posted on October 28, 2005 03:25:45 PM new
Patrick Fitzgerald, held one hell of a down to earth press conference today.
After seeing Mr. Fitzgerald today I sure wouldn't want him after me about anything!!!!
fenix, Fitzgerald for the Supreme Court? If the solid first impressions about the man turn out to be true. Mr.Fitzgerald for the Supreme Court will never happen under a NEOCON CON-servative form of government like we live under now.
Phonies,liars,cons and crooks like Bush,Cheney and the CON-servative law makers of today are scared to death of a guy like Fitzgerald.
posted on October 28, 2005 03:36:08 PM new
What do you mean Colin - It is a fact that Scooter Libby lied twice to the FBi and then again to the grand jury and that his very own notes prove that he lied. It is a fact that he was indicted based on these lies and it is a fact that as a result he was forced to resign. What is it that you think there are not facts to support?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
posted on October 28, 2005 04:06:47 PM new
Gee, Bear, that silly willy CIA just doesn't know who their agents are or aren't but I'm sure the flake that wrote the article you posted knows more than they do
See, the CIA (NOT the Democrats)asked the Department of Justice to investigate the exposure of their agent.....now WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT if she wasn't a covert agent?
That's facts!
Sorry, rave on....
Why did "Scooter"(assinine name for an adult) LIE ? IF there was no reason to LIE ?
posted on October 28, 2005 04:22:48 PM new
Scooter Libby Indicted on Five Counts in Plame Case
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Jim Roberts
Oct 28, 2005
Vice presidential adviser I. Lewis "Scooter' Libby Jr. was indicted Friday on charges of obstruction of justice, making a false statement and perjury in the CIA leak case.
Broadcast reports are reporting that he has been indicted on a total of five charges.
The indictments stem from a two-year investigation by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald into whether Rove, Libby or any other administration officials knowingly revealed the identity of CIA employee Valerie Plame.
No indictment mentions the "outing" of Valerie Plame.
The five-count indictment accuses Scooter Libby of "lying about how and when he learned about CIA official Valerie Plane's identity in 2003 and then told reporters about it," according to wire reports.
posted on October 28, 2005 04:43:54 PM new
Colin - if you still don't know what the lies are then I think that it is YOU and not the liberals on this board that don't have enough basic info to be arguning this topic right now.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
posted on October 28, 2005 05:17:40 PM new
"Obstruction of justice. The indictment says Libby "did knowingly and corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede" the grand jury's investigation by misleading its members about when and how he acquired and disclosed information to reporters about Plame's employment at the CIA.
Two false statement charges. The charges stem from Libby's conversations with FBI agents on Oct. 14 and Nov. 26, 2003, regarding his conversations with NBC Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert and Time's Matt Cooper in July 2003.
Two perjury charges. Libby is charged with lying under oath on March 5 and March 24, 2004, while testifying to the grand jury about his conversation with Russert and conversations with other reporters, including Cooper."
posted on October 28, 2005 05:31:38 PM new
No Colin - I just actually watched the news conference and the readings of the indictments rather than comment when I knew nothing.
He claimed that he was informed by Tim Russert the Plame was a Cia agent and that until that time he had no knowledge of his however his own notes state that he had previously been informed by cheney that Plame was a CIA operative and Russert states that in te conversation he had with Libby that Plame was not brought up. He also claims that he was simply a cog in the rumor mill passing info to one press member to another where in fact he was the beginning of the line.
Do you actually watch the news before you comment on it or just form your opinion based on party line? It seems that for one that earlier complained that liberals have no interest for facts you don't seem to have felt a need to get any before forming your opinion.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
posted on October 28, 2005 05:48:39 PM new
I guess you didn't read the message I posted.
It makes no difference if I'd watch the news or not. It has not been stated just what these "lies" were and why they were lies.
You are such a party liner you can't see the difference between an indictment and a conviction.
You may have watched the entire thing on your TV but apparently you didn't comprehend what was going on. You heard what YOU wanted to hear and made it fit the way you felt.
posted on October 28, 2005 06:19:25 PM new
Like I thoought. It 's a witch hunt.
TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I--CRIMES
CHAPTER 73--OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
Sec. 1503. Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally
(a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening
letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede
any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United
States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other
proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing
magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or
petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or
indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been
such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other
committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the
performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force,
or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or
impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due
administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection
(b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial
of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves
the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of
imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of
that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been
imposed for any offense charged in such case.
(b) The punishment for an offense under this section is--
(1) in the case of a killing, the punishment provided in
sections 1111 and 1112;
(2) in the case of an attempted killing, or a case in which the
offense was committed against a petit juror and in which a class A
or B felony was charged, imprisonment for not more than 20 years, a
fine under this title, or both; and
(3) in any other case, imprisonment for not more than 10 years,
a fine under this title, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 769; Pub. L. 97-291, Sec. 4(c), Oct.
12, 1982, 96 Stat. 1253; Pub. L. 103-322, title VI, Sec. 60016, title
XXXIII, Sec. 330016(1)(K), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1974, 2147; Pub. L.
104-214, Sec. 1(3), Oct. 1, 1996, 110 Stat. 3017.)
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Sec. 241 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch.
321, Sec. 135, 35 Stat. 1113; June 8, 1945, ch. 178, Sec. 1, 59 Stat.
234).
The phrase ``other committing magistrate'' was substituted for
``officer acting as such commissioner'' in order to clarify meaning.
Minor changes were made in phraseology.
Amendments
1996--Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 104-214 inserted at end ``If the offense
under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case,
and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical
force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be
imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided
by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense
charged in such case.''
1994--Pub. L. 103-322, Sec. 330016(1)(K), which directed the
substitution of ``fined under this title'' for ``fined not more than
$5,000'', could not be executed because the words ``fined not more than
$5,000'' did not appear in text subsequent to amendment by Pub. L. 103-
322, Sec. 60016. See below.
Pub. L. 103-322, Sec. 60016, designated existing provisions as
subsec. (a), substituted ``magistrate judge'' for ``commissioner'' in
two places and ``punished as provided in subsection (b)'' for ``fined
not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both'',
and added subsec. (b).
1982--Pub. L. 97-291, Sec. 4(c)(1), substituted ``or juror'' for ``,
juror or witness'' after ``officer'' in section catchline.
Pub. L. 97-291, Sec. 4(c)(2), (3), substituted in text ``grand'' for
``witness, in any court of the United States or before any United States
commissioner or other committing magistrate, or any grand'' after ``or
impede any'', and struck out ``injures any party or witness in his
person or property on account of his attending or having attended such
court or examination before such officer, commissioner, or other
committing magistrate, or on account of his testifying or having
testified to any matter pending therein, or'' after ``discharge of his
duty, or''.
Effective Date of 1982 Amendment
Amendment by Pub. L. 97-291 effective Oct. 12, 1982, see section
9(a) of Pub. L. 97-291, set out as an Effective Date note under section
1512 of this title.
Section Referred to in Other Sections
This section is referred to in sections 201, 1512, 1961, 2516, 3142
of this title; title 7 section 12a; title 29 section 1111.
posted on October 28, 2005 07:02:46 PM new
Text of Libby's Statement Regarding His Indictment
Skip directly to the full story.
The Associated Press Published: Oct 28, 2005
Text of former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's statement regarding his Friday indictment:
Earlier today I submitted my resignation to the president. Obviously, today is a sad day for me and my family.
It has been my great privilege and honor to have the blessing of serving our country in public service in the State Department, the Defense Department, and recently the Office of the Vice President.
I've spent much of my career working on behalf of the American people and for the safety of our citizens.
I have conducted my responsibilities honorably and truthfully, including with respect to this investigation.
It is with regret that I step aside from that service today. I am confident at the end of this process I will be completely and totally exonerated.
AP-ES-10-28-05 1911EDT
-----------------
"Mr. Libby has served his country for a long time and deserves his day in court. The burden lies on Mr. Fitzgerald to prove his case, not on Mr. Libby to prove his innocence." - Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.
---
"We are quite distressed the special prosecutor has decided to pursue alleged inconsistencies in Mr. Libby's recollection and those of others' and to charge such inconsistencies as false statements.
As lawyers, we recognize that a person's recollection and memory of events will not always match those of other people, particularly when they are asked to testify months after the events occurred." - Joseph A. Tate, counsel for Libby.
