this liar hasn't been investigated and put under oath by Fitzgerald

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html

Plame's Input Is Cited on Niger Mission
Report Disputes Wilson's Claims on Trip, Wife's Role

Oh, looky, after only two posts in this thread Broomstick has already sunk to personal insults with no facts at all.

Why not at least try to refute our points before calling us names, Broomstick?

"...Republicans like you have ZERO respect for the rule of law." And Liberals like you, with the nastiness, maturity and intelligence of a "Broomstick", are the reason I used to be a Liberal. You confirm again that I made the right decision.

Broomstick,
Thanks for proving that the progressives on this thread have nothing but their cheap liberal talking points. THey are willing to swim in the sew*ge of Clinton even now.

'Cause maybe, just maybe someone who comes forward is volunteering to be a fall guy? Gee, could that be a possibility? Nahhhhh....

One more point on that note: that being it usually helps if your "fall guy" is in the loop and in support of the Iraq War policy, which he was not.

It was a known fact that Armitage was not in synch with the White House Iraq War policy.

That is why it was a surprise to everyone that the leak wasn't from a war supporter.

And I'm sure that is why the left hasn't called for Armitage's head.

I'm late to this party, but good for GWB!

Too bad you missed Jim's flailing about, JR, it was quite entertaining.

If we're talking respect for the law and this is all about Jim being offended, not about the appropriateness of the punishment but the "letter" of the punishment as it was given, it might be important to note that the President can legally and with all regard to the "letter" of the law, commute or pardon anyone he or she feels like commuting or pardoning.

The letter is fulfilled.

So what's the beef? The *fairness*?

If it's fairness, then it matters that the jury seems to have admitted that Libby was a scapegoat. Our law and our sense of right and wrong doesn't accept punishing one person because someone else deserves to be punished. It matters if the investigation to find the leaker was pursued when the leaker was already known. It matters what other people got and what sort of people get pardons.

If it's fairness it matters what happened to other even higher level perjurers who lied about things that also weren't crimes.

What the f**k are all you lib fag*ots upset about? You're all of a sudden interested in the just and legal? I wonder why this afternoon all of a sudden.

You're all of a sudden interested in the just and legal? I wonder why this afternoon all of a sudden.

Because Bush spoiled their Fitzmas. They were sooooooo hoping to have at least one member of Chimpy's administration behind bars. It would have satisfied their BDS.

And now he went and spoiled it, so they're throwing tantrums like the emotional 3-year-olds they are.

LAImmigrunt, will you ever get over your bile as a result of the deposition of Diem?

Clinton was so bad that even the NYT couldn't defend him

http://www.mishalov.com/Clinton_IndefensiblePardon.html
Mr. Clinton was fully aware that pardoning Mr. Rich, the ex-husband of Denise Rich, a prominent fund-raiser for the Clintons and the Democratic Party, would carry a distinct taint and invite irate protests from federal prosecutors like Mary Jo White in Manhattan. That is probably why he kept it a secret that he was considering a pardon, bypassing the normal process in which the Justice Department vets pardon applications and submits them to the president with a recommendation. Small wonder that Ms. White and other current and former law enforcement officials are said to be livid. Mr. Clinton's irresponsible use of his pardoning authority has undermined the pursuit of justice.

Broomstick,
I am having fun pointing out the dishonest hyprocrisy of the progressive left and you keep proving my points. It posted these just to help you guys learn sth new.

Hillary talked about cronysim but she forgot about her brother and her brother in law.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/20/clinton.pardon/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Keeping his promise to work until the last hour of the last day of his term in office, President Clinton granted 140 pardons -- including one to his own brother -- before preparing to relinquish power to the incoming Republican administration of George W. Bush.

A vast majority of those who received the last minute pardons are unknown to the public, although the list does include former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros, Whitewater scandal figure Susan McDougal, Patty Hearst and former CIA Director John Deutch.

Hey Broomstick, don't you have to stand by in case Her Highness Hillary has to go somewhere? Or did she give you the night off?

Because Bush spoiled their Fitzmas. They were sooooooo hoping to have at least one member of Chimpy's administration behind bars. It would have satisfied their BDS

I tried to find some links where lefties were outraged at Armitage for allegedly outing Plame.

It turns out this whole "outing thing" wasn't out of principle for the left. It was about "who" they could get.

Come on lefties, where is your outrage at Armitage.

Crickets.........

LAImmiGRUNT...

You seem to think that any Clinton errors somehow mitigate what Bush has done. Get one simple point thru the 2 neurons in your head: Clinton's term ended in January 2001.

Dredging up alleged equivalencies does not diminish the fact that we are currently enduring what will be deemed The Worst Presidency in American history. Historians will have to create a new standard, far below the level of failed & near-failed presidencies when they attempt to classify the Bush Regime. And make no misstake, it will eventually be labeled a regime.

The worst, Broom? You must be too young to remember Jimmuh Cahtuh's reign. They invented the terms "stagflation" and "misery index" during his tenure.

joe,
The liberals at the NYT are willing to leak security information to undermine the GWOT. This outing stuff is just a fake. Liberals don't care about women (eg. Clinton), gay people (Foley), or the poor. These are simply props for their propaganda

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDVhYWQzMmQ3YWRlNzFkYjRmZmY4ZTQzZmUwZjJhZjI=

This is far FAR too funny. - WARNING - WARNING -
SEVERE DANGER OF SHRAPNEL INJURY FROM EXPLODING LIBERAL HEADS. If their heads do remain intact, be careful! They may try to gnaw on your ankles.

Mike, Dubya should have waited for the 4th.

We could have used the lefty heads for fireworks.

If Libby knew he was Not Guilty, why did he let Judith Miller sit in jail for him?

Maybe Schadenfreude...for betraying our country with all of the NYT leaks of vital national security programs.
I know that won't assuage the fury of the MSM, but perhaps someone was making a point here.

Thanks for reminding me Broom! In 20 or so years when this ISN'T remembered as the 'worst presidency ever' we get to hear the left STILL wailing and gnashing their teeth about it! The amusement never ends!

Broomstick,
You seem to be a slow learner. The hypocritical left get exercised over a commutation not even a pardon by Bush while they can ignore pargongate by Clinton. This is quire relevant since the other Clinton is the leading pres candidate. Looks like the liberals are willing to support known corrupt Clinton machine. That 's the point. Oops, only 6 months and the liberal culture of corruption is fully in place. Dem congress polls even lower than Bush. Yup history will remember the disgraceful record of the liberals during the cold war and GWOT. You can be sure of that.

Oh, Broomie. It certainly doesn't mitigate anything, but it does give us some perspective. "It's a Pot meet Kettle" moment.

My amazement and amusement is the left is pretending that something like this wasn't going to happen, and it wasn't even a pardon...yet.

Guess what? Controversial pardons and commutations will always be a highlight of every presidency. Count on it.

Hey, cool. I'm over it.

Glad so many, are so proud to be the members of the break-the-law no-accountability party.

Yeeeehhhaaah!!!

Clinton pardoned people too!!! We ***love**** having a President who hate the law like Clinton did!

Woooohhaaaaaa!!!!

It was all Armitage! Fitzgerald should have convicted him without an investigation!

Yahooooo!!!!

Valerie Plame never even existed! She was created by Nancy Pelosi sacrificing fetii to Barbara Streisand in the Jane Fonda compound!

Sluuuurrrppp!

I just found the WMD! CLinton had them all along!

The hypocritical left get exercised over a commutation not even a pardon by Bush while they can ignore pargongate by Clinton. This is quire relevant since the other Clinton is the leading pres candidate.

Note to LAI - Hillary and Bill are two separate humans. Only one's been president already. Just so you know.

It was all Armitage! Fitzgerald should have convicted him without an investigation!

No, but Fitz should have been spending more time prosecuting the real leaker than chasing down a minor charge like perjury.

Oh, and LAI - 6:57.

Note to LAI - Hillary and Bill are two separate humans. Only one's been president already. Just so you know.

Note to Jim... that's why LAI said the other Clinton.

Please learn to read, it will help immensely.

Note to LAI - Hillary and Bill are two separate humans. Only one's been president already. Just so you know.
--------------------------------------------------
They are partners in corruption. You either don't know better or you simply try to be dense again. I will leave it up to you to do your homework now since you have been shown to be wrong so many times already. If you continue to support Hillary, then don't talk about the respect for the law or ethics. Just go check out her corruption for yourself before spouting your mindless spin here.

Hey Billybob. I fixed your comment for you, also.

There's nothing "Conservative" about the Right. Nixonian/Racist/Fascists move the world backwards.

Just call them what they are. Fascist Bastards.