CIA Leak Prosecutor Focuses On Libby
As federal prosecutors in the CIA leak investigation reach the critical stage of deciding whether to bring criminal charges, they are zeroing in on contradictions between the testimony of I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, and that of New York Times reporter Judith Miller, according to sources close to the investigation and attorneys for individuals enmeshed in the probe.
The prosecutors and the federal grand jury are also scrutinizing whether Libby, or his attorney, tried to discourage Miller from giving testimony to the grand jury, or tried to improperly influence what Miller would say if she testified, according to the same sources.
And did Scooter Libby simply act as a lone wolf, without the go-ahead from his boss — or his boss’s boss?
It’s not about any of that. It’s about getting the opposition locked up just because they happen to be conservative. Being on the right of issues is their only crime. What did they do? Dalley around a few legal loopholes? It’s done all the time, where’s the crime?
Actually, it’s about getting opposition locked up because they’re lying, lawbreaking, cheating, sleazy fucks.
Really, if it was *our* guys pulling shit like this, you’d be all over it. So would soem of us, too.
Calm down.You guys have heard of sarcasm. Right?
Legal loopholes.
What legal loopholes are those? Or are “legal loopholes” the things that *must have been* utilized if Republicans are under the microscope.
And will someone PLEASE tell me: What is the “right” of this “issue”? Is there even an issue at stake?
No.
Hey use gays! (political footballs) OOPS! I meant Hey youz guys!
Don t Plame Karl just because his Doo-Doo is Mike Brown and Rummy. He just happens to be the Frist Dick-C.-Rat to Delay Tom in getting the Scooter over to Homeland Stupidity. Truth is& Karl has a Lott on his mind and I Ken Lay odds he wouldn t Phil a Gramm of Rice right now-with getting Miered down in a court nomination and/or what some Dick is gonna do to resurrect the Armey. ENERGY BILLS itself as the frontrunner. However, Arabs to Abramoff& me thinks Karl shouldn t have Bin Laden with Safavian Dubya s arse.
Dugger;
Bitterness does not become you. Perhaps if there were more transparency in the Republican Leadership, there would be less hatred for them.
Yes indeed. Just like the left’s phoney concern for our military during the last election, the concern about leaks in the CIA has gone out the window. Its all about ‘perjury and obstruction of justice’ now – as long as that is the thing that gets the hated Republicans. Screw the CIA (as my point about Agee illustrated) and leaks, get those Bushies!
Dugger, The Left is so Transparent if you pay Attention
IMHO, once you’re down to perjury and obstruction of justice , you’re engaged in the political equivalent of “smack talk.”
It’s like saying, “We can’t prove anything serious against you, but we can try to blame you for that — hence, perjury and obstruction of justice .”
And, remember, when Clinton was found guilty of perjury, and impeached, he still didn’t resign.
So why should any Republicans oblige you by falling on their swords?
And, remember, when Clinton was found guilty of perjury, and impeached, he still didn t resign.
And that was okey-dokey with you at the time, wasn’t it, Frank?
Clinton wasn’t found guilty of perjury, Frank D, he was acquitted of perjury and obstruction by the senate and later found guilty by the judge in the Paula Jones case of civil contempt for giving “intentionally false evidence”. He also agreed to that with prosecutor Ray. And it only took $64 million dollars of often times ridiculous investigation into a failed ancient land deal to reach this verdict.
Now we have the president saying he knew of Karl Rove’s involvement two years ago? With all the bullshit he threw about getting to the bottom of it and firings for people involved it is strating to look like a conspiracy to cover it up. Maybe Bush should be put under oath so we can find out what the people involved told him.
Midderpidge;
Let’s see if we can predict what Bush would say;
I can’t recall…….I have no knowledge……In other words, the Alzheimer’s defense.
Watching the wingers perform backflips to spin this thing in their posts is kind of like a drinking game.
Next time PSU or Dugger or Frank D repeats a GOoPer talking point — (Watch! It’ll be Wilson who gets indicted! They’re criminalizing politics! A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich! Perjury is a weak indictment! Plame was a desk jockey and identified as Wilson’s wife in Who’s Who! Rove didn’t use her correct name! Just a witch hunt! Mass left-wing conspiracy!) — everyone does a shot of tequila.
Obstruction of justice is so easy. A crime was committed last fall. My huge staff and I question you for hours about minor details in your day to day life. “Now is it true you posted about abortion on OW’s web site in Jan 2005? Yes. About Iraq in 2004 and had an exchange with Mr X. Yes. About Kerry and the election in October 2004? Yes. Aha! Gotcha! It was in Sep 2004. You had no posts in October, you filthy miscreant! You are not fit to sit in that chair, oh’ foul obstructor of justice. Book ‘em Dano!”
Dugger
Actually, buma, i’ll buy you a BOTTLE of tequila–I’ll even make it Petron–if you can find an example of me saying any of that on this site EVER!
Oh right, you did remind us and you got it wrong. Way to go Frank, so true to form.
– IMHO, once you re down to perjury and obstruction of justice , you re engaged in the political equivalent of smack talk. –
Oh my goodness. Frank, would you care to remind all of us here what the impeachment proceedings against Clinton were based on? Think about this, Frank and Dugger. You bitch about Bush-hatred but look where your partisan hackery has taken you. You have been reduced to arguing that perjury and obstruction of justice are no big deal, mere judicial ‘Gotcha.’ I have to ask you, does this new low in standards apply to everyone charged with perjury and obstruction of justice or just Republicans who lie to grand juries?
“So why should any Republicans oblige you by falling on their swords?”
Um, because the very same Republicans were arguing that perjury and obstruction of justice meant Clinton should resign or be impeached not seven years ago.
Dugger –
Whatever the charges, if perjury is among them I think we can all be fairly confident that Fitzgerald is not going to accuse Rove or Libby of lying about the exact day they had corn flakes for breakfast in January of 2003. If perjury charges are brought it will probably be because Rove and Libby lied about events material to the investigation. There’s a big fucking difference. But in your efforts to discredit the investigation you keep conflating simple forgetfulness with perjury. I bet Fitzgerlad is smart enough to know the difference even if you aren’t. I beleive you have said before that we don’t know anything so we have to wait until the evidence comes out but that doesn’t stop you from trashing Fitzgerald and the entire investigation. I’m afraid you can’t have it both ways.
And don’t even start with this “phony concern” over the troops in 2004. Our troops still don’t have the proper body armor, the families of dead soldiers are recieving bills for army medical care and just yesterday we found out that the Pentagon will not be honoring the $15k bonuses it promised to National Guard troops who re-enlisted to serve in Iraq. All of which is why Bush has to arrange scripted teleconferences with carefully selected officers (including his own press flack) instead of talking to real enlisted men and woman. Your bullshit just doesn’t wash in the face of the facts. Not to mention the fact that you sound like the guy who bitched that the FBI didn’t care about murder and bootlegging when it busted Al Capone for tax evasion. This Plame thing really brings out the partisan hack in you.
Buma, great idea… but we’d all be on a month long binge
frame (,
“we can all be fairly confident ”
If by ‘we’ you mean progressives, wouldn’t argue. If you mean all of us, you are wrong, pure and simple. A good example is Rove not mentioning first interview his conversation with Cooper. Later he voluntarily informed the prosecutor of the conversation. We’ll see if Fitzgerald tries to get him for that.
And I already have started with the ‘phoney concern” over the troops because thats exactly what it is. When there was a chance progressives could get a few military votes, they were all over the net with crocodile tears about veterans benefits and pay and armor. After the vets and military helped re-elect Bush, our good progressive buddies aren’t to be seen. Likewise its already happened on the Plame leak. At first it was all about the ‘damage’ done to the CIA. Progressives were just good citizens out to help the CIA be strong and viable. Now that the smoke signals say perjury and obstruction, its ‘to hell with the CIA. Just get Rove and Libby.” Progressives must have a corpse to kick!
Dugger
Let’s see Dugger, the troops don’t have adequate armor, they don’t have adequate veterans benefits and they are being misused in Iraq. Even if it is phony concern from some left wingers, it beats the hell out of your tinkerbell denial of the reality.
As for the Plame thing, the damage is already done, I could care less if they prosecute Rove and Libby, what should have already been done is that ANYONE who was involved in that kind of idiotic political skullduggery should have their security clearances revoked so they can’t do that kind of shit again. Criminal charges would be their just desserts for that kind of security breach, and Bush and his administration should have orders and memos flowing down and out strictly condemning the leak and outlining a plan so every single person with security clearance knows to never do it again. Instead, as usual, Bush talked tough and lied to everyone trying to move the spotlight away from himself. Nice president we got there.
I don’t see any progressives saying ‘to hell with the cia’ or ‘to hell with body armor’
miitterpidge,
I was in the AF 27 years. There was always a shortage of some critical combat gear – for a variety of reasons. During all those times, we heard zilch from leftists – except that occasionally we were subhuman murderers. Zilch. Now comes an election; an election involving a person liberals hate more than absolutely anybody else in the world. Do I think they would fake concern for a soldier’s issue, in effect -use us-, to get rid of that person? Yep. Sure do. And with you guys, its always “buy” “buy”. More benefits, more this, more that. Vote for our guy and we’ll give you something. We understand you don’t give anybody anything that you don’t take from somebody else. Pardon me if I’m wrong and you are out there making body armor.
And, Mitter, what exact, real world damage has been done re Plame. Not symbolic. Not legal technicality. Real damage. Who’s been hurt on 1/50th of the scale of the hurt rendered by progressive hero Philip Agee? Would like to hear your honest answer to that.
Dugger
TomY,
So, TomY, you agree with me that Mitterpidge was talking out of his/her *ss with “the damage is already done” statement? As you feel we’ll only find out in the upcoming days re damage – meaning we know of no damage as of now. Nicht wahr?
I asked and still ask, exactly what real damage has been done? Is there not a better answer than we don’t know?
Dugger
As someone once said: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
“Mitter, what exact, real world damage has been done re Plame”
I’m sure we’ll find out in the coming days, Dugger. The only people who make declarative statements about Plame’s status are the republicans defending the administration’s actions and minimizing the “real world damage.” You would know better if you hadn’t already made up your mind based not on evidence but right wing talking points.
midderpidge: I’m sorry. Did you say “Found guilty of perjury”? I should have said, “Was guilty of perjury”. Isn’t that how you lefties do it?
As for how “I felt” about it: I believe, unlike you lefties, that the President is the President the people voted for, not the one I wanted. So, I didn’t like him when I first heard about his involvement in the race in 1991. I didn’t believe it when he was re – elected in 1996, but what are you gonna do? I thought he was going to be a lousy President, and nothing he did in eight years changed my mind.
Was I in the “mob around the windmill” with a torch and an axe handle? Nah.
I’m not just a conservative; I’m conservative, too.
So why should any Republicans oblige you by falling on their swords?
Um, because the very same Republicans were arguing that perjury and obstruction of justice meant Clinton should resign or be impeached not seven years ago.
Who decided to lump together resigning with impeachment? That was clever by half.
You know what I mean — you’re hoping Republicans will resign, but why? Clinton was impeached. He wasn’t impeached instead of resigning, he never mentioned resigning. Perhaps if he had resigned before being impeached, as Nixon had done, he might be garnering some sympathy now. Instead, after he left office (he didn’t dare say it before) he declared that he stayed in office because “he knew” that’s what the people wanted him to do. There weren’t a whole lot of constituents begging their representatives to call the impeachment off, were there?
So, I ask again, why should you be asking for Republicans to resign?
This whole thing may even spill over into the Senate (Roberts)
http://yglesias.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/10/18/23404/204
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10446
Dugger –
Democrats and Kerry ran on supporting the troops. Bush, however, convinced conservatives such as yourself that only Republicans cared for the troops. And so Kerryt lost by a slim margin. And now where are we? The same problems that were brought up in the 2004 campaign are still with us. Bush has done nothing to support the troops and the situation seems to have gotten worse with soldiers getting bills for their medical care and the Pentagon reneging on its promise of bonuses. All I have to say to you is this: Sucker. Too bad our soliders are paying the price for your gullibility.
I asked and still ask, exactly what real damage has been done? Is there not a better answer than we don t know?
At the very least they have caused a boatload of taxpayer money to be spent on the investigations of their misdeeds and subsequent coverups.
So, I ask again, why should you be asking for Republicans to resign?
Um, maybe because lying and obstructing justice about your official taxpayer-paid duties is a bit more serious than the best case the vwrc could drum up against Clinton?
Truth be told, though, I wanted Rove and Libby to resign even before all this crap came to light.
Wilbur;
Just remember the expression plea bargain, and remember how much pressure is going to be added to Fitzgerald should the indictments include Cheney. More than likely, as is the case with white-collar criminals routinely, is they get a few months at most. You see the reason your white-collar criminal is so amped about fighting the war on crime, is he wants to feel safe from the street criminals so he can ply his trade sans any competition.
Wilbur — ::Bzzt!:: Wrong! Try again…
Truth be told, though, I wanted Rove and Libby to resign even before all this crap came to light.
That’s more like it!
Actually, Frank, both my statements are correct. And are you sure your last initial is really “D”? The more desperate you get the more I hear the whiny voice of Frank Burns behind your posts.
frame. Bush didn’t me convince me of jack squat about who did or didn’t support the troops. Long years of first hand personal experience did. And you obvioulsy don’t understand the mindset of the ‘troops’. You eveidently can only equate support with giving some them some social program. ‘Troops” liked Bush better becasue they know he was closer to being one of them. And they, like me, will never forgive Kerry for his after war activities (nor Fonda) . Troops appreciate, rather than ridicule, ‘mission accomplished”. You don’t have to like or agree with that. Just understand the troops see it differently than you and progressives.
Dugger
Wilbur, Don Rickles you ain’t — get over yourself…
Ya. Okay. I’m sure the troops appreciate a banner printed by the White House press staff more than they appreciate body armor and for the Pentagon to keep its promises about bonuses and medical care. I’m gald to hear you now consider adequate equipment and pay in return for reenlistment mere “social programs.” I’ll put that down with your argument that perjury and obstruction of justice are the jaywalking of the judicial system. Keep lowering those standards, Dug!
Wilbur,
You make my point for me. Is this the best ‘hurt’ you cam come up with?
“At the very least they have caused a boatload of taxpayer money to be spent on the investigations of their misdeeds and subsequent coverups. ‘
Your ‘they’ , I assume the alleged leakers, didn’t cause this. Somebody decided to do it. It needn’t have been done at all. The investigations, if need at all, could have ben done within the current structure. Of course, Democrats would have compalined so due to political presure,t here was a special prosecutor. But thats the sytem overreacting.
Dugger
frame,
Most troops had body armor. Troops have always lacked something. They lacked under Johnson, Carter, and Clinton just as much under Bush etc. Progressives were only heard from when they thought the shortage could be used to get Bush. Troops also care about morale and misson accomplishment and being supported on those items. They care about esprit de corp and are gung ho. You don’t need to like or accept that , but thats the way good troops are. To try and make ‘troops’ another ‘victimized’ , lobotomized Democrat constituency will never work.
Dugger
Nice.
Which Democratic constituencies would you characterize as “lobotomized”?
As a matter of fact, “actual harm” is something that’s been forgotten in all the breathless reports about the Plame matter.
Was there any harm done to U.S. security interests? None of the so-called reporters working this story have remembered to ask.
The absence of harm wouldn’t excuse recklessness in revealing the identity of a CIA agent and it wouldn’t justify the covert White House operation to “get” a political detractor. But it is a relevant part of the story. No one seems to have made a solid case either way.
Under dugger’s way of thinking if the pilot of a loaded airliner slipped his copilot a mickey, downed a quart of jack daniels in the pilot seat and snorted twelve lines of coke; if said pilot then slipped into a well-earned coma; if said airliner did loop-de-loops around the empire state building; if said pilot slumped forward upon the controls of the airliner in just the right way so that the landing gears deployed and the airliner was steered to a perfect landing at Laguardia; if the jolt of landing was just enough to wake the pilot from his haze enough to bring the plane to a safe halt; then said pilot, according to Dugger, should not be liable for censure, much less dismissal or even criminal prosecution, since no actual harm was done.
That’s what Dugger would say if the pilot was a Republican. If the pilot was a Democrat Dugger would be all over him like shit on a shingle.
What a tool.
Wilbur,
Your pilot analogy is reasonable butit still suggests no real harm done – which was my point. Evreybody walked away. Your pilot engaged in active, overt immediatley dangerous illegal behavior which risked the lives of lots of passengers. None of that is the case with Plame. None of it. In fact no one has identified anything of immediate or even near term significant negative impact. A paper cover company may have had to be erased, but she was no longer in the field. Hadn’t been for a while. Unlike the Agee deal, no one has been murdered and unlike Agee, here maybe one and one only, Wash DC based CIA person was outed. So, how, if at all, was it near term dangerous like your pilot analogy? And I’m not sure what the actual long term danger is if it is proven to be a crime. That its a bad thing to out CIA agents. Yes, but Agee already taught those who pay attention that.
Some technical violation may be uncovered and that may lead to indictments and Democrats will have won a major political victory. Thats what it is now and has been about all along. I’ll believe otherwise when you show me a raft statements from leftie posters here and Democrats in general, before Plame, expressing concern about the well being and cover of CIA agents. It wasn’t on the their radar scopes until it became a way to get Bush.
Dugger
A Bush-appointed Republican special prosecutor is trying to win a political victory for Democrats?
Whoops.
I ll believe otherwise when you show me a raft statements from leftie posters here and Democrats in general, before Plame, expressing concern about the well being and cover of CIA agents
As dim as my opinion is of Rove and Libby, I, for one, never would have dreamed that they would stoop so low as to out an undercover agent for cheap shot at a political opponent.
” Bush-appointed Republican special prosecutor is trying to win a political victory for Democrats?
Whoops. ”
Whoops, my behind! Who said he was ‘trying’ to win a vicory for Dems? And hopefully, you will remember the track record of special prosecutors going after memnbers of their own party.
Dugger
Maybe nobody. Maybe “that’s what it’s been about all along” has some other meaning I don’t get.
Quaker,
“Maybe that s what it s been about all along has some other meaning I don t get. ”
I think you nailed it.
Dugger
I see. You wrote:
So the CIA referred a complaint to the Ashcroft Justice Department which in turn handed the complaint to a Republican special prosecutor appointed by the White House. This special prosecutor has conducted a thorough and (in the words of the President) dignified investigation over many months.
But the whole thing all along was about the Democrats winning a political victory.
And this makes no sense to me because I can’t understand the simple, obvious meaning of your words, right?