Regarding the Libby Commutation -- Corrected
Liberals in the Media and elsewhere are shocked... simply SHOCKED... and outraged that President Bush commuted Scooter Libby's two-and-a-half-year prison term.
As with so many other things, these Liberals are hypocrites and worse... deceitful to boot.
1. Some have accused conservatives of holding a double standard in that they castigated Clinton for lying to a Federal Grand Jury, yet pushed for a Libby pardon.
What's hypocritical about the Left's accusation here is President Clinton didn't spend a single day in prison-- wasn't even sentenced to prison. So the double standard lies in the Left's desire to see a Republican staffer punished more harshly than a Democratic president for, essentially, the very same crime.
2. This past march when Libby was convicted, Liberal Media mouthpieces all over the airwaves (including FOX) touted this as "The highest-ranking White House official" ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair.
But this is patently false. Does anyone remember Henry Cisneros? Bill Clinton Cabinet Member? Henry Cisneros Secretary of Housing and Urban Development? The same Henry Cisneros who was indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, giving false statements and obstruction of Justice. The same Cisneros who managed a plea agreement of 'guilty' to lying to the FBI, who also managed to avoid jail alrogether. And the Left are screaming about Libby getting his sentence commuted? Besides which, Cisneros' conviction was AFTER Iran-Contra. Which makes Cisneros the highest White House official who would have been ordered to prison for a very long time.... had he not gotten off the hook big-time. The Clinton White House stone-walled the Barrett investigation at every turn-- the net result being that Cisneros was let off the hook. Last time I checked, EVERY member of the President's Cabinet outranks the Vice President's chief of staff.
3. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew who leaked the Plame name BEFORE he began to focus on the office of the Vice President. Before. And that 'who' was Richard Armitage-- there's your man. And yet Fitzgerald continued his investigation, and Libby for some inexplicable reason chose to lie about something that ultimately had no bearing on the outing of a NON-covert CIA operative. Even on the day Fitzgerald handed down his indictment, he clearly stated that Ms. Plame was NOT outed, and that NO charge for such was included in the indictment.
So Henry Cisneros, a bigger political fish than Libby; he pleads guilty to a lesser charge and ultimately spends NO time in jail, eventually getting a pardon from his boss, while Libby gets 30 months for the very same "crime" to which Cisneros pled guilty? So Libby, a Republican, get's a harsher sentence than Cisneros, a Democrat?
Talk about injustice! Clinton tells a bold-faced lie to a Federal Grand Jury, is justly impeached for it, get's to keep his office, and his freedom, but Libby get's two and a half years? Cisneros get's NO time, and the Liberal pus-gobs on TV get all indignant over Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence?
And many of these "Wonders of Intellectual Acuity" think talk-radio needs to be reined in? It's the other way around. Liberal Media needs to be reined in. They have a lot of nerve accusing talk-radio of propagating distortions of fact.
How about these pardons? Signed by President Clinton on his last day in office, for people who did far worse, by degrees, than Libby.
Susan McDougal, who had already completed her sentence, was pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal; McDougal had served 18 months on contempt charges for refusing to testify about Clinton's role.
Dan Rostenkowski, a former Democratic Congressman convicted in the Congressional Post Office Scandal. Rostenkowski had served his entire sentence.
Melvin J. Reynolds, a Democratic Congressman from Illinois, who was convicted of bank fraud, 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice, and solicitation of child pornography had his sentence commuted on the bank fraud charged and was allowed to serve the final months under the auspices of a half way house. He had served his entire sentence on child sex abuse charges before the commutation of the later convictions.
Roger Clinton, the president's half-brother, on drug charges after having served the entire sentence more than a decade before. He was also briefly alleged to have been utilized in lobbying for the Braswell pardon, among others.
President Clinton waited 'til all these (with the exception of Roger who finished his sentence a decade BEFORE president Clinton took office) served their sentences, THEN pardoned them. A lot of good that did MISTER McDougal, who died in prison.
So, Scooter libby gets a commutation-- but not a pardon! And the Media wonders about double standards?
