Bush commutes Libby's prison sentence

Gee, I guess perjury is only important to republitards when it involves sex and Democratic Presidents. Hypocrites that they are, I am sure lots of folks will be carrying water for chimpy and shotgun dickie.

bastards

I guess Republicans don't think Perjury is that big a deal after all.

Scooter's getting off with no effective punishment. I'm quite sure that the $250,000 fine will be offset in some way. Probably a "signing bonus" when he get's some nice cushy job at a Right wing think tank, like Wolfowitz.

Whoda thunk it?
Unreal!!!!

Now this should be fun.

How many are going to trash Bush (knowing he does have the Constitutional authority) without acknowledging the wrongs from other admin's. From Presidents on down.

Who is going to speak with a forked tongue.

This commutation is itself an act of "obstruction of justice". The Offices of the President and the Vice President are up to their nostrils in this CIA leak case. Bush should have recused himself from any involvement in pardons or commutations.

The "cloud over the VPs office" has spread to the entire Executive branch. In fact you can smell the sulfur wafting throughout the GOP.

If one concludes that the '08 win is already out of reach for the Party, it seems like the only decent thing to do.

The House should draw up impeachment articles for this alone. What a travesty of justice!

Comment? There aren't words adequate to describing the depth of my disgust at this vile venality.

This just in - the chimpy administration is seeking mandatory sentencing for criminals - http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/06/17/administration_pushes_for_mandatory_sentences/

Except of course for FOC (Friends of chimpy). What a farking hypocrite!

While Chimpy McFlightsuit was out gallivanting with his buddy, Vlad Putin, Chimpy's puppetmaster, Dick "Shotgun" Cheney, issued his (I mean President Bush's) commutation of Scooter Libby's prison term.

I'm sure Dick stuck this "get out of jail" free card under Chimpy's nose for signature long ago.

As noted by Sidney Blumenthal - "The Decider has decided that Dick Cheney will decide what the Decider decides." And here, Dick Cheney has decided that Chimpy will decide to let Scooter get away with perjury - in connection with outing a covert CIA agent.

I guess when you're doing the bidding of Dick "I'm my own branch of government" Cheney, disclosing the identity of a covert CIA agent is not illegal . . . .

I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised, but this gang of thugs contempt and brazen disregard of the law continues to amaze me.
Jan. 20, 2009 can't come soon enough.

Dear Mr. James:

Please explain where in the U.S. Constitution President Bush has the "middle ground" authority to "commute" sentences. The Constitution mentions reprieves and pardons, but where does the idea of "commute" come from?

-Dennis Boyle

Can there be any doubt the the Bush Whitehouse is totally corrupt and morally bankrupt. Impeach Bush and Cheney.

No doubt someone in the administration will find contributors to pay the $250,000 fine. Or maybe Scooter can raise it himself doing speaking engagements. I can see the promotional brochure now: "Dr. Plamelove, or How to Stop Worrying and Love the Empire".

How many are going to trash Bush (knowing he does have the Constitutional authority) without acknowledging the wrongs from other admin's. From Presidents on down.

Who is going to speak with a forked tongue.

Posted by: PG | July 2, 2007 6:55 PM
Even if that were correct,
didn't your mother tell you 2 wrongs don't make a right? I thouht you were all about law and order, or is that just some name from a TV show?

That sigh you hear in Washington is all the criminals in the Bush administration breathing easier knowing they can be tried & convicted, but not serve any time.

Reminds me of the Ford pardon of Nixon. The public
was so shocked and mad that Jerold did not get a second term in office.
It's going to take years for the Republican Party and a lot of PR to recover from this yahoo President.

I can't believe this, talk about cronyism, Scooter lies and obstructs justice during a Treason investigation and the Republican Commander Guy communtes his sentence?

So much for the Republican Party being the Party of Law & Order".

I can't wait until the GOP nominee for President in 08 has to go around the country stumping for votes while at the same time having the W. and Cheney noose hanging around their neck.

I thought all of the weirdo leftists would go ballistic. Bastards, all of you (gee, Trib censors if Seth can use that word, so can I, right?).

Where was your outrage when Clintoon pardoned one of the world's top criminals, Marc Rich?
Where was your outrage when Clintoon pardoned drug dealers at the behest of Tony Rodham?
Perjury, two books (one by liberal icon Carl Bernstein) says Hillary commited perjury. Where is your outrage, leftist bastards?
There is proof Bill Clintoon RAPED Juanita Broadderick. Where is your outrage, leftist bastards, over a RAPE?
You leftist bastards are PATHETIC!

kind of funny that the apologists seem to be saying Fibby doesn't DESERVE to go to jail because all he is guilty of is protecting his boss!!

but, he is a grown man, and if you obstruct justice to protect a felon, u deserve EXACTLY to go to prison... i'm quite sure that is precisely why obstruction of justice is a crime...

due DIRECTLY to Fibby's deliberate actions, a felon has escaped justice...

and now (add it to the list *sigh*), due directly to the actions of the mean-spirited, dry-drunk schmuck usurping the office of the presidency, another felon has gone free...

what a disaster this administration is...

if the nader-voters from florida in 2000 had any honor at all they would self-immolate...

Geez - Even Martha Stewart and (I never thought I use this name as exemplary) Paris Hilton stepped up and did their time.

"By taking the middle ground of a commuted sentence, Bush certainly relieves much of the pressure Libby was experiencing as well as the mounting pressure on the president himself."

"Middle ground"? You treat this is if Bush engaged in some dignified act of compromise. This was no compromise; it was a craven act lacking all dignity. And this from the guy who was told to say that he was restoring honor and dignity to the White House. This is a very, very small White House indeed.

RNC Bruce,

Bring your lunch, it's gonna be a long one.

Looks like the only people that approve of the "middle ground" are neocons and the Washington press corps.

it was gop hero HAMILTON who argued for the presidential pardon... his thrust being that:

"The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel."

On whom has Bush bestowed the benefit of this incredible power of redemption?

The unfortuante criminal? The father who has stolen bread to feed his family??

Oh, that's right! One of his immediate subordinates guilty of obstructing a federal criminal investigation aimed him and his #2...

"Americans want to be assured that the next administration will bring honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN’s “Capital Gang,” 8/13/00]

"The President has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration." [White House Briefing, 9/29/03]

I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action." [Bush Remarks: Chicago, Illinois, 9/30/03]

"Americans are tired of investigations and scandal, and the best way to get rid of them is to elect a new president who will bring a new administration, who will restore honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN’s “Burden of Proof,” 9/15/05]

Hechava job Dubya.

stick a fork in the GOP. Please. what a disaster.

I can't for the life of me figure out why "the Base" is applauding this move. Are these the same "law and order" Republicans who couldn't spend enough money and waste enough time investigating President Clinton, to the effect of finding absolutely nothing accept a wholly unrelated stain on a blue dress.

Face it, if you think Scooter Libby got a raw deal from an overzealous prosecutor, than you must acknowledge that Mr. Clinton got at least as raw of a deal.

Finally, it appears President Bush has given up on painting lipstick on the pig that is his adminstration. I would have thought he would have at least held out for an 11th hour pardon rather than risk taking on yet another scandal for his already beleagured team. Apparently I was wrong.

According to the Bush Doctrine, personal loyalty to the president is the highest of all callings, far exceeding patriotism or loyalty to the country. Heckuva job Scooter.

If anyone still believes in equal justice under the law, the question is, "What took Bush so long?" The penalty for Bill Clinton committing perjury before a GRAND JURY was temporary suspension of his law license which he did not use anyway.

Relax kids. Clinton pardoned hundreds of scoundrals, including granting 140 pardons his last day in office which included convicted child sex offender Mel Reynolds and Dem convict Danny Rostenkowski. Commuting the Libby sentence is certainly no worse than the stunts Billy Clinton pulled along these lines in office. At least Libby wasn't convicted for having sex with a minor and set free such as Mel Reynolds.

Well thank you "bill r", for making my point. I never said whether it was right or wrong, I was just asking who is going to step up to the plate and be honest. LOL
PG

How many are going to trash Bush (knowing he does have the Constitutional authority) without acknowledging the wrongs from other admin's. From Presidents on down.

Who is going to speak with a forked tongue.

Posted by: PG | July 2, 2007 6:55 PM
Even if that were correct,
didn't your mother tell you 2 wrongs don't make a right? I thouht you were all about law and order, or is that just some name from a TV show?

Posted by: bill r. | July 2, 2007 7:19 PM

Another setback for the left's war on terror.

Bush stole your Fitzmas!

Ha Ha

I love it. Left winger's paranoid delusions just stepped up a notch.

Break out the pills because your BDS is going to be flaring up.

Don't cry into your organic/vegatarian meal at your 4th of July celebration. (Assuming you think it's a day to celebrate.... the birth of our imperialism... right?)

The shiek liberal super couple in Santa Fe is a little sad today. Awwwwww, maybe they'll get another magazine cover for this one.

Oh man, not even a hurricane on the radar to get you excited.

Shock and awe! His treasonous actions continue to shock and awe! How do we get our government back???

"Where was your outrage when Clintoon pardoned one of the world's top criminals, Marc Rich?"

Johnny D, you mean the same Marc Rich who's lawyer was one Lewis "Scooter" Libby?

"Perjury, two books (one by liberal icon Carl Bernstein) says Hillary commited perjury. Where is your outrage, leftist bastards?
There is proof Bill Clintoon RAPED Juanita Broadderick. Where is your outrage, leftist bastards, over a RAPE?
"

No prosecutions, no convictions. No actual evidence. Juantia Broaddricks only sworn testimony about the rape is that it did not happen.

If it did happen it should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Until that time Bill Clinton is innocent until proven guilty.

Quit spreading lies Johnny Torture.

Good job President Bush!!!

The Sopranos have been in charge of the White House for years, & they are in complete control now. After all, when a felon like Libby faces prison you have to keep him from ratting out the boss. You could whack Libby, or take real good care of him. bush Soprano chose the latter.

In a funny way, I'm enjoying this, for a couple of reasons:

1. It completely and utterly bares the corrupt soul of Bush and the GOP.

2. It basically hands the entire government to the Dems in 18 months, probably for decades.

3. It provides a nice anecdote for future historians to use, to sum up the moral bankruptcy of this administration.

Congrats!

This is most reminiscent not of Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich, but of Bush's (the one actually elected) pardons of Weinberger & the other Iran-Contra Felons. It is similar because if Weinberger or Libby ratted the bushs out, there could be serious prison time involved.

For all you Democratic and Liberal "Hate Mongers" I have two words for you: MARK RICH

Put that in your pipe and smoke it! You people are a joke! Go out and buy a dog and kick it when you get in from your sad lives.

BT

Mark Rich. That's funny. And who was it who stopped Fitzgerald from proceeding on that pardon?

George W. Bush

Quack, Quack, Quack!!!!!
There's little else that our lame duck president could be a success at, so he might as well try to please the right-wingers that are more concerned about Scooter Libby's 30-month sentence than wrongful executions of the innocent.
Scooter's still guilty despite a commutation, and the president is still a pathetic coward.

Ahem, Marc Rich may have been a scumbag, but he wasn't COVERING UP FOR THE VICE PRESIDENT AND THE GUY WHO COMMUTED HIS SENTENCE.

This is pure obstruction of justice. Guess the Republicans don't believe in laws any more.

I for one am glad the President Bush commuted the prison sentence of this fellow Republican.
I am also glad to see that elected Democrats are taking the high road and not pressing for impeachment of the sitting President, for this would only be seen as a retaliatory gesture against the GOP for impeaching President Clinton.

No, I want the foul stench of this administration to hang over the 2008 elections.
I want the American People to question why the Republican Party is not pressing to carry on the legacy of the incumbents, "elected" officials who brought the Republican Platform into the Oval Office; why they condoned this "mistakes were made and we will correct them" administration with blind party loyalty instead of questioning purely on a legal or moral basis.

No, I want the Bush Administration to hang like a bloody albatross from the neck of the GOP for many, many, many years to come...a Scarlet Letter...a voice from the dead, disillusioned and disenfranchised, screaming...

"See? SEE?!!? See what happens when the GOP is in power??"

fin

Put that in your pipe and smoke it! You people are a joke! Go out and buy a dog and kick it when you get in from your sad lives.

Posted by: BT | July 2, 2007 8:20 PM

Whats the matter BT? Upset that more Americans see what a "joke" your party is? Law and order...sheeez!

If you want to defend this despicable action that's your right, but if all you have to say is "Mark Rich" then stop talking, because that's just an idiotic comment to make. Nobody supported the Rich pardon -- I specifically remember being disgusted when Slick Willie did it -- but it's irrelevant to the travesty of justice President Bush perpetrated today.

Libby was fairly convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice and is being let off the hook solely because he's a friend of the President. That's disgraceful. And it's hypocritical. This is further evidence that the Adminstration has no respect for the rule of law.

Again, if you feel otherwise then make an intelligent case for it -- I bet you can't. But if you're just going to babble incoherently like BT or JD or whomever then don't waste our time. You have no idea what you're talking about and you just confirm everyone's suspicion that the GOP is rapidly turning into a party of right-wing reactionary nutcases.

Unbelievable. Just when you think these guys can't get any worse or any more corrupt, this happens.

Impeach. Impeach them all right now.

This Bush fiasco may not be over. He could still fully pardon Libby before he leaves office.

Bush is a bigger a@@hole than I thought.

JD,

I can guarantee there is very little liberal dilusional paranoia these days. come 2008, we'll control every single branch of government at the federal level and a vast majority of house, senate and governors at the state level.

Does it get any better than this? we'll see. I'm sure Bush will continue to make the landscape even better for Democrats.

Governor Bush on his rationale for not commuting the 152 death sentences he oversaw:
"I don’t believe my role [as governor] is to replace the verdict of a jury with my own, unless there are new facts or evidence of which a jury was unaware, or evidence that the trial was somehow unfair."

On the subject of Dick Cheney's right-hand man who took one for the team and got 2.5 years:
"the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive.”"

As per Chgo.Trib. calls this the middle ground- conservative republican sycophants!

Well, as Bush said, the "accountability moment" was the 2004 election. True enough, nobody in this administration has been held accountable for anything since 2000. I guess our only remaining hope is that these people will burn for eternity in the fires of hell.

For John D: Having sex with women, against their will or not (and we don't know it was rape, BTW), is one thing. Violating your oath to protect the Constitution is another. So is lying to go to war; so is setting up your friends to raid the Treasury in that war, sending men and women to die in the name of a falsehood. And you want to talk about Clinton? Of course you do. You sure don't want to talk about the lying, thieving, murdering bastards — your word — running the government now, for the very obvious reason. And to equate a sex crime (if it was a crime) with violating the Constitution and declaring yourself about it and the law simply reveals your absolute ignorance and immorality.

Considering this admin. let Sandy Berger go with a slap on the wrist for committing a very serious crime, I'd say letting Libby go for lying about a non-crime makes us even!

C'mon people, much more serious issues to get excited about.

What a glorious day it is when not only is justice served, but it causes the liberal denizens of this forum to become apopleptic!

My only disappointment with the President's action today is that it is only a commutation, not a full pardon (hopefully that comes later).

Not only are the liberals unable to formulate an actual argument to support their opposition to the President's decision, but they apparently can't make a sufficient number of ad hominem attacks. What a spectacular demonstration of intellectual and ethical bankruptcy.

But please, libs, keep on posting! Your remarks are among the most entertaining and amusing reading in the Trib!!

Libby's case should have been thrown out when it was determined that there was no underlying crime. Why is this?

Because, if these was no underlying case, how can anyone be questioned about it? What would the prosecutor be asking about?

From what I have read, when there is no underlying crime or when charges are dropped, ancillary cases are usually dropped because there is nothing to talk about.

For those who are new to this, when I talk about "underlying crime", I am referring to the supposed leak of Plame's name. As we have seen, there was no crime, because, if there was, Fitzgerald would have gone after the person (Novak? Armitage?).

This whole case was a joke and Bush did the right thing. As it is, Libby has some big bucks to cough up.

vulture, one can only hope so... i'm in favor of getting the bonfire started now just in case...

Who is going to speak with a forked tongue.

Posted by: PG | July 2, 2007 6:55 PM

The speakers with forked tongues are the outraged wingnuts that whine about Clinton's pardons to this day. Hypocrites all. This means you, JohnD.

Nevermind, I found my own answer. The presidential power to commute stems from the 1925 EX PARTE GROSSMAN case. [Ducat and Chase's Constitutional Interpretation.

This raises a challenge, though, for you strict constructionists: Because this is based on a Supreme Court decision and not the actual words of The Constitution, how can you give Bush your unquailfied sanctioning of his actions?
--Dennis Boyle

Some of the posts above show how far the wacko right will go to defend Bush. They have drunk the Kool-Aid, and will defend him, no matter if the crime were mass murder in broad daylight, on live television. Like him, they can never own up to a mistake.

As much as I hate George Bush and the rest of his administration and appointees in various positions, I have to remember how disgusted I felt when Clinton pardoned Marc Rich. He did things far more scandalous than Libby did, and now lives overseas in near secrecy.

On a more personal note, as a Jew, I am upset that both of these vilified men come from my heritage.

I guess the upside to this decision is that the Democratic lock on statewide office here in Illinois will continue.

Patrick Fitzgerald was the only hope for a decent statewide candidate that the Republicans had. However if you've watched any of the news coverage of Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence, you'll have seen how the Republican's have felt the need to trash Fitzgerald in order to protect Bush. "Overzealous prosecutor" etc...

Who are the Republicans going to dredge up to rin against Durbin? Alan Keyes?

Great job Republicans.

Dems should be thanking "W" as he has handed them the 2008 election. GOP candidates, quit now and save your money. Hope and pray the Dems screw up so you can get back in 2012.

Clinton was a horrible president and did pardon a ton of garbage, Mark Rich included. However, Clinton didn't get the country stuck in a war with no way out.

The Bush administration, a true disaster for the GOP and for the country.

Mark Rich? How low is it for a GOP fanboy to say that since Clinton pardoned Rich, that Bush was right to commute Libby? Just because someone you mark as an enemy does something wrong doesn't mean that you're within your rights to do the same. Sheer lunacy by followers of a cabal who may as well defecate on the Constitution . . . they've already had a grand time urinating on it.

Valerie Plame and her husband were nothing but political pigeons put up by Chuckie Schumer and are own Dickie Durbin to be sacrificed on the DNC altar--guess what folks it ain't gonna happen. President Bush wisely said I'm looking this over legally and ethically and Scooter Libby should not go to prison. Judge Reggie Walton made the wrong call because Pat Fitzgerald the prosecutor made the wrong call--Fitzgerald although praised by Bush needs no praise he bungled the job. Richard Armitage gave away sweet little Valerie Plame Wilson's name. Fitzgerald knew this but since he couldn't agree there was a crime because Valerie wasn't undercover since she hadn't worked overseas for more than 5 years. She had a desk job at Langley, VA. for more than five years. Robert Novak says Richard Armitage gave her name away--he also, says Joe Wilson gave her identity away when he published her name and job on Marquis Who's Who in America-- Fitzgerald was wrongly appointed as a special prosecutor in the last days of John Ashcroft's tenure-- who wrongly agreed to turn him loose and the driveby media never said a nice thing about Ashcroft until he turned the hounds of baskerville loose on the Bush Administration. It all depends on whose ox is being gored. Fitzgerald knew Libby was not wrong but after spending millions on the prosecution he had to come up with sometning even though he knew Armitage was the guy from day one so, he made Scooter pay for lying which really was forgetfullness with all his respnsibilities fighting the real War on Terrorists who no one can say doesn't exist world wide
Scooter must pay the the $250,000 fine which is excessive to please Patrick--and must serve 2 years probation. President Bush --Scooter has been taken for a Jackass ride please pardon him--Jerry White, Springfiel, IL

Do you ever notice that no matter what Shrub and his cronies do, JohnnyD and the rest of the Republic sycophants always defend the action?

The universal excuse: 'Well, Clinton was worse because...' This excuse is so lame, even 8 year olds give it up. If you can't compose a better argument than 'Clinton was worse...' please call your dad or mom so they can help you out.

Don't you people ever get tired of defending the indefensible?

I'd say letting Libby go for lying about a non-crime makes us even!

C'mon people, much more serious issues to get excited about.

Posted by: miketrev | July 2, 2007 9:22 PM

Thats what I truely dislike about people like you and the republican party. The law and order party claims that the court is wrong and there was no crime committed. Who gave you the power over our judicial system. Laws are only there for the rest of the country..not the "chosen".
Your party is toast for years to come.

Bush makes a "middle ground" decision, eh?!?
Libby keeps walking free-all-the-way, and talking
poor me victimization.
Meanwhile, Bush & Cheney's
Repuglicrite Plutocracy
cash-in more chips to
immediately wipe-out this
traitorous felon's fines.
Banana Repuglicanism reigns
supreme!!!

Middle ground? no wonder the Tribune had thousands of cancellations when it endorsed Bush in 04.
Sadly the Trib is Repeublican because of Lincoln and it's clueless enough to think that it still should be today

I must say, I was rather not caught by surprise by these revelations. I just can't wait to hear how Bill Clinton ties into all this.

Typical Spouting Lies Joseph: If George Bush lied about Iraq, then so did Bill and Hillary Clinton, so did Tom Daschle, so did John Kerry, so did John Edwards, so did Chuckie Schumer, so did Al Gore. Would you like me to continue?
Who raided the Treasury? That seemingly is new left wing loon lie.

