Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on June 05, 2007, 09:49:29 AM
-
I doubt he serves time. If he is allowed to remain free on bond pending his appeal, he'll get pardoned by Bush.
Libby sentenced to 30 months in prison
POSTED: 12:45 p.m. EDT, June 5, 2007
Story Highlights• NEW: Former vice presidential aide also assessed $250,000 fine
• Libby was convicted in March of perjury, obstruction of justice
• Libby maintains his innocence, will appeal his conviction
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was sentenced Tuesday to 30 months in prison for lying to investigators looking into the leak of a CIA operative's identity.
He also was fined $250,000. Libby was convicted March 6 of four counts in a five-count indictment alleging perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to FBI investigators.
He plans to appeal the verdict.
The 30-month sentence was for the obstruction of justice charge. Libby received shorter sentences on the other counts, to run concurrently.
"People who occupy these types of positions, where they have the welfare and security of the nation in their hands, have a special obligation to not do anything that might create a problem," U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said, according to The Associated Press.
Libby was found guilty in March of lying to investigators about what he told reporters about Valerie Plame, whose identity as a CIA operative was leaked to the media in 2003.
Libby has maintained his innocence ever since he was indicted and resigned in October 2005.
Libby spoke briefly at the sentencing hearing, telling the judge, "It is respectfully my hope that the court will consider, along with the jury verdict, my whole life," the AP reported.
Among those in the packed courtroom were Libby's wife, Harriet Grant, sitting with conservative commentator Mary Matalin, a former Cheney aide, the AP said.
On Tuesday, the judge released dozens of letters written to him by Libby's supporters and detractors, including former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton.
In one letter, Robert Blackwill, who served as presidential envoy to Iraq and in several other posts under President Bush, said he has known Libby for 20 years.
"During these years at the White House, I encountered no one more driven by analytical temperament, fairness of mind and sound policy reasoning than Scooter Libby," Blackwill said.
"Mr. Libby in my judgment has been, over the decades, an exemplary public policy practitioner."
Another person, whose signature was redacted, wrote, "I am writing to urge that Scooter Libby receive the maximum possible sentence. Due to the crimes for which he was convicted, we may never know of the more substantial criminal activities for which he served as a firewall."
The case involves statements Libby made to the FBI and a grand jury during their probe into how the covert identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame was leaked. Libby was the only person charged in the probe. He was not accused of actually leaking classified material.
Plame's name became public when Robert Novak named her in his column on July 14, 2003. Her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, had openly questioned the Bush administration's basis for invading Iraq. (Timeline of key events in investigation)
Former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has admitted he disclosed the information to a reporter. Novak pointed to another "senior administration official" -- Bush political adviser Karl Rove -- as the second source for his column.
After the jury returned its verdict against Libby on March 6, lead defense attorney Ted Wells appeared on the courthouse steps with Libby and his other attorneys and declared, "We have every confidence Mr. Libby ultimately will be vindicated." Wells said he believes his client is "totally innocent and that he did not do anything wrong."
Cheney has continued to express support and empathy for his former chief of staff, and it's possible Libby could be granted a presidential pardon before the end of President Bush's term.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/05/cia.leak.trial/index.html
-
The man got sentenced for having a bad memory. :-\
-
The man got sentenced for having a bad memory. :-\
With no underlying crime. No one has been prosecuted for "outing" Plame.
-
Why is it even a crime to lie for the Vice President? ::)
-
If there was't a crime committed how could he be going to jail?
-
If there was't a crime committed how could he be going to jail?
I just think it was a witch-hunt. It's also just my opinion that the information after-the-fact points in the direction of a witch-hunt.
-
If there was't a crime committed how could he be going to jail?
"Libby was convicted March 6 of four counts in a five-count indictment alleging perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to FBI investigators."
What was he lying about? The "outing" of Plame, which apparently wasn't a crime.
-
"Libby was convicted March 6 of four counts in a five-count indictment alleging perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to FBI investigators."
What was he lying about? The "outing" of Plame, which apparently wasn't a crime.
Isn't perjury a crime?
-
Isn't perjury a crime?
but here is the thing...outing plame wasn't a crime in the first place, so he never should have been asked about it....if noone is going to jail for outing plame then why does it matter if he knew the name or not?
-
Isn't perjury a crime?
Of course.
-
but here is the thing...outing plame wasn't a crime in the first place, so he never should have been asked about it....if noone is going to jail for outing plame then why does it matter if he knew the name or not?
I suppose it doesn''t matter unless you are asked under oath and lie about it?
-
With no underlying crime. No one has been prosecuted for "outing" Plame.
No underlying crime? Libby lied in court and got caught.
End of story for him. Perjury prosecutions like Libby’s are not unusual. Hell, if witnesses could lie with impunity, then the entire justice system would break down.
He deserves more time in prison and I’ll tell you why.
In the Plame affair, rather than confront Mr. Wilson’s accusations directly, the White House went after him and his wife—and then lied about the involvement of its senior officials in disclosing her identity. The perpetrators of these unpatriotic partisan acts have yet to be punished, and the President, as usual, has failed to uphold his own professed ethical standards.
Remember Bush saying this, “And if this helps stop leaks, this investigation in finding the truth, it'll not only hold someone to account who should not have leaked -- and this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action. But also hopefully we'll help send a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop as well.”
He authorized the leak and bullshitted the American public. http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0406nj1.htm
The Bush Administration ruined the career of a covert WMD inspector during a time of war where WMDs play a central role.
That sure stinks to high heaven.
-
No underlying crime? Libby lied in court and got caught.
End of story for him. Perjury prosecutions like Libby’s are not unusual. Hell, if witnesses could lie with impunity, then the entire justice system would break down.
He deserves more time in prison and I’ll tell you why.
In the Plame affair, rather than confront Mr. Wilson’s accusations directly, the White House went after him and his wife—and then lied about the involvement of its senior officials in disclosing her identity. The perpetrators of these unpatriotic partisan acts have yet to be punished, and the President, as usual, has failed to uphold his own professed ethical standards.
Remember Bush saying this, “And if this helps stop leaks, this investigation in finding the truth, it'll not only hold someone to account who should not have leaked -- and this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action. But also hopefully we'll help send a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop as well.”
He authorized the leak and bullshitted the American public. http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0406nj1.htm
The Bush Administration ruined the career of a covert WMD inspector during a time of war where WMDs play a central role.
That sure stinks to high heaven.
What was the underlying crime?
Even the jurors believe he was a fall guy.
-
No underlying crime? Libby lied in court and got caught.
End of story for him. Perjury prosecutions like Libby’s are not unusual. Hell, if witnesses could lie with impunity, then the entire justice system would break down.
He deserves more time in prison and I’ll tell you why.
In the Plame affair, rather than confront Mr. Wilson’s accusations directly, the White House went after him and his wife—and then lied about the involvement of its senior officials in disclosing her identity. The perpetrators of these unpatriotic partisan acts have yet to be punished, and the President, as usual, has failed to uphold his own professed ethical standards.
Remember Bush saying this, “And if this helps stop leaks, this investigation in finding the truth, it'll not only hold someone to account who should not have leaked -- and this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action. But also hopefully we'll help send a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop as well.”
He authorized the leak and bullshitted the American public. http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0406nj1.htm
The Bush Administration ruined the career of a covert WMD inspector during a time of war where WMDs play a central role.
That sure stinks to high heaven.
Bill Clinton is the only man that can lie in court under oath, c'mon you guys know that! 8)
-
What was the underlying crime?
Even the jurors believe he was a fall guy.
Who cares what the 'underlying crime' was?
Perjury and obstruction of justice are both crimes the last time I checked.
How can an investigation get to the bottom of a matter if the participants under scrutiny are lying to the investigators?
