Thinking Right

By steve-o

March 7, 2007 8:41 AM | Link to this

First post of the day!!

Libby needs to sit in a cell for a little time-out to ponder what he did. Playing games with the life of someone’s wife just because they disagree with you and then lying about it is a little low-down for my taste.

Bye Scooter. It would be great if we could send you your old boss to keep you company!

By Reece

March 7, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this

Jim you partisan hack,

I welcome the idea of Bush pardoning Libby. That would be a nail in the coffin of many of these reichwingers going forward. If he does that it’s truly going to be the death knell for the Neoconservative cult for years to come.

By Shar

March 7, 2007 9:06 AM | Link to this

A pardon for Libby would be such a blatant admission of the political, biased, self-serving nature of Presidential pardons that it could spark a movement to get rid of the practice altogether, which is not a bad idea.

Libby exposed the covert identity of a political enemy’s wife, without shame or remorse, in order to undermine the credibility of that enemy’s argument. Your comment about “one band of power players out to get another” is the right headline but cites the wrong players - people at the highest level of government launched an illegal, personal attack on a private citizen who disagreed with their “spin”. Libby know what he was asked by Cheney to do was wrong - that’s why he lied about his behavior to a grand jury.

The legal system cannot condone perjury and obstruction, and that is true whichever side of the political fence you choose. It was, in fact, the rationale for the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton, only he was not convicted. Libby was, and should absolutely serve his sentence.

By Southern Democrat

March 7, 2007 9:08 AM | Link to this

Good idea. It worked out well for your party and the nation when President Ford pardoned Nixon (sullying the then-sterling record of a good man).

Mr. Wooten, perhaps you and Hillary should discuss the vast right and left wing conspiracies that you each see in the day-to-day workings of our government.

On a partisan note, apparently Republicans STILL haven’t learned that it’s not the ACT, it’s the COVER-UP (see Scooter Libby and Foley).

Americans appreciate honesty.

I encourage anyone who has not seen it to watch “The Ghosts of Abu Ghraib.” Perhaps I am biased because my grandfather served as an Army MP officer, but the way that this Administration allowed private contractors and the CIA to order MPs to commit acts of torture is not just inhumane and unethical; it’s illegal.

Do you advocate doling out pardons for that, too?

By Aquagirl

March 7, 2007 9:09 AM | Link to this

Hey Jim, did you defend Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky episode, when one band of power players in Washington was out to get another?

Didn’t think so.

By Jim's a Cherry Picker

March 7, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Omigosh…stop it….it hurts.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.

Pathetic.

By CJ

March 7, 2007 9:23 AM | Link to this

So, Jim agrees after all that innocent persons can be convicted of a crime. Even so, he continues to advocate legislation that would require less than a unanimous jury decision to impose the death penalty. Why? Jim thinks, it seems, that only well-connected white Republicans are convicted of crimes they didn’t commit.

Of course, Scooter Libby should not be pardoned. He was prosecuted by a political appointee of President Bush (I’m sure the Attorney General would have fired Fitzgerald if he thought nobody would notice) and found guilty by a detail-oriented jury that actually asked questions of witnesses during the trial and deliberated for ten days before reaching their verdict. Libby was found guilty because, in all likelihood, he is guilty. Let him have his appeals, but…no pardon.

By Curious Observer

March 7, 2007 9:27 AM | Link to this

I watched another version of the Wooten spin on Faux News last night, where Bob Novak and others used the sophistry that because no crime was committed in outing Valerie Plame, there was therefore no crime in lying to FBI agents and the grand jury in answering questions about that outing.

Perjury is a felony regardless of the nature of the surrounding investigation, for it strikes at the very heart of the justice system. Libby perjured himself and in doing so obstructed justice. Even a jury that was sympathetic to Libby recognized the seriousness of the crimes he committed. It doesn’t matter whether Libby was the first to identify Plame as a CIA employee or whether he was the last. It doesn’t matter whether Plame’s identity was recognized as covert. Lying to a grand jury and to FBI agents is criminal, regardless of the circumstances.

So go ahead and spin Libby’s conviction as some kind of clash of political parties. The fact is that Wooten and his ilk didn’t hesitate to recognize the seriousness of Clinton’s perjury when he was being investigated. If this kind of reaction to a criminal conviction is the best we can expect from the neocons, then justice itself will have been sacrificed long ago. The use of a presidential pardon to exempt Libby from the punishment for his crimes will be but one more rape of the law by this administration.

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this

Jim Wooten,

You have described very accurately what went on in Washington with Scooter Libby. It is truly a sad day for American justice.

All the hysterics from liberals on these AJC blogs only confirms what you have said. It was a political revenge act, not one for truth or justice.

I hope this travesty will be corrected in the courts. President Bush should not have to correct a verdict that was given with subterfuge and vindictiveness. The courts should correct their own mistakes. This verdict sounded like something out of the Dark Ages, not a time when facts and truth were the basis for decisions.

By TW

March 7, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this

The visiting team? The system of justice in this country is ‘the visiting team’? You tip you hand, Wooten. Perhaps an Al Qaeda jersey would be a good purchase with some of your tax cut.

By abc

March 7, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this

None of the jurists thought Libby was innocent, they just thought he was a fall guy. So be it; a pardon would be inconsistent with justice. He broke the law, he serves the time.

However, in being nothing but a fall guy, perhaps it should be pursued exactly who he was a fall guy for; and if those individuals broke the law too, then prosecute them also.

By melo

March 7, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this

The political spin on both sides of this episode makes clear that, as with much of the rest of life in partisan America, what you conclude depends on your taste — or distaste — for this Administration. That statement is true Mr Wooten, only as it relates to all of us, you and me included!! However, in this case, THE JURY has concluded and not evry Tom, Dick and Harry as you would want to deceive on this blog. The Jury verdict has sifted through the SPIN and thats the conclusion that matters!! HAHAHAHAHA OFCOUSE!!!