Oh and Left wing Idiots: Clintoon also pardoned TERRORISTS in, what?, 14 FALN TERRORISTS!
Like I said before, the left wing bastards are pathetic!

JuannieD,

Let's do this again. Man it's getting tiring. Libby was Marc Rich's lawyer when pardoned. Scum plays with scum. If you don't like the Rich pardon, condemn chimpy for the libby pardon. Otherwise, put a cork in it.

Robin has it right. Calling Bush's actions "middle ground" shows how far the Tribune has fallen. Bush has shown no respect for the Legislature or Judiciary. Bush is a little dictator, the worst President in history, and the Tribune calls him a moderate.

For those that think this is unbelievable, I suggest a) you read up on pardons and clemency and, b) read up on the non-case that underlies Libby's case.

Then, here is a list of the people Clinton pardoned: http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm

We have people convicted of bank embezzling, conspiracy to defraud the government, tax evasion, perjury, drug dealing, bribery, theft, wire fraud, forgery, racketeering conspiracy, etc., etc., etc.

Near as I can tell, Clinton pardoned over 450 people. Unbelievable?

I can't WAIT to see who W pardons as he leaves office. Should be a regular who's who of upstanding Republicans. Jack Abramoff, Duke Cunningham, Steven Griles. All fine family men, I'm sure.

Assuming he DOES leave office...

But Bill R., Bill Clinton perjured himself, too! Yes, it's a crime, but last I checked, Clinton never went to jail for it. Although he is banned from practicing law (just like Libby). Seems like the punishments fit both scoundrels' crimes.

It's going to be humorous watching Hillary try and be flabbergasted and high and mighty on this issue. I sure hope she doesn't choke on that Marc Rich cash that she and her husband traded for a presidential pardon. Can't you just see the Daily Show running the list of terrorists and fugitive financiers the Clintons pardoned over her speech?

If Lewinskygate was a victimless crime, then Scooter perjuring himself in an investigation where the leaker of Valerie Plame's identity (Richard Armitage) faced absolutely zero charges has to be, too. Sorry to call you leftists bastards on that, but you can't come up with an underlying crime because none was ever committed. If your Golden Boy, Bill Jeff Clinton, didn't have to serve time, why should Libby?

Is it true the WH has turned off the incoming phone lines? If so, that says more than anything I can say.

Near as I can tell, Clinton pardoned over 450 people. Unbelievable?

Posted by: Al | July 2, 2007 11:13 PM

Take your own advise, Al...Ronnie Raygun pardoned 406...Nixon 902...and beyond all that..where does 2 wrongs make a right?

Sorry to call you leftists bastards on that, but you can't come up with an underlying crime because none was ever committed.
Posted by: Hillaryis44 | July 2, 2007 11:30 PM

I guess thats because us "leftist bastards" (childish) find that if a court says a law was broken, we believe in the justice system. We don't pretend to be above the law or the ones that determine what the law is. To run on the law and order party makes 72% of Americans puke.

Come to think of it, can we also hear Mrs. Clinton discuss whether losing your high federal office is insufficient punishment for perjury?

First- Can any of you libs say anything about Bush and the Republicans without calling him names? Grow up!

Second- What was the sentence for Sandy Berger for stealing documents (pertaining to the Clinton pillow fight with terror) from the national archives and then latter lying about it?

Third - Did Clinton get jail time for perjury in his sexual harassment court case?

Fourth - Valerie Plame was not a CIA operative and the investigation should have stopped when Fitzgerald determined this. Which should have been within two days of the start of the investigation. If Valerie Plame was a CIA operative (see legal definition) Fitzgerald would have charged the leaker for that specific violation.

Libby The Traitor obstructed justice while acting GWB's employee. GWB then set him free. Libby carried out his obligation as Bush's thug to distract attention from Bush's lies about yellowcake. As we know, Libby mostly succeeded, as even the admin later conceded that the story was so bogus that it had no place in the SOTU.

As with Marc Rich and every other pardon mentioned, though, there was no accusation that the president had any connection to the crime. Not so here. Even our lowly 26 percenters should be able to see the difference between freeing a random crook like Marc Rich and freeing one of your own murderous thugs. The former results from questionable judgment, while the latter is simply the last step in a criminal conspiracy, deftly carried out to conclusion.

For once -- just once -- maybe you folks can put the country's interests above those of your pathetic political party. Come back to America.

What's significant here is that Libby was guilty of a crime undertaken as GWB's employee

It's time to IMPEACH The Commander Guy and Veep Shotgun Dick !

Take back your country America:
VOTE DEMOCRATIC IN 08 !!!

Great post Al!

And don't all you lefties forget that B.J.Clinton pardoned 16 F.A.L.N. terrorists so Hillary could get the Puerto Rican vote in New York!
I don't think scooter Libby went around making bombs and blowing up innocent Americans...The Clintons are scum!

Paulo

Moderator,

I'm asking you to kindly take down the posts by John D where he's calling people "ba******" (I've counted three on this post story alone), it's insulting to me and everyone else here like myself who enjoy The Swamp, thankyou.

The middle ground? As Richard Dawkins has said, "When two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them. It is possible for one side to be simply wrong."

There is no middle ground in this case; only the one of justice and the side seeking to elude it.

I am he as Dick is he as Karl is me
and we're all crooks together
See how they run like pigs from a gun
see how they fly
I'm crying
Sitting with my crab-cake
Waiting for Putin to come
KGB T-shirt, stupid bloody Monday
Man you've been a naughty boy
you let your eye go dim

I'm the uniter I'm the decider I'm the commander guy
Goo goo g' joob

Henry bulldog Waxman
pretty little politicians in a row
See how subpoenas fly like Lucy in the sky
See how they try
I'm crying
I'm crying, I'm crying
Weapons of Mass Destruction
I made it up I won't deny
Richard Pearl's wet-dream
Wolfowitz's pet scheme
Boy, you've been a naughty boy
you let your country down

I'm the uniter I'm the decider I'm the commander guy
Goo goo g' joob

Sitting in my Daddy's garden
waiting for Vlady to come
If Putin doesn't come I can still tie one on with Stolichnaya

I'm the uniter I'm the decider I'm the commander guy
Goo goo g' joob

Curveball, Smurfball, yellowcake and Plamegate
don't you think Haliburton laughs at you
See how they smile like pigs in a sty
See how they snide
I'm crying

Climbing up the Tower's rubble
Elementary Chimpy blaring in the bull-horn
Man, you should have seen them eatin' up the words I spoke

I'm the uniter I'm the decider I'm the commander guy
Goo goo g' joob
Goo goo g' joob
Goo goo g' goo
goo goo g' joob goo
juba juba juba
juba juba juba
juba juba juba juba
juba juba

This is a great day. Justice is served and all the liberal leftwing idiots go have a cry together at their favorite hair salon. Libby was railroaded in a political witch hunt. Disclosing Valerie Plame's identity was not crime . Libby didn't even lie -- he remembered the timing of something incorrectly and fell into liberal trap. It would have been a miscarriage of justice for the man to serve time. The Republican Party is the party of law and order, and they have proved yet again.

"Nevermind, I found my own answer. The presidential power to commute stems from the 1925 EX PARTE GROSSMAN case. [Ducat and Chase's Constitutional Interpretation."

Actually, Ex Parte Grossman only confirmed the right of the President to pardon for contempt of court, the case is not directly related to commutations.

The right to commute a sentence is derived from Common Law (the King of England could do it, so the president can too). This was explicitly confirmed in Ex Parte William Wells.

Heck, Scooter won't feel any of the 'excessive' pain the sentence had put upon him. How much do you want to bet that either the RNC or other wealthy friend, such as Cheney or Bush, will either pay his fine for him or give him the money to do so???

He should have been required to have served at least part of the jail term and perhaps had part of the fine reduced...at least he would have felt some misery for his mistake...

It is sickly amusing that all of the republicrit cantidates followed the official script and praised the event. None of them had the testicular fortitude to say that someone who is convicted of a crime has to pay the price.

Hillaryis44,

Please,try not to debate with leftist bastard billr.
He is an idiot-He'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experience...

Paulo

Libby will still get a pardon at the end of Bush's term. When he issues the pardon Bush will release a statement about how the fine and the 570 days of supervised probation was punishment enough.

This was no middle ground, this was the minimum intervention necessary by the President to keep Libby out of jail while at the same protecting Libby's right to claim 5th ammendment protections to avoid tesitfying before Congress.

It will have unintended consquences too. Around the country right now, there are defense lawyers updating their boilereplate language for the appeal of sentences for similar charges. If two years in prison is considered too harsh for these charges in one case, that should apply to all others as well- at least that will be their arguement.

In his statment today, Bush said that the consequences of the judgement against Libby will be long lasting. I suppose from the perspective of the weakened and shamed oval office, 570 days is a long long time.

None of this is a surprise. We all knew this was coming. With Bush's approval ratings at an all time low, it's not like this is going to hurt him with his base (as dwindling as it may be). The neo-cons are always going to scream about Clinton when they're trying to justify breaking the law and violating the Costitution. I don't know if the Bush supporters on this board honestly think that ANY of us could commit perjury and obstruction of justice and NOT do time in jail, but we all know it would never happen. Scooter had his day in court. He had a trial and was found guilty of two felonies. If this had been you or I, we wouldn't have even gotten a 30 month slap on the wrist. We'd be doing YEARS longer! And not in some Federal resort hotel.

The "middle ground" is only temporary. The pardon will come when Bush leaves office.

I generally believe that prison terms are useless in cases like this and Paris Hilton. But if you're going to reduce Libby's prison sentence, then why not change the financial terms. Make the fine a cool million, instead of $250,000. Make the probationary period longer, too.

And so the biggest lie perpetrated on the American public since Vietnam continues.

And let's make no mistake. Libby's crime was part of a concerted effort to discredit Joe Wilson by outing his covert CIA wife. Splitting hairs and stating that he wasn't the first to out Plame so no crime was committed may sell with the prosecutor, but this citizen isn't buying it. If a group of holigans yells "fire" in a crowded theater all at once, it doesn't mean the intent to cause chaos wasn't there.

And the White House outed a covert agent DESPITE the fact that the horses were already out of the barn. The Bush administration already had its war and tens of thousands of people were about to lose their lives and limbs.

Tens of thousands of men and women have lost their lives and limbs because of this president's decision to go to war based on fraud and deception.

That's all that needs to be said.

Nobody seems to get this very mportant point.

With a commutation of sentence, Libby's appeals process continues, and he cannot be forced to testify. If he were pardoned, then he has no choice BUT to testify.

This is a calculated part of a widespread coverup. The Trib should be reporting this on the front page as a continuing coverup - as they most certainly would have if this were a Democratic administration.

This is a failure of our political system, our justice system, and the role of the press in promoting the truth.

I am amazed at the great lengths cons will go to to rationalize this rampant lawbreaking. They lack true morality, have no sense of proportion, have a perverted idea of what justice is, are dishonest at their core, and stand for no other principal than to deny ever being wrong about anything ever.

A lesson for our Republican friends who's response has been to scream "Marc Rich!"-

The Democrats DID criticize the Marc Rich Pardon at the time.

"The pardon of Rich has been criticized by some congressional Democrats as well. Rep. Henry Waxman of California, senior Democrat on the committee, called the par "an end run around the judicial process."

"The pardons, particularly Rich's, have drawn some criticism. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, called it "a disgrace," and even Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota said he was troubled by that pardon, describing it as "inappropriate."

"Mr. Chairman, while I am not entirely comfortable with the focus of this hearing, I do believe that legitimate questions have been raised about the pardon of Marc Rich in particular. And for me, as for many Senators, and many Americans, suspicions about this pardon arise from the fact that Marc Rich’s ex-wife Denise Rich was a large donor to the Democratic party. Not just a large donor, a huge donor. According to press reports based on the research of the Center for Responsive Politics, Ms. Rich donated $867,000 to Democratic Party committees during the Clinton presidency, and most of that was soft money. She also donated $66,300 to individual Democratic candidates in hard money. She also contributed $450,000 to President Clinton's presidential library fund. These kinds of numbers can’t help but raise questions about this pardon." - Senator Russ Feingold

Too bad you Republicans are such sheep that you can't bring yourself to ever question the decisions of your leader, no matter how misguided.

I continue to be perplexed by Libby's defenders.

A career Republican prosecuter, Patrick Fiztgerald,was tasked by a Republican DOJ to act as special prosecuter to investigate the disclosure of a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame.

A grand jury indicted Libby for perjury. A jury found Libby guilty and a Republican judge appointed by Dubya sentenced Libby.

And this is all a witch hunt by Democrats? You people are nuts.

As a conservative Republican, I was disgusted with the Clinton last-minute pardons. Ditto for what Bush did for Libby. If you believe in the rule of law, then the White House has "jumped the shark" with this latest stunt. I will not vote for any GOP candidate who supports what the President did with Libby.

R.I.P.
U. S. Constitution

Ratified June 21, 1788
Died July 2, 2007

Let's look at the facts, folks. Scooter Libby DID NOT OUT Valerie Plame. It was Richard Armitage and the CIA. Armitage told Robert Novak it was Plame who had herv hubby sent to Niger and then the CIA confirmed it for Novak. Patrick Fitzgerald knew this within ONE WEEK of being handed the case.
So, let's see, that is like if the police or DA knew who the Brown's Chicken murderers were within one week of investigating the crime, but then not charging anyone with anything for three years but indicting someone they interviewed who couldn't remember a converation they had with investigators two years after they first spoke with investigators.
Fact is, Libby had nothing to do with Plame's so-called outing and Fitgerald knew that from the beginning. Libby was indicted on perjury and obstruction of justice, which in itself is questionable because no one remembers exact conversation and when they took place two, three years after they happened.
So Loony Lefties, please tell us who you spoke to and what you said to them three years ago!

Impeach. He and Cheney and Paolo are all traitors and cowards. Don't keep typing. DO SOMETHING. CALL PELOSI! IMPEACH

It has been obvious from the beginning that Cheney's Administration believes it is above the law. All the defenders of this group must not believe rendering justice should be blind; but on the other hand will blindly accept GOP hypocrisy.

Now this should be fun.

How many are going to trash Bush (knowing he does have the Constitutional authority) without acknowledging the wrongs from other admin's. From Presidents on down.

Who is going to speak with a forked tongue.

Posted by: PG | July 2, 2007 6:55 PM

Excellent point PG. Threr have been seceral administrations that have screwed up as much or, yes, even more than the current one. They all are motivated by greed and power, obtained under the guise of public service.
Oh, I do love the childish nicknames people come up with when submittingthere supposed adult comments. Makes it easy to see why so many schools are on academic warning lists. If adults do this in a public forum, Then it should be no surprise when the kids put forth the same behavior.

Once again, with the chance to do something right, the idiot, George W. Bush, does something wrong.

He's a corrupt scumbag.

"The whole world is watching!"

Do you ever think about the people who have died since Mr. Bu$h took the Whitehouse? The numbers are staggering. The people in the Twin Towers who were cremated in an instant (if they were lucky)they showed up one day at work and poof: Bu$h was doing a press op in a gradeschool. The people in the Pentagon being roasted alive while Chenney was underground; also allowing our nation to be attacked (even Osama was quoted as being surprised he was given so much time to carry out "the mission)". The passengers on flight 93 seeing the attack for what it was and rising up and defending our nations capital from futher destruction knowing it would cost them their lives? HEROS all. The citizens of Iraq (innocent of 9/11) and our soldiers (many enlisted under Clinton) and private citizens that are there(contracts with Halliburton pay extremely well and tax free). Do you think about the people who lost their lives in Katrina and are you still surprised at the "No Responders" from the whitehouse? There crime being born American. The people who are now being used (deported) to make us believe we are safe from illegals who want a job (dying from no medication). It always comes back to following the money trail doesn't it? Record profits for Oil companys (no surprise there)and huge tax breaks for "the Base." The freedom(?)of the press continues to ignore the truth, but the truth will surface because the people of America are inbreds. We are inbred as seekers of truth, justice, and the American way, and we will not be silent. We will not go quietly into the night. Take the labels off. This is not about Republicans or Democrats. We all bleed blue until that blood is spilt then we all bleed red. Let us end this Uncivil War. Let us once again unite and stand for the ideals that built our nation. Let us remember who we are and what we stand for.

I love it- !

For all of the left folks fighting for the high ground here- (did john E really say he was offended by name calling? that was classic).

What is really stinging you here is that your favorite punching bag, Bush, has beaten you at your own game. Thats where all of your anger is coming from- go with it, it is really entertaining!

you all know that this was your VICTORY we finally got him, someone is going to jail! Never mind the facts - SOMEONE ASSOCIATED WITH CHENEY IS IN JAIL!! WoohOO.

You lost.... sorry.

Compare W.'s pardon list to Clinton's. That may shut a couple of you folks up.

For those saying it wasn't a crime to release Valerie Plame's name, you are ignorant of the law. Exibit A of the trial record clearly states that at the time of the leak she was a covert agent.

On top of it, by exposing her as an agent, the leakers also exposed the company that she worked for as a CIA front.

This company was -- get ready, you're gonna love this -- was responsible for checking for weapons of mass destruction in Iran! So now, we have no accurate information on what's going on in that country.

Anyone defending Libby is just as traitorous as he is.

Chimpy's commutation of Scooter is even more calculating and cynical that it appears on its face.

While commuting the prison term portion of the sentence, but still keeping the conviction in place, Scooter still has a "live" issue to appeal - the conviction itself - which is still going on. Had Bush granted a full pardon, Libby would no longer be in legal jeopardy for the Plame leak affair.

By granting only a commutation of the prison sentence and retaining Libby's right to appeal the conviction itself, Bush has essentially insulated Libby from being called before Congressional oversight committees - which may wish to ask Mr. libby a few questions about Dick "Shotgun" Cheney's involvement in the Plame leak. Such a Congressional investigation may provide even more damning evidence of Executive Branch involvement. By manipulating the pardon in this manner, Libby can still claim to Congress that he won't testify because his appeal is still pending (and is likely to remain pending throughout the remainder of the President's term). This keeps him out of the hands of those pesky Congressional oversight committees.

At one point, an poster from the past,Juanito

For John D and Global Warmer... my baby cousin, now a grown man, is serving in Iraq. We have already lost one family member to a roadside bomb just over a year and half ago. Now we are all hoping and praying for Chris' safe return home.
I'm interested to hear from one or both of you about how todays decision affects his life. What cause is there for celebration? Because you think President Bush's decision "sticks it" to liberals? Have we really degenerated to a level where the goal is simply to make the other guy look bad? What about what is right for the country? Will this unify the country? Will it hasten the end of the war? Will it serve anyone other than Scooter Libby? Who gains from it other than Scooter Libby and his family? We are at WAR. Real people ache forever when the hear the news about their family. Real people are dying. Explain to me why the president is even bothering to think about the potential pain of one man who was convicted in a court of law. Scooter Libby had a jury trial and he was convicted. The fact that the president cares one bit about this case and this man when my family and hundreds of thousands of other family members are praying that their sons and daughters don't get killed today is disgusting. Shouldn't we thinking about the country and what it needs, not what Scooter Libby needs. My family is fighting for your right to cheap energy. I'm embarrassed by your glee over such an irrelevant man.

We all knew this was coming, didn't we? $250k for little baby Scooter is chump change to Chimpy and Shotgun Dick. They've already raised millions for his legal fund. How much of that do you suppose came from Paul Bremmer's missing $8 billion cash in Baghdad? You remember they had a little "payroll process" mishap there - - with cargo pallets of $100 bills. So, $250k for little baby Scooter? Easy.

It was clear before Jeb Bush & Kathryn Harris manipulated the Florida results in 2000 that Cheneybush was already engaged in lying, cheating, stealing, covering up their crimes, being insanely secretive about everything and had complete contempt for anyone Shotgun Dick ordered them to.

There is no shame in the Cheneybush regime. There is no decency or anything the slightest bit worthwhile in the Cheneybush Regime. They are murdering monsters with nothing but contempt for anyone Shotgun Dick doesn't personally approve.

Hey, here's an idea I'm sure we all can support: Let's film a TV commercial demonstration with the Bush twinkettes (Babs & Jen) and Mary Cheney all receiving a demonstration of their daddies'Waterboarding "interrogation" methods, then strapping them into cages with ice water thrown on them, lights left on 24 hours a day and being told they're going to die unless they confess what they know about the Cheneybush regime's other crimes we all "know" they have committed, might have thought of committing or saw a news report that someone thought Cheneybush might have had a discussion about committing. After all, if Cheneybush and their spawn aren't hiding anything, they shouldn't object, right?

If we're wrong and get ordered to jail, well, it's not that far until January 2009. We can drag things out that long to wait for our completely justified pardon.

BTW: Is it imagination or are JohnD and JD and BT all the same person? They make the same mindless statements. Come out, come out ... little rightwingnut.

Middle Ground!? Between what, arogance and flagerant disregard for the law? Typical Tribune tip toeing when it comes to Bush.

Even your print editorial this morning had more spine. Middle ground--unbelievable.

True this is a pathetic but Democrats need to brush off their collective memories and remember that Slick Willy did the same thing only many times over! Funny how our memories are so short when it suits our politics!

Don't worry Libs, you still have the "Attorney firings scandal" The fishing expedition is proceeding.

America is totally OUTRAGED over that "scandal"

What was that all about again?

Oh yeah, nothing.

Two facts

1. Valerie Plame was not covert. So - no threat to our security here.

2. The washington post did OUT the cia secret prisons that were holding people like Khalid Sheik Mohammed.

People that want to use the Libby non issue to blast the president from a national security point of view are being either ignorant or dishonest.

Does everyone forget Bill Clinton's pardons?

Chalk up another disgrace for the putrid fraud known as the Bush administration. I am beyond disgust.

Mr Bush did not think that the punishment was fair....thousands have spent time in jail Mr President for much much less...If this was a judgment call on your part, it only puts your judgment ability in question.

Deadenders:

You folks can always be counted on for willful obtuseness, and this matter is no exception.

Scooter committed a crime to protect Bush and Cheney, and Bush rewarded him by sparing him jail. He'll certainly be pardoned eventually, but that can wait.

That is substantively different than Clinton pardoning people with whose crimes he had nothing to do. By cutting Libby slack, Bush took yet another step advancing the underlying crime, i.e., covering up his lies.

I find it striking that any number of self-proclaimed Republicans on this page share the "leftists'" outrage over this matter, yet you 26%ers can't bring yourself to the conclusion that anything GWB does is less than holy. It's ok to separate yourself from GWB. He could not care less about you, so why do you so shame yourself by apologizing for his misdeeds? Just let it go and call it the way you see it, for once.

BTW: Next week will be some other scandal. Feel free to cut and paste, as the deadenders' reaction will be identical, regardless of the facts.

So here we are, dems throwing darts at republicans, right wingers throwing haymakers at left wingers. Bottom line, it doesn't really matter whether we're talking about republicans or democrats - all politicians are morally bankrupt. No-one gets to the top in politics without sacrificing one principle for another. I'm not defending it - it's a travesty - but none of this should surprise anyone. We should all, regardless of our political affiliation or beliefs, be a little ashamed of our American political and legal systems.

The following is a link to the timeline of the investigation of the outing of CIA covert operative, Valerie Plame. The investigation came at the requst of the CIA to the Ashcroft DOJ, which ordered the FBI to do same.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/custom/2007/03/06/CU2007030600916.html

These are facts, not opinion, not conjecture, not wishful thinking, BUT FACTS.

I thought the reason you wingers voted for Bush/Cheney was to "restore honor and integrity" to the White House. I agree Clinton was bad, but these guys are a disaster. Libby's sentence reduction is just one more insult added to a long list starting with the Brooks Brothers riot during the Florida recount in 2000, through Abu Ghraib, domestic spying, Guantanamo, Katrina, the Justice Department purge, and the never-ending occupation of Iraq.

I hope you all were just as upset with Clinton's parting pardons as you are about this one.

"Funny how our memories are so short when it suits our politics!" (Posted by: Alan)

Why do so many focus on the past? We need to move ahead as a country and forget about what this side did before and that the past actions of one party makes it alright for the other side to do the same now. Scooter Libby was convicted. Why is his sentence of such concern to the president? I was disgusted when Bill Clinton pardoned all the people he did at the end of his tenure. I'm also disgusted at George Bush's commuting of Scooter Libby. The difference is, Bush is President now---not Clinton. I wish people could focus on what is relevant and happening right now. We need to stop all the tit-for-tat. Oh yeah...and to throw in my two cents---this president and his cronies need to stop their perpetual abuse of the president's power.

no name said it well.

this commuting of a sentence is political business as usual and clinton set the standard for it.

liberals, don't get your panties in a bunch. it's your turn in 2008 and you can play the game as you wish then.

It is just and fair that Scooter Libby was pardoned. He was caught in a trap setup by that twerp of a prosecutor, and it's no surprise he was found guilty of something; he was marked from the beginning.

The real tragedy of this case is that Richard Armitage, the person who ADMITTED to doing what Scooter Libby was convicted of, never appeared ANYWHERE in this case. He never appeared on the stand, charges were never brought against him, and so on.

And worse yet, in his earlier days, Scooter Libby provided legal work for Armitage free of charge.

Scooter Libby should've never been charged in the first place. And for those of you who are uninformed of these facts, why don't you get a clue about this case before you go about trashing President Bush and Vice President Cheney over this case that hardly had legal merit.

Little Johhny D,
If Scooter could not remember a conversation he had with a reporter about the ID of a CIA operative, why didn't he just answer, "I don't remember"? It worked for Ronnie and other Republicans who wanted to avoid the long arm of the law.

Fitzgerald knew who outed Plame before trial. He went forward. Libby got caught in the web. Im happy Bush commuted his sentence. I wish he had given him a full pardon. What I see is no matter what Bush does it won't be the right thing in some eyes. What a pity to hold such hatred.

The use of the word "hypocrite" has to stop. In this case, the only people who aren't hypocritcal are those that either thought both Clinton and Libby were rightfully charged, or those who thought both Clinton and Libby were railroaded. If you think Libby is being railroaded, step up and admit you were wrong about Clinton being charged (there was no underlying crime there, either). If you think Libby was rightfully charged (the rule of law), then admit Clinton was also rightfully charged. Otherwise, stop using the word hypocrite. Also, as Tim mentioned, both sides are calling each other names while simultaneously being offended at the name calling. Hmmm. Now what word would describe that?

wow! the thought and analysis that goes into these comments amazes me. i never knew that such intellectual and insightful comments graced this blog.

you are all a bunch of class-acts, it's a wonder that the politcial situation is-what-it-is with people like you doing the reasoning and thought leadership of our communities.

bravo and cheers!

Hello, insane right wingers or neo-conservative extremists. Whichever you prefer. Just a reminder that you can not have it both ways. You can't say the law applies differently to different people. This is America. Whether Democrat or Republican, black or white, man or woman, the law is supposed to be honored the same way. (Yes, statistics say there are descrepencies, but that is whole other argument.) Bush has circumvented the law. Libby lied. Repeatedly. Not just once. And he (well I guess Libby and Bush) abused his position that was suppose to serve the PEOPLE. Not Cheney and Bush alone. It is disgusting and you should be ashamed for defending this. Politics aside. Libby broke the law and should be punished according to the law. A real life judge sentenced him. Not a prosecutor. A real life jury found him guilty. Now we have a still life president pardoning him.

It sickens me that you can defend this. I mean, I don't mind arguing for your political dogma, however flawed I may perceive neo-conservatism (Hell, conservatism in general),but this is the law of the land. If you really loved America, you would defend it laws and the process that has made the USA a great country. Not support someone that has no respect for this country and it's people.

Well, I guess that it is fitting that Bush spends the 4th with Putin. They both share the same opinions on how to run a Dictatorship..errrr Democracy.

Richard, Tim

I am with you- I am still irritated by Ken Starr- I believe they were both (clinton/libby) railroaded and I especially thought there was no point in allowing the Clinton drama - to go so far.

Personally I would prefer a Bush pardon of the two border patrol agents than Libby- But i do love the self serving, and self righteousness the Libby stuff is bringing out of the left. It is good reading!

"I hope you all were just as upset with Clinton's parting pardons as you are about this one."
Posted by: no name | July 3, 2007 11:13 AM

This is what Wingnuts seem utterly incapable of understanding: Democrats and liberals WERE upset with President Clinton's 11th hour pardons. Yet the same Republicans who spoke so forcefully that the rule of law would be shattered by instances of perjury and obstruction of justice now prefer that Their Guy go free because, my oh my, it was merely perjury and obstruction of justice.

If Libby got a raw deal from an overzealous prosecutor, then so did President Clinton. Anything else is rank blatant hypocrisy.

Doogie, your link was very interesting. In it, we learn that Scooter Libby was not the leaker, but Richard Armitage. We learned that Judithy Miller and Matt Cooper were able to testify after Scooter Libby said they could (doesn't sound like someone who has something to hide, huh?).
And in regard to Matt Cooper and Judith Miller, if Fitzgerald knew Richard Armitage was the leaker within days of taking the case, why did he go after them? That in and of itself is scary that a federal prosecutor would jail reporters because he wants their sources even though he already knows who "outed" Valerie Plame. The media was largely silent on this matter. I'd be willing to bet if this was a Democratic administration and a federal prosecutor was jailing journalists for their sources even though he already knows the media would have hounded Fitzgerald into oblivion!

John D.,

Your comments presuppose there was only one leak of Plame's name. Which I don't think is accurate.

After Wilson got back from Niger and wrote his op-ed piece, he, and then his wife became a focal point by several entities withing the Bush Administration either running their mouths (like Armitage) or others like Cheney outright trying to discredit Wilson.

The discredit started with a simple "Wilson doesn't know what he's talking about" to later suggesting his wife (Plame) sent him on a "junket."

Dropping Plame's name may have caused serious harm to US national security and who know's what to the people she had contact with overseas. Besides putting her family at risk and her contacts at risk other CIA operatives (and future agents) and their contacts or potential contacts need to know that disclosure of their identies is serious business and will be prosecuted.

Bush has put himself above the law and probably should be impeached and forced to resign along with his VP Chenny. This comes on the heals of the debacle about Chenny's office which is "off limits". I am appalled at the "dual" laws - one for our elected officials and one for the rest of us. Other comments posted before mine say it all. I am at a lose to find a word that expresses my feelings about our administration beyond "absolute disgust"

Travesty of our great country! When will the corruption stop. No one other countries laugh at our judicial system! Many recite our "past" indiscretions. Does that make this one right. It was refreshing to see someone step up to the plate (i.e., M. Stewart and P. Hilton cases). This goes very deep to cover ups and yes, people did get hurt because of it. Sad our country has these type of memories for future America to read about years from now. When is it ever going to change - when American will have its dignity and faith in what is right and wrong.

"Does everyone forget Bill Clinton's pardons?

Posted by: Terry Kiley | July 3, 2007 10:27 AM"

Does anyone forget how incensed the Republicans were and are over them? SEVEN YEARS AND MORE AFTER THE FACT?

Mark S., if it was such a crime then please explain why the leaker, Richard Armitage, hasn't been charged with even a parking violation? I'm looking forward to your response. This ought to be rich.

Johnny Torture-

I guess we need to remind you that Libby was prosecuted by a Republican Prosecuter,working for a Republican led Justice Department, during a Republican Administration.

So no matter which way you turn or squirm, this is a REPUBLICAN screw up of some sort.

If Libby was wrongfully prosecuted by the Justice Department, Gonzalez should resign. If he was not, then Bush's action was wrong. Take your pick.

Childish John E., could you please lobby to have this posting removed, too?

bastards

Posted by: seth | July 2, 2007 6:47 PM

Or is this another case where it's okay for leftists to use such language, but not okay for people on the right refuting them?

Republicans: the No Accountability Party.

W. Bush: the No Accountability President.

Quick common sense check..

What kind of covert agent commutes to and works at Langely every day- while she is supposed to be covert. ?

Answer: only the ones that are covert by convenience-

Bryan, you have a point, but I don't necessarily think you can place the blame for either investigation on the prosecutors (Ken Starr, and Pat Fitzgerald). Both were appointed to do a job, investigate credible allegations of misconduct. They both did their jobs.

The question should be, why were they appointed in the first place? Fitz knew there was no crime committed in the leaking of Plame's name. That's why Armitage is enjoying fat checks on the speaking circuit and even fatter consulting fees even after we know he gave Novak Plame's name.

Fitz had to make someone responsible for all the money spent on his investigation, and Libby was just dumb enough to lie under oath. Problem solved. But make no mistake about it, the leaker is still enjoying his freedom.

Mark S., if it was such a crime then please explain why the leaker, Richard Armitage, hasn't been charged with even a parking violation? I'm looking forward to your response. This ought to be rich.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 3, 2007 12:13 PM

If no crime and Libbys perjury is OK...then what was the crime Clinton is guilty of that his perjury was enough to impeach?

4 boxes used in defense of liberty: soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box...

sooner or later we'll have to get to box number four because it is the only thing they understand...

wingnuts, u will not drag this country into your sesspool without a fight

Let's not forget that Bill Clinton granted 395 pardons during his presidency, of which 140 were issued on his final day in office. I'm sure we all remember his pardon of financier Marc Rich, who at the time had already fled the country on tax evasion charges. There were allegations that friends of Marc Rich used personal influence and campaign contributions to obtain his pardon. Other charges regarding last day pardons by Clinton prompted calls for congressional hearings and action by federal prosecutors. Some things never change.

Doug, if she was at such a risk, then why be photographed for the cover of Vogue? And, please, don't give me, "Well she was already outed, so why not?" Putting yourself on the oover of a magazine out in the public for life does not seem like something someone would do concerned about their identity. She was not nor will she ever be in danger. She was not covert when her identity was "leaked," and the fact remains it was the CIA that Robert Novak used to verify the information he received from Richard Armitage. So, if the CIA verified it was Plame that to me indicates her status was not a concern for her bosses.
Also, as it stands now, much of Wilson's report has been discredited and not by the White House, but by facts. I think you're a smart enough man to do the digging and find that out.

John (man with no name) D.,

Ask Patrick Fitzgerald why he didn't prosecute Armitage.

My guess is Armitage copped to having a big, knucklehead mouth and that's why he got a pass.

Does everyone forget Bill Clinton's pardons?

Posted by: Terry Kiley | July 3, 2007 10:27 AM

Actually, we all remember them. The problem is that not all of us are capable of considering context, circumstances, relative harms, etc. You fall in the latter group.

After reading all of the above posts, here's the final score.

Against Scooter skirting the rule of law - 95%

For Scooter skirting the law - 4%

To stupid to know the difference - 1% (Heartburn, John D, JD and Paulo)

I just listened to Dubya hold the door open for a full Libby pardon. He sounded like a scared junior high school kid getting ready for the big debate.

Republicans rejoice. Your '08 election cycle chances that were already on life support are now DOA.

With Scooter taken care of, immigration solved, now you can get back to that rousing success story in Iraq.

Anonymous,

Are you that stupid?

Libby lied during a criminal investigation! Committed purjury! He obstructed justice.

Is that rich enough for you? Or are you going to give me some more Marc Rich excuses. Sheesh.

I have no idea why Armitage hasn't been charged yet.

Makes me sick. How can he look at himself in the mirror? How can he sleep at night?

no name said it well.

this commuting of a sentence is political business as usual and clinton set the standard for it.

liberals, don't get your panties in a bunch. it's your turn in 2008 and you can play the game as you wish then.

The Tribune could find only one Republican to comment? Try the Drudge Report or any number of other sources to find all sorts of Republicans from Fred Thompson to Rudy who cheer the action, and to counter the Tribune editorial, the one in the Wall Street Journal which describes the entire thing as a travesty on our system of justice. And for Hillary to criticize? Blatant hypocrisy considering her husband's full pardons of thieves and felons. How silent she was at that time.

We heard so many on the right attack the immigration bill as granting "amnesty" to those who committed a crime. Now they have no problem with communting the sentence of (and even demand a full pardon for) a convicted criminal in the administration. Hypocrisy!

this administration is wallowing in the mire. with the stolen elections, trumped up war, Katrina mess, disregard for international law, record profits for oil industry, etc...now a flagrant blatant f/u to the judicial system, have we hit rock bottom yet? if not, what will it take?

this country is done... democracy doesn't even exist in the hearts of americans anymore...

if it did, the sun would have risen on a million people surrounding the white house with pitchforks and shovels and torches, whatever they could carry...

democratic leadership?? what a joke... obama can go Fu*k himself...

Did u all catch what he said? He didn't reject pursuing impeachment because we simply don't have the votes with all the blue-dogs... he said impeachment is ONLY for serious malfeasance or incompetence...

sure obama, nothing SERIOUSLY wrong with this admin... u and hilary are two sycophantic centrist peas in a pod...

face it democrats, we are screwed beyond measure...

if we continue to act like wet noodles -- if we continue to be negligent of the fact that we ARE IN a knife fight with rapacious thugs -- the best we can hope for is more of the same... 4-8 years of holding our ground, followed by 8-12 years of losing ground fast...

yeah, that's gonna work out well for us...

it is time for democrats to put aside the politics of 'feeling good' and realize the unfortunate truth...

right-wingers are rabid animals... the longer we pretend that they aren't out of lazyness and fear of the what dealing with them entails the worse a job it will be when we have to... and we will have to, it's only a question of time...

they have rigged the system, and they no ZERO self restraint, they have ZERO moral sense governing their actions...

they will continue to push... and face it ladies and gentlemen, even the those of u most resistent to what i'm saying... they will continue to push until one day they cross a line over which even u won't be able to abide...

can there still be any doubt that they know no bounds?

are u waiting for them to eat live kittens during a press conference??

what are u waiting for?

the truth is i don't even consider right wing sleezebags to be human...

It is clear from reading the many leftist posts that there is a lack of basic understanding of the issues in the case. Based on the facts, the "outing" of Phlame (sp?) was many things, but not a crime in itself since she was not under cover. Libby has to pay $250,000, perhaps bill can float him a loan with proceeds from one of his Dubai consulting agreements.

Andy
love it
well said about the nutcases
Thanks

Funny, I don't remember the outpouring of liberal anger at Clinton's pardons. I must have been out of the country at the time, I guess. Regardless, I am not happy with the pardons by either president.

The sheeple have spoken. Anything goes as long as it's GOP. What a sad bunch you are.

This has gone past impeachment. These people are all guilty of treason and should be shot accordingly as per the law.

Once and for all...

Plame WAS covert at the time of her outing. The CIA has stated this.

http://www.salon.com/news/primary_sources/2007/05/30/plame/index.html

Period. End of discussion.

Letting Scotter scoot is certainly "obstruction of Justice". But, then again, getting "rid" of a bunch of prosecutors because of "Administration Dissatisfaction" could also be seen as "obsrtuction of Justice". The Paris fiasco could be seen as a failed attempt at "obstruction of justice. A judge throwing an obvious murderer back into society because the evidence was not obtained properly could certainly be seen as "obstruction of justice"

All of these acts are leagally correct. It must follow, then, that if our system of justice says that these acts (and many others) are leagally correct, and we find them as an obstruction, a travisty, etc, then I think we had better start looking very closely at that system.

It looks to me like it needs an overhaul quickly, very quickly! I do not think our country can stand much more of the "justice" that is being crammed down our throat.

Funny, I don't remember the outpouring of liberal anger at Clinton's pardons. I must have been out of the country at the time, I guess. Regardless, I am not happy with the pardons by either president.

Posted by: no name | July 3, 2007 1:34 PM

Apparently you were out of the country. Did you have a nice time?

I posted a selection of Democratic Senators criticizing the Marc Rich pardon at the time earlier in the thread. That was the result of about 3 minutes of Google. Try it sometime.

How many Republican Senators have criticized Libby's commutation?

se "Pulitzer Prize" th,

Your way and wonder with the English written word is ...well.... escapes me.

No period, no end of discussion, Tony. If she was so thoroughly understood to be covert, then WHY didn't Fitzgerald indict the leaker, Richard Armitage? Simple, because he knew he could never prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she fit that definition in a jury trial.

We're anxiously awaiting your response to why Richard Armitage is collecting gobs of cash on the public speaker circuit and enjoying rubber chicken meals today, and not indicted facing trial, if it's such a slam dunk that a crime was committed. Face it, without an indictment of the leaker any claim that Plame's outing was anything other than a political act stands on brittle glass.

If Plame was covert at the time of her outing, why didn't crusading Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald charge Armitage instead of fishing until he hooked Libby? How can anyone compare President Bush's commuting the sentence of Libby in an investigation in which no one was charged with the actual crime with former President Clinton's myriad of "pardons for dollars", favor for Roger, etc.?

Mark S., I'll tell you why Armitage hasn't been charged. Because no crime was committed. Fitz knew he wouldn't be able to prove that she fit the covert definition to a jury, especially when a defense attorney could parade her Vanity Fair spread and her husband's political comments in front of a jury. It would've been a disaster for the entire case. Then there's the fact that Plame, herself, committed perjury when she claimed in congressional testimony that she didn't send her husband to Niger, only to recant that story in later congressional testimony.

Where's her prison sentence? Now that you've been educated on the subject, please go about the business of calling other posters stupid while using that great line of yours "I don't know."

To all you clowns saying no crime was committed...then tell me what Clintons crime was.

Based on the facts, the "outing" of Phlame (sp?) was many things, but not a crime in itself since she was not under cover.

Posted by: DB Cooper | July 3, 2007 1:26 PM

For god's sake you people are illiterate. Not only did Republican prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald confirm Plame's status was covert, the CIA says she was. The reason no one was charged with a crime was because Fitzgerald felt he could not prove beyoned a reasonable doubt that her ID was revealed intentionally and maliciously. Mostly because someone was lying and obstructing the investigation. This scumbag was convicted by a jury of his peers unanimously. There was no hung jury and your President showed everyone how he really feels about the institutions of democracy when they work as the Framers intended. Rot in Hell you anti-American Fascists. Everyone who supports this commutation will be first against the wall.

Saying she was covert and proving it to a jury are two different things, Jethro. Are you going to register your "I don't know" with your buddies' as to why Armitage hasn't been charged with a crime, too? Please spew some more venom. We're all enjoying the show.

It's amazing how the 101st keyboard brigade here in the Swamp claims to more about Plame's covert status than not only Fitzgerald, but the CIA itself.

Why would the CIA, led by a Republican, give false information to a Republican Prosecutor, who was investigating this Republican administration?

Jethro:

They are not illiterate (talk about faint praise!). They are, however, in blatant bad faith and are demonstrating, once again, that they put the interests of their political party well ahead of their country's interests. Time and time again, without exception.

To all you armchair lawyers (who also happen to be armchair warriors and cowardly chickenhawks): Did it ever dawn on you that Libby had perfectly competent "real"
lawyers representing him? Do you suppose they had the insight to raise issues such as whether Plame was a covert agent?

In short, ARE YOU PEOPLE SO DELUDED AS TO THINK YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE LEGALLY AND FACTUALLY VALID, GIVEN THAT THESE VERY ARGUMENTS WERE RAISED, CONSIDERED AND REJECTED BY PEOPLE FAR MORE COMPETENT TO HANDLE THESE MATTERS THAN YOU? Give it up. Libby is a crook. Bush is a murderer. And night follows day.

another post from the TOP 1%- thanks john E.!

Tony- no she wasn't, end of story. Wow! that works both ways - cool!

Or if she was covert, she was a really bad at being covert, you know that whole using your real name, being on the cover of magazines, sending your hubby on secret agent missions thing..

Common sense is only bestowed on the top 1 %- Thanks again john E.

jethro said-
Rot in Hell you anti-American Fascists. Everyone who supports this commutation will be first against the wall.

Confusing emotional response following confused logic...

Jethro,

As the "famous" Fox Mulder once said:

"The Truth Is Out There"

Apparently this guy who calls himself: no name, anonymous, heartburn, Juanito, Leo T etc. doesnt see it that way when the offender is one of his guys (Republican).

more lying from the wingnuts...

john E. took exception to john D. calling ppl on this board bastards...

i was referring to the bush administration, who by the way deserve worse than anything i can express in words..

Tony, I understand how it must seem perplexing to those of you in the 102nd DNC keyboard brigade, but you have to have a rudimentary understanding of the American legal system, and in your case that's obviously lacking.

Whether or not CIA or Fitzgerald classified Plame as covert, that status is still something that a defense attorney could question in a trial. You see, we have this thing called a right to a fair and speedy trial by a jury of your peers. By your peers. Not the CIA or a prosecutor. Any definition a prosecutor or a government agency comes up with is open to questioning by a defendant's attorney,

SO, if a defense attorney, who would have every right to subpeona Plame to testify at Armitage's prosepctive trial, questioned Plame's covert status by pointing out that she appeared in Vanity Fair, lied about sending her husband to Niger to congress or engaged in politics through her husband, well, do you see how that could be embarassing for the prosecutor, CIA, Plame and Wilson? There is your problem.

This witness would have the credibility of, say, Michael Jackson's accuser's mother. Fitzgerald knew that Plame as a witness was a train wreck, so he wisely avoided indicting Armitage and also avoided scraping back the lid of how corrupt some CIA officers are.

Instead, he indicted Libby, whose stupid lies were his own fault, and would not open CIA up to the embarassment that is their politically-active operative and her ambassador husband.

Got it now?

The Cheneybush Regime is good. It is fair. It upholds the rule of law. It governs with the philosophy of compassionate conservatism. Cheneybush is a uniter, not a divider. Our schools are better today than they were 6 years ago. We have a balanced national budget, thanks to Cheneybush. There were weapons of mass destruction. Sadam Hussein did plot with Al Queda to commit the 9/11 attack. Osama bin Laden is the fault of the Clinton administration. We were met with candy and flowers in Baghdad. The nation building we're doing in Iraq will spread democracy throughout the middle east. Saudi Arabia is a good friend where everyone is equal and there are no human rights violations. Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity are right about everything. It's urgent we amend the Constitution to outlaw gay marriage because only straight marriages are good and stable and god loving. Using stem cells is murder but bombing 100,000 Iraqi babies is not. Republicans are good and smart. Democrats are leftwing loonies. Donald Rumsfeld did a great job and served his country with distinction. George Tenet deserved the Medal of Freedom he got. Roberto Gonzalez is a great and independent Attorney General. Getting a bl*w jo* in the Whitehouse is bad but f**king the entire country is dandy. Cheneybush saved America from the disastrous budget surplus created during the Clinton term. Yes, friends, all this and more ring true for John D, JD and his various secret names. Long live Cheneybush: the bearers of decency and honor in the world.

The Decider, er John E., if anyone should be shot for treason, here is the real list:
Bill Clintoon
Hillary Clintoon
John Kerry
Harry Reid
Nancy Pelooooozi
Ted "manslaughter" kennedy
John E., The Decider, dt, Smirky McFlightsuit or whatever name you want to go by

Heartburn-

I linked to a declassified Memo from the CIA that Patrick Fitzgerald filed in Federal court clearly stating that she was covert at the time of her outing.

Do you have a memo from the CIA stating otherwise? Nope.

Bu then you know more about her status than the CIA, right?

Anonymous-

Whether or not Plame was covert is a simple staement of fact, not opinion.

The CIA designates which of their employees are covert. The CIA stated she was, in fact, covert.

Where is the evidence that she was not in fact designated covert by the CIA, and that the CIA was lying when they stated otherwise.

As to the idiotic Vanity fair claim....it was AFTER her cover was blown. She was not covert at any point after that. If you'd read the mom you's see that her cover was officially lifted in December 2003. The Vanity fair cover appeared in January 2004.

But basically now you're saying that a Republican prosecuter and the Republican led CIA conspired to lie in federal court about Ms. Plam's status in order to frame Republican administration officials.

Wow, that's so much better. What a great administration.

Tony- I just might know more than the CIA- that was a document that Fitzgerald presented. Whats with the CIA giving Plame covert status retroactively?

Using your same source- especially in the attached

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/06/06/plame_covert/index.html

you will see that one of the original creators of the criteria for Covert agents questions Plames status.. you and i can go in circles trying to pin the label of covert or not on plame. Bottom line is that if her status as covert was so compellingly obvious - why are we even talking about Libby? Why did Fitz not pursue Armitage?

HE COULDN"T BECAUSE GETTING PLAME IN COURT AND TESTIFYING WOULDVE THROWN ALL OF HIS WORK INTO THE TRASH!

We have solved it- Mr. Tony! We have an egotistical, overzealous prosecutor !

Good work -

How can ANY poster on this comment board dare to compare this woefully inadequate sophomore of a President-select (*remember 2000 ? He didn't win the election, folks...) to any other President, living or dead. His wrongdoing has made the Nation suffer horribly - the lower classes, those who wait upon table in Kennebunkport and Crawford, have been taxed into penury so his wealthy frat-mates can enjoy tax breaks...and corporations have raped our environment, pillaged the health and insurance industries...all to the detriment of you and me.

And now another of his Skull and Bones mates gets off with a slap on his limp wrist.

The filthy fundamentalist Republicrap that always support that morally bankrupt party will file their snide remarks about the Kennedy family, Bill Clinton, and all the rest of their tired drivel. That's what we can expect from droolers who were home skooled in DuPage County, safe from the real world of Cook County.

I myself have had it with the pretenders.

Can't wait until 2008...Yes Ma'am, Madame President Clinton!

We have solved it- Mr. Tony! We have an egotistical, overzealous prosecutor !

Good work -

Posted by: heartburn | July 3, 2007 5:59 PM

A Republican!

Fantastic. You must be so proud of your party, anyway you look at the situation, a Republican ends up at fault.

Tony, you're a joke. Have you ever been in a court of law in your life? Nothing is as black and white as you would like to make it out to be, to a jury. The very person who wrote the law disagrees with CIA's assessment! Plus, it doesn't matter what CIA says, only what a jury can be persuaded to believe!

Remember the rock-solid DNA evidence against OJ? Seems like the jury had a different idea about that than the government and the prosecutor did, despite all the FACTUAL science that was argued in that trial.

Would you be willing to risk your entire case, and the reputation of the entire CIA, on the testimony of a train wreck like Plame? C'mon.

There's nothing overzealous about Fitzgerald, either. He was appointed to a political investigation and he secured the best conviction that he could. That he was only able to bag a perjuring bureaucrat in the whole thing should tell you something about the merits of the investigation he was appointed to in the first place.

p.s. The Vanity Fair thing establishes that she wanted to be a public person and profited from the attention, whether it was before or after the fact. I'd love to see you try and spin that positively in a court of law.

Fantastic. You must be so proud of your party, anyway you look at the situation, a Republican ends up at fault.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 3, 2007 7:09 PM

Nothing to be crowing about here. If it were the Blagojevich or Daley administration you could say the same thing, only it would be all democrats. Both parties need ethics reform.

Only the very stupidest and childish things post under the words 'anonymous'. The very epitome of a chickenhawk. Unable to reason; unable to argue; unable to even show a nom de plom better than anonymous. What a pitiful, childish person. I hope his mom takes his computer away.

Look, Anonymous, there is a concept called evidence. I've produced evidence. You've produced nothing. Nothing at all.

Nice try.

But I like your theory. Let's see, there is a chance that a jury could be convinced that George Bush is a mass murderer. Therefore, by your theory, I can say he's a mass murderer, even though I have presented no proof of such.

George Bush is guilty of mass murder! It doesn't matter if it's true, only that a jury could be persuaded it's so.

Let's keep playing anonymous's game, shall we?

I could possibly convince a jury that the moon is made of green cheese. Therefor it is equally valid to say the moon is made of green cheese as it is to say it's made of rock.

I could possibly convince a jury that the earth is the center of the solar system. Therefore all of modern astonomy is has no more validity than that conclusion.

I could possibly convince a jury that anonymous is doing more than pathetically trying to deflect criticism from the Republicans at any cost. OK, I may have pushed it too far there. Even the dimmest jury would be able to see that anonymous is doing just that.

What is truth said Pilate, jesting.

Posted by Anonymous July 3, 2007 8:13 PM

Juanito/Leo T you're a joke,

The prosecuter that you are drooling on is a Republican who said he was unable to get a conviction on TREASON because Scooter Libby LIED and OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE and he also said after the Scooter verdict that VALRIE PLAME WAS A COVERT AGENT.

You can scream and twist the facts all you want waterboy Leo, the Republicriminals that you support are flushing themselves down the crapper.

Now go on back over to redstate.com where everyone will agree with your drivel, Mr Anonymous.

Tony, I've produced just as much evidence as you. I've shown that Plame would be a horrible prosecution witness (perjured herself, made misleading statements to congress,etc., all of that would come up on cross). Then there's the proof that, despite anything Fitzgerald said, Armitage hasn't been charged with a thing. Nothing. Zilch. That speaks volumes about how secure any conviction for the supposed underlying crime is.

You call all of us whenever Armitage is charged with a something in connection with this investigation. Any crime. Then you can use your name-calling, your "I'm right, period, end of sentence" drivel. Until then, you're just blathering because the facts don't support your assertions.

Yes, I realize the courage it must take to post under the name "weinerdog43." Nothing anonymous or childish about that.

Tony, I think you'll have a much easier time convincing a jury that Valerie Plame's not a reliable witness than you would the Earth is flat. Here's a link to a USA Today story about how declassified memos show she either lied under oath about sending her husband to Niger, or just has a horrible memory:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-29-plame-testimony_N.htm

Then there's the book deal she's fighting with CIA over.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12653226/from/RSS/

If this isn't proof that the witness' testimony is unreliable, I don't know what is. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for holding CIA accountable and finally getting to the bottom of this, but since it would too embarassing to the agency it's obvious now that that's never going to happen.

Posted by Anonymous aka Leo T July 4 11:02 AM

Leo Juanie,

Your whole argument is a sham when you base it on what you "think" Valrie Plame would say or do.

That's way you don't do well here on the Swamp, because unlike when you're on redstate.com people here actually challenge your line of crap.

P.S. - I especially enjoy watching you try in vain to justify this criminal administrations lawless actions, beanie boy.

Bush and the 28% dead-enders are thrilled at the emperor's end-run now, but the voters will have the final say in 2008. If the republican presidential contenders who are rushing to praise Bush's actions think they can win in '08 without independents and swing voters I refer you to the midterms. Only the sheeple will put up with this travesty.

Anonymous-

How does Plame's alleged credibility problem effect the veracity of a memo written by her employer, the Central Intelligence Agency?

Are you implying now that the Republican led CIA is shielding Plame?

Tony, you're not listening to what I've previously posted. Any definition by the government, republican or democrat it makes absolutely no difference, or one of its agencies (and CIA is certainly one) is open to questioning and rebuttal by a defense attorney. The moment that that memo, or any memo from CIA, is entered into evidence as an exhibit to prove that Plame is covert, it can be rebutted by the defense.

They could call to the stand one of the authors of the law who disagrees with CIA's estimation that Plame was covert. More importantly, it would open up Plame to being subpeonaed to testify about her covert status, itself. She worked in Washington, D.C., not abroad, so she'd have to explain how she was covert. The law itself is vague, saying an officer must have "served" overseas five years before the outing event, but that doesn't necessarily mean they had to live overseas.

Worst of all, once she was on the stand she'd be opened up to questioning on cross examination about inconsistencies in her own story (the links I sent) and they would be relevant as those questions would go to the reliability of the witness' testimony.

Listen, I don't like Bush or Republicans in general. I think they've made a mess of this country over the last seven years, but that doesn't mean this whole investigation isn't a sham. I don't even know who this Juan/Leo person some of the truly angry posters on this site seem to think I am. What I do know, is the law and how prosecutors weigh decisions to indict.

If Fitzgerald could've proved that leaking Plame's name put our intelligence agents in real jeopardy and that she was an innocent victim of a politically-motivated witch hunt, Armitage would've been indicted. I promise you that. Any statement Fitzgerald made about her covert status or any CIA memo about it, simply doesn't carry the weight of the decision to not indict. We're talking about a law here (the intelligence identities protection act) that's been enforced exactly once since it was passed in 1982. That, alone, should tell you how difficult it'd be to obtain a conviction for Armitage's supposed crime.

So, instead we're left with the conviction of a bureaucrat for perjury in the course of an investigation that netted no indictments for the underlying crime. Doesn't that seem, to you, like a conviction that's merely there to justify the investigation itself? Does that seriously make you feel good as an American? Not a Democrat or a Republican, mind you, but as an American?

Libby might be complete pond scum, but it doesn't change the fact that his obfuscation on the stand is something that happens all the time in America and is usually dealt with by probation or prison sentences of less than a year. Especially since Plame did it, too, and hasn't been indicted.

Let me state, too, for the record that I don't belong to the republican party and have never voted for Bush. I'm actually a Democrat. I just don't like it when the legal system is used for political games and that's clearly what's happened here. "Getting" Bush or Libby should not be a priority of our legal system, just like getting Clinton never should have been.

I've said before in this discussion that indicting Armitage would've exposed the political machinations that go on regularly inside CIA. Only when that happened would we know the real reasons why Plame and Wilson did what they did and why Cheney, Armitage and Libby did what they did. But since that indictment will never come, we'll continue to go on knowing next to nothing about how the sausage is made at CIA.

"She worked in Washington, D.C., not abroad, so she'd have to explain how she was covert. The law itself is vague, saying an officer must have "served" overseas five years before the outing event, but that doesn't necessarily mean they had to live overseas."

You obviously haven't evene bothered to read the memo I posted from the CIA.

It specifically states that she had covert assignements abroad.

"If Fitzgerald could've proved that leaking Plame's name put our intelligence agents in real jeopardy and that she was an innocent victim of a politically-motivated witch hunt, Armitage would've been indicted. I promise you that. "

How can you promise that? It surely could be questioned in court. Therfore you cannot make that statement, right?

And we also get back to the question of why a Republican Prosecuter, at the direction of a Republican Department of Justice would falsely charge a Republican administration official. Why just not say "there was no crime". That's a much better end for them than this mess.

But let's be serious here.

There is very strong direct evidence that Ms. Plame was in fact Covert. The CIA itself admits that to be true.

To counter that you have spun a web of supposition that relies on both the CIA and a federal prosecuter falsifying evidence to claim she was covert when she was not.

Have you ever heard of Occam's Razor?

Occam's Razor? C'mon Tony, act normal for a minute.

I've read the memo that says she had overseas assignments, but the thing that's questionable is the wording of the law and what it means, not whether or not Plame had overseas assignments.

A jury would have to decide this and while I agree that you've posted some strong evidence that she was, indeed, covert, the arguments against it are just as strong (one of the authors of the law says she was not). At the trial level all that's necessary for acquittal is reasonable doubt. It's a strong vs. strong argument and anything that can't go beyond reasonable doubt demands acquittal. The system favors acquittal in this case.

It's simply not something you can prosecute on. For the final time, the government's definition of "covert" is, by no means, the final say. Especially when expert witnesses will testify to the opposite. You can't win an argument in court simply by saying "I'm right, I'm right, the government says I'm right," especially with a vaguely worded covert definition, as the IIPA of 1982 most definitely is (all of one conviction since its inception, and that was an agent that passed names to her Ghanaian boyfriend).

"If Fitzgerald could've proved that leaking Plame's name put our intelligence agents in real jeopardy and that she was an innocent victim of a politically-motivated witch hunt, Armitage would've been indicted. I promise you that."

I can promise that not because of anything that may or may not be proven in court (the assertion that such a statement would required to be proven in court is in itself, absurd) but because Patrick Fitzgerald is a prosecutor par excellence who would have gotten his man had he been able to prove criminality. I realize this is a position based on reputation, but considering Fitzgerald's track record, I have no reason to doubt him. Ask George Ryan, Tony Rezko or the principals of operation hired truck if he doesn't get his man. He does.

For Fitzgerald not to indict, he had to look at the facts and realize that proving guilt would not be possible or at least be of such a low percentage that indictment was neither wise or ethical. Libby's guilt was a different story.

Libby betrayed the trust of the American people and deserved his conviction, but an obstruction of justice conviction for an investigation with no underlying crime still rings hollow to me, as an American and a member of Bar. It just does.

"And we also get back to the question of why a Republican Prosecuter.."

This statement is incorrect, Patrick Fitzgerald belongs to no political party. He famously changed his voter registration to "no party" after registering as an independent here in Illinois and was then solicited by something called the Illinois Independent Party.

I understand, Tony, from your posts that this issue must upset you greatly, but if you eliminate the passion of politics from your posts and look at it objectively you may see things differently.

"To counter that you have spun a web of supposition that relies on both the CIA and a federal prosecuter falsifying evidence to claim she was covert when she was not."

I've actually done no such thing. I don't think anybody falsified anything. I defy you to quote me claiming anything of the sort.

My position is, and always has been, that the definition of "covert" in regard to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 is ill-defined. Since it is, CIA's designation of Plame as covert is as open to interpretation as anything else in a jury trial.

I know you don't agree with this and you'll again post that I haven't read your memo, but I assure you that I have. But, Tony, it's simply not the end all and be all of the argument that you want it to be. There's a mountain of refuting evidence that goes the other way, too. None of this has to do with the fictional conspiracy between CIA and Fitzgerald that you've conjured up in your own mind.

But for your sake, Tony, let's say you COULD prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that she was covert, and let's then say that the witness' testimony held up on cross examination and her own conflicting statements do not torpedo it.

Then there's this little problem: "The 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act . . . makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the name of a covert agent."

Knowingly? Now, did Armitage KNOW he was disclosing her name and how can that be proven in court?

Here's the prosecutor on the subject: "And all I'll say is that, look, we have not made any allegation that Mr. Libby knowingly, intentionally outed a covert agent. We have not charged that. And so I'm not making that assertion."

Could this possibly be why Armitage wasn't charged? Novak has said the comment was made to him in almost offhand manner. For Armitage to have known Novak would write about it he'd've had to have had a separate conversation with Novak about on or off the record. Novak's testimony indicates no such conversation took place.

This was merely a case of reporters and government officials gossiping amongst themselves that somehow made it into the papers.

Now, if you were to say the IIPA needs to be rewritten to better define covert (including distinctions for OCs and NOCs), I'd be right there with you. I'd be willing to wager it'd net more than 1 conviction in 25 years if it were. But as it is, this is simply the result of a flawed investigation based on the wording of a flawed law.

I have no desire to continue in the head-butting of this debate anymore. You've refused to acknowledge basic truths, like the definition of covert being ill-defined in the law, in your posts. So, I won't be posting anymore to this blog.

I can see why people don't post to blogs when this is the level of argument that goes on here. There's a great deal of anger, here. I hope you can do your part to bring the level down and have civilized debate. Good luck.

"My position is, and always has been, that the definition of "covert" in regard to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 is ill-defined. Since it is, CIA's designation of Plame as covert is as open to interpretation as anything else in a jury trial."

Ahh, I see. No one can ever be prosecuted under this law, because the meaning of the word "covert" can always be questioned. I get it.

While you're at it, can you tell me what the meaning of the word "is" is?

And please quit expanding the subject. I never claimed that Plame would be a credible witness, or that Armitage, or for that matter, Libby was guilty of a crime. All I claimed was that Ms. Plame had covert status at the time of her "outing."

I think it's pretty clear that Ms. Plame had that status, in the eyes of the CIA as much as it was possible for anyone to have that status.

Does the man who helped write the law know the exact nature of Ms. Plame's work? Does he know what her assignments were? Or is he just a talking head speaking in generalities? Could his testimony be shredded in a court of law as a result? I would think that would be most likely.

You can continue to metaphysically attack that there is no proveable covert status, and you can argue definitions, but you cannot seem to argue that the defining authority considered her anything other than covert. You are the one who has refused to acknowledge that simple matter of fact.