The larger issue is still relevant to me: The entire Plame affair reeks of treason done solely for a game of political 'gotcha'.
-
Bill Clinton is the only man that can lie in court under oath, c'mon you guys know that! 8)
That depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
-
Bill Clinton is the only man that can lie in court under oath, c'mon you guys know that! 8)
Yeah, and the 12th pope was a bastard too. And the price of tea in china is down.
-
Who cares what the 'underlying crime' was?
Perjury and obstruction of justice are both crimes the last time I checked.
How can an investigation get to the bottom of a matter if the participants under scrutiny are lying to the investigators?
The larger issue is still relevant to me: The entire Plame affair reeks of treason done solely for a game of political 'gotcha'.
I care. In other words, there was no underlying crime, like I've already stated.
You can throw words like "treason" around all you want, but no one has been charged with a crime (other than Libby).
I agree with the jurors on this one: Libby was simply a fall guy.
-
Yeah, and the 12th pope was a bastard too. And the price of tea in china is down.
atta boy! give clinton a free pass 8)
-
I care. In other words, there was no underlying crime, like I've already stated.
You can throw words like "treason" around all you want, but no one has been charged with a crime (other than Libby).
I agree with the jurors on this one: Libby was simply a fall guy.
I said that it 'reeks of treason'...the Bush gang is not stupid. He helped destroy a covert WMD agent all legal like. He authorized the leak. Bush lied about his knowledge of the entire outing of Plame...for once in his life, he played stupid instead of actually being stupid.
Beach Bum you say "Libby was simply a fall guy." right? A fall guy for whom and what?
-
I said that it 'reeks of treason'...the Bush gang is not stupid. He helped destroy a covert WMD agent all legal like. He authorized the leak. Bush lied about his knowledge of the entire outing of Plame...for once in his life, he played stupid instead of actually being stupid.
Beach Bum you say "Libby was simply a fall guy." right? A fall guy for whom and what?
I have no idea. Maybe "fall guy" isn't the right phrase. He is the victim of a witch hunt.
-
Who cares what the 'underlying crime' was?
Perjury and obstruction of justice are both crimes the last time I checked.
How can an investigation get to the bottom of a matter if the participants under scrutiny are lying to the investigators?
The larger issue is still relevant to me: The entire Plame affair reeks of treason done solely for a game of political 'gotcha'.
Plame's boss testified that she was not in covert status...that is why the leaking of her name is not a criminal act....It would be like calling a guy to the stand that wittnessed a water gun fight..."do you remember who shot the water first"..."no I don't" ...down the road they find out he lied about knowing so they throw him in jail? And no that isn't far fetched because the leaking of her name isn't any more illegal than a water gun fight.
-
Plame's boss testified that she was not in covert status...that is why the leaking of her name is not a criminal act....It would be like calling a guy to the stand that wittnessed a water gun fight..."do you remember who shot the water first"..."no I don't" ...down the road they find out he lied about knowing so they throw him in jail? And no that isn't far fetched because the leaking of her name isn't any more illegal than a water gun fight.
Right.
-
Plame's boss testified that she was not in covert status...that is why the leaking of her name is not a criminal act....It would be like calling a guy to the stand that wittnessed a water gun fight..."do you remember who shot the water first"..."no I don't" ...down the road they find out he lied about knowing so they throw him in jail? And no that isn't far fetched because the leaking of her name isn't any more illegal than a water gun fight.
She was covert. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
Plame was ‘covert’ agent at time of name leak
Newly released unclassified document details CIA employment
Libby is likely the first step in the US's case for finding who leaked a covert agent's status. Here's what Atty. Fitzgerald had to say:
"Libby's lies, made impossible an accurate evaluation of the role that Mr. Libby and those with whom he worked played in the disclosure of information regarding Ms. Wilson's CIA employment and about the motivations for their actions."
"The investigation was necessary to determine whether there was concerted action by any combination of the officials known to have disclosed the information about Ms. Plame to the media as anonymous sources, and also whether any of those who were involved acted at the direction of others. This was particularly important in light of Mr. Libby's statement to the FBI that he may have discussed Ms. Wilson's employment with reporters at the specific direction of the Vice President."
This is not over yet. Libby is the first link in the chain.
-
She was covert. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
Plame was ‘covert’ agent at time of name leak
Newly released unclassified document details CIA employment
Libby is likely the first step in the US's case for finding who leaked a covert agent's status. Here's what Atty. Fitzgerald had to say:
"Libby's lies, made impossible an accurate evaluation of the role that Mr. Libby and those with whom he worked played in the disclosure of information regarding Ms. Wilson's CIA employment and about the motivations for their actions."
"The investigation was necessary to determine whether there was concerted action by any combination of the officials known to have disclosed the information about Ms. Plame to the media as anonymous sources, and also whether any of those who were involved acted at the direction of others. This was particularly important in light of Mr. Libby's statement to the FBI that he may have discussed Ms. Wilson's employment with reporters at the specific direction of the Vice President."
This is not over yet. Libby is the first link in the chain.
Dude, I saw the clip where her direct supervisor was on the stand and testified under oath that she was not in covert status...you can show me all of the reporters renditions you want, but I saw and heard it first hand......
-
Dude, I saw the clip where her direct supervisor was on the stand and testified under oath that she was not in covert status...you can show me all of the reporters renditions you want, but I saw and heard it first hand......
I wasn't aware that the testimony of her 'boss' was dispositve of the case. Where is this "testimony"? B/c I don't believe you have access to grand jury testimony. It's secret.
Her peers certainly admitted that she was covert all along.
-
Here is Joseph Wilson himself, talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today: "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity." Read that again. Now reflect on the fact that there has been an ongoing investigation FOR TWO YEARS conducted, we were breathlessly and rather constantly told in the weeks surrounding the initial controversy, on the basis that the White House and reporters OUTED A CLANDESTINE AGENT. Now we know. She wasn't. Not then.
-
Here is Joseph Wilson himself, talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today: "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity." Read that again. Now reflect on the fact that there has been an ongoing investigation FOR TWO YEARS conducted, we were breathlessly and rather constantly told in the weeks surrounding the initial controversy, on the basis that the White House and reporters OUTED A CLANDESTINE AGENT. Now we know. She wasn't. Not then.
What the heck are they investigating then?
-
Does it matter whether Plame was covert or not?
The last time I checked it wasn't a crime to get a free blow job yet Clinton was convicted (impeached by the House) for lying under oath about this non-crime (and also was disbarred).
Personally, I believe she was covert but even if she was not the act of destroying a covert asset (Brewster Jennings was a CIA front company) to damage Wilson (who was proven correct in his claims regarding guy) is despicable
from march 13th of this year:
During House hearings today, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) announced that CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden recently told Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) that there was no doubt Victoria Plame Wilson was covert. Cummings — relaying what Waxman had told him — said that Gen. Hayden expressed clearly and directly, “Ms. Wilson was covert.”
Cummings also asked Wilson to respond to the specific claim, made by Victoria Toensing and others, that Plame had lost her covert status because she “had not been stationed abroad within five years.” Cummings asked, “During the past five years, Ms. Plame, from today, did you conduct secret missions overseas?” She answered, “Yes I did, congressman.”
-
Here is Joseph Wilson himself, talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today: "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity." Read that again. Now reflect on the fact that there has been an ongoing investigation FOR TWO YEARS conducted, we were breathlessly and rather constantly told in the weeks surrounding the initial controversy, on the basis that the White House and reporters OUTED A CLANDESTINE AGENT. Now we know. She wasn't. Not then.
Wilson has explained that as soon as she was outed by Novak she was 'de facto' no longer covert
-
Here is Joseph Wilson himself, talking to Wolf Blitzer on CNN today: "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity." Read that again. Now reflect on the fact that there has been an ongoing investigation FOR TWO YEARS conducted, we were breathlessly and rather constantly told in the weeks surrounding the initial controversy, on the basis that the White House and reporters OUTED A CLANDESTINE AGENT. Now we know. She wasn't. Not then.
The link I provided states quite clearly that the CIA classified her as a covert spy.
"Clandestine" means nothing. The operative word is 'covert'. She was covert.
Here's a link to the applicable law:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html
Note that "covert" is the operative word and "clandestine" is nowhere to be found.
Even if Joe Wilson confused the two terms, which I don't think he did, his opinion is not relevant to the legal proceedings.
-
The link I provided states quite clearly that the CIA classified her as a covert spy.
"Clandestine" means nothing. The operative word is 'covert'. She was covert.
Here's a link to the applicable law:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html
Note that "covert" is the operative word and "clandestine" is nowhere to be found.
Even if Joe Wilson confused the two terms, which I don't think he did, his opinion is not relevant to the legal proceedings.
Why wasn't Novak prosecuted if he outed a covert agent?
-
I don't know..I mean he says he can't remember..whatever. They couldn't find anything big over this, unlike Sandy Burger.
-
from what I've read:
"Fitzgerald's decision had nothing to do with technical aspects of IIPA, but rather with its scienter requirements. That is, the leakers had to know that leaking Plame's name could be damaging, and Fitzgerald didn't think he had the evidence to make that case. That might have been especially true since the leaks seem to have been authorized at very high levels, something the leakers could have used in their defense at trial"
-
Why wasn't Novak prosecuted if he outed a covert agent?
Read Straw Man's latest. Knowledge in leaking is the key.
-
I doubt he serves time. If he is allowed to remain free on bond pending his appeal, he'll get pardoned by Bush.
Libby sentenced to 30 months in prison
Libby was convicted March 6 of four counts in a five-count indictment alleging perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to FBI investigators.
IMO, if you out a CIA spy, you should suffer the same fate as Saddam.
-
IMO, if you out a CIA spy, you should suffer the same fate as Saddam.
Our National Security depends on covert CIA spies.
Oh, like Bush really gives a sh*t.
-
Does it matter whether Plame was covert or not?
The last time I checked it wasn't a crime to get a free blow job yet Clinton was convicted (impeached by the House) for lying under oath about this non-crime (and also was disbarred).
Personally, I believe she was covert but even if she was not the act of destroying a covert asset (Brewster Jennings was a CIA front company) to damage Wilson (who was proven correct in his claims regarding guy) is despicable
from march 13th of this year:
During House hearings today, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) announced that CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden recently told Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) that there was no doubt Victoria Plame Wilson was covert. Cummings — relaying what Waxman had told him — said that Gen. Hayden expressed clearly and directly, “Ms. Wilson was covert.”
Cummings also asked Wilson to respond to the specific claim, made by Victoria Toensing and others, that Plame had lost her covert status because she “had not been stationed abroad within five years.” Cummings asked, “During the past five years, Ms. Plame, from today, did you conduct secret missions overseas?” She answered, “Yes I did, congressman.”
actually her full response was basically that once covert always covert...which in CIA buisness isn't true. If you aren't sent on a covert overseas mission for 5 years then you lose covert status.....you guys are taking things out of context to support your claims. Plain and simple she was covert at one time but was not covert at the time of the leak...
-
actually her full response was basically that once covert always covert...which in CIA buisness isn't true. If you aren't sent on a covert overseas mission for 5 years then you lose covert status.....you guys are taking things out of context to support your claims. Plain and simple she was covert at one time but was not covert at the time of the leak...
see the last paragragh of the post to which you are responding
Cummings also asked Wilson to respond to the specific claim, made by Victoria Toensing and others, that Plame had lost her covert status because she “had not been stationed abroad within five years.” Cummings asked, “During the past five years, Ms. Plame, from today, did you conduct secret missions overseas?” She answered, “Yes I did, congressman.”
-
Read Straw Man's latest. Knowledge in leaking is the key.
So who outed a covert CIA agent, besides Novak who didn't know she was "covert"? I see a lot of smoke, but no fire.
-
actually her full response was basically that once covert always covert...which in CIA buisness isn't true. If you aren't sent on a covert overseas mission for 5 years then you lose covert status.....you guys are taking things out of context to support your claims. Plain and simple she was covert at one time but was not covert at the time of the leak...
(4) The term “covert agent” means—
(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency—
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or
Plame testified that she had undertaken overseas assignments in the five years before she was outed, meaning that even the narrow provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 would have been met in her case.
-
So who outed a covert CIA agent, besides Novak who didn't know she was "covert"? I see a lot of smoke, but no fire.
On June 23, 2003, LIBBY met with New York Times reporter Judith Miller. During this meeting . . . Libby informed her that [Joe] Wilson’s wife might work at the CIA.
Paragraph 17 of the Indictment describes Libby telling Miller again that Plame was a CIA agent on July 8, 2003.
Paragraph 21 of the Indictment describes Official A (Karl Rove) as confirming to Robert Novak that Palme was a CIA agent during the week prior to July 11, 2003 (presumably after July 6.)
Paragraph 23 of the Indictment describes Libby telling Matt Cooper that Plame was a CIA agent on July 12, 2003.
Paragraph 24 of the Indictment describes Libby telling Judith Miller again on July 12, 2003 that Plame was a CIA agent (apparently Judy Miller has a faulty memory and could not hold the thought in her head).
-
(4) The term “covert agent” means—
(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency—
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or
Plame testified that she had undertaken overseas assignments in the five years before she was outed, meaning that even the narrow provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 would have been met in her case.
Recently declassified CIA documents confirm that she was indeed covert at the time she was outed.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
WASHINGTON - An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.....The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."
-
see the last paragragh of the post to which you are responding
that is what I am refering to...here is the rest:
Congressman, thank you for the opportunity. I know I’m here under oath, and I am here to say I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency. Just like a general is a general whether he is in the field in Iraq or Afghanistan, when he comes back to the Pentagon, he is still a general. In the same way, covert operations officers who are serving in the field, when they rotate back to a temporary assignment in Washington, they, too, are still covert.
But CIA protocal says you have to be sent on overseas covert missions at least every 5 years and she did not fulfill that...just becasue she went over seas doesn't mean she went covertly...
-
On June 23, 2003, LIBBY met with New York Times reporter Judith Miller. During this meeting . . . Libby informed her that [Joe] Wilson’s wife might work at the CIA.
Paragraph 17 of the Indictment describes Libby telling Miller again that Plame was a CIA agent on July 8, 2003.
Paragraph 21 of the Indictment describes Official A (Karl Rove) as confirming to Robert Novak that Palme was a CIA agent during the week prior to July 11, 2003 (presumably after July 6.)
Paragraph 23 of the Indictment describes Libby telling Matt Cooper that Plame was a CIA agent on July 12, 2003.
Paragraph 24 of the Indictment describes Libby telling Judith Miller again on July 12, 2003 that Plame was a CIA agent (apparently Judy Miller has a faulty memory and could not hold the thought in her head).
O.K. Then why wasn't he charged with outing a covert agent? This seems kind of silly to me. Remember that old Wendy's commercial? "Where's the beef?"
-
that is what I am refering to...here is the rest:
Congressman, thank you for the opportunity. I know I’m here under oath, and I am here to say I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency. Just like a general is a general whether he is in the field in Iraq or Afghanistan, when he comes back to the Pentagon, he is still a general. In the same way, covert operations officers who are serving in the field, when they rotate back to a temporary assignment in Washington, they, too, are still covert.
But CIA protocal says you have to be sent on overseas covert missions at least every 5 years and she did not fulfill that...just becasue she went over seas doesn't mean she went covertly...
newly released documents say otherwise
-
O.K. Then why wasn't he charged with outing a covert agent? This seems kind of silly to me. Remember that old Wendy's commercial? "Where's the beef?"
Q: So why wasn't Libby charged with revealing Plame's identity as an undercover agent? Isn't that the more serious crime?
A: To do that, Fitzgerald would need to prove that Libby knew that Plame was a covert agent and that making the information public was a crime. Grand jury testimony in Libby's indictment suggests that he told investigators and grand jurors he did not understand that Plame's work status was classified.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-10-30-CIA-Q&A_x.htm
-
I find it awfully suspicious that Libby's harsh sentence came only a day after the William Jefferson indictment, especially since there was no crime committed on Libby's part as the Attorneys were arguing.
-
I find it awfully suspicious that Libby's harsh sentence came only a day after the William Jefferson indictment, especially since there was no crime committed on Libby's part as the Attorneys were arguing.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17479718/
Jurors convict Libby on four of five charges
Cheney’s ex-aide faces jail time in CIA leak case; sentencing set for June
You see conspiracy where none exists.
The date of sentencing was chosen at the reading of the verdict. Standard stuff.
-
Q: So why wasn't Libby charged with revealing Plame's identity as an undercover agent? Isn't that the more serious crime?
A: To do that, Fitzgerald would need to prove that Libby knew that Plame was a covert agent and that making the information public was a crime. Grand jury testimony in Libby's indictment suggests that he told investigators and grand jurors he did not understand that Plame's work status was classified.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-10-30-CIA-Q&A_x.htm
Then who did it?
-
Then who did it?
That will be determined. It's hard to make that determination when material witnesses are lying to the cops.
That's why Libby went down.
-
So who outed a covert CIA agent, besides Novak who didn't know she was "covert"? I see a lot of smoke, but no fire.
Sounds like you followed the trial........25%er. ::)
-
That will be determined. It's hard to make that determination when material witnesses are lying to the cops.
That's why Libby went down.
Fitzgerald's metaphor of throwing sand in the umpires face comes to mind
-
That will be determined. It's hard to make that determination when material witnesses are lying to the cops.
That's why Libby went down.
I'll be holding my breath. . . . I think if they had the goods on someone they would have offered immunity to Libby and dropped the hammer by now.
-
Sounds like you followed the trial........25%er. ::)
Ah who asked you Grumpy Old Man? Another insightful comment. ::)
-
I'll be holding my breath. . . . I think if they had the goods on someone they would have offered immunity to Libby and dropped the hammer by now.
Immunity? Flipping for a two and half year sentence?
Not much incentive if you ask me.
Anyways, in cases like these, sweep up the garbage emanating from the hub before you go to the heart.
-
This is kind of reminds me of the OJ trial.
At this point we all pretty much know what happened but the crook(s) are just going to get off
-
Immunity? Flipping for a two and half year sentence?
Not much incentive if you ask me.
Anyways, in cases like these, sweep up the garbage emanating from the hub before you go to the heart.
He was facing a lot more than 30 months when they charged him.
-
This is kind of reminds me of the OJ trial.
At this point we all pretty much know what happened but the crook(s) are just going to get off
I get that same feeling. Let's hope Fitzgerald has something to hang his hat on.
It pisses me off that, for all the talk about protecting this country from terrorists, a Bush official ruined the career of a US agent that goes after terrorists and WMDs.
Shows you where the administration's heart is.
-
This is kind of reminds me of the OJ trial.
At this point we all pretty much know what happened but the crook(s) are just going to get off
Doesn't remind me of the OJ trial at all. We know OJ did it. There is solid evidence showing he did it. We don't have that here. I've asked numerous times in this thread who outed a covert agent. Nobody seems to know.
-
He was facing a lot more than 30 months when they charged him.
Yeah, but speculation is speculation.
-
I get that same feeling. Let's hope Fitzgerald has something to hang his hat on.
It pisses me off that, for all the talk about protecting this country from terrorists, a Bush official ruined the career of a US agent that goes after terrorists and WMDs.
Shows you where the administration's heart is.
I'm pretty sure this won't go any further.
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17479718/
Jurors convict Libby on four of five charges
Cheney’s ex-aide faces jail time in CIA leak case; sentencing set for June
You see conspiracy where none exists.
The date of sentencing was chosen at the reading of the verdict. Standard stuff.
Yeah, I know, but the sentencing was TODAY, the judge could have gave him as little as probation as opposed to the 30 month sentence, funny, a Democrat gets caught for stuffing classified documents in his underware and gets off with a slap on the wrist and Libby get's sentenced to 30 months for a crime that was never proven......ONE DAY after William Jefferson was indited......yes, I see a real conspiracy and double standard!!
-
Yeah, but speculation is speculation.
If we're evaluating whether or not they would/should have offered immunity, you have to look at the max punishment he was facing.
-
Doesn't remind me of the OJ trial at all. We know OJ did it. There is solid evidence showing he did it. We don't have that here. I've asked numerous times in this thread who outed a covert agent. Nobody seems to know.
really, how do you know. A jury of his peers seemed to think there was reasonable doubt.
Then again - I know that Cheney/Bush wanted to go to war and knew they were using phony "evidence" in the guy documents. When confronted with Wilsons' editorial, Cheney decided he was going to attempt to destroy Wilson's credibility by outing his wife who has now been proven to have been a covert agent for the CIA. In doing so I know that they committed treason but like OJ they will get off and be photographed playing golf until they drop dead of natural causes (in Cheney's case I hope that it's long and painful form of cancer)
-
Libby shoud be hung for treason IMHO.
-
Doesn't remind me of the OJ trial at all. We know OJ did it. There is solid evidence showing he did it. We don't have that here. I've asked numerous times in this thread who outed a covert agent. Nobody seems to know.
That is being determined.
Fact: Plame was outed days after an op-ed piece appeared in a national newspaper by J. Wilson highly critical of the president's claims in the SOTU speech regarding a case for war.
Who had the most to gain by threatening Wilson's wife? Who was jonesing for an Iraq invasion?
-
Libby shoud be hung for treason IMHO.
On something that was never proven? Sandy Burgler stole classified docs and that WAS proven......now that could be considered treason!
-
If we're evaluating whether or not they would/should have offered immunity, you have to look at the max punishment he was facing.
No you don't. You look at the deal you can cut. Reduced charge or reduced sentence. It is possible the court denied any plea bargaining.
-
Yeah, I know, but the sentencing was TODAY, the judge could have gave him as little as probation as opposed to the 30 month sentence, funny, a Democrat gets caught for stuffing classified documents in his underware and gets off with a slap on the wrist and Libby get's sentenced to 30 months for a crime that was never proven......ONE DAY after William Jefferson was indited......yes, I see a real conspiracy and double standard!!
Shit, I haven't heard such crying since my nephew was born.
It was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Libby broke the law and is now a felon.
-
Looking back on all this I bet Cheney wishes he had just ignored the Wilson editorial
The guy documents have been proven to be phony and it hasn't changed anything
We've gone to war and there's no end in sight (six days, six weeks, I doubt six months my ass)
I'm sure we'll still be in Iraq by the time Libby gets out of jail
We've recently said we're staying in Iraq forever (aka the "Korea Model" except Iraq is nothing like Korea)
It's time to put this war in the regular budget so we can see what it's really costing us.
-
Isn't perjury a crime?
Then why didn't Clinton serve time in prison?
Come on, Oz, this is a political witch hunt.
-
really, how do you know. A jury of his peers seemed to think there was reasonable doubt.
Then again - I know that Cheney/Bush wanted to go to war and knew they were using phony "evidence" in the guy documents. When confronted with Wilsons' editorial, Cheney decided he was going to attempt to destroy Wilson's credibility by outing his wife who has now been proven to have been a covert agent for the CIA. In doing so I know that they committed treason but like OJ they will get off and be photographed playing golf until they drop dead of natural causes (in Cheney's case I hope that it's long and painful form of cancer)
How do I know OJ did it? Because I watched the entire trial and reached my own conclusion. The Bruno Magli shoe print convinced me (before the civil trial). Plus a civil jury found him liable.
-
That is being determined.
Fact: Plame was outed days after an op-ed piece appeared in a national newspaper by J. Wilson highly critical of the president's claims in the SOTU speech regarding a case for war.
Who had the most to gain by threatening Wilson's wife? Who was jonesing for an Iraq invasion?
In other words, we have no clue who allegedly outed a covert agent.
-
On something that was never proven? Sandy Burgler stole classified docs and that WAS proven......now that could be considered treason!
S. Berger should've gone to prison as well.
-
How do I know OJ did it? Because I watched the entire trial and reached my own conclusion. The Bruno Magli shoe print convinced me (before the civil trial). Plus a civil jury found him liable.
yep, OJ is guilty
and we all know that Cheney instructed Libby to out Plame in retaliation for Wilsons editorial which cast doubt on the (now proven bogus) claim that Saddam was attempting to buy yellow cake uranium from guy
we also know that Plame was in fact a covert operative at the time she was "outed"
Fitzgerald appears to have determined that he can't prove any of this in a court because Libby played the "good soldier" and took the fall.
Par for the course for the Bush Crime Family
Loyalty to the Family comes before loyalty to your country
-
yep, OJ is guilty
and we all know that Cheney instructed Libby to out Plame in retaliation for Wilsons editorial which cast doubt on the (now proven bogus) claim that Saddam was attempting to buy yellow cake uranium from guy
we also know that Plame was in fact a covert operative at the time she was "outed"
Fitzgerald appears to have determined that he can't prove any of this in a court because Libby played the "good soldier" and took the fall.
Par for the course for the Bush Crime Family
Loyalty to the Family comes before loyalty to your country
If "we" know this then why hasn't Cheney been charged with a crime?
-
If "we" know this then why hasn't Cheney been charged with a crime?
how is Fitzgerald supposed to prove it when Libby first lies and then won't talk
-
how is Fitzgerald supposed to prove it when Libby first lies and then won't talk
I have no idea. You said we "know" that Cheney outed a covert agent. How do we know this?
-
I have no idea.
Ain't that the truth.
-
Ain't that the truth.
Silence Ebenezer.
-
I have no idea. You said we "know" that Cheney outed a covert agent. How do we know this?
we know it the same way that you know that OJ was guilty even though the jury in his criminal trial found him innocent.
yeah yeah - civil trial found OJ guilty but admit it, you knew OJ was guilty before the civil trial
-
we know it the same way that you know that OJ was guilty even though the jury in his criminal trial found him innocent.
yeah yeah - civil trial found OJ guilty but admit it, you knew OJ was guilty before the civil trial
I knew OJ was guilty based on the evidence. Where is the evidence that Cheney outed a covert agent . . . and why hasn't the government acted on this evidence?
-
yep, OJ is guilty
If the glove don't fit, you must acquit. ???
Can you tell the mean IQ of Americans is under 100?
Hahaha......
-
I knew OJ was guilty based on the evidence. Where is the evidence that Cheney outed a covert agent . . . and why hasn't the government acted on this evidence?
really - the jury in his criminal trial looked at all the evidence and found him innocent so how come you "know" different.
-
really - the jury in his criminal trial looked at all the evidence and found him innocent so how come you "know" different.
Bum knows all..............about nada.
-
really - the jury in his criminal trial looked at all the evidence and found him innocent so how come you "know" different.
Thinly veiled attempt at being devil's advocate. :) They found him not guilty. Not the same as "innocent."
I agree with the civil jury who found him liable for murder.
-
Bum knows all..............about nada.
Shouldn't you be off committing malpractice somewhere?
-
Thinly veiled attempt at being devil's advocate. :) They found him not guilty. Not the same as "innocent."
I agree with the civil jury who found him liable for murder.
I'm not arguing semantics with you.
It's generally agreed that OJ is guilty.
Anyone who knows about the facts of the Plame investigation and Libby trial KNOWS that there is a pile of evidence that points to the fact that Libby outed Plame at the direction of Cheney.
from the National Journal -
-----------------
President Bush told the special prosecutor in the CIA leak case that he directed Vice President Dick Cheney to personally lead an effort to counter allegations made by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV that his administration had misrepresented intelligence information to make the case to go to war with Iraq, according to people familiar with the president's interview.
A central focus of Fitzgerald's investigation has been why Libby would devise a cover story on how he learned of Plame's CIA work when prosecutors had obtained Libby's own notes showing that Libby had first gotten the information from Cheney. Libby told the FBI and testified to the grand jury that he had forgotten what Cheney had told him by the time that he made the Plame disclosure to reporters.
"I no longer remembered it," Libby testified to the grand jury regarding his June 12 conversation with Cheney. It was only after speaking to Russert, Libby testified, that he "learned" the information about Plame's CIA employment "anew."
Federal investigators have concluded that Libby's account is implausible. They have also questioned Libby's testimony that he does not believe he discussed the matter again with Cheney until at least July 14, 2003, the date of Novak's column that called Plame an "agency operative."
Federal investigators have a substantial amount of evidence that Cheney and Libby spoke about the matter in detail shortly after Wilson's column appeared on July 6. Cheney's handwritten notes in the margin of the Wilson column are one reason that prosecutors have believed that the two men spoke earlier than Libby has said they did.
-------------------------
We could trade quotes all night but who really gives a shit.
I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that Cheney is responsible.
Shit we got more evidence of that than we have on most of the people in Gitmo
Libby's going to jail while other guilty parties (Cheney,Rove, perhaps others) are getting off
I'll bet you a dollar that Libby goes to jail before Paris Hilton get's out
-
I'm not arguing semantics with you.
It's generally agreed that OJ is guilty.
Anyone who knows about the facts of the Plame investigation and Libby trial KNOWS that there is a pile of evidence that points to the fact that Libby outed Plame at the direction of Cheney.
from the National Journal -
-----------------
President Bush told the special prosecutor in the CIA leak case that he directed Vice President Dick Cheney to personally lead an effort to counter allegations made by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV that his administration had misrepresented intelligence information to make the case to go to war with Iraq, according to people familiar with the president's interview.
A central focus of Fitzgerald's investigation has been why Libby would devise a cover story on how he learned of Plame's CIA work when prosecutors had obtained Libby's own notes showing that Libby had first gotten the information from Cheney. Libby told the FBI and testified to the grand jury that he had forgotten what Cheney had told him by the time that he made the Plame disclosure to reporters.
"I no longer remembered it," Libby testified to the grand jury regarding his June 12 conversation with Cheney. It was only after speaking to Russert, Libby testified, that he "learned" the information about Plame's CIA employment "anew."
Federal investigators have concluded that Libby's account is implausible. They have also questioned Libby's testimony that he does not believe he discussed the matter again with Cheney until at least July 14, 2003, the date of Novak's column that called Plame an "agency operative."
Federal investigators have a substantial amount of evidence that Cheney and Libby spoke about the matter in detail shortly after Wilson's column appeared on July 6. Cheney's handwritten notes in the margin of the Wilson column are one reason that prosecutors have believed that the two men spoke earlier than Libby has said they did.
-------------------------
We could trade quotes all night but who really gives a shit.
I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that Cheney is responsible.
Shit we got more evidence of that than we have on most of the people in Gitmo
Libby's going to jail while other guilty parties (Cheney,Rove, perhaps others) are getting off
I'll bet you a dollar that Libby goes to jail before Paris Hilton get's out
Evidently, the prosecutor didn't believe Libby outed a covert agent. Romney said today that the prosecutor knew it was Richard Armitage who outed Plame before Libby was prosecuted. Is this true?