By jbmlaw

March 7, 2007 9:38 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. The WSJ has an excellent history of the prosecution today by Ronald Rotunda, assistant majority counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee (for our slower leftist friends, that means he worked the Democrat side.) “…(A)s most people know by now, Patrick Fitzgerald never charged anyone with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982… after he quickly determined there was no violation of that law. …

“,,,about the time of Mr. Fitzgerald’s appointment, …Richard L. Armitage told the FBI that he was the primary source who revealed Ms. Plame’s identity. Mystery solved!… But rather than going home, Mr. Fitzgerald asked Messrs. Armitage and Novak to keep that information quiet. He also asked for and received approval to expand his investigation…”

The only “crime” in this case arose in an investigation that commenced after proof that the investigator held irrefutable proof that there was no crime. I respectfully suggest that such abuse of prosecutorial discretion merits a disbarment action.

Perhaps on the upside here, though, it is heartening to see leftists interested in laws against lying when there is no crime committed. I wonder if they now justify prosecution of a high official who lies under oath in a conscious effort to deprive an average citizen of a fair trial.

By Shar

March 7, 2007 9:39 AM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten, it is truly worrisome that you would write this item. It was not “a jury’s affirmation of your bias”, it was a jury’s finding of guilt, after ten days of very careful, thoughtful deliberation. You ignore the facts presented, dismissing the jury’s conclusions and their ramifications as merely reflecting “[their] taste - or distaste - for this Administration”. You don’t even address the perjury and obstruction felonies, coming from the heart of the Vice President’s office. Instead, you just advocate getting rid of the whole unsightly mess with a pardon, “of course”.

The defense posited, and jury believed, that Libby was a “fall guy” for others in the Administration who chose this method of dealing with opposition to their plans, and who ordered him to carry out illegal activities. The jury, and many Americans, can feel sympathy for a man, by all accounts a smart and decent one, who lost his moral compass under duress. However, he committed felonies and tried to subvert the justice system. Unless the Nuremburg plea of “I was ordered to do it by my superiors” is invoked, and those superiors called to account, Libby must answer for his actions. Your piece this morning offers nothing but the bitter resentment of someone whose compatriots have been caught, and as such is not a meaningful or even appropriate editorial on the part of the AJC.

By UGAlaw

March 7, 2007 9:39 AM | Link to this

The real shame here is that Libby is riding the heat for the real culprit. His 5 deferment boss historically doesn’t have the gonads to step up to the plate and be a man about anything. The biggest mistake George Bush ever made was putting Dick Cheney on the ticket.

By Writer's block

March 7, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this

We have to ask how badly America has been hurt by W’s administration. (Reputation, financial condition, and strategic defensive posture). Did W allow Al Queda to become an invicible quadruple threat by squandering the last six years in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of going after the infant cells now approaching maturity? Or are the rumors of Al Queda’s second coming greatly exagerated? We simply have no data. We cant know their strength. We only have fear, which W seems to weild with the mastery of one annointed by oil.

Then we have roadside bombs and casualties. The conspiracies of terrorists live in our imagination as our fears get punctuated one by one when these suicide attacks and IEDs explode. The situation could seem more dire than it really is. We simply dont know.

I dont think Bush knows either. That means nobody is in charge. That means anything could happen quickly.

Watch for exploding spring market rally as the dow climbs this wall of fear.

By time for the truth

March 7, 2007 9:41 AM | Link to this

So … predicktably the usual puss filled line of leftist afterbirth slithers on here to rabidly gloat about the despicable evil lynching of a true selfless patriot like Libby by a sick and twisted power crazed prosecutor who knew there was no crime commited. As this whoralicious leftist hag Plame wasn’t a “covert” operative and its turdbrained lying Bush hater hubbie puked up pathetic empty lies about WMD’s in its odious involvement in a blatant attempt to try and discredit part of the war on towel head terror!!

My astute comments simply reflec and almost mirror back the level of rabid Bush hate speech that huffington.puke revels in everyday!!

Yesterday the resident leftist filth p!ssed and moaned in triumphalist hypocrisy about forum hate … yet jim’s an arselicker - as just one example of an utterly worthless leftist on here - posted typical hysterical huffington.puke about the wit and wisdom and perspicacity of national treasure Ann Coulter. I’m generously just wittily mirroring back your visceral hate speech jim’s an arselicker!!

Libby became the probably inevitable fall guy for a scumbag prosecutor faced with NO case and NO trial for a NON-EXISTENT crime - this poisonous marxist lite hag wasn’t a covert operative!!

The white trash cocaine sniffing (see his brother Woger’s FBI surveillance tape) Arkanasas rapist committed blatant perjury and had VASTLY greater lapses of memory than Libby ever did. As did the heffalump obsessive eco whacko nutter - the alBOre when questioned about the illegal Bhuddist Temple fundraising scam. The Little Rock rapist should have been jailed for perjury and venal presidential pardon selling!!

Libby should of course be pardoned immediately. Watching the rabid Bush derangement syndrome leftist scum screech and screech for weeks about this would be fabulous free entertainment for us normal, patriotic, clear thinking Americans.

By Van

March 7, 2007 9:42 AM | Link to this

Whether or not Libby should be pardoned, fall solely in the powers given the President. There are certain instances where the President can not issue a pardon, but Libby does not fall within these restrictions.

As with Clinton’s questionable pardons, some allegedly for money, we can rant and rave all we want, but if President Bush pardons Libby, he has that authority.

By Brad

March 7, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

I just know the democrats don’t want to go down the road of pardons during the Clinton administration. Now how many times did Hillary say she doesn’t recall during Whitewater again? That said, this was nothing more than a political mine’s bigger than yours contest between Libby and Fitzgerald. Their rivalry goes way back. Everyone knows that. Libby in jail while a real criminal like Samuel ‘Sandy’ Berger walking free is the real crime here. I would surmise that lifting top secret documents subpoenaed from a federal institution by the 911 Commission would be more detrimental to this nation than mentioning a name of someone who was never proven to be a covert CIA operative at the time. It’s all about going after Bush. This is also still payback from the Republican Clinton smearing. Such is the ugly world of politics. Never fear, the Republicans will find a way to hit back down the road.

By jbmlaw

March 7, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this

One additional note on the Libby prosecution is the judicial fallout that arises.

(1) There is no longer any effective legal shield for reporters’ sources. There was never anything enshrined in statute, merely a traditional respect for the value of “sunshine,” now destroyed by the bad-faith prosecution.

(2) Nobody who is a potential subject of an investigation will ever speak with an investigator again, not if he has a brain. “Mis-remembering” is now criminal. Far safer to simply invoke the fifth amendment against self-incrimination.

By Jim's a Cherry Picker

March 7, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

All you apologists remember this:

Fall guy or not, Libby is GUILTY of lying under oath on several ocassions and hindering a federal investigation.

Period. That’s a fact.

It doesn’t matter how “noble” the cause. It doesn’t matter how nice of a guy he is or how bad the jury feels for him.

All that matters is that he lied under oath.

Guilty. He’s Guilty. Scooter Libby is Guilty.

He’s a Guilty man. Scooter Libby, that is…the former top aide to the Vice President of the United States of America…he’s Guilty of lying under oath.

Just for kicks…let’s review some of the text from the GOP’s Contract wtih America. As you read these fine words, please remember some of the things that are ongoing with the GOP at this very moment, Scooter Libby’s GUILTY verdict first and foremost:

REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH AMERICA

As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to join that body we propose not just to change its policies, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives.

That is why, in this era of official evasion and posturing, we offer instead a detailed agenda for national renewal, a written commitment with no fine print.

This year’s election offers the chance, after four decades of one-party control, to bring to the House a new majority that will transform the way Congress works. That historic change would be the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public’s money. It can be the beginning of a Congress that respects the values and shares the faith of the American family.

Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act “with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right.” To restore accountability to Congress. To end its cycle of scandal and disgrace. To make us all proud again of the way free people govern themselves.

So, with those words in mind and remembering that they were written by the GOP and used for political purposes:

Who’s proud of our government?

Have the “bonds of trust” been restored?

Has the “cycle of scandal and disgrace” ended yet?

By NoWonder

March 7, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this hope this travesty will be corrected in the courts. President Bush should not have to correct a verdict that was given with subterfuge and vindictiveness. The courts should correct their own mistakes. This verdict sounded like something out of the Dark Ages, not a time when facts and truth were the basis for decisions.

Dusty, I always heard that ignorance is bliss. In your case it it not just blissful ignorance, you are truly brain dead! Somebody please remove Dusty’s feeding tube.

By Dennis

March 7, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this

Well, it didn’t take you long to get to the heart of you comments today, Mr. Wooten. So let’s think about your topic.

Through out this trial Libby has been a good soldier. He hasn’t rolled over on Dick Cheney and why let/make him (one of the good ole insider boys) go through all of the appeal processes?

No doubt in a conservative’s eyes, that alone is worth the presidential pardon you are calling for.

Bush being practically a lame duck president anyway and his popularity poll is at rock bottom already, what difference would an immediate pardon make? Why not just pardon Scooter Libby now and get it over with?

No. For “political considerations”, Libby, an “innocent man”, must continue suffering for the good of the Bush administration for something Libby “didn’t do” - at least until the end of Bush’s term.

Of such is “conservative” politics.

But, geezz, that sound just like the way “political prisoners” are being treated at Guantanamo.

You don’t have to be a blind conservtive not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

By melo

March 7, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this

“,,,about the time of Mr. Fitzgerald’s appointment, …Richard L. Armitage told the FBI that he was the primary source who revealed Ms. Plame’s identity. Mystery solved!… But rather than going home, Mr. Fitzgerald asked Messrs. Armitage and Novak to keep that information quiet. He also asked for and received approval to expand his investigation-JBMLAW No new revelation here!!!!

the only ‘crime’,yes, thats the one that matters. If you have nothing new to offer, go early to the country club today. Enjoy your drinking day!! LIBBY, GUILTY AS CHARGED. SO LOSER.

By Writer's block

March 7, 2007 10:04 AM | Link to this

Libby will end up with a great job with big oil or some defense contractor. Like Rummy did.

By Writer's block

March 7, 2007 10:07 AM | Link to this

Bush should pardon the astronaut stalker-lady first. (Just to test the waters and see how big the backlash is).

By melo

March 7, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this

As with Clinton’s questionable pardons, some *allegedly for money, we can rant and rave all we want, but if President Bush pardons Libby, he has that authority-VAN* So true. As of now, the JURY VERDICT IS IN. Have a nice day and lick your wounds good!!

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

NoWonder,

What are you doing at the computer when the rest of the mob is out celebrating? I thought you would be running in the streets by now.

I appreciate your concern but I am doing just fine, thank you. But you better worry about our Justice System. When politics become the rule of law, even a misguided liberal like you might find it incomvenient.

By Southern Democrat

March 7, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

Jbmlaw,

I would respectfully disagree with your assessment of Fitzgerald’s job performance and, as you know, any insinuation of prosecutorial misconduct is incredibly serious. I don’t know if you’ve ever worked on the prosecutorial / investigative side of our field, but I can tell you that based upon my observations of it, there are many, many times where the intially suspected crime does not turn out to have sufficient evidence to bring before the grand jury, but the actions of witnesses and persons of interest don’t “pass the smell test” and require some deeper probing; as I mentioned above, sometimes the cover-up is infinitely worse than the act.

While I think that your conclusion regarding the rights of reporters post-Libby trial is correct, your blame is missplaced. Remember the source of this whole accusation: Armitage leaked proprietary information to a conservative reporter in an attempt to discredit someone who was speaking out against the administration’s reliance on faulty intelligence. This action put a government officer’s life at risk and was purely politically motivated.

Take a step back and look at it again.

By Mid-South Philosopher

March 7, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

It hit me like a ton of bricks!

All along, this administration has reminded me of something that I had forgotten or, at the very least, had pushed back into the inner recesses of my memory. While the challenges have been different, yet, throughout the past six years there has been something strangely familiar about the environment at the White House.

It became clear last evening after learning that Lewis “Scooter” Libby had been convicted of “perjury.”

The George W. Bush White House is cut in the pattern of the Nixon White House. Major players in the administration are dishonest and lie blatantly. There is no accountability among the inner circle, except to sacrifice the incidental “scape goat”, i.e. Scooter Libby.

Republicans should never lie. They are not as talented at it as the Democrats and it always looks worse when a Republican lies…after all, we expect the Democrats to do it, but the Republicans…they are the pillars of the community are they not?

Hell, if Georgie “Lost in Alabama during Vietnam” Bush had any guts, he would be a man and issue the pardon for Scooter now, and while he is at it he would go ahead and include Cheney and Rumsfeld for “any” crimes they “might” have committed. I don’t think “Georgie” is really as brave as he would like us to believe.

I don’t know about the rest of you “conservatives”, but Georgie Bush was the worst mistake I ever made.

Unfortunately, had I to do it over again, with what was running against him…I probably would have voted the same way.

Too bad we can’t outlaw “politicians” from running for President.

By Bag-o-donuts

March 7, 2007 10:14 AM | Link to this

The visiting team, huh? I thought there was only one team with a couple of political divisions. Jim, you wave your own partisan team’s flag once again while claiming the reason for guilt is partisan divide, a great diversionary tactic. No, guilt would be due to the facts of the case. People seem to forget that an op-ed was written and then a CIA officer was exposed in petty retaliation. That is fact. I’ve heard the trivial splitting hairs commentary on whether Valerie Plame truly was a CIA officer and it reminded me of the ridiculous Clinton comments on the definition of the word “is”. Lies are lies regardless of the party affiliation.

Add Scooter to this list: Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, Bob Ney, Mark Foley, Brian Doyle, Claude Allen, David Safavian, Bob Taft and Ernie Fletcher. These republicans have all been indicted, convicted or resigned in the 6 years the Bush administration has been in power. The residue of Jack Abramoff still lingers. Is there any credibility left for Republicans in DC? Do you believe anything Cheney says anymore?

Pardon Scooter if you want W, but absorb the consequences. Republicans lost the midterm election because of a combination of lousy execution of government and lack of credibility and truth. Those are the facts, not partisan comments.

By Writer's block

March 7, 2007 10:14 AM | Link to this

I wonder if Nixon would have pardoned or forgiven deep throat for what he did to his own administration? Nixon actually realized on National Television during an interview with Frost that he should have simply pardoned haldeman and erlichman, and the second story men. He blurted it out with a really revealing change in facial expression. “….you know what? I could have just pardoned them….”

By Redneck Convert

March 7, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this

From now on if I ever get innervued by a FBI agent or a grand jury, I ain’t saying nothing. I won’t lie or say I don’t remember. I will just clam up. They can’t get me then. If I’m stopped for speeding in my beer truck I don’t plan to say a thing to the cop. I will just stay all stone-faced. I won’t even show him my driver liscence. He could probly get me for something if I did.

Wooten is right. Libby was chased like a rabbit by a bunch of libruls. What I can’t figure out is why the Justice Department that is Republican would appoint a librul as a persecuter. They must have been a lot of good conservatives out there willing to take the job. This Fitzgerald guy must be a big Democrat. He was the one making all the calls. We need to fire the whole Justice Department for putting a librul in charge of the case.

So I say let my President pardon all the conservatives and keep all the libruls in jail. If enough of them stay in jail we will get our two House districts back and be able to tell a few fibs without getting jailed for it.

Sorry to see that TFTT is still on the drugs. He’s been ranting for two days now about black people and how the white people is getting the shaft and other stuff. What he says is true and all but I wish he would use Those People and other names us rednecks use to hide how we really feel. Too bad they don’t give drug tests before they let English people into this country. TFTT woulda flunked so bad even England would deport him somewhere else.

By Southern Democrat

March 7, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this

Dusty,

I would respectfully submit that if politics are the rule of law, it became crystallized as such in Bush v. Gore when all 9 justices voted along partisan lines, a terribly sad result. I would have much preferred a 9-0 result one way or another that was grounded more in law and not each justice’s subjective interpretation of it.

By melo

March 7, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this

Add Scooter to this list: Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, Bob Ney, Mark Foley, Brian Doyle, Claude Allen, David Safavian, Bob Taft and Ernie Fletcher. These republicans have all been indicted, convicted or resigned in the 6 years the Bush administration has been in power. The residue of Jack Abramoff still lingers. Is there any credibility left for Republicans in DC? Do you believe anything Cheney says anymore? Bag-o-donuts

Say Amen.And its not over yet because there is still 2 some years to go and still some people’s scalps to claim in this DUMB Presidency. How worse can this incompetency and dishonest be and how long can Americans continue to take it??

By getalife

March 7, 2007 10:26 AM | Link to this

One of worst Jim. They outed a CIA operative!

Why would Libby lie?

Duh, to protect cheney of course.

I am amazed watching the hate party making excuses for this convicted felon.

Their character and souls are corrupted by their blind devotion to their hate, criminal party.

These are the worst of Americans. What in the world will it take for these failed Americans to say enough with the hate and corruption?

Geez.

By SOBEIT

March 7, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

To hell with all this misplaced sympathy for Scooter Libby! Anybody dumb enough to do the dirty work for the most dishonest, unscrupulous, and cowardly man ever to inhabit this planet deserves to stew in his own juices as Libby is having to do. The real injustice here is that it is Libby and not Dick Cheney on his way to the slammer.

By jm

March 7, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive!” -Sir Walter Scott, Marmion 1808.

By time for the truth

March 7, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this

How come a few decent black folks aint long ago lynched inbred rednekkk for its unremitting, blatantly racist utterly unfunny hateful remarks about blacks??

I ONLY wisely and reasonably despise blatant black racists/bigots … like the execrable crackpipe and sharptongue and calypso louis farracrap et al!!

Whereas inbred rednekkks’ moronic despicable racism is viscerally aimed at ALL blacks!!

GO CRASH YOUR STOLEN BEER LORRY inbred - you sorry brainless crystalmeth abusing rednekkked turd!!

By Brad

March 7, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this

Libby is guilty of lying. That is an undeniable fact. But as jbm said, it’s nice to see you leftie wingnuts finally pay attention when someone lies to investigators, let alone a grand jury and under oath. That said, you wingnuts are ones to fingerwag about ethics. Did not Speaker Pelosi say something to these words?

‘We will have the most ethical congress in history.’

With William Jefferson Ziploc being elected to a congressional committee and Harry Reid Land Flipper as majority leader, I can see you wingnuts are off to a thunderous start in just a few months on teaching Republicans a thing or two. I can hardly wait for more lessons this year.

By Writer's block

March 7, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Bush should pardon me too. What is the minimum tip for having a veal sandwich delivered to your hotel room in NYC? I gave the guy a ten, and the sandwich was 6.50. I thought later that five would have been better. The pizza holes, those wonderful little stores, are all manned by south americans now. Five years ago it was all Russians. Every hot dog joint, every hotel, every minimum wage job is taken by south americans now. The russians must have moved up to the next tier. New York City. Opportunity. Somehow traffic keeps moving. That’s an indication that Americans know how to solve problems. Lots of traffic cops waving traffic on and stopping new yorkers from blocking the intersection by encroaching into cross traffic when the light is green. You have to stay back and wait your turn. There’s a $350 fine for honking, yet all you hear are horns. (all nite long) Somehow accidents are rare even though lane changes are rule-free, and pedestrians face red-light-running taxis . I saw a dozen near fatal slaughterings by taxis against foot traffic, it was a damn near thing each time, and yet at the last minute, the person stepped back, like they were alerted by radar only a new yorker could develop. I’d just stare in amazement. New Yorkers start crossing well before the light turns red for oncoming cross traffic so they’re in the middle of the intersection if there’s late taxi traffic coming from the peripheral. and taxis suffer no fools. The hotel had a smell of carpet cleaner and smoke and exotic BO that you would not believe However, the hotel had free parking, so it was almost worth it. It’s 60 bucks a day to park in nyc. I’d still never stay at that horrid hotel again. I liked the neighborhood it was in though. New York City has neighborhoods that evolve as the new apt. towers go up. It’s really quite nice. I could live in NY. The hotdogs are to die for. I could live on hot dogs. brown mustard. perfect. they grill them. there’s this taste you cant get anywhere else. pizza heaven. and the pastrami on rye!!!! I dont think I had one vegetable the entire week. How much is the blood test for rickets, anyway?.

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

MidSouth Philosopher,

We don’t need to stop politicians from running for President. We need to stop weak kneed philosphers from making political statements while jumping ship.

Bush’s White House does not look like Nixon’s. Bush has not lied nor deceived. Cheney has not lied and deceived. And I doubt that Libby has. But you are so prejudiced that you want to condemn the President, Cheney and Rumsfeld, none of whom have been convicted or even discovered doing anything illegal.

The American people will not be fooled. The Libby trial was a farce. Justice was served only for political revenge, not for finding the truth.

The weak always run, change their minds and maintain no loyalty. So, run with the crowd, midsouth, but I wouldn’t be proud of it.

By getalife

March 7, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

Just freaking disgusting.

By Van

March 7, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this

SOBEIT,

You had me confused for a second, I thought you were going on about Al Bore.

By steve-o

March 7, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this

getalife,

I’m just waiting for Markus’s attempt to exculpate Libby through endless links to conservative blogs and bolded caps font, as well as endless name calling.

But something tells me that our other conservative apologists on this blog may beat him to the punch…

By Van

March 7, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

Southern Democrat,

The two decisions that came out of the Bush Vs. Gore recount in Florida, were 7-2 against the Florida Supreme Court and 5-4 on what to do about the recounts.

Last time I checked , there was never a 9-0 decision regarding the Bush vs. Gore p#ssing match.

By Brad

March 7, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

Clinton’s national security adviser, Samuel ‘Sandy’ Berger, walks free. That’s a real tragedy of American justice.

By Realist

March 7, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

Wow..looks like the walls are tumbling down on this administration. I’m proud that I am at command of the helm of my own mind now. I fear Dusty will continue to throw the life jacket away. Kill yourself

Even though I know its liberal trash that voted…but how awful can you be to have numerous towns vote to impeach you..Vermont was it?

By melo

March 7, 2007 10:53 AM | Link to this

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/07/washington/07cheney.html?th&emc=th

Bush’s White House does not look like Nixon’s. Bush has not lied nor deceived. Cheney has not lied and deceived. And I doubt that Libby has-Dusty

Even monkeys are laughing at you Van!! Re-read your statement and look in the mirror while doing that. Tell me if you like the contotion on your face. THE JURY VAN, THE JURY. Its an American tradition, THE JURY.Embrace our justice system or else you rooting for Alqeada.

By getalife

March 7, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

steve-o,

Yes, the wingnut blogs are full of excuses today.

Check out these comments

Geez.

By Realist

March 7, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

Van…re-read what Southern actually wrote..then re-type a response.

By DNC

March 7, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this

By steve-o

March 7, 2007 10:44 AM |

I’m just waiting for Markus’s attempt to exculpate Libby through endless links to conservative blogs and bolded caps font, as well as endless name calling.

steve-o, Markus is exactly the kind of conservative poster that is needed here. He has become the stereotypical right wing trash that chases others to the left. Nobody wants to be associated with such ignorant scum.

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this

Southern Democrat,

Your mind has crystalized over Bush and you can’t even get your facts straight about Gore vs. Bush.

But you have given us one of the obvious reasons for prejudice in Libby’s case. You are still seething over the fact that Gore/Democrats lost an election and that it was confirmed on all counts.

If you were honest with yourself, you would not be celebrating a loss of justice, a case where the guilty, Armitage, was not even tried. Libby was actually convicted on “loss of memory” as crime. I think it is beyond your will to see things fairly in politics.

By steve-o

March 7, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

getalife,

Yup…the Freepers are cyber-Blackshirts indeed. Hang the jury??? They are completley insane. These guys believe that a female country band is more threatening than a lying high-end political staff member!

DNC,

Point well taken!

By Southern Democrat

March 7, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

Dusty & Van,

Please re-read my posts, comprehend them, and then decide whether to attack me.

By Mid-South Philosopher

March 7, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this

We can’t have it both ways, Dusty. Either “Georgie” Bush is corrupt or inept or maybe both.

I, and a lot of independent voters, though we were replacing Clinton with a person of higher standards. What we got was not what we were seeking.

If the honest Republicans (assuming that there are some left) don’t get their act together and reign in this President, we will have Hillary or Barack to look forward to for the next four years …not to mention a pro-socialist Congress.

By JohnD(the actual)

March 7, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

The campaign of misinformation never stops pouring from the Left. “They”, Libby and the administration according to the Left, outed, exposed, revealed a CIA operative. Yet, the reality says otherwise and the Left charges on undeterred by the fact that Richard L. Armitage admittedly leaked the name of Valerie Plame. Several posts here still accuse Libby of being the source.

Quoting Curious Observer,

“Perjury is a felony regardless of the nature of the surrounding investigation, for it strikes at the very heart of the justice system.”

Where was all this righteous indignation for acts of perjury when President Pants-Around-His-Ankles was the perpetrator?

And the Left here accuses Jim Wooten of partisanship!

By Brian Curtis

March 7, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

It’s good of Wooten to offer thoughtful commentary on the Libby case right after explaining that he knows nothing about it.

Thanks for clearing up that silly notion of “blind partisanship,” Mr. W.

By UGAlaw

March 7, 2007 11:32 AM | Link to this

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 11:08 AMLibby was actually convicted on “loss of memory” as crime. I think it is beyond your will to see things fairly in politics.

Uh, Dusty. Get the facts of the case straight. Libby was convicted of perjury, not “loss of memory”. The charge was Perjury. The verdict was guilty. I guess your next point will be that there were nothing but liberal democrats on the jury. And by the way Dusty, you would have a hard time in any case whining about the “politics” of the case when the prosecutor was a republican appointed by a republican Department of Justice. You just can’t stand the fact that the prosecutor actually did his job. You expected and wanted just another political hack didn’t you?

By Reece

March 7, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this

Brian,

Jim Wooten’s word are simply his attempt to emulate his alter-ego mAnn Coulter.

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

Mid South,

If you want to compare Bush to Clinton, then you are not an independent voter. Clinton is a man without morals. Bush is maintaining his. The two are not comparable.

I see Bush as honest, intelligent and looking to the future. If he has been “inept” making some decisions for our country during the greatest mishaps of our times, then it only proves that he is human and few could have done any better.

I believe he saw the growth of terrorism in the Middle East and its terror already reaching us on 9/11. I believe that he saw the future of our country was in jeopardy and did what he thought was best.

I also think that the future will prove that he was correct in taking action, not waiting until the terrorists were at our throats.

I know that you, and Southern Democrat, will continue to work against the President and his efforts. I know you’d rather wait on terrorism and not wage war. But I cannot negate the knowledge that what you are doing, perhaps unintentionally, undermines the country and encourages our enemies.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this

Regardless of whether or not Bush pardons, it is a sad day for Republicans. Mid-south, I loved your comment that Republicans aren’t allowed to lie, but we expect it from the Dems. That is so true. Bush has been vilified so much that the libs will find a way to tear down this administration, whether deserved or not. I’m in agreement with you on the voting choices too. I voted for Bush twice, but if I had another conservative choice, I most likely would have picked differently. However, with the choices before me, I agree to that my vote would be the same today.

Brad, I love your posts and I’m totally with you on your opinions.

Realist, you seem to have changed a little since about 4-5 months ago. Are you the same poster, or has someone else assumed your name later on?

By jm

March 7, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

I wonder what the over/under is on date that Alberto Gonzales will ask for Patrick Fitzgerald’s resignation.

Libby got caught lying (presumably for his boss) and will have to face the music. If W had any smarts, he would have done what his father had with Caspar Weinberger and pardoned him before the investigation started.

As for Sandy Berger (I would have at least liked to have him face a judge), it was a republican administration that let him walk off “scot free”, so quit whining about that.

By UGAlaw

March 7, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

By JohnD(the actual)

March 7, 2007 11:21 AMWhere was all this righteous indignation for acts of perjury when President Pants-Around-His-Ankles was the perpetrator?

So JohnD, you have a problem with this prosecutor doing his job just because another didn’t?