AP-ES-10-28-05 2006EDT
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 28, 2005 07:08 PM ]
posted on October 28, 2005 07:07:07 PM new
I'm hoping for a plea bargain that will force a whole bunch of nuts to begin falling out of the trees in Washington. Who here thinks that Libby is going to take the fall all by himself? I think he's going to drag a lot more people down with him. In fact, I think the prosecutors are counting on it. I know I am.
posted on October 28, 2005 08:07:09 PM new
Linda_K.
Bush said if anyone in the White House was Indicted he would "FIRE THAT PERSON".
Today Bush didn't fire anyone. He except big Scooter's resignation and spoke words of praise about CHENEY's old buddy Scooter.
Just another lie in a very long string of lies from BUSH/CHENEY and good old boy Scooter.
Cheryl, I am guessing old Scooter will never go to trial. He will cop a plea. If not can't you just see Cheney along with a long list of other White House officials setting in a witness chair with their right hands on the Bible. LOL
Patrick Fitzgerald would chew them up and spit them out before lunch. He knows that the White House knows that. I don't believe Fitzgerald wants to harm the country more than it already is harmed with that kind of a trial.
I hope it will go that way because it would be better for the country. The U.S. can't take much more turmoil from Bush and his GANG. We need to all remember its not just Bush and Cheney that has the U.S. in turmoil its the whole CON-servative form of government that is too blame.
Bush is becoming more of a Lame Duck everyday. Now the American people will start finishing off the CON-servative form of government in the 2006 elections.
The American people are now understanding and seeing first hand how the Iraq War was started on a bunch of deliberate lies.
posted on October 28, 2005 08:31:11 PM new
Cheryl,
First of all he's not guilty.
Secondly he's a conservative Not a whining liberal so he would never pass blame to someone else.
posted on October 28, 2005 08:54:28 PM new
Only the tip of the iceberg. This is going to reveal lots about the machinations that went on in creating the big lie that led to this war. Libby is expendable and the bushies are hoping he'll be the end of the line scapegoat, but it isn't gonna be so. This has been Bush's worst week so far, but I'm betting there are worse ones in the works.
The right is fractured after the Supreme Court nominee debacle, and Bush's Brain is still under investigation. 2006 is looking better and better. There's going to be an "anybody but" vote, just you wait and see.
____________________________________________
Habla siempre que debas y calla siempre que puedas....
posted on October 29, 2005 03:52:10 AM new
I just don't understand it. If he and others are guilty, don't you folks on the right want to see them punished? Or, would you prefer they keep on doing what they're doing? Ordinary citizens have to pay for their crimes what makes these people any different? IMO, they should be held to even higher standards than the rest of us.
I'm not happy all of this is going on. It's embarrassing, to say the least. It's all over Europe and we look like a bunch of idiots. I, for one, don't like being lumped into all of this, but that's what people do.
If Libby is innocent, he will be found innocent. However, they have the evidence that he lied. Why should he get away with that when you all pitched a damned fit when Clinton lied over a lesser offense? Should Nixon have gotten away with what he did as well?
I have continually said that this should not be made into a party issue. Isn't telling the truth one of those values those on the right are so eager to promote? As a taxpayer and one who in part helps to pay this man's salary, don't you think I have the right to know the truth and don't you think the only way to find that out is to investigate him?
I'm just curious as to what the right's answers are to these questions. You guys are so conflicting in what you expect from a democrat and what you expect (or don't) from a republican. The same standards should be held for both parties and if one breaks the rules, they deserve to be punished. Democrat or republican.
Now, I'm off to my weekend hiking trip. Some R&R is in order here. No TV's, no radios. No news!!
Enjoy the weekend everyone! Oh heck, that goes for you conservatives, too.
posted on October 29, 2005 05:32:48 AM new Gee, not a very strong defense coming from the righties in here!
Quoting the law as if the CIA, the United States Department of Justice, and Fitzgerald need help ????
Here's a "brilliant" piece of pap (bolded no less !) :
""The burden lies on Mr. Fitzgerald to prove his case, not on Mr. Libby to prove his innocence." "
DUH, ya think ? OH , this must be a NEW idea! No one ever heard of THAT before.
Here's a jewel:
""Secondly he's a conservative Not a whining liberal so he would never pass blame to someone else.""