-
S. Berger should've gone to prison as well.
Fvck yes he should have.
If anyone else would have STOLEN classified information they'd be doing time in prison.
The damn justice system is broken.
-
Shouldn't you be off committing malpractice somewhere?
Ok, that was funny!! :D
-
Yes, he’s married with children, but in some circles Scooter Libby is widely believed to be gay or bisexual. Is this common knowledge (or a common belief) among straight people?
-
Evidently, the prosecutor didn't believe Libby outed a covert agent. Romney said today that the prosecutor knew it was Richard Armitage who outed Plame before Libby was prosecuted. Is this true?
Was She or Wasn't She?
Arguing that Libby deserves jail time, Fitzgerald says Plame was a covert agent.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18927332/site/newsweek/?nav=slate?from=rss
Yes Fitzgerald did think that Plame was a covert agent. However the elements of the crime of illegally outing a covert agent are the intentional disclosure of the covert agent's identity with knowledge that that agent is covert in status and protected by the US.
Fitzgerald did not see enough evidence to charge Libby with that crime. He had more than enough evidence though to convict him of trying to impede or destroy the investigation into whom really did leak the information.
As for Armitage, "Armitage acknowledged that he had passed along to Novak information contained in a classified State Department memo: that Wilson's wife worked on weapons-of-mass-destruction issues at the CIA. (The memo made no reference to her undercover status.)
Fitzgerald found no evidence that Armitage knew of Plame's covert CIA status when he talked to Novak and Woodward.
This very clearly explains that Armitage only had the information included in the INR memo. That, in turn, shows he didn't leak Plame's covert identity and he didn't leak Plame's maiden name. Now, Novak claims to have learned those details through a kind of immaculate knowledge. But Novak's claims, like Libby's, are suspect."
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2006/09/why_armitage_do.html
-
...
The damn justice system is broken.
Duh, talk to the Attorney General. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Duh, talk to the Attorney General. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
BWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Like the Democrats were any better.
Your blind allegiance to your political party is hilarious.
-
Ok, that was funny!! :D
;D
-
Was She or Wasn't She?
Arguing that Libby deserves jail time, Fitzgerald says Plame was a covert agent.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18927332/site/newsweek/?nav=slate?from=rss
Yes Fitzgerald did think that Plame was a covert agent. However the elements of the crime of illegally outing a covert agent are the intentional disclosure of the covert agent's identity with knowledge that that agent is covert in status and protected by the US.
Fitzgerald did not see enough evidence to charge Libby with that crime. He had more than enough evidence though to convict him of trying to impede or destroy the investigation into whom really did leak the information.
As for Armitage, "Armitage acknowledged that he had passed along to Novak information contained in a classified State Department memo: that Wilson's wife worked on weapons-of-mass-destruction issues at the CIA. (The memo made no reference to her undercover status.)
Fitzgerald found no evidence that Armitage knew of Plame's covert CIA status when he talked to Novak and Woodward.
This very clearly explains that Armitage only had the information included in the INR memo. That, in turn, shows he didn't leak Plame's covert identity and he didn't leak Plame's maiden name. Now, Novak claims to have learned those details through a kind of immaculate knowledge. But Novak's claims, like Libby's, are suspect."
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2006/09/why_armitage_do.html
So who outed a covert agent in violation of the law? Somebody give me a straight answer. Sounds like Giuliani was right: there was no underlying crime.
-
The investigation is ongoing. The proceedings not released are secret. Fitzgerald gives few clues who is next.
Just b/c a case develops slowly doesn't mean there is no case at hand.
Rudy knows that and he is being less than truthful in offering his conclusion.
What is the alternative Beach Bum? Bury our collective head in the sand to an outing of a covert Agent investigating WMDs during a time of war and pretend nothing happened?
What do you think?
-
The investigation is ongoing. The proceedings not released are secret. Fitzgerald gives few clues who is next.
Just b/c a case develops slowly doesn't mean there is no case at hand.
Rudy knows that and he is being less than truthful in offering his conclusion.
What is the alternative Beach Bum? Bury our collective head in the sand to an outing of a covert Agent investigating WMDs during a time of war and pretend nothing happened?
What do you think?
Decker you won't find a bigger "law and order" person than me. But what I don't like is unfairness in the system. I don't see this Libby prosecution as much different than what happened to Clinton. I was opposed to that witch hunt too. There was no underlying wrongdoing there either. I'm opposed to the Gonzales witch hunt for the same reason. It's a waste of time and money IMO.
It looks like what happened here was they targeted Libby as the source of the leak and when that didn't pan out they charged him with lying and "obstruction" (obstructing what??).
I don't condone people lying to authorities, but there has to be some common sense and proper exercise of discretion by people who have an enormous amount of power.
-
Decker you won't find a bigger "law and order" person than me. But what I don't like is unfairness in the system. I don't see this Libby prosecution as much different than what happened to Clinton. I was opposed to that witch hunt too. There was no underlying wrongdoing there either. I'm opposed to the Gonzales witch hunt for the same reason. It's a waste of time and money IMO.
It looks like what happened here was they targeted Libby as the source of the leak and when that didn't pan out they charged him with lying and "obstruction" (obstructing what??).
I don't condone people lying to authorities, but there has to be some common sense and proper exercise of discretion by people who have an enormous amount of power.
Clinton's case involved a dismissed civil lawsuit. The Libby case involves national security our country.
I'd say those are two very different things with the Libby case being extremely important.
I would love to answer your question, but the truth is is that I don't know the answer. I can guess. But this subject matter (WMD covert agent exposed/time of war/national security) is too big of a topic to not seek answers.
As for Gonzales, there were enough republicans calling for his resignation to justify bipartisanship--i.e. not a witch hunt.
-
Clinton's case involved a dismissed civil lawsuit. The Libby case involves national security our country.
I'd say those are two very different things with the Libby case being extremely important.
I would love to answer your question, but the truth is is that I don't know the answer. I can guess. But this subject matter (WMD covert agent exposed/time of war/national security) is too big of a topic to not seek answers.
As for Gonzales, there were enough republicans calling for his resignation to justify bipartisanship--i.e. not a witch hunt.
I would agree with you if Libby impacted national security. He didn't. But I'm not going to get too worked up over Libby, because assuming he can remain free pending appeal, Bush will pardon him before he leaves office.
How many of the nearly 300 Republicans in Congress called for the resignation of Gonzales? The Gonzales matter is a Democrat-manufactured controversy.
-
I would agree with you if Libby impacted national security. He didn't. But I'm not going to get too worked up over Libby, because assuming he can remain free pending appeal, Bush will pardon him before he leaves office.
How many of the nearly 300 Republicans in Congress called for the resignation of Gonzales? The Gonzales matter is a Democrat-manufactured controversy.
Libby obstructed an ongoing investigation into finding the official that leaked the i.d. of Plame--a WMD spy. That necessarily affects our national security during a time of war.
Sen. John Sununu, Chuck Hagel, Tom Coburn, Adam Putnam, Pat Roberts, John McCain and Gordon Smith all want Gonzales gone.
-
Libby obstructed an ongoing investigation into finding the official that leaked the i.d. of Plame--a WMD spy. That necessarily affects our national security during a time of war.
Sen. John Sununu, Chuck Hagel, Tom Coburn, Adam Putnam, Pat Roberts, John McCain and Gordon Smith all want Gonzales gone.
Hagel and McCain are democrats...
-
Libby obstructed an ongoing investigation into finding the official that leaked the i.d. of Plame--a WMD spy. That necessarily affects our national security during a time of war.
Sen. John Sununu, Chuck Hagel, Tom Coburn, Adam Putnam, Pat Roberts, John McCain and Gordon Smith all want Gonzales gone.
Libby obstructed an ongoing investigation into a crime that apparently never happened. No impact on national security.
Assuming those 7 members of Congress called for Gonzales' resignation, you call that bipartisan?
-
Libby obstructed an ongoing investigation into a crime that apparently never happened. No impact on national security.
Assuming those 7 members of Congress called for Gonzales' resignation, you call that bipartisan?
Yes I would call that bipartisan. Hagel and McCain are leaders and if they speak out you can bet the rank and file is not far behind.
Exposing the secret identity of a covert agent during a time of war who specializes in hard to get intelligence regarding Iranian nuclear weapons development and acquisition has no effect on national security?
If that doesn't qualify, then what exactly does?
-
It's not just Plame's career that is over b/c of this leak. Her CIA cover organization Brewster-Jennings and all ties to it are now dead.
The money, workhours, international relations were all wasted b/c of the leak.
We are less safe for it.
-
Libby obstructed an ongoing investigation into a crime that apparently never happened. No impact on national security.
Assuming those 7 members of Congress called for Gonzales' resignation, you call that bipartisan?
How do you arrive at the conclusion that there was no impact on National Security.
The CIA front company Brewster Jennings was destroyed and the damage assesment has never been revealed but it's rumored that assets (i.e informants) were assasinated.
Plame was covert at the time she was outed
The investigation was initiated at the request of the CIA so I guess it's safe to assume that they thought a crime had been commited
Libby's own notes state that he learned of Plames identity from Cheney
Libby is a friggin lawyer. If he KNEW he had not commited a crime then why lie about it and open himself up to perjury and obstruction charges. He must really feel like an ass that he chose to lie when he simply could have told the truth and gotten off.
Here's a relevent comparison from John Dean:
In July 1984, Samuel Morrison - the grandson of the eminent naval historian with the same name - leaked three classified photos to Jane's Defense Weekly. The photos were of the Soviet Union's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, which had been taken by a U.S. spy satellite.
Although the photos compromised no national security secrets, and were not given to enemy agents, the Reagan Administration prosecuted the leak. That raised the question: Must the leaker have an evil purpose to be prosecuted?
The Administration argued that the answer was no. As with Britain's Official Secrets Acts, the leak of classified material alone was enough to trigger imprisonment for up to ten years and fines. And the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit agreed. It held that the such a leak might be prompted by "the most laudable motives, or any motive at all," and it would still be a crime. As a result, Morrison went to jail.
Here is the CIA's damage assesment after Aldrich Ames - see if you think some of this might apply to the outing of Plame and worse Brewster Jennings:
The damage which Aldrich Ames did to his country can be summarized in three categories:
-- By revealing to the Soviet Union the identities of many assets who were providing information to the United States, he not only caused their executions, but also made it much more difficult to understand what was going on in the Soviet Union at a crucial time in its history;
-- By revealing to the Soviet Union the way in which the United States sought intelligence and handled assets, he made it much more difficult for this country to gather vital information in other countries as well;
-- By revealing to the Soviet Union identities of assets and American methods of espionage, he put the Soviet Union in the position to pass carefully selected "feed" material to this country through controlled assets;
-
you guys don't know when to just quit a debate....people on here are very set in their beliefs...I haven't seen many instances where someone said "you know what I see what you are saying..."
-
Yes I would call that bipartisan. Hagel and McCain are leaders and if they speak out you can bet the rank and file is not far behind.
Exposing the secret identity of a covert agent during a time of war who specializes in hard to get intelligence regarding Iranian nuclear weapons development and acquisition has no effect on national security?
If that doesn't qualify, then what exactly does?
I think you need a few more Republicans to make the criticism bipartisan.
Didn't Armitage "out" Plame before Libby?
-
How do you arrive at the conclusion that there was no impact on National Security.
Because Libby apparently wasn't the one who outed Plame.
-
Because Libby apparently wasn't the one who outed Plame.
Cheney outed Plame...........Libby took the fall.
-
Because Libby apparently wasn't the one who outed Plame.
so you're saying that the only way that the outing of Plame and the destruction of Brewster Jennings could have any impact on National Security is if it was proven that Libby outed her.
i.e we can't prove Libby did it so therefore there is no impact on National Security????
-
so you're saying that the only way that the outing of Plame and the destruction of Brewster Jennings could have any impact on National Security is if it was proven that Libby outed her.
i.e we can't prove Libby did it so therefore there is no impact on National Security????
I'm saying it appears as though someone outed Plame before Libby said anything, so whether or not Libby mentioned her name after she had already been outed is pretty meaningless.
-
I'm saying it appears as though someone outed Plame before Libby said anything, so whether or not Libby mentioned her name after she had already been outed is pretty meaningless.
Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice (obstructing the investigation into the outing of Plame).
It's irrelevent to his specific case whether anyone else had also outed Plame - it doesn't change the fact that he still lied about it and still obstructed the investigation.
It's also irrelevent as to who the original source of the leak to the question of whether it impacted National Security
-
Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice (obstructing the investigation into the outing of Plame).
It's irrelevent to his specific case whether anyone else had also outed Plame - it doesn't change the fact that he still lied about it and still obstructed the investigation.
It's also irrelevent as to who the original source of the leak to the question of whether it impacted National Security
I wasn't talking about his case, I was responding to the question re whether or not his actions impacted national security. The person who outed Plame impacted national security. That person apparently wasn't Libby.
-
I wasn't talking about his case, I was responding to the question re whether or not his actions impacted national security. The person who outed Plame impacted national security. That person apparently wasn't Libby.
Actually - since someone did out a covert agent and since that did result in the loss of an asset (Brewster Jennings) and since Libby did obstruct the case (Fitzgeralds metaphor of throwing sand in the umpires face) the result was that the leaker is still out there and could do this (or something worse) again ....so one could easily make the argument that by obstructing the investigation he is has impacted national security.
btw - you also written a few times that this was a crime that never happened.
If that were true then Libby is the dumbest lawyer on the planet.
Who would choose to lie about a non-crime and face jail for perjury and obstruction when one can just tell the truth and go home
The answer of course is that Libby/Cheney/Rove etc... knew full well that Plame was covert and therefore knew that revealing her was a crime.
The same could probably not be said about Armitage
Even if it weren't a crime (which it was) they certainly knew that outing her would compromise Brewster Jennings and that would harm our National Security
Bottom line - they chose a political hatchet job over the security of out country
The fact that Wilson was exposing their lies about guy makes it that much worse.
These people are all traitors
-
btw - you also written a few times that this was a crime that never happened.
Right. That's what I keep reading and hearing and no one has provided any proof that a crime was committed. My comments about someone outing Plame assumes a crime was committed.
-
Right. That's what I keep reading and hearing and no one has provided any proof that a crime was committed. My comments about someone outing Plame assumes a crime was committed.
it's a crime to knowingly out a covert agent
Plame was covert
Fitzgerald followed the clues all the way back to Libby who then lied and obstructed the investigation
Libby's own notes seem to be the smoking gun that points to Cheney and one would have to assume that Cheney knew that Plame was covert and if not surely knew that outing her would compromise Brewster Jennings.
Fitzgerald (presumably) realized that he was effectively at a impasse and chose to go for the only thing that he could get a conviction on.
Why would you defend people who are willing to sell out your safety and the safety of your children to cover up their own lies and crimes??
That's the only part that I don't get
-
it's a crime to knowingly out a covert agent
Plame was covert
Fitzgerald followed the clues all the way back to Libby who then lied and obstructed the investigation
Libby's own notes seem to be the smoking gun that points to Cheney and one would have to assume that Cheney knew that Plame was covert and if not surely knew that outing her would compromise Brewster Jennings.
Fitzgerald (presumably) realized that he was effectively at a impasse and chose to go for the only thing that he could get a conviction on.
Why would you defend people who are willing to sell out your safety and the safety of your children to cover up their own lies and crimes??
That's the only part that I don't get
I've already stated my views on Libby in this thread. I think this horse is just about dead.
I think militarymuscle was right. :)
-
Right. That's what I keep reading and hearing and no one has provided any proof that a crime was committed. My comments about someone outing Plame assumes a crime was committed.
Of course a crime was committed.
The Crime: exposing the identity of a covert agent specializing in Iranian acquisition of WMDs which consequently destroyed years of spy work and a CIA cover business--Brewster-Jennings. All of that during a time of war predicated largely on WMDs.
It is manifestly evident that a crime was committed. To claim otherwise is to not look at the plain facts
Libby hurt the investigation for finding the perpetrator of the crime and, for whatever reason, took the fall for whomever did the deed. Even the jury admitted that one.
Juror: Libby is guilty, but he was fall guy http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/06/libby.juror/index.html
Don't you see that's exactly how the US mafia used to operate? Lower guys in the pecking order would take the fall for the more important guys orchestrating the crime.
If the US adopted your 'head in the sand' approach, here's what would happen:
Material witnesses could lie about an investigation and not worry about consequences. Our entire legal infrastructure would crumble.
That is horrible policy.
-
As for Armitage outing Plame (taking the fall), "Armitage acknowledged that he had passed along to Novak information contained in a classified State Department memo: that Wilson's wife worked on weapons-of-mass-destruction issues at the CIA. (The memo made no reference to her undercover status.)
Fitzgerald found no evidence that Armitage knew of Plame's covert CIA status when he talked to Novak and Woodward.
This very clearly explains that Armitage only had the information included in the INR memo. That, in turn, shows he didn't leak Plame's covert identity and he didn't leak Plame's maiden name. Now, Novak claims to have learned those details through a kind of immaculate knowledge. But Novak's claims, like Libby's, are suspect."
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2006/09/why_armitage_do.html
-
Of course a crime was committed.
The Crime: exposing the identity of a covert agent specializing in Iranian acquisition of WMDs which consequently destroyed years of spy work and a CIA cover business--Brewster-Jennings. All of that during a time of war predicated largely on WMDs.
It is manifestly evident that a crime was committed. To claim otherwise is to not look at the plain facts
Libby hurt the investigation for finding the perpetrator of the crime and, for whatever reason, took the fall for whomever did the deed. Even the jury admitted that one.
Juror: Libby is guilty, but he was fall guy http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/06/libby.juror/index.html
Don't you see that's exactly how the US mafia used to operate? Lower guys in the pecking order would take the fall for the more important guys orchestrating the crime.
If the US adopted your 'head in the sand' approach, here's what would happen:
Material witnesses could lie about an investigation and not worry about consequences. Our entire legal infrastructure would crumble.
That is horrible policy.
You are conclusively stating a crime was committed, but have no idea who committed this "crime." That's my problem with the Libby prosecution. The Libby prosecution wasn't about vindicating some social policy. It was about crucifying a guy because they couldn't get the alleged big fish.
-
You are conclusively stating a crime was committed, but have no idea who committed this "crime." That's my problem with the Libby prosecution. The Libby prosecution wasn't about vindicating some social policy. It was about crucifying a guy because they couldn't get the alleged big fish.
Somebody in the administration committed a crime but thanks to Libby we may never know who dun it.
We have a body--the exposed covert agent and all the fallout from it--destroyed CIA front, compromised intelligence relations.
If we have a body, there must be a killer. Libby and his lies and obstruction just bought time for the killer to flee.
They crucified Libby b/c he was protecting the "big fish" orchestrating the crime by lying/obstructing.
-
Somebody in the administration committed a crime but thanks to Libby we may never know who dun it.
We have a body--the exposed covert agent and all the fallout from it--destroyed CIA front, compromised intelligence relations.
If we have a body, there must be a killer. Libby and his lies and obstruction just bought time for the killer to flee.
They crucified Libby b/c he was protecting the "big fish" orchestrating the crime by lying/obstructing.
So the only reason they don't know who allegedly outed a covert agent is because Libby lied? I don't believe that. They simply don't have the evidence. In any event, it will all be over in about a year-and-a-half. :)
-
So the only reason they don't know who allegedly outed a covert agent is because Libby lied? I don't believe that. They simply don't have the evidence. In any event, it will all be over in about a year-and-a-half. :)
most likely YES - especially given that Libby's notes specify that he heard it first from Cheney and since Cheney is the VP he should obviously know that this information was classified
Putting the law aside for a moment - the actions of Cheney, Libby, Rove etc... are totally indefencible.
Bush/Cheney were using known fraudulent documets to make the case for war with Iraq
Many different people and organizations cast doubt on those documents and they still continued to use them as a primary reason to go to war.
Wilson told the truth and exposed their LIES.
How anyone can defend Libby/Cheney/Bush etc.. is beyond comprehension
-
So the only reason they don't know who allegedly outed a covert agent is because Libby lied? I don't believe that. They simply don't have the evidence. In any event, it will all be over in about a year-and-a-half. :)
That's not what I am saying.
I am saying by the fact of the exposed covert agent herself, we have someone in the administration that exposed her.
That is crime. Someone committed that crime and it wasn't Armitage.
I think Straw Man summed it up pretty well.
-
That's not what I am saying.
I am saying by the fact of the exposed covert agent herself, we have someone in the administration that exposed her.
That is crime. Someone committed that crime and it wasn't Armitage.
I think Straw Man summed it up pretty well.
Thanks
I think in this instance we have enough pieces of the puzzle in place to be able to make out the big picture
-
I'm not arguing semantics with you.
It's generally agreed that OJ is guilty.
Anyone who knows about the facts of the Plame investigation and Libby trial KNOWS that there is a pile of evidence that points to the fact that Libby outed Plame at the direction of Cheney.
from the National Journal -
-----------------
President Bush told the special prosecutor in the CIA leak case that he directed Vice President Dick Cheney to personally lead an effort to counter allegations made by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV that his administration had misrepresented intelligence information to make the case to go to war with Iraq, according to people familiar with the president's interview.
A central focus of Fitzgerald's investigation has been why Libby would devise a cover story on how he learned of Plame's CIA work when prosecutors had obtained Libby's own notes showing that Libby had first gotten the information from Cheney. Libby told the FBI and testified to the grand jury that he had forgotten what Cheney had told him by the time that he made the Plame disclosure to reporters.
"I no longer remembered it," Libby testified to the grand jury regarding his June 12 conversation with Cheney. It was only after speaking to Russert, Libby testified, that he "learned" the information about Plame's CIA employment "anew."
Federal investigators have concluded that Libby's account is implausible. They have also questioned Libby's testimony that he does not believe he discussed the matter again with Cheney until at least July 14, 2003, the date of Novak's column that called Plame an "agency operative."
Federal investigators have a substantial amount of evidence that Cheney and Libby spoke about the matter in detail shortly after Wilson's column appeared on July 6. Cheney's handwritten notes in the margin of the Wilson column are one reason that prosecutors have believed that the two men spoke earlier than Libby has said they did.
-------------------------
We could trade quotes all night but who really gives a shit.
I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that Cheney is responsible.
Shit we got more evidence of that than we have on most of the people in Gitmo
Libby's going to jail while other guilty parties (Cheney,Rove, perhaps others) are getting off
I'll bet you a dollar that Libby goes to jail before Paris Hilton get's out
Hey Bum
I owe you a dollar
-
Hey Bum
I owe you a dollar
lol. :D I take Visa, Mastercard, American Express . . .
She has to appear in court today. I hope the judge puts her back in jail. Nothing like celebrity justice.