Printable View
True this whole case barks of desperation.Quote:
Originally Posted by surasak
I thought it was GWB who lied! Why isn't he being impeached?
Are they so desperate to make the Bush white house look bad that this is all they could come up with.
Anyway it will be difficult to prove Libby willfully committed perjury. (which is what Fitzgerald has to to for a conviction.) The case is very weak.
Carl Rove is laughing his ass off how badly the dems fell for this turkey.
surprise, surprise....earl and boonie continue to dodge the questions....they're pretty good at attempting to distract from the issue, but a dodge is a dodge.
What dodge? You claim he is the leaker and yet he's not charged. What we have here is the relishment of prosecutorial abuse. He learns who the leaker is yet he continues to probe into people's lives. An investigation by a federal prosecutor will make anyone stutter. And so Fitzgerald continued generating fear until someone stumbled and then he had his criminal. There was no perjury or obstruction until Fitzgerald insisted.
where do you come up with this kind of nonsense? how could the man responsible for trying to 'establish a republican majority for the future' be laughing about having the current vice president being called to testify in the perjury and obstruction of justice trial of his chief of staff?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
think about it...the vice president's chief of staff is alleged to have lied to the justice department about the outing of CIA officer in a time of war....and earl thinks rove is laughing.
next week we'll get a look at how much rove is laughing when he is called to testify.
unfortunately it appears cheney is going to flee to japan so he doesn't have to testify.
Libby Trial: Where Will Cheney Be? - Newsweek Politics - MSNBC.com
what a coward...but what should we expect from the man with five vietnam era deferments? certainly not to stand up and meet his responsiblities.
stutter? libby lied.Quote:
Originally Posted by attaboy
unlike many of his apologists, libby is not stupid. he concocted this elaborate ruse so that it would be difficult to convict him on a treason charge.
cheney told libby (FACT--check the grand jury testimony)
libby claims he forgot cheney told him
libby claims russert told him (russert denied this under oath) so he was free to blab her identity to three other reporters.
that, essentially, is libby's defense.
the degree of evidence presented in a trial of treason (especially involving the vice president's chief of staff) would have to be extremely high, and libby's clever pattern of obstruction made that nearly impossible to reach. fitzgerald is wise prosecutor and indicted libby for a lesser crime because he is sure of a conviction.
it's amusing how this has turned into an attack on fitzgerald....yet no one can provide any evidence that he is a partisan---and let's not forget, he was appointed by john ashcroft's justice department.
As is so common in the U.S. these days (and perhaps always) politics clouds people's sense of objectivity.Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
The top dawgs testify on tape. That's one of the perks of being really important.
^
the evasion continues (not much of a surprise though).
really?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
Libby trial sheds light on White House - Yahoo! NewsQuote:
The drama being played out in a Washington courtroom goes back in time to the early summer of 2003. The Bush administration was struggling to overcome growing evidence the mission in Iraq was anything but accomplished.
The claim about weapons of mass destruction that was used to justify the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 had not been supported. Insurgent attacks were on the rise. Accusations were growing that the White House had distorted intelligence to rationalize the invasion.
Trial testimony so far — including eight hours of Libby's own audio-recordedd testimony to a grand jury in 2004 — suggest that a White House known as disciplined was anything but that.
What has emerged, instead, is:
_a vice president fixated on finding ways to debunk a former diplomat's claims that Bush misled the U.S. people in going to war and his suggestion Cheney might have played a role in suppressing contrary intelligence.
_a presidential press secretary kept in the dark on Iraq policy.
_top White House officials meeting daily to discuss the diplomat, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, and sometimes even his CIA officer wife Valerie Plame.
Libby is accused of lying to the FBI nd the grand jury about his talks with reporters concerning Plame.
laughing his ass off earl?