Yup, that's why bush, Cheney, Rove are all jumping loudly to his defense, revealing in detail what really happened....NOT!
Looks like they're passing the blame to Scooty Bug
!!!!!
posted on October 29, 2005 05:40:25 AM new " Isn't telling the truth one of those values those on the right are so eager to promote?"
NO
Lies have characterized their administration and the use and technique of lying in order to achieve ends has been so obviously useful that their followers here have shamelessly adopted the practice.
The Bush administration led the way with lies that started a war under false pretenses. They smear and lie with wild abandon and that practice is so obvious that it's called "swiftboating" in memory of their success in lying about the military record of John Kerry.
They operate with the idea that we have reason to be truthful only insofar as it serves our interests or that truth is worth pursuing only when it gets you where you want to go.
posted on October 29, 2005 06:07:07 AM new
Kerry's Swiftboat action was no lie Helen, I am surprised you still buy into that fiction.
That is the reason Kerry is not President, he got caught in his lies.
It will be an interesting court trial. I still believe that Libby is the sacraficial lamb for some higher up, how high I don't know.
What I do think is poor judgement on President Bush's part is his open support for Libby. If he is convicted, then Bush's fallderall about "firing" anyone connected was BS.
He should be keeping his mouth shut and just say will be watching or something of the sort.
posted on October 29, 2005 10:22:54 AM newDeny, Deny, Deny..
Isn't that what willie told monica??????
Still no proof Scooter outed plame.
I gave my liberal neighbors son a book for his birthday. He went crazy trying to find where to put the batteries.
[ edited by Bear1949 on Oct 29, 2005 03:46 PM ]
posted on October 29, 2005 11:12:50 AM new
"There's going to be an "anybody but" vote, just you wait and see."
Prof- That statement makes me ask the question, is that what you really want?
This is the problem with those in power, both Republicans and Democrats. They are too busy chasing each other, that neither side really cares about the bigger problems facing this country.
I want accountability, whether it is the Bush Administration or Clinton. I am sick of the "vote for the lessor evil" mentality that this country continues to accept, or even worse, the popularity vote. The demise of politics in America isn't individual ideologies, but rather the party system. Remove the parties from the problem, and you can have two, three or more strong candidates that cannot hide behind the walls of their party. Realistic? No. But a necessary part to remove influence, to minimize the blame game, and to remove the "my team" mentality. It is tiring to see the party line vote. I would rather have a candidate or elected official who votes their mind and their constituency instead of their party. "Anybody but..." isn't the solution to the problem. It is voting for the best candidate who will work to improve this country whether they are Republican, Democrat, Idependent, or other. I have no problems voting for a Republican, if I believe they are what is best for this country. George Bush has proven he is not the right guy at the right time, and he certainly isn't holding or accepting any responsibility whether it be his Administration or the Katrina fiasco, or the war in Iraq. Saying it and actually meaning it are two different things.
[ edited by rustygumbo on Oct 29, 2005 11:17 AM ]
posted on October 29, 2005 02:05:56 PM new
Rusty - there is never going to be a truly great president. The very nature of the american public and press is such that the individuals that would probably be best for the job would not go near it with a ten foot pole. Who in their right mind would really want the job?
As far as this case goes...I cant believe that he would allow it to go to trial. I think Cheney is going to make sure he has a nice cushy job waiting for him when he gets out and hes going to take a plea and serve less than 2 years.
This "I must have made a mistake, I just had too much goin on at the time" excuse is embarassing. Is he really going to get up on a stand and swear that the chief of staff of the VP of the US has such lousy memory skills that he forgot the existance of info that he discussed with half a dozen gov officials before he gave the info to a reporter?
I think the most entertaining part of the trial if there is one, will be watching Linda, Bear, Colin, et al trying to explain and justify Libby confusing his boss and friend of 30 some years (who actually gave him the info on Plame)with a member of The Left Wing Liberal Media, Tim Russert (who he told the FBI and Grand Jury gave him the info).
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
[ edited by fenix03 on Oct 29, 2005 02:07 PM ]
posted on October 29, 2005 04:07:06 PM newProf- That statement makes me ask the question, is that what you really want?
Of course not, but I can guarantee you, the Republicans want it even less!
____________________________________________
Habla siempre que debas y calla siempre que puedas....