But back to Cisneros in closing: Who here remembers David Barrett, the Independent Counsel assigned the job of investigating Cisneros? From Wiki:
Here's the disconnect in Liberal minds [at least in my neck of the woods]. Former Governor Don Siegleman and Health South CEO Richard Scrushy have been sentenced to decent jail terms, seven and a half and six years respectively. Yet on a local talk radio on Liberal Night [yes, they only get one night], these men bemoan Libby's commutation, while insisting Siegleman and Schrushy should be let out of jail. There is a HUGE double standard here.
_________
Apologies for the error. All I can only point to are the late hour and heavy eyelids for confusing Henry Cisneros with Michael Milken. My overall point remains however: the glaring double-standard of Liberals and Media, their hypocrisy, and their deceitfulness in relating the facts...
As with so many other things, these Liberals are hypocrites and worse... deceitful to boot.
1. Some have accused conservatives of holding a double standard in that they castigated Clinton for lying to a Federal Grand Jury, yet pushed for a Libby pardon.
What's hypocritical about the Left's accusation here is President Clinton didn't spend a single day in prison-- wasn't even sentenced to prison. So the double standard lies in the Left's desire to see a Republican staffer punished more harshly than a Democratic president for, essentially, the very same crime.
2. This past march when Libby was convicted, Liberal Media mouthpieces all over the airwaves (including FOX) touted this as "The highest-ranking White House official" ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair.
But this is patently false. Does anyone remember Henry Cisneros? Bill Clinton Cabinet Member? Henry Cisneros Secretary of Housing and Urban Development? The same Henry Cisneros who was indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, giving false statements and obstruction of Justice. The same Cisneros who managed a plea agreement of 'guilty' to lying to the FBI, who also managed to avoid jail alrogether. And the Left are screaming about Libby getting his sentence commuted? Besides which, Cisneros' conviction was AFTER Iran-Contra. Which makes Cisneros the highest White House official who would have been ordered to prison for a very long time.... had he not gotten off the hook big-time. The Clinton White House stone-walled the Barrett investigation at every turn-- the net result being that Cisneros was let off the hook. Last time I checked, EVERY member of the President's Cabinet outranks the Vice President's chief of staff.
3. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew who leaked the Plame name BEFORE he began to focus on the office of the Vice President. Before. And that 'who' was Richard Armitage-- there's your man. And yet Fitzgerald continued his investigation, and Libby for some inexplicable reason chose to lie about something that ultimately had no bearing on the outing of a NON-covert CIA operative. Even on the day Fitzgerald handed down his indictment, he clearly stated that Ms. Plame was NOT outed, and that NO charge for such was included in the indictment.
So Henry Cisneros, a bigger political fish than Libby; he pleads guilty to a lesser charge and ultimately spends NO time in jail, eventually getting a pardon from his boss, while Libby gets 30 months for the very same "crime" to which Cisneros pled guilty? So Libby, a Republican, get's a harsher sentence than Cisneros, a Democrat?
Talk about injustice! Clinton tells a bold-faced lie to a Federal Grand Jury, is justly impeached for it, get's to keep his office, and his freedom, but Libby get's two and a half years? Cisneros get's NO time, and the Liberal pus-gobs on TV get all indignant over Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence?
And many of these "Wonders of Intellectual Acuity" think talk-radio needs to be reined in? It's the other way around. Liberal Media needs to be reined in. They have a lot of nerve accusing talk-radio of propagating distortions of fact.
How about these pardons? Signed by President Clinton on his last day in office, for people who did far worse, by degrees, than Libby.
Susan McDougal, who had already completed her sentence, was pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal; McDougal had served 18 months on contempt charges for refusing to testify about Clinton's role.
Dan Rostenkowski, a former Democratic Congressman convicted in the Congressional Post Office Scandal. Rostenkowski had served his entire sentence.
Melvin J. Reynolds, a Democratic Congressman from Illinois, who was convicted of bank fraud, 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice, and solicitation of child pornography had his sentence commuted on the bank fraud charged and was allowed to serve the final months under the auspices of a half way house. He had served his entire sentence on child sex abuse charges before the commutation of the later convictions.
Roger Clinton, the president's half-brother, on drug charges after having served the entire sentence more than a decade before. He was also briefly alleged to have been utilized in lobbying for the Braswell pardon, among others.
President Clinton waited 'til all these (with the exception of Roger who finished his sentence a decade BEFORE president Clinton took office) served their sentences, THEN pardoned them. A lot of good that did MISTER McDougal, who died in prison.
James McDougal died of a heart attack in federal prison in Fort Worth, Texas. The circumstances of his death remain questionable: he was apparently denied access to his heart medication, and he was placed in solitary confinement without the medication.
So, Scooter libby gets a commutation-- but not a pardon! And the Media wonders about double standards?
But back to Cisneros in closing: Who here remembers David Barrett, the Independent Counsel assigned the job of investigating Cisneros? From Wiki:
The office of the independent counsel issued a press release along with the final report stating:An accurate title for the Report could be, "WHAT WE WERE PREVENTED FROM INVESTIGATING." After a thorough reading of the Report it would not be unreasonable to conclude as I have that there was a coverup at high levels of our government and, it appears to have been substantial and coordinated. The question is why? And that question regrettably will go unanswered. Unlike some other coverups, this one succeeded.
Here's the disconnect in Liberal minds [at least in my neck of the woods]. Former Governor Don Siegleman and Health South CEO Richard Scrushy have been sentenced to decent jail terms, seven and a half and six years respectively. Yet on a local talk radio on Liberal Night [yes, they only get one night], these men bemoan Libby's commutation, while insisting Siegleman and Schrushy should be let out of jail. There is a HUGE double standard here.
_________
Apologies for the error. All I can only point to are the late hour and heavy eyelids for confusing Henry Cisneros with Michael Milken. My overall point remains however: the glaring double-standard of Liberals and Media, their hypocrisy, and their deceitfulness in relating the facts...
from the mind of... Eric | 12:01 AM
34 Comments:
Where did you get your info on Cisneros? According to that great source Wikipedia "Cisneros negotiated a plea agreement, under which he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of lying to the FBI, and was fined $10,000. He did not receive jail-time or probation. He was pardoned by President Bill Clinton in January 2001.
Also we come up against the difference of pardon and commutation. A pardon is outright forgiving a crime and the penalty required by law. A commutation is different though it says that the conviction is valid, but the punishment is too severe.
In his autobiography published in 1999 Bush talked about pardons and commutations when he was governor of texas dealing with death row inmates. He said, "it was not his place to 'second-guess' the courts. What do you think is different now?
And you trot out the tired trope that Valerie Wilson was not an undercover CIA agent. Patrick Fitzgerald settled this in a court filing in May before Libby's sentencing, "At the time of the initial unauthorized disclosure in the media of Ms. Wilson's employment relationship with the CIA on 14 July 2003, Ms. Wilson was a covert employee for whom the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."
He also suggested to the judge that Libby not receive any leniency, "He has expressed no remorse, no acceptance of responsibility, and no recognition that there is anything he should have done differently - either with respect to his false statements and testimony, or his role in providing reporters with classified information about Ms. Wilson's affiliation with the CIA."
But I guess we all misunderstood the president when he said, "f 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."
I forgot the link to the Fitzgerald quotes. It's here.
Neither shocked, nor outraged. It's just more of the same. Just more of the same.
Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. (Yawn. I am sooo tired of this evil presidency, I really wish it would go away.)
But the premise of EL's post is right on. There is simply no disregard for the rule of law, as has been whined by the left, simply because Bush's opinion differed from the court's. And weighed against tons of pardons granted by Clinton, it's a pretty lame argument. Bush merely altered the sentence (Libby still has a conviction on his record, 2yrs of probation and 250K in fines atop his legal bills.) A pardon wipes out the entire thing. If given to Libby, he'd have paid in now way. Clinton's pardons were in many cases after the fact, but a pardon means "don't worry, we'll pretend your cool". "Yeah, I did it, but Bubba says it's OK." Bush's actions were more like, "No, give him only ten lashes, not 30."
I especially like the comparison to Clinton's lie, which is more apples to apples. There is no question that Clinton lied. Though he is a known philanderer, I doubt he could forget whether he got it on with anyone of them. It's not like he's got Wilt Chamberlain stats. But Libby's "lie" was hardly on the same plane. Especially considering the actual "outing" was committed by Armitage.
As far as the outing goes, it seems to me that I read of some woman who was instrumental in defining for the CIA the various levels of security, including what "covert" implied, and to her, Plame didn't match the description. Does this sound familiar to anyone, or am I confusing something?
The most sane reason I have heard that Patrick Fitzgerald didn't indict Richard Armitage is because the law against disclosing covert agents say the act must be taken with the aim of damaging US security. Armitage didn't leak Mrs. Wilson's name with a desire to damage US intelligence ability so he doesn't meet the technical definition of having broken the law. Neither does Robert Novak. Mr. Libby wasn't charged with exposing a covert agent. He was charged with fibbing to investigators.
President Bush can pardon and commute sentences. What is galling is that he wasn't willing to let "Scooter" spend even a day in jail. It was only hours before the commutation was announced that an appellate court said "Scooter" would have to continue his appeals while serving his time. Adding to the gall is the president's words when this affair broke that he would see whoever leaked the name punished fully. And of course lets not forget how he has been so stingy with the pardon pen for other people. This president sees the laws of the nation as things that shouldn't apply to him and his.
Marshall, I have to ask do you think Scooter Libby lying about an issue relating to national security is less severe than Bill Clinton lying about whether he cheated on his wife?
Forget Marshall! I say "Yes"! It speaks to character. No one, not even Fitzgerald, can honestly say Libby's lie was, beyond any doubt, deliberate. The same cannot be said of Clinton.
What's sickening to me is you and seemingly EVERYONE on the Left's willingness to overlook Bill's crime because it involved sex, but foam at the mouth because Libby might have confused dates and times and meetings while on the witness stand.
And it wasn't a lie about "whether" he cheated on his wife... he DID cheat on his wife, and lied about it on the witness stand... which is PERJURY.
Prove Libby deliberately lied. You can't. We all know Bill did. How does one accidentally lie about cheating on ones wife while on the witness stand. Clinton's was a DELIBERATE lie.
Even after knowing that Armitage didn't intentionally leak a CIA agents name, Fitzgerald still chose to drag his investigation on. The very purpose of his investigation was to find out who leaked. He knew before the investigation got revved up, yet he still wanted blood. So he circled the swimmers waiting for the first sign of weakness then charged in and made a case and conviction on something that had no bearing whatsoever on his purpose for investigating in the first place.
Plame/Wilson was not covert. Too many people already knew who she worked for, if not in what capacity. Joe Wilson had him and his wife listed in 'Who's Who' for crying out loud. That's not particularly covert. If anyone outted Valerie Wilson, it was Joe and Valerie Wilson. Besides which, Marshall's point still casts doubt on the entire need for an investigation to begin with. Valerie Wilson did not meet the definition of a covert agent. Too many people already knew she was a CIA operative for her to ever go undercover.
What galls me is your and the Left's hypocrisy.
Okay, no hypocrisy here. I think that if Clinton's people were pardoned for crimes they committed, that it was wrong to do so. I condemn that sort of cronyism as a deadly attack at our Republic.
Will you now join me in condemning the Scooter commmutation of a crime for which he was convicted?
Will you join with me then, in condemning Bush for hiring multiple people associated with (some with convictions) the Iran Contra scandal (wherein Reagan/Bush administration flunkees lied about our involvement in WAR CRIMES)?
I, for one, am disgusted by pardons based on cronyism and further disgusted by those who'd hypocritically condemn it when done by "the Other," but praise it when done by My Team. So then, I'm sure you will indeed join me in condemning Bush for this commutation. Yes?
Surely you won't admit to the very same hypocrisy that you rightly condemn here?
No, Dan, I will not join you in condemning the Libby commutation. Your condemnation of Clinton's pardons and communtations is pointless... they were still pardoned or received commuted sentences. There's no point in condemning what every president has a right to do. ESPECIALLY Clinton. The point of this post is the hypocrisy on the Left... the hypocritical outrage and gall.
Isn't it about time you put that old tired "war crimes" horse of your out to pasture. It doesn't run anymore. If it ever did. Especially since Reagan is not at issue... the Media portrayal of Libby being the highest ranking White House Official since 'Iran-Contra', which is patently false.
I, for one, am disgusted by your 'one-trick pony' political discourse.
What is different now?
I don't know BenT. Perhaps he thought Libby got a raw deal, seeing as how no one was even charged with outting Plame.
What I am disappointed about George's tenure as Governor is his refusal to commute to life the sentence of Carla Faye Tucker, his sister in Christ. She certianly earned her death sentence, but she was clearly not the same woman she was when she received her sentence.
Yet, EL, lateness of hour or not, now, in the light of day, you leave an unfactual rant about Cisneros up, besmirching his character, to poison the the record. Classy.
And, so Bush should have pardoned Tucker, even though she did what she did and was convicted fair and square, because she became a Christian? Holy cow. You know, he swore to uphokld the constitution of the state of Texas; not the New Testament. I guess he might have pardoned her because she became a Christian, then resigned his office. That would've been about right.
"The point of this post is the hypocrisy on the Left... the hypocritical outrage and gall."
I'm not sure I understand. You suggest that the "Left" is being hypocritical. I tell you that not all on the so-called Left are hypocritical. That there is me (and many others) who think crony pardons poison the political process and it is disgusting and should be ended.
But then you say you are glad that Scooter had his sentenced (imposed by a jury of his peers in a fair trial) commuted, bypassing the legal system.
So, are you are one of Them, then? One of those that believe in political pardons, as long as it's your party that's doing the pardons, but you'll choose to condemn it when the Others do?
If so, then your post here should be praising Scooter's commutation, not condemning that which you are taking part in.
I think better of you. Knowing you to be a decent fella, I'd hope you are actually opposed to these disgusting disruptions of justice and the mocking of our political and judicial systems. No?
ER, I know you to be more intellectual saavy that this, so I'll refrain from be caustic or sarcastic.
I'm not besmirching Cisneros. I'm besmirching everyone pointing their finger at the evil Bush for doing what Clinton himself did FOR Cisneros, and others... members of the FALN Terrorist group among them.
And no, I said I was 'disappointed' that Bush chose not to extend a little clemency(sp?). That's a far cry from saying he 'should have'. I for one would love to have seen her sentence communted, but Bush saw things differently, and Karla Faye DID earn her punishment. At least she won't suffer the 'Second Death' from which no clemency is possible.
I just wish you were opposed to the disgusting mockery that was "Fitzgerald's Justice." His mandate was over the moment he learned who outted Plame. Which must have galled him to think he'd lose the money and prestige that would come from frying the White House. There was no underlying crime committed by anyone in the White House, yet he went after them nonetheless. Furthermore, he used testimony from trained journalists, among others, who claimed faulty memories themselves; unable to recall this or that. The irony is, Fitzgerald used this kind of testimony to indict Libby for having the same kind of memory problems.
OH. And the last time I checked, your face isn't on every nightly news broadcast denouncing the Bush Administration. Please exercise enough commonsense to understand which Liberals I'm refering to.
"I just wish you were opposed to the disgusting mockery that was "Fitzgerald's Justice.""
Wasn't Scooter convicted by a jury of his peers in an above-the-board trial and sentenced by a judge in good standing? Are you suggesting that somehow Fitzgerald corrupted the system and all these individuals who were involved?
If so, please provide evidence. If not, then please acknowledge political cronyism for what it is and join me in denouncing political pardons from whichever side does it.
ER. The post is factual... Now. If you feel otherwise, please point the errors out. I'm reasonable. BenT questioned my facts, I admitted I goofed then amended the post, with a mea culpa of sorts at the bottom. What more do you want?
The deck was stacked against Libby from the beginning of the trial. The pool of jurors was taken from a district that is 8:1 Democrat, and the judge... isn't he a staunch Democrat? Do you mean to tell me politics plays NO PART in the court system? You don't really believe our judicial system is beyond reproach do you?
eh hem... Mike Nifong? Politics... Personal Power... Miscarriage of Justice... eh hem... all those people getting off death row because of a faulty judicial system, among other reasons?
Besides which, Fitzgerald's mandate ended the moment he discovered who outted Plame. The whole affair should have ended there. But again... personal political capital was to be made, and it was an opportunity Fitzgerald couldn't let slip away.
Besides which, are you willing to disallow every future president his or her right under the Constitution to pardon or give clemency?
I've got work to do... I'll banter with you guys later.
"Are you willing to disallow every future president his or her right under the Constitution to pardon or give clemency?"
I'm willing and desiring to clarify the rule to disallow political cronyism of the sort that Clinton, Reagan and Bush have used it for - wherein one pardons one's own administration, family and friends for political reasons, financial gain or even to cover one's own butt.
THAT is not what the framers of the Constitution intended and is an abuse of the system.
It's the sort of action that you might expect to see in a banana republic, not the great US Republic. It is an abuse of authority, a spitting on the Constitution and the great notion that all people are created equal and ought be held equally accountable under the law. We have enough of a two-tiered system as it is.
We don't need to encourage more liberties for the rich and powerful than they already have - Democrat or Republican.
"Do you mean to tell me politics plays NO PART in the court system?"
It absolutely plays a part. And when wrong-doing happens, evidence should be brought to the light of day and the wrong should be righted.
So, bring evidence.
Or, lacking any in this case, join me in an unhypocritical opposition to the use of crony-pardoning, Dem or Republican. Pardoning of one's friends and political allies for selfish political reasons is always wrong, regardless of the party.
Surely you agree?
You section number 2 is still there and still inaccurate.
Also I have to ask you to expand upon this idea that Fitzgerald couldn't follow charges uncovered during his investigation. The argument your making is that a traffic cop can't arrest you if he sees an open beer bottle after pulling you over for speeding.
As well it should be made clear exactly who prosecuted Scooter Libby. Patrick Fitzgerald called for by a Republican congress and selected by Alberto Gonzalez. Judge Walton a man who had been appointed by George Bush to his position. The appellate court made up of two other Republican appointees (one by Reagan, one by H.W. Bush, and one by Clinton). Are you telling me that all these Republicans were set out to get Scooter Libby?
Ruminating even further I have to speak about this conservative habit of pointing to Pres. Clinton for comparisons. You do remember tat in 2000 George Bush ran on the premise that he would be different from Bill Clinton? He named his campaign jet "Accountability One". If someone else is unprofessional, or petty, or mean, or psychopathic it does not justify similar tendencies in you. This one of my guiding mottoes. It was true in childhood and i find it even more true and helpful in adulthood. If only George Bush could have met Ms. Simmons (my first grade teacher).
And even more to say about this idea that Valerie Plame wasn't covert:
1. Not everyone who is covert is a super-secret agent lying to friends and family alike. Don't get all your ideas about intelligence work from tv and movies.
2. Not everyone who works in the CIA building is a CIA employee. The CIA employs lots of contractors and outside firms. It uses these as light cover for some of their agents.
3. In that same court briefing, a write-up of which I linked to earlier, (which you apparently didn't read) Patrick Fitzgerald says, "While assigned to CPD, Ms. Wilson engaged in temporary duty (TDY) travel overseas on official business. She traveled at least seven times to more than ten countries. When traveling overseas, Ms. Wilson always traveled under a cover identity — sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias — but always using cover — whether official or non-official cover (NOC) — with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."
4. Because her identity has been exposed and publicized not only have all the arrangements for her cover become known, but any other agents who utilize the same cover are jeopardized.
You can try to distract with claims about Joe Wilson's Africa trip or Who's Who. But the simple fact remains Valerie Plame was exposed recklessly by this administration.
The double standard here is that the Bush administration has been strenuously opposed to any softening of sentencing standards. Critics have long pointed out that judges are allowed to take account of negative facts not proven to the jury, but defendants' positive contributions are ignored, as is the collateral damage that imprisonment causes the families involved.
Bush made use of every element of that critique when he gave his reasons for commuting Libby’s sentence.
Bush's decision was at odds with the very sentencing system he and his Justice Dept. have vigorously supported.
"Plame was exposed recklessly by this administration."
Only an idiot would believe that after all the facts to the contrary have been laid out on the table.
And you make a grave error if you truly believe I glean all my knowledge of things from what I see on television or in movies. That's another idiotic statement.
How about this. Let's try engaging our opponents without resorting to insult. Don't like being called an idiot? Neither do I. You think I'm too smug in my own sense of intellectual superiority? Better look in a mirror pal.
How were my statements wrong? Was Valerie Wilson not outed by the administration? Was my adjective wrong? Were they careless instead of reckless?
And you who try to say she wasn't a covert agent simply because , "...she had a desk job." A lot of the CIA's intelligence work is paper related. Analysts who read reports from UN agencies. Liaisons to other countries. Anonymous staff who track minute details to spot those changes that signal growing threats to the US. To say that only field agents need cover or are real CIA agents is a Jack Bauer view that simply isn't reality.
You still haven't responded to some of my thoughts like Bush's own words where he disdained interfering with the courts. Or the quote from Patrick Fitzgerald where he talks about Libby's lack of remorse.
Libby's lack of remorse!!!! For what!? Having a bad memory like all the journalists whose testimony based on poor recollections was used against him in a sham trial!!???
Again, "sham trial"? That would be horrible!
Provide the evidence so that the sham can be exposed, the jurors and judge arrested and matters set straight.
According to Bush, the jury did a fine job. Maybe he's in on the conspiracy to convict an innocent man, too!
We'll arrest 'em all just as soon as you provide one single shred of real evidence.
Don't be silly Dan. If a jury renders a decision based on testimony and evidence provided, it does a good job regardless of the quality of said testimony or evidence. In fact, it can only work with the testimony and evidence provided. They are not supposed to, as is so easy to do for the left, project their beliefs upon the situation.
As to evidence, I can at least provide you with another perspective by directing you to AmericanThinker.com. Go into the archives and read related articles, particularly those by Clarice Feldman. Just those from January of this year should do it, but you could go back further. You'll read quite a bit that isn't highlighted, if reported at all, by the MSM. Enjoy.
"They are not supposed to, as is so easy to do for the left, project their beliefs upon the situation."
That's interesting, coming from those who are projecting their opinion that this was a "sham trial" and suggesting that Libby had a kangaroo court on a reality that doesn't support that notion.
The whole "sham trial" thing is interesting, given that the prosecutor and judge were both Republicans.
Dan,
Just go and read as I've recommended. "Sham" might not be the perfect adjective, but...
Marshall, you should read the actual indictment handed down by Patrick Fitzgerald.
It makes it very clear that Lewis Libby knew who Valerie Plame was and that she was a covert agent. He shared that information with Judith Miller at a June 23rd lunch. Libby is a former lawyer he knows how to speak to a grand jury and FBI agents. If he had trouble remembering he would have said so in language that would make that clear. But he didn't. He used language to mislead the FBI and the grand jury.
An indictment is the charge against the defendant, not the judgement. What it claims and what the defendant claims are usually different and why it goes to court. Why would you insist, without being the Amazing Kreskin, that he spoke a deliberate lie, rather than what he "knew" to be true? I never meant to imply that HE felt he had trouble remembering, only that his statements differing from the reporters version could be a matter of not having total recall abilities.
And let's not forget these reporters had faulty memories of their own, and yet the prosecution used their imperfect memories against Libby.
Post a Comment
<< Home