Well at least Cheney knows his prioritiesQuote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
Is there a traitor in the WH ? more than one apparently
Well, the concept that absolute power corrupts absolutely is very evident when it comes to prosecutors. Like with the Duke Rape case, this is an absolute sham. So Libby may be convicted for lying about something he didn't do. Fitzgerald knew that Richard Armitage leaked the information and yet he continued to investigate. Why? His job was to find the person who leaked the information about Valerie Plame, not to catch someone, anyone in a lie. It would be one thing if Libby was engaging in a cover-up for Armitage, but that's not the case.
So why prosecute Libby?:confused:
because he lied to the FBI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
Well, following that logic, the Senate should have approved the removal of Bubba too...:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
perhaps.
but clinton ( a married man) lied about getting a blow job from an intern.
libby's lie was about when he decided to start blabbing to the press about the identity of a CIA agent during a time of war.
OK...but who blabbed first?Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
Why not go after Armitage?:cool:
And let's not forget that Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative wasn't classified which makes the entire issue moot.
The assumption of her so-called covert status is just that: an assumption.
So if her identity was already known it makes the whole Fitzgerald indictment completely spurious.
it will be interesting to see if cheney will be able to muster-up the courage to testify this week.
or will he have other priorities at the time?
Did Clinton lie to the FBI?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon MeeWell, following that logic, the Senate should have approved the removal of Bubba too...:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
Believe he lied to just about everybody but most importantly to Congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by Milkman
That carries more 'weight' than just lying to the FBI...:cool:
Seriously,Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon MeeBelieve he lied to just about everybody but most importantly to Congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by Milkman
That carries more 'weight' than just lying to the FBI...:cool:
The Libby case is different than the Clinton, case legally.
I am pretty sure of this (although I've forgotten some of the old details).
That pffft you hear is the sound of air going out of the Scooter Libby trial...:rolleyes:
Link
boonie, you linked to a media column which highlighted a blog written by a woman who writes movie screenplays.
here's an amusing update on what happened yesterday...(fyi, this columnist has a history of pointing out the absurdity of this administration and especially cheney.)
washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlinesQuote:
Libby must believe himself to be in desperate legal straits to have six journalists serve as his character witnesses. And, indeed, the reporters' testimony appeared to do little to dent the prosecution's case that the former chief of staff to Vice President Cheney eagerly shared CIA officer Valerie Plame's name with reporters and then said otherwise under oath. But Libby's team did establish that the defendant wasn't the only administration official dishing about Plame.
The leadoff witness, The Post's Walter Pincus, testified that then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer told him about Plame's identity -- directly contradicting Fleischer's sworn testimony.
Next, Woodward testified that then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told him about Plame.
Novak fingered top Bush strategist Karl Rove as well as Armitage.
Combine that with earlier testimony that Fleischer and Libby each leaked to two other reporters, and it seems possible prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald would have had an easier time finding out who in the administration didn't leak Plame's identity.
hey earl, is rove still laughing?
libby and his former boss don't have the courage to take the stand.
NY Times AdvertisementQuote:
One likely factor in that calculation is that putting Mr. Libby on the stand would expose him to a cross-examination by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the chief prosecutor, that could be withering. Mr. Fitzgerald complained that the defense had engaged in a “bait and switch” tactic by keeping Mr. Libby off the stand after repeatedly suggesting that he would testify.
Mr. Cheney’s testimony, which was much anticipated, would have set a precedent as the first appearance of a sitting vice president as a witness at a criminal trial. It was also expected to bolster a major part of Mr. Libby’s defense: that he was so consumed by the crush of high-stakes issues like global terrorism and Iraq that he might not have remembered all the details of his conversations.
But the trial threw up numerous instances in which Mr. Cheney took a personal role in managing the White House response to accusations from Joseph C. Wilson IV, a prominent critic of the Iraq war, that the evidence for going to war had been knowingly overstated. Mr. Cheney could have been exposed during cross-examination to uncomfortable questions about his close involvement in trying to undermine Mr. Wilson’s criticisms.
i don't know why that links comes up as 'advertisement', but it links to the story.
HeH...:cool:
Cheney won't testify in Libby perjury trial
^ a coward always stay a coward, well you should know ;)
Another deferment!