By Reece

March 7, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

Dusty,

With the resources and minds that are available to the POTUS there is absolutley no excuse for the ineptitude that you mention. Bush has the mental capacity of an orange. As for his morality?? C’mon, you must be kidding, he’s shown time after time that his idea of moral conduct is twisted beyond rationality.

By steve-o

March 7, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this

Yeah Dusty…your favorite child-king is a pretty horrible leader.

And it’s not only “leftists” that believe this, but rather 70% of the country.

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

Reece,

If you liked the “morals” of Clinton then I don’t doubt that you think Bush has twisted morals.

If you think the mental capacity to secure a master’s degree at a top line university is that of an orange, then you yourself are full of juice.

We have nothing to discuss. In the meantime, why don’t you look up the definition of morals and intelligence? You might find that you have neither.

By pothead

March 7, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

Libby was convicted of purjury. People here say that it shouldnt matter that he lied because the act of outing a covert op (whether in the field or at home) caused no harm?

So wait, by that same reckoning, if I grow my own weed and smoke it, Im causing no harm (not helping the drug trade, not trafficing, just smoking my own) and therefore its perfectly ok?

Pass da dutchie to the left hand side…

By Realist

March 7, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this

Barbara,

Welcome back…the time I was in hiatus was for a lil soul searching. After the defeat in November I thought long and hard about the direction we were heading and the future life form my son. I didn’t like what I saw. I have not lost my conservative principles, but only strengthened them. I’m a Reagan conservative and I know now that the Bush administation, this war in IRAQ, the blind eye to illegal mexigration will have a negative effect on my son’s future.

Oh..I still hate liberals

By melo

March 7, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this

I see Bush as honest, *intelligent and looking to the future-DUSTY* Van has some company. Monkeys are having a field day laughing, i tell ya!

When DUMB, I mean Bush competently and successfully swallows a Pretzel and they actually print that in the Wall Street Journal and on Jim Wooten’s blog, than I will have to believe that he has some intelligence. I just think competence and intelligence go hand in hand. Do you believe that Dusty? IF not please feel free to change my mind.

By Southern Democrat

March 7, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

What is most entertaining about sparring with you on this board is watching you continually expose your own hipocrisy.

As I have stated before, I did not condone any of President Clinton’s behavior and found the blind loyalty of many Democrats to him troubling and dangerous to this country.

You have stated that those who criticize a president during wartime are either traitorous or not supporting the troops; yet you admit that youd did not support President Clinton during the Bosnia Conflict, the Somalia Conflict, or the bombings of al Qaeda bases.

You claim that an independent prosecutor bringing charges against someone who is convicted by an independend jury is politically motivated in this instance, but the independent prosecutor investigating Bill Clinton was not?

Who is the blind partisan again?

And, FYI, I can name 10 Republicans I’ve voted for in general elections for either statewide or nationwide office over the past 10 years, how many Democrats have you voted for?

By Mrs. RepubLady

March 7, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

Yes, pardon Scooter! He gave me some great stock tips once, and I made a fortune. Friends should be able to talk without fear of repercussion. A simple breach of national security (which has led to great financial gain for me) is not as bad as getting a bl-w job! My goodness, you should all rot in Hades for just asking for one of those! Disgusting and truly unforgivable.

By Jables

March 7, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

Are you f*** retarded?

By Seriously

March 7, 2007 12:17 PM | Link to this

Has anyone here ever claimed what Sandy Berger did was right?

Has anyone here ever defended what he did?

I didn’t think so.

By Jesus

March 7, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

Realist wrote, “I still hate liberals.”

You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.” But I say to Realist, love your enemies. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.

By rarringt

March 7, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

Afternoon all,

Dusty said,

I see Bush as honest, intelligent and looking to the future. If he has been “inept” making some decisions for our country during the greatest mishaps of our times, then it only proves that he is human and few could have done any better.

With all due respect, I would encourage you to take the larger view on “some” of his decisions.

9/11 was a horrible event, the worst terrorist attack in our country since Timothy McVeigh and the OK City bombings. Thousands of people - americans - lost their lives due to the dubious actions of 19 members of a then-extremist-even-in-the-Arab-world Al-Quaeda.

The world sympathized, welcomed us into the reality of international terrorism, and stood with us ready to eradicated Bin Laden (remember him?)

That was the stage set for Bush in 2001. He had near unanimous support, including mine for tracking down and killing the b**s responsible.

But then, some peculiar things happened.

He confused Al-Quaeda with Iraq.

He confused Bin Laden with Hussein.

He ignored his father and Secretary of State (former Chmn, JCS) who told him he couldn’t hold Iraq easily.

He ignored his generals, who told him he couldn’t do it cheaply or with a skeleton force.

He ignored most of the rest of the world that had previously supported him, relying on staunch allied like the UK (which has rebelled), and of course the fine people of Palau) (who also brought their troops back).

He confused his razor-thin victory in 2004 as a mandate, and considered the 2006 elections, where independents and disaffected GOPers returned the Dems to power, as a marginal non-event.

He prepared budgets that are so frontloaded as to put this country in its worst financial crisis since the depression, and are set to collapse starting in 2009, the year he leaves office.

He presided over the Walter Reed scandal, which has been brewing since at least 2004.

He insisted on elements of the PATRIOT act which have effectively hamstrung the first and fourth amendments.

He lobbied for the indefinite detention of suspects in secret locations, with no charges brought except in secret trials.

And that’s just the foreign policy stuff. Sure, Clinton shouldn’t have lied about cheating, and Whitewater and Travelgate were unnecessary exercises in stupidity on their part. But let me ask:

How did Lewinsky help create budgetary rules that literally sets the country up for near-bankruptcy?

How did travel favors for constituents vilify our country worldwide?

How did selling nights in the Lincoln Bedroom result in our wounded being subjected to horrid conditions in stateside army hospitals?

