Bush statement on Libby order

[jman507]

You are right. People won’t remember, but once again, it was not a pardon.

You are right, this is not amnesty. It is a very pro-family move, in order to not have this family ripped apart.

I’m sure it’ll be forgotten soon as the next most outrageous thing Bush has done comes up on the next news cycle.

 

[gnjsdad]

They are the same in that both usurp the will of an impartial jury. And I still contend that Bush’s commutation was an attempt to protect his own skin. In my opinion, this is obstruction of justice.

Or participation in the coverup of Libby’s obstruction of justice.

We know that Valerie Plame was a covert agent, because in the original referral by the CIA to the Justice Dept, the CIA said she was a covert agent.

And we know that the claim by those using the logic of the Bill Clinton/Scooter Libby defense that Richard Armitage was the real leaker is a smokescreen. Libby was heavily involved in the WHIG operation to discredit anyone who might shed light on bogus intelligence. Not only Joe Wilson, but people like David Albright, an expert on nuclear fissile materials who was skeptical of claims that Saddam was obtaining aluminum tubes for nuclear centrifuges, were targeted by the WHIG.

Valerie Plame, who worked in the counterproliferation division of the Directorate of Operations, was involved in the apprehension of the infamous “aluminum tubes” Cheney, Rice, Powell, and the President all used to great effect in 2002 to scare the public into supporting a war.

It was this facet of WHIG operations that Libby successfully, it appears, helped to deflect from public scrutiny.

Paralabagne:

It is just getting started. Darker clouds are on the horizon.

Yes, I’m afraid you’re right.

 

[estesbob]

Or participation in the coverup of Libby’s obstruction of justice.

We know that Valerie Plame was a covert agent, because in the original referral by the CIA to the Justice Dept, the CIA said she was a covert agent.

Then why wasnt Libby charged with leaking her status? Or why wasnt Richard Armitrage charged. The truth is she did not even come close to meeting the definition of a covert agent as given in the law. She had not been overseas foor more than 5 years, her status as an employee of the CIA was well know in Washington Circles(she was even listed in Whos Who in Washington DC). Again the most telling proof it it is obvious armitrage leaked her name and status and no charges were filed.

And we know that the claim by those using the logic of the Bill Clinton/Scooter Libby defense that Richard Armitage was the real leaker is a smokescreen. Libby was heavily involved in the WHIG operation to discredit anyone who might shed light on bogus intelligence. Not only Joe Wilson, but people like David Albright, an expert on nuclear fissile materials who was skeptical of claims that Saddam was obtaining aluminum tubes for nuclear centrifuges, were targeted by the WHIG.

Again neither Libby or Armitrage were charged with anything concerrning the status of Plame. Libby was charged with lying to a Grand jury-the same thing Bill Clinont and Henry Cisneros were charged with

Valerie Plame, who worked in the counterproliferation division of the Directorate of Operations, was involved in the apprehension of the infamous “aluminum tubes” Cheney, Rice, Powell, and the President all used to great effect in 2002 to scare the public into supporting a war.

So?

It was this facet of WHIG operations that Libby successfully, it appears, helped to deflect from public scrutiny.

The Special prosecutor said that he had gone as far as he could and no charges were anticiapted in the case anymore. Given this why would commuting libbys sentence defelct public scrutin?. it is not on par, for instance. with Clinotn Pardoning Susan McDouglal who is alleged to have had informatiuon that would lead to his impeachment. Unlike Libby she refused to testify.

The truth of the matter is there is not there there.

 

[gnjsdad]

Then why wasnt Libby charged with leaking her status?

He was charged with perjury and obstruction. Thanks to his efforts, Fitzgerald could not determine whether criminal charges could be brought against anyone in the Vice President’s office or the WHIG. In Fitzgerald’s apt analogy, Libby threw sand in the umpire’s face in order to prevent him from making the correct call.

estesbob:

Or why wasnt Richard Armitrage charged.

Armitage wasn’t charged because he admitted to Fitzgerald that he was Novak’s source. Also, the only reason Armitage even knew who Valerie Plame was is because he had read a negative dossier on Joe Wilson written by Libby and Karl Rove. Also, just because one person (Armitage) leaked the name of Valerie Wilson to one reporter (Novak) doesn’t mean that others (Libby et al) who leaked to other reporters (Judith Miller and Matt Cooper) weren’t possibly guilty of a criminal conspiracy.

estesbob:

The truth is she did not even come close to meeting the definition of a covert agent as given in the law. She had not been overseas foor more than 5 years,

As I said, in the original referral of the case by the CIA to the Justice Dept, the CIA said she was covert. If the CIA subsequently retracted this characterization, I haven’t seen it. Have you?

estesbob:

her status as an employee of the CIA was well know in Washington Circles(she was even listed in Whos Who in Washington DC).

I don’t see how this is relevant, unless Who’s Who listed her as Valerie Plame Wilson, covert CIA agent.

estesbob:

So?

So, being an agent in the Directorate of Operations lends credence to the contention that she was covert.

estesbob:

The Special prosecutor said that he had gone as far as he could and no charges were anticiapted in the case anymore. Given this why would commuting libbys sentence defelct public scrutin?.

Commuting Libby’s sentence can credibly be called participation in obstruction of justice. Absent the prospect of jail, Libby would have no reason to cooperate further with the Special Prosecutor. He can wait things out till the pardon, and those in the WHIG and Cheney’s office who may have been guilty of criminal acts (we’ll probably never know now, will we, thanks to Scooter Libby) will sleep well.

estesbob:

it is not on par, for instance. with Clinotn Pardoning Susan McDouglal who is alleged to have had informatiuon that would lead to his impeachment. Unlike Libby she refused to testify.

It’s just like Susan McDougal. And BTW, Libby did not testify at his trial.

 

[estesbob]

He was charged with perjury and obstruction. Thanks to his efforts, Fitzgerald could not determine whether criminal charges could be brought against anyone in the Vice President’s office or the WHIG. In Fitzgerald’s apt analogy, Libby threw sand in the umpire’s face in order to prevent him from making the correct call.

He could have bought charges against anybody who broke the law. Since it is obvious that Plame was not a covert agent as defined by the law there is notihing whatsover illegal about anyone mentioning her name and occoupation

Armitage wasn’t charged because he admitted to Fitzgerald that he was Novak’s source. Also, the only reason Armitage even knew who Valerie Plame was is because he had read a negative dossier on Joe Wilson written by Libby and Karl Rove. Also, just because one person (Armitage) leaked the name of Valerie Wilson to one reporter (Novak) doesn’t mean that others (Libby et al) who leaked to other reporters (Judith Miller and Matt Cooper) weren’t possibly guilty of a criminal conspiracy.

Armitarge wasnt charge because Plame was not a covert agent as defined by law. he could talk about her and her occupation to anyone he wanted to without breaking any laws.

As I said, in the original referral of the case by the CIA to the Justice Dept, the CIA said she was covert. If the CIA subsequently retracted this characterization, I haven’t seen it. Have you?

Again it doent matter what the CIA decsribed her as. The quesion was was she a covert agent as defined by the law-she was not-thus no one was charged under the law and anyone from the Presdent on donw to me could legally mention her name and occupation

The Ironic thing is it is court record is clear that neither Libby, Novak or Armitrage knew she was ever involved in covert actions. at any time in her carreer. The first person to reveal that to the press was her Husband, Joe Wilson. He wasnt charged either as his wife was not a covert agent as defined by the law.

Commuting Libby’s sentence can credibly be called participation in obstruction of justice. Absent the prospect of jail, Libby would have no reason to cooperate further with the Special Prosecutor. He can wait things out till the pardon, and those in the WHIG and Cheney’s office who may have been guilty of criminal acts (we’ll probably never know now, will we, thanks to Scooter Libby) will sleep well.

How could justice be obstructed if it was not illegal to leak her name and occupation?

 

[gnjsdad]

He could have bought charges against anybody who broke the law. Since it is obvious that Plame was not a covert agent as defined by the law there is notihing whatsover illegal about anyone mentioning her name and occoupation

I’ve heard opinions on whether she was covert under the law, but I haven’t heard the judge in the case make that determination.

estesbob:

Armitarge wasnt charge because Plame was not a covert agent as defined by law. he could talk about her and her occupation to anyone he wanted to without breaking any laws.

Again it doent matter what the CIA decsribed her as. The quesion was was she a covert agent as defined by the law-she was not-thus no one was charged under the law and anyone from the Presdent on donw to me could legally mention her name and occupation

The Ironic thing is it is court record is clear that neither Libby, Novak or Armitrage knew she was ever involved in covert actions. at any time in her carreer. The first person to reveal that to the press was her Husband, Joe Wilson. He wasnt charged either as his wife was not a covert agent as defined by the law.

How could justice be obstructed if it was not illegal to leak her name and occupation?

You keep going back to that contention, but the CIA, as far as I know, continues to maintain she’s a covert agent and the judge at Libby’s trial has not made that determination.

 

[estesbob]

I’ve heard opinions on whether she was covert under the law, but I haven’t heard the judge in the case make that determination.

It against the law to leak the name of a covert agent AS DEFINED BY THE LAW. Both armitrage and Libby leaked her name and neither was charged with violating the law.
BTW-the judge FORBADE any testimony whatsoever as to whether she was a covert agent as defined by the law. That is why Libby will probably win on appeal.

You keep going back to that contention, but the CIA, as far as I know, continues to maintain she’s a covert agent and the judge at Libby’s trial has not made that determination.

It doesnt matter what the CIA said she was/. All the matters is the definition of a covert agent as defined by the law. She did not meet that definition The judge didnt make a determonation becuase Libby wasnt charged under thatlaw.

 

[valenzuelaf]

It against the law to leak the name of a covert agent AS DEFINED BY THE LAW. Both armitrage and Libby leaked her name and neither was charged with violating the law.
BTW-the judge FORBADE any testimony whatsoever as to whether she was a covert agent as defined by the law. That is why Libby will probably win on appeal.

It doesnt matter what the CIA said she was/. All the matters is the definition of a covert agent as defined by the law. She did not meet that definition The judge didnt make a determonation becuase Libby wasnt charged under thatlaw.

Stop confusing them with the FACTS. It doesn’t matter how many you present them with. Their “HATE” for Bush is so strong their judgement is clouded. I:hypno: