Gotta look out for your pals as the crooks stick together.
President Bush Monday spared former vice presidential aide Lewis “Scooter” Libby from going to prison for 2 1/2 years for obstructing the CIA leak investigation, a White House official said.
The official said Bush “has commuted the prison sentence … leaving intact the probation and fines handed down by the court.”
“That means he is not going to jail,” the official said.
“The President’s commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence does not serve justice, condones criminal conduct, and is a betrayal of trust of the American people.
“The President said he would hold accountable anyone involved in the Valerie Plame leak case. By his action today, the President shows his word is not to be believed. He has abandoned all sense of fairness when it comes to justice, he has failed to uphold the rule of law, and he has failed to hold his Administration accountable.”
Sen. Harry Reid:
“The President’s decision to commute Mr. Libby’s sentence is disgraceful. Libby’s conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone. Judge Walton correctly determined that Libby deserved to be imprisoned for lying about a matter of national security. The Constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own Vice President’s Chief of Staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law.”
John Edwards responds:
“Only a president clinically incapable of understanding that mistakes have consequences could take the action he did today. President Bush has just sent exactly the wrong signal to the country and the world. In George Bush’s America, it is apparently okay to misuse intelligence for political gain, mislead prosecutors and lie to the FBI. George Bush and his cronies think they are above the law and the rest of us live with the consequences. The cause of equal justice in America took a serious blow today.”
Chris Dodd:
“By commuting Scooter Libby’s sentence, the President continues to abdicate responsibility for the actions of his Administration. The only ones paying the price for this Administration’s actions are the American people.”
Huh? What? Is there a link?
You’re absolutely right Oliver. Just ask Mark Rich.
Marty,
Marc Rich was pardoned because Ehud Barak went to the mat for Clinton in trying to resolve one of the toughest international issues facing this world.
Libby was rewarded for his no-remorse, take-the-bullet-for-Cheney attitude.
In the mind of an absolute nutter, they are the same.
Bush just made a statement that Bush Loyalists are above the law.
Macswain
Good one. Now let’s read your excuse for drug pusher Carlos Vignali.
Marty, be proud that being convicted of perjury and obstruction is no longer a punishable offense if you’re a Repug politico.
For Libby, his criminality will turn out to be a good career move. He’ll wind up at some GOP ‘think tank’ or lobbying firm.
Ah, the false equivalence brigade is out in force today. Speaking of Clinton (somehow you people always are) most of you owe him a big apology right now. Seems that perjury and obstruction of justice isn’t the big crime it was in his day. Nowadays even if you’re convicted of it (unlike Clinton) you don’t go to jail.
Sorry, infectious pieces of shit, they are. The whole damned lot of them. They all will burn in hell.
Thank goodness he wasn’t driving on a suspended license!!! The public would have never allowed this!!!
This country is already dead.
Gee, I feel safer at night that our President commuted a sentence from outing a CIA agent in the press. Not treason to King Geo.
“Rule of Law” baby!
Lolololololol!
Us Repubs are strict konstrukshinists and we beleeve in the rool of law!
Justisss has bin served!
Kant tuch this!
Repubz roool!
Boo-yah!
The truth is the U.S. Government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) no longer represent the interests of the American people.
The Roman Empire and many others collapsed through history.
Our turn is around the corner.
Remember July 4 1776? Boy, people had balls back then.
Short-term, this is the ultimate proof that Bush and Cheney and their cronies are power-mongers, plain and simple.
Long-term, Bush’s tenure is the gift that keeps on giving. Democrats couldn’t ask for better PR than the corrupt joke that is the Bush administration.
Worst.
Administration.
Ever.
our President commuted a sentence from outing a CIA agent in the press.
And you have evidence of that, right? Cause Mr. Fitzgerald would LOVE to know your source.
Nice to see the system of checks & balances are in place to prevent a runaway judiciary.
Vignali had his sentence commuted after serving six years of a sentence that was imposed under the now unconstitutional mandatory minimums that wrongfully precluded the exercise of judicial discretion and allowed for brutally long sentences especially for drug crimes.
Scooter was sentenced under guidelines that were instructive, not mandatory and allowed for the discretion of a Bush-appointed federal judge. Of course, Scooter, unlike Vignali, will serve no time for his crimes.
Keep the false equivalents coming! It’s all you got when you’re trying to justify Libby’s free pass to commit crime.
AMNESTY FOR SCOOTER; JAIL FOR HARD WORKING IMMIGRANTS!!!
“And you have evidence of that, right?”
Scooter lied to prevent the public from ever knowing what crimes were committed. This is his reward. In case you’re wondering, this is why Americans are starting to believe that Republicans hate America.
“In John Edwards’ America it is ok to condemn a war you voted for, exploit your wife’s cancer for campaign funds, charge over $50,000 per speech on the “war on poverty) (while lamping at night in a $6 million, 28,000 sq. feet home), hire two anti-Catholic bigots to help run your campaign, make over $500,000 in part-time salary from the same hedge fund elites you now rally against and pay $400 for a haircut.” Any wonder why this man is stuck in 3rd place in every Dem poll?
When Republicans do something wrong and/or criminal, you’re supposed to mention Clinton, not Edwards, dummy. Get with the program.
ZOMG LOOK! BLOWJOB!
See, that’s how America works.
This was not Bush, it has the rank stank of Dick Cheney’s supremely stupid arrogance all over it.
I would love to hear what Rethug politicians running in closely contested elections in districts where they’re trying desperately to keep their jobs in 2008 have to say about yet another this genius political move from the White House.
And now, finally, whenever Conservative scum bring up the Clinton pardons, they can just STFU. Never mind that Bush the Elder pardoned Cap Weinberger, Armand Hammer, ASlam Adama, and Orlando Bosch, figures as bad as Marc Rich and worse.
No, that argument is over.
As the poster above says:
Bush is the gift that keeps on giving.
I’ll add a football analogy:
Dems are taking Bush’s fumbles and picks and gift balls and running with them.
SCORE!!
Dems have a three-touch lead AND the ball, it’s the fourth quarter, and the GOP Deefense has been out there working hard since the middle of the first quarter. And just take a look at who’s playing quarterback for them.
I smell a blowout.
Jaim
When liberals don’t get their way you’re supposed to holla “Impeach Bush” till your face turns blue, you start foaming at the mouth and your head literally bursts from exasperation, stupid.
BTW, it’s funny how the name “Richard Armitage” is conveniently forgotten by liberals so “concerned” about Valerie Plame’s “outing”.
It’s funny how MrGrey conveniently forgets that Armitage didn’t lie to protect Cheney from the rule of law.
“I respect the jury’s verdict, but I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive.”
In other words, “I do not respect the jury’s verdict.”
Why even have juries for federal crimes that implicate a President’s administration?
Geeze.
Two words:
“Marc Rich.”
Nice to see the system of checks & balances are in place to prevent a runaway judiciary.
That doesn’t really work. See, he was in the process of appealing his sentence. That’s where you find the checks and balances.
Four words: “answered in post 3.” Libby lied specifically to obstruct justice. Now Bush is rewarding him. That’s why your President’s at 25% in the polls, Ed. Because he’s a dishonorable criminal.
Marc Rich? Now that’s an interesting link since Scooter Libby was the lawyer for Marc Rich from 1985 to 2000. Either Marc Rich was not as evil as you folks assume him to be, or Scooter Libby is even twice as sleazy.
Marc Rich made tens of millions of dollars by illegally doing business with a terror state (back before the war on terror was in vogue), and then he became a fugitive to run away from American justice. (In fact, one of Rich’s companies did business with Iraq while Saddam was under sanctions.)
President Clinton, with the wave of a pen, removed even the taint of a conviction from Rich’s record. Libby (who, unlike Rich, didn’t make a nickel apart from his government salary during the time in question) faced the music, didn’t run or hide, and will live with a felony conviction on his record.
Ehud Barak? Denise Rich, one of Clinton’s biggest fund raisers, may have had a little more to do with “going to the mat” with Clinton on behalf of her husband.
Is the “Clinton Argument” that Clinton made a bad pardon, and that therefore, Bush can pardon anyone under any circumstances?
A simple “Yes” will do.
Do we have to go down the list of Bush Sr. pardons to compare to Clinton’s? I seem to recall airplane blowing up terrorists, rogue billionaire fugitives from justice, and heroin dealers.
But, it’s nice to hear you guys cheering for an administration that continues to go out of its way to undermine our intelligence services when we need them most. Good job traitors.
Marc Rich made tens of millions of dollars by illegally doing business with a terror state…
President Clinton, with the wave of a pen, removed even the taint of a conviction from Rich’s record
Posted by: Ed | Jul 2, 2007 8:55:49 PM
=======================
Ed, I’ll see your “But But Clinton” and raise you two “Reagan/Iran weapons for hostages/Cap Weinbergers”.
As I expected, everyone here is missing the relevant contrast and comparison.
1) The contrast between Bush/Libby and Clinton/Susan MacDougal.
Why did Bill let her sit in the slammer for nearly two years if she committed no crime? She received no special recognition from Clinton, she was just simply one of the batch of 140 “midnight pardons” he signed on Jan. 20, 2001. Why didn’t he take better care of Susan?
2) With respect to “corruption,” compare Bush/Libby to the Bill & Hillary Clinton/Hugh Rodham “Pardongate” scandal. As you recall, Hugh Rodham was forced to return $400,000 to Almon Glenn Braswell and Carlos Vignali after prosecutors learned that he “represented” them with respect to clemency.
Also, this is not a pardon, it is a commutation. Scooter Libby is still a convicted felon and still owes $250,000 in fines.
Marc Rich had to pay a $100,000 fine before returning to the US, and Carlos Vignali’s sentence was commuted after he had already served six years.
(Maybe Libby would have gotten a better deal from Hugh Rodham for that $250,000 he will pay in fines.)
Again, Ed, was Marc Rich horrible? If so, why did Scooter Libby represent him for 15 years? What a despicable lot you all are.
“Also, this is not a pardon, it is a commutation. Scooter Libby is still a convicted felon and still owes $250,000 in fines.”
Just a week ago Mike would have called this A-M-N-E-S-T-Y. My, what a difference a week can make.
What you guys don’t seem to understand is that the Bush administration exposed elements of our undercover intelligence program for political purposes. Not just Libby, but Rove, Armitage, and all the other guys on that chart - essentially the entire senior Bush administration. Any outrage or shame over this?
That exposure damaged our intelligence gathering abilities in several ways; intelligence gathering in Iraq and Iran, intelligence gathering and analysis in regards to proliferation and wmd programs in the middle east; it potentially exposed and endangered several undercover agents abroad; it exposed a CIA front company; and it undermined the faith of the intelligence community and jeopardized recruiting efforts.
And when the machinery went in motion to try and patch some of that damage through investigation and prosecution, demonstrating there is a consequence for exposing our agents, the Bush administration stonewalled, lied and obstructed, culminating in Libby’s trial for obstruction and perjury. He was tried and found guilty, and now President Bush has shown every agent and recruit that there is no consequence for endangering them, selling them out, undermining their efforts, or ruining their lives. And it seems too many Americans cheer this.
Oo, the trademark hypocrisy from wingnuttia is RANK in here tonight!
Ed, can you explain why Dick Cheney, whose company Halliburton ALSO did business with Saddam’s Iraq via a subsidiary while Cheney ran the company and Saddam was under sanctions, has never had to answer any questions?
“Executive Privilege”, right? You make me sick.
I think even the wingnuts will agree this move is one of the stupidest yet from this incompetent failure of an Administration.
I think even the wingnuts will agree this move is one of the stupidest yet from this incompetent failure of an Administration.
No, because that would require them to think.
Republican principles do not exist. Neither do Republican patriots.
You quoted Chris Dodd,
“The only ones paying the price for this Administration’s actions are the American people.”
Hundreds of thousands of dead, maimed, or bereaved Arabs might have disagreed.
Why is “obstruction of justice” so often applied to the actions of this administration?
Wellstone,
Maybe you could explain what was illegal about doing “business with Saddam’s Iraq”?
Saddam could legally sell a certain amount of oil; the oil sales were supposed to be monitored by the UN and the UN was supposed to account for the money earned from the sales and then verify that it was appropriated according to the Oil For Food agreement Saddam signed in 1991.
Halliburton provides oilfield services and equipment. Maybe you could explain how selling equipment or providing consulting and engineering services to Iraq so that they could pump oil and then sell it via the UN Oil For Food program was illegal.
The money from those oil sales was supposed to be spent on food and medicine. Are you saying that Halliburton should have let Iraqi children starve?
This is truly disgusting. Will they be getting away with this too? Is there a will to stop this shit?
Scooter remains a convicted felon. Is he still eligible for a taxpayer-funded pension after his scrape with the rule of law? Just askin’.
Hehe! All this partisan stuff is quite amusing, trying to decide whose steaming pardon stinks more. Todays news is a travesty on the face of it; an obvious favor to a fall guy in the wake of an act of treason.
But the defense of the Marc Rich pardon is equally smelly. Macswain’s comments at 6:04 p.m. are a great example. “Marc Rich was pardoned because Ehud Barak went to the mat for Clinton in trying to resolve one of the toughest international issues facing this world.” I guess the TIME article detailing Marc Rich’s $70K contribution to the first senate campaign of Hillary Clinton and Rich’s $450K donation to the Clinton presidential library were inconsequential.
Senator Clinton is today “outraged”.
hehehe! Tell me about it, sister!
Oh, the horror. A president using his constitutional powers of clemmency to commute the sentence of a political crony. Gee, we’ve never seen that happen before.
Foster,
Put the booze down for a second and get your facts straight. Though you may view women as chattel, it was Denise Rich who has given money to the Clintons as well as other Democrats; not her former husband.
Congress and James Comey in the DOJ investigated the shit out of it. Are you calling for the same here? Clinton also had legal opinions from some of the top tax experts in the country who said Rich did nothing wrong and Rich was still required to pay $100 million into a public pot; not the measly $250k Libbey’s rich backers will pay.
You & I will feel more sting from a speeding ticket.
Macswain,
Denise Rich, who gave the $520,000 to the Clintons also aggressively lobbied for her Marc’s pardon. I don’t generally attribute such means to chattel, and your aspersions of sexism are transparent diversions. And Martin Ginsberg (the “the top tax expert in the country who said Rich did nothing wrong”) was very gracious to the man who appointed his wife to the Supreme Court. We should all be blessed with such loyalty.
It stinks, Macswain. Just as today’s news does. My point is, while so many here insist you must decide which injustice smells worse, one cannot,in the end, recognize one and not the other. And the subtext is, don’t accept such corruption from either party. Ultimately, this level of corruption begins to blur the distinctions, leaving true power in the hands of those who can pay to play. The Irony of Rich having been represented by Libby only underscores the problem.
And leave my boozing out of this!!
CA-LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN-TO-
HO-HO-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN!
(echoes into distance)
Which CIA network did Marc Rich expose? Dumbass.
Marc Rich was pardoned because Ehud Barak went to the mat for Clinton in trying to resolve one of the toughest international issues facing this world.
Wow. I’m just weepy over that.
Of course, I witnessed all of the outrage that Democrats let loose when Clinton pardoned Mel Reynolds. Bank fraud, wire fraud, false statements and federal election fraud. He’s the same guy who had done 5 years already for banging a 16 year old campaign aide.
I remember how Democrats were outraged at such a travesty of justice.
Oh wait….
The phony outrage on behalf of what President Bush did for Libby is a freaking joke. Spare us all please.
“I remember how Democrats were outraged at such a travesty of justice.
Oh wait….”
I remember a lot of Democrats complaining about who Clinton pardoned.
“The phony outrage on behalf of what President Bush did for Libby is a freaking joke. Spare us all please.”
So you are complaining about Clinton pardoning people, but are also complaining about people complaining about Bush pardoning people.
Hmmm, that seems like hypocrisy to me. Perhaps I’m just misreading your statements.
I’ve long given up hope of intellectual honesty from Jay. I’m just surprised Dugger hasn’t shown up to spread his “political prisoner” elephant shit.
While we expect democracy
They’re laughing in our face
And although our cries get louder
Their laughter gets louder still
Above the sound of ideologies clashing.
I remember a lot of Democrats complaining about who Clinton pardoned.
Really? Got any source information to back that up because aside from Georgie Steph complaining about the pardon of Marc Rich, I don’t remember many Democrats saying much of anything.
So you are complaining about Clinton pardoning people, but are also complaining about people complaining about Bush pardoning people.
What’s done is done. What I am commenting on is what appears to me to be faux outrage. All of these self-aggrandizing statements by Edwards, Pelosi, Reid etc. are politically calculated comments (note Reid’s absurd “silencing critics of the Iraq war” BS), nothing more.
Faux outrage, even if you could prove it, is still an improvement over your total lack of principles. Scooter obstructed justice to protect the White House, and Bush rewarded him. Come back when you have an actual defense for these actions.
The problem here has little to do with George W. Bush or Bill “Eight Years Ago” Clinton.
The problem here is that the American people now understand that if you’re being prosecuted for a federal crime and ultimately convicted by a jury of your peers, if you are doing it for the sake of your administration and political party, you suffer no real consequences.
I don’t care if you play for the Red Team, the Blue Team, or if you live in Nigeria. This is a pathetic showing by the United States government.
What are the legal consequences for perjury? The answer cannot, as a fundamental truth, be “nothing.” And as a practical matter, “nothing” is what I. Scooter Libby received.
Yes, Bush has the “power” to do this. It’s in the Constitution. But that “argument” doesn’t get to the crux of the issue. Congress has the “power” to impeach Bush. Does the same “using his constitutional powers” apply here too?
The powers outlined in the Constitution are not cards to be played in a poker game. They represent the foundation on which this country was formed. This isn’t a joke, told by only the most powerful men (and sometimes women) in America.
This is why Americans don’t give a crap about politics. And how can you blame them?
Another disheartening display of executive arrogance in a series of disheartening displays in executive arrogance.
What does it mean to be convicted of perjury?
Very well put, Cellulose.
I’m so glad it comes right after Jay expressing the GOP’s core principle: “WHAT’S DONE IS DONE.” A perfect contrast to highlight exaclty what’s wrong with these Bush Republicans: they believe in nothing but power.
Scooter obstructed justice to protect the White House, and Bush rewarded him.
$250,000 fine, probation and a convicted felon? That’s some reward.
“[W]e must always maintain the highest ethical standards. We must always ask ourselves not only what is legal, but what is right. There is no goal of government worth accomplishing if it cannot be accomplished with integrity.”
– George W. Bush, 2001
“What’s done is done.”
– Jay, 2007
Ultimately, the message Bush left was clear- he doesn’t actually think Libby’s innocent. In fact, in his statement he even acknowledged Libby was guilty. But what matters to Bush and his cronies is that you can break whatever laws you want; it’s just not fair to actually have to go to jail for them. Let’s hope Democrats can hammer that message in over and over again: Bush doesn’t think people who break the law for him should go to jail…If there was any sense in the major campaigns, the Democratic talking point for 2008 should be “Vote Democrat 2008: because Republicans actually hate you.“
Convicted. By a jury. Appeals for stay of sentence denied. By a judge. Who cited the jury decision.
Come on, Wingnuts, admit it: Scooter was busted for a serious matter and convicted. Forget anybody else or anything else, this is all that matters.
And what happened to the George W. Bush who, as Texas governor, once commented on the 152 people whose executions he presided over, “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”?
By commuting the sentence instead of pardoning, Bush ensures Libby can’t be forced to testify by Congress. 250K’s a drop in the bucket for a loyal Bush soldier. Now the American people may never know the nature of Cheney and Bush’s wrongdoing, but we do know that they were sufficiently frightened to pull this very unpopular decision out of their bag of tricks. (60% of the public think Scooter should have served his time.)
Actually, my “What’s done is done” comment is about what Clinton did as well as it was implied that I was bitching about the pardon of statutory rapist Mel Reynolds, but not about Libby.
Of course, reading comprehension has never been your strong suit.
Your statement is clear, Jay: actual crimes are of less importance to you than “faux outrage” is. The faultiness of your moral compass could not be more obvious — I’m surprised you feel any shame about it, frankly.
actual crimes are of less importance to you than “faux outrage” is.
My comments have nothing to do with one versus the other. My comments about faux outrage (which it is) stands on their own. I don’t care for phonies.
If your moral compass was so in tune, you’d never want anything to do with Bill Clinton again he issued a plethora of pardons to various thugs and creeps. Ah, but that’s not the case now is it? You’d all be happy as pigs in shit if Bill were to become the first ‘first husband.’ As such, actual crimes are of no importance to you. All that matters to you is who commits them and who is on the receiving end of a Presidential preference. Mel Reynolds? “Oh well.” Scooter Libby? “That’s outrageous!!!”
Like I said: phony.
“he issued a plethora of pardons to various thugs and creeps”
But did he do it to protect his own office from an investigation? That’s what people are mad about, since you’re mind-reading skills seem to be so off. Think I’m phony all you like: you still have offered no defense for Scooter’s obstruction of justice and have shown no sign of being up to the task.
I can’t make a case that justifies Libby not going to jail, so let me call some liberals names.
To Mike, who needs a primer on legal and illegal business activity while under sanctions:
First, it was ILLEGAL for ANY US-based company to do business with Iraq, as it is illegal to do business with ANY official “State Sponsor of Terror.”
Period.
So Halliburton purchased a foreign subsidiary to make money with Saddam. In effect, they used a LOOPHOLE to circumvent US Law.
Does that sound familiar? It is a trademark of this bunch.
Link
“… According to oil industry executives and confidential United Nations records, however, Halliburton held stakes in two firms that signed contracts to sell more than $73 million in oil production equipment and spare parts to Iraq while Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer of the Dallas-based company…”
“…Cheney has offered contradictory accounts of how much he knew about Halliburton’s dealings with Iraq. In a July 30, 2000, interview on ABC-TV’s “This Week,” he denied that Halliburton or its subsidiaries traded with Baghdad.
“I had a firm policy that we wouldn’t do anything in Iraq, even arrangements that were supposedly legal,” he said. “We’ve not done any business in Iraq since U.N. sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a standing policy that I wouldn’t do that.”
Cheney modified his response in an interview on the same program three weeks later, after he was informed that a Halliburton spokesman had acknowledged that Dresser Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump traded with Iraq. He said he was unaware that the subsidiaries were doing business with the Iraqi regime when Halliburton purchased Dresser Industries in September 1998.
“We inherited two joint ventures with Ingersoll-Rand that were selling some parts into Iraq,” Cheney explained, “but we divested ourselves of those interests.”
The divestiture, however, was not immediate. The firms traded with Baghdad for more than a year under Cheney, signing nearly $30 million in contracts before he sold Halliburton’s 49 percent stake in Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co. in December 1999 and its 51 percent interest in Dresser Rand to Ingersoll-Rand in February 2000, according to U.N. records…”
So what we end up with, Mike, is simple: With the stroke of a pen, Bush has completely chopped off the legs of ANY moral or comparative argument by any wingnut.
The BEST you can offer now, Mike, is that you and Bush are just as bad as Clinton was, if not worse. We all know what that means to wingnuttia.
Thank you for playing, and you may take the consolation prize of the Home Version of “Political Spin”, so you can practice while huddled in your bunker with Dick Cheney at an undisclosed location, and prepare for the next political catastrophe out of your White House.
To Mike, who needs a primer on legal and illegal business activity while under sanctions:
First, it was ILLEGAL for ANY US-based company to do business with Iraq, as it is illegal to do business with ANY official “State Sponsor of Terror.”
Period.
So Halliburton purchased a foreign subsidiary to make money with Saddam. In effect, they used a LOOPHOLE to circumvent US Law.
Does that sound familiar? It is a trademark of this bunch.
Link
“… According to oil industry executives and confidential United Nations records, however, Halliburton held stakes in two firms that signed contracts to sell more than $73 million in oil production equipment and spare parts to Iraq while Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer of the Dallas-based company…”
“…Cheney has offered contradictory accounts of how much he knew about Halliburton’s dealings with Iraq. In a July 30, 2000, interview on ABC-TV’s “This Week,” he denied that Halliburton or its subsidiaries traded with Baghdad.
“I had a firm policy that we wouldn’t do anything in Iraq, even arrangements that were supposedly legal,” he said. “We’ve not done any business in Iraq since U.N. sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a standing policy that I wouldn’t do that.”
Cheney modified his response in an interview on the same program three weeks later, after he was informed that a Halliburton spokesman had acknowledged that Dresser Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump traded with Iraq. He said he was unaware that the subsidiaries were doing business with the Iraqi regime when Halliburton purchased Dresser Industries in September 1998.
“We inherited two joint ventures with Ingersoll-Rand that were selling some parts into Iraq,” Cheney explained, “but we divested ourselves of those interests.”
The divestiture, however, was not immediate. The firms traded with Baghdad for more than a year under Cheney, signing nearly $30 million in contracts before he sold Halliburton’s 49 percent stake in Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co. in December 1999 and its 51 percent interest in Dresser Rand to Ingersoll-Rand in February 2000, according to U.N. records…”
So what we end up with, Mike, is simple: With the stroke of a pen, Bush has completely chopped off the legs of ANY moral or comparative argument by any wingnut.
The BEST you can offer now, Mike, is that you and Bush are just as bad as Clinton was, if not worse. We all know what that means to wingnuttia.
Thank you for playing, and you may take the consolation prize of the Home Version of “Political Spin”, so you can practice while huddled in your bunker with Dick Cheney at an undisclosed location, and prepare for the next political catastrophe out of your White House.
But did he do it to protect his own office from an investigation? That’s what people are mad about
Nothing the President did protects him from an investigation. You pulled that “Libby cannot testify before Congress now” stuff right out of your ass. So that is NOT what people are mad about.
Keep telling yourself that though.
“You pulled that “Libby cannot testify before Congress now” stuff right out of your ass.”
No. Because his sentence was commuted, his appeal is pending. That means he can still take the 5th if called before Congress. If he’d been pardoned, he couldn’t. It’s really not that complicated, Jay. That’s why Bush didn’t pardon him — to protect the White House from his potential testimony.
“I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors.”
– George H.W. Bush, 1999
“What’s done is done.”
– Jay, 2007
Hang on a second. Waaaaay back up there–second comment, from Marty:
“You’re absolutely right Oliver. Just ask Mark Rich.”
If you want to go that route, Marty, let me riddle you this: Who was Marc Rich’s lawyer when he was angling for that pardon?
Here’s a hint: his name starts with “I.” and ends with “lewisscooterlibby.”
Weird, but true.
“You pulled “Libby cannot testify before Congress now” stuff right out of your ass.”
Sure, if his ass is logic, or maybe the concept of thinking about the issue for five seconds.
Scooter’s jail sentence was commuted, yes? So legally speaking he’s on probation now, which I understand lasts two years, plenty of time for ol’ Scoots to draw a gigantic curtain with the Fifth Amendment on it around himself every time anyone asks him a question, until his inevitable full and unconditional pardon in January 2009.
No. Because his sentence was commuted, his appeal is pending. That means he can still take the 5th if called before Congress. If he’d been pardoned, he couldn’t. It’s really not that complicated, Jay. That’s why Bush didn’t pardon him — to protect the White House from his potential testimony.
This makes absolutely no sense (not surprising). Even if he was fully pardoned he could have taken the fifth. Invoking the 5th amendment is used to protect yourself, not others so this notion that a commuted sentence was part of some plot to keep Libby from talking is just more of your ignorant blather.
Hunh? Wuzzat? Z adura beat me to it? Twice?
Shoot. That’s what I get for not catching up on the thread ‘fore I post.
Good work, z.
Even if he was fully pardoned he could have taken the fifth. Invoking the 5th amendment is used to protect yourself, not others
If one has been pardoned, Jay, one is not in jeopardy of self-incrimination; thus taking he Fifth becomes unnecessary.
I see Nimrod and Handjob are reading the same legal books that must have been written by Barney Fife.
If one has been pardoned, Jay, one is not in jeopardy of self-incrimination; thus taking he Fifth becomes unnecessary.
Regardless Quaker, invoking the fifth amendment is used to protect against self incrimination. Libby cannot take the fifth to protect somebody else.
So again, this notion that people are upset because it prevents Libby from testifying before Congress is bullshit.
I AM RIGHT DAMN IT
You’re really not getting it, are you, Jay? You can’t hide behind the 5th on a matter you’ve already been pardoned for because you cannot be incriminated on that matter. You can, however, draw new charges of perjury or contempt. Lucky that his sentence was commuted, though! That pending appeal means he can’t be called to testify by Congress at all! If only we were all so well connected to powerful criminals like Bush and Cheney!
“Libby cannot take the fifth to protect somebody else.”
If it implicates himself, he can. What we’re discussing is the idea that he was ordered by Cheney to leak Plame’s identity to punish Joe Wilson for exposing one of Cheney’s pro-war claims. Yes, he can hide that order from Cheney behind the 5th.
You can’t hide behind the 5th on a matter you’ve already been pardoned for because you cannot be incriminated on that matter. You can, however, draw new charges of perjury or contempt.
No shit Sherlock.
Lucky that his sentence was commuted, though! That pending appeal means he can’t be called to testify by Congress at all!
Says who? Where did you get this brilliant piece of insight? Oh I forgot. From your ass.
What we’re discussing is the idea that he was ordered by Cheney to leak Plame’s identity to punish Joe Wilson for exposing one of Cheney’s pro-war claims.
We already know that’s not the case, so what is your point?
“Where did you get this brilliant piece of insight?”
No, his appeal could still reverse his fine and his probation status. As long as that’s pending, he can decline to give self-incriminating testimony on the basis that it might affect its outcome. If we were pardoned, he couldn’t make that argument. This really isn’t that complicated, Jay.
“That means he can still take the 5th if called before Congress. If he’d been pardoned, he couldn’t.”
I take it you never watched a second of Oliver North’s testimony in the Iran-Contra investigation.
in fact, I did. What point are you trying to make? Obviously if they give Libby immunity, it’d be a different story. North was given immunity because they were trying to get to the people above him. But in Libby’s case, they need a stick, not a carrrot.
As long as that’s pending, he can decline to give self-incriminating testimony on the basis that it might affect its outcome.
Again, self incriminating testimony. He can only protect himself. You seem to be having trouble grasping that concept.
If we were pardoned, he couldn’t make that argument.
Yes but he could still take the 5th because he could draw new charges. You said so yourself.
You’re tripping over your own words and using it merely as way to justify your supposed ‘outrage’ at this action. You’re behaving as though you’d be celebrating a pardon because it would make Libby ripe for Congressional testimony, but I sincerely doubt it.
What we’re discussing is the idea that he was ordered by Cheney to leak Plame’s identity to punish Joe Wilson for exposing one of Cheney’s pro-war claims. Yes, he can hide that order from Cheney behind the 5th.
Funny how that seems to have passed everyone by.
Funny how that seems to have passed everyone by.
It’s been passed by because it’s a complete non-starter. We already know who was the source of the information. So while this notion that Cheney was in his office, cackling and twisting his mustache, while ordering Libby to leak Plame’s identity makes for a great story at Bush Haters Anonymous meetings, it has no basis in fact.
If Libby were pardoned, Congress could force him to testify about the specific lies he told in court.
As it stands now, pending appeal, Congress can’t force him to do that.
Are you ever going to say anything that addresses this simple point?
You mean you don’t want it to.
I stand in awe of the brainwashing job done by the right-wing media-spin machine on wingnuttia.
In spite of clear and convincing testimony, the distortions and outright denials of facts continue from these idiots.
1. Libby DID leak Valerie Plame’s name, at least to Judith Miller, perhaps and probably to others.
2. Valerie Plame WAS a CIA Covert Agent, working to protect her country from the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
2. How many OTHER leakers there were, and we may never know who and how many, is immaterial to intent and law.
3. The leaks were ordered by Cheney’s office, which issued clear orders to their operatives to attack Joe Wilson’s credibility.
4. All the main points Wilson made in his Op-Ed have been proven true.
5. Libby was convicted of several felony counts of Obstruction of Justice, Making False Statements, and Perjury. Convicted. By a jury. Sentenced for his crimes. He remains a felon.
Wow- missed a few comments here. Let’s try this on for size. Perhaps Libby should have gotten a $50,000 fine and probation. Seems the going rate for stealing classified documents involving our national security, lying to investigators and then getting caught in said lies.
Oh Wait!
That wasn’t Libby’s deal. He got caught making contradicting statements in an investigation in which the special prosecutor knew within the first five days who “leaked” the name AND no federal law had been broken.
In any case, his remaining fine is five times higher (than the paper in the pants guy) and he is now on probation as a convicted felon barring it being overturned on appeal. Oh yeah- and he lost his job, unlike that certain past high profile case of lying under oath. Punishment seems to fit the crime here when you look at recent precedent.