And, oh yeah, how many troops and civilians died and were wounded because of a cattle deal gone wrong?

Seriously, Dusty, I know you want to vilify Clinton and deify Bush because that’s what partisanship is all about. Problem is, partisanship ain’t what it’s cracked up to be. Look at things from an independent, free-thinking viewpoint, and you’ll see that Bush isn’t “making decisions during the greatest mishaps of our times.”

Bush, and the mentality that voted for him in 2004, is the greatest mishap of our time.

By Captain Freedom

March 7, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this

The Captain heard that Barbara issued a clarion call for his wisdom during yesterday’s exchange. It warms my heart.

The Captain would love to engage in the mockery today. How he would love to expediently disparage our centuries old legal system and to call a Republican prosecutor a traitor and a tool of the Bush haters (yea, alas, Fitz is one of those weak-kneed Republicans who lets principle stand in the way of devotion to True Belief).

How the Captain longs to stake out a position that is beyond refutation because of its inherent stupidity and logical cupidity. How the Captain yearns to make sweeping generalizations that blindly support our efforts in pursuit of True Belief.

Yea and verily, the Captain wishes to stand arm-in-arm with stalwart feces-flingers like Markus, Timeless Truth and Dusty (along with the newcomer Brad, who is quickly proving his bona fides as the dullest knife in the drawer, true Corner material, that fellow).

But the Captain despairs at the possibility that his remarks could possibly make the True Belief crowd look any worse, any less principled, any less concerned with factual consistency, than this crowd can do on its very own.

For if, as Dusty believes, I am really just making fun of these yokels, then my mission is a fools errand. For if the aim is satire, it is pointless to strike a blow against a crowd that works so hard to trumpet their own pernicious ignorance and deep-seated hatred of American traditions. A crowd that satirizes the very idea of Patriotism as it uses our Constitution like a roll of cheap fanny ribbon.

The Captain is alarmed…perhaps Dusty was right. Perhaps I really have been mocking her all this time. How could she possibly have known?

By melo

March 7, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this

If you think the mental capacity to secure a master’s degree at a top line university is that of an orange, then you yourself are full of juice-Dusty

The Yale admission was a ‘hook up” Daddy secured that, just as he secured the Texas national guard posting(and never really served but was awol), instead of Vietnam and the connections to the baseball team and fortune and to the Presidency ahead of Mccain and other Republicans ahead of him. If you think villifying veterans like Mccain during the presidential elections, sending troops to a war and having them killed when noone of your own kith and kin(philandering daughters included) have ‘volunteered’ for the volunteer army, is good morals, then you and Bush have a macabre sense of morals indeed!!

By DumbDetector

March 7, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 12:00 PM If you think the mental capacity to secure a master’s degree at a top line university is that of an orange, then you yourself are full of juice.

And you Dusty are full of sh&t! Shades of Edwin “I am the one” Williams. It’s a shame that this “master’s” degree program didn’t consist of anything more than blogging for dummies 101. You are a PHd when it comes to that. Thanks for the joke of the day Dusty.

By rarringt

March 7, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

Didn’t realized how long the post was. Sorry ‘bout that.

By Dave

March 7, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this

They should put him away for a long long time. They should make sure there are plenty of cells available for Dick, Rummy, Dubya, and Wolfman as well. They are all crooks, criminals, liars, and most of all murderers! May they all rot in hell.

By Webspinner

March 7, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this

Why is it you right-wingers seem to always have “trouble getting drawn into” stories, arguments, debates you know you can win, or that reflect poorly on people of your ilk? Awfully convenient to ignore a story that reveals the true nature of hard-ball Washington politics and exposes VP Cheney for the mean-spirited, manipulative so-and-so he truly is. Way to go, Jimbo.

By Killin' Time

March 7, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this

Seriously at 12:17. You’re exactly right!

Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger was sentenced to 100 hours of community service, fined $50,000 plus administrative costs and placed on probation for two-years for removing classified documents from the National Archives and destroying some of them. Here’s what Berger said after his sentencing:

“I deeply regret the actions that I took at the National Archives two years ago, and I accept the judgment of the court…”

There were no cries of prosecutorial misconduct or team victories or losses. No appeals were filed, and no pardons were advocated or requested. In other words, there’s no comparison.

By Libertarian, former Republican

March 7, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this

It’s this simple: perjury is perjury. I am glad that Mr. Libby was convicted, as it certainly appears that he did perjure himself.

And, yes, I did support trying President Clinton for perjury and suborning perjury if he was convicted in his impeachment trial and removed from office.

By ckt

March 7, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this

Dusty -

Gore won the 2000 vote by just under 600,000 in the popular vote. Tell me if the tables were flopped, you wouldn’t still be b**ing about it.

By Webspinner

March 7, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

OK, “By time for the truth” … now that you’ve puked all over this blog, I guess it’s time to go drown some kittens. What a sad, sorry life you must lead.

By Matthew

March 7, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this

Bush is certain to pardon Libby before Bush leaves office AND he is certain to bomb Iran on his way out as well, just because he can.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this

Hey Captain! I may not agree with your politics, but you always make me smile. I look for you at Starbucks all the time.

Realist, I can understand having a change of heart. My boys are 11 and 13, and girls 14 and 16, and each year I think I’m closer to hearing those words I don’t want to hear. “Mom, I want to join the military.” (Or become a police officer…..) What will I say, since both their father and I are vets, and I admire the police officers? Ughhh, I hope that time is slow in coming….. It scares the hell out of me.

And Jesus, the “I still hate liberals” comment was meant for my entertainment. Even Jesus laughed…… In fact, he laughed a lot. And I think he smiles when we laugh too. You might want to read up on the “judge not…” verses while you’re calling Realist out.

By JP

March 7, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this

Just what I expected: Wooten, you are a worthless hack.

Libby lied THROUGH HIS TEETH to protