Aide to Cheney Appears Likely to Be Indicted; Rove Under Scrutiny
Associates of I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, expected an indictment on Friday charging him with making false statements to the grand jury in the C.I.A. leak inquiry, lawyers in the case said Thursday.
Karl Rove, President Bush’s senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, will not be charged on Friday, but will remain under investigation, people briefed officially about the case said. As a result, they said, the special counsel in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, was likely to extend the term of the federal grand jury beyond its scheduled expiration on Friday.
We need to know from the administration why members of senior White House staff have been indicted, did the president or vice president have a role in the commission of perjury? Why or why not? Is this a pattern?
We have questions.
There are so many intertwined little sub-plots to this whole twisted tale, it is easy to lose the thread of it all.
One thing is for sure, it’s gonna be one big dirt sandwich and we’re all going to have to take a bite.
Hunter@KOS says;
any “extension”, if it happens, could mean anything from Rove being put on double-secret probation,
Bluto may throw a toga party at the Bush Animal White House but his ehtics grade point average will still be 0.0.
Tuco needs to review his US history a bit before attempting “there was no crime, just a couple of forgetful fellas’-defense.
Alger Hiss, anyone? What did he end up going to jail for? Is Tuco going to say Hiss did nothing to affect national security?
Watergate? Most of the folks caught up in Watergate also didn’t wind up in jail because they were convicted of breaking and entering.
It is highly likely a number of senior WH officials will be indicted; this indicates a pattern of corruption throughout the administration. It also demonstrates, beyond dispute, AWOL George and Unka Dick have repeatedly lied to the American public.
Obviously, this entire matter will badly damage an already vastly unpopular administration. I’ll bet AWOL George wakes upworrying about the civil suit which will compell his testimony under oath.
You’re distorting history: The people who actually broke in WERE convicted of conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping.
Others who were behind the scenes were convicted of other crimes.
For your analogy to work, Rove, Libby, and anyone else who “leaked” information would have to be compared to the original Watergate group who broke in.
Additionally, you try to bring up Alger Hiss’ pergery convictions. Hiss’ actions took place well before the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. What would you have liked to see Hiss convicted of?
No, what I said was exactly true. “The people who actually broke in WERE convicted of conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping.”
I then pointed out why this fact makes your analogy to Rove/Libby incorrect.
Jadegold needs remedial reading 100.
[...] th 4-2 and whoever wins this game comes out with at least a share of first place. Anybody who reads Oliver Willis knows that he s a Redskins fan. Everybody who reads this blog kn [...]
I see JWG needs remedial US History 100, as well.
WRT Watergate, 13 WH officials and GOP poohbahs were indicted (Porter, Kalmbach,Haldemann, Ehrlichman, Mitchell, Colson, Strachan, Mardian, Parkinson, Reinecke, Chapin, Dean, Magruder). Parkinson was acquitted; the rest were found guilty of making false statements, perjury, obstruction of justice, conspiracy. Nixon was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Now, given the fact the seven implicated in the burglary (Hunt, Liddy, Sturgis, Barker, McCord, Martinez, Gonzalez) were convicted of burglary (5 had been caught at the scene) and conspiracy and wiretapping, myvassertion still holds true:
Most of the folks caught up in Watergate also didn t wind up in jail because they were convicted of breaking and entering.
13 > 7 even in alternative universes.
WRT Hiss. You seem to be saying there was no law Hiss was breaking when he commited espionage.
What excuse have I made for anyone in the Plame case? Some of you need to apply some reading comprehension skills.
All I have done is correct some bad analogies.
Ignoring whether or not Hiss actually was a spy, this source would seem to indicate that Hiss could not be tried for his alleged espionage:
Therefore, both your analogies fail to relate to Rove/Libby.
It’s fun to watch Tuco and JWG spin and split hairs at the same time. Better than cirque du soleil.
Now the need to make excuses for the Rovians has driven them to belittle the alleged crimes of … Alger HIss. Priceless.
Am I ashamed of my attitude now when I think back on the Clinton persecution? No, because there is a fundamental difference: Rove, et al. are being investigated for breaking the law in the course of their official duties while in office.
Please point to what we know Hiss did to affect national security. What “espionage” do we know he committed?
I guess pecker tracks on a dress is no longer a big deal either.
To be clear, anyone who lies under oath should be tried and convicted of a serious crime.
It was impossible to try Hiss for anything other than perjury, so his example does not apply in the Plame case.
Those who committed the actual break-in at the Watergate were convicted for crimes related to the break-in. So trying to compare them to the leaker(s) does not work if the Plame indictments are for perjury (a crime committed long after the initial “crime” of leaking).
That was never the big deal, cleo. I think the fact that while under oath in a deposition in a sexual harassment lawsuit, the President chose to knowingly lie was the gist of the consternation.
jadegold says, in regards to a potential Libby indictment that “It also demonstrates, beyond dispute, AWOL George and Unka Dick have repeatedly lied to the American public.”. In fact, all it demonstrates is that during the course of the investigation, it is alleged that Libby made false statements to the Grand Jury. Nothing more. Nothing less.
And despite your assertions, if the indictment of Libby is for false statements, then it is readily apparent that Fitzgerald could not make a case for any violation of the Intelligence Protection act. So much for her being “outed”.
Frank_D: “Actually, I was kinda nauseated by the pecker tracks on a dress. ”
I didn’t know you were so sensitive.
Which is worse? Impeding the process of a civil sexual harassment suit, or impeding the investigation of a felony investigation of a crime that has a possible penalty of execution?
There’s no comparison. That’s why us Clinton defenders find it incomprehensible when Clinton bashers try to compare the two.
Actually, I was kinda nauseated by the “pecker tracks on a dress.”
In fact, all it demonstrates is that during the course of the investigation, it is alleged that Libby made false statements to the Grand Jury. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Really? So when AWOL George says to the public he has no idea who–if anyone–leaked Ms. Plame’s occupation but we find later that AWOL George has taken Karl Rove to task for that leak–that’s not a lie? When Unka Dick tells MTP that he had no idea who Joe Wilson was and that he had no briefing about his trip to Niger–but we find out George Tenet briefed Unka Dick 3 months previously about Wilson–that’s not a lie?
Apparently, JD believes it’s ok to lie as long as you’re not before a GJ.
“And isn t it true, if the Times story is accurate, that there was no outing of Valerie Plame, and consequently, no damage to national security interests?”
…
“if the indictment of Libby is for false statements, then it is readily apparent that Fitzgerald could not make a case for any violation of the Intelligence Protection act.”
Here’s the spin: “If Libby lied, there was no crime.” Ya, that makes sense. Maybe, just maybe, Fitzgerald couldn’t make a case for the first potential crime because principle players like Libby were lying to him. We’ll soon see. But the reason perjury and obstruction of justice are a crime in the first place — since you both need a reminder — is because they tend to get in the way of discovering the truth. Understand?
5 counts. Doesn’t sound like Libby accidently forgot something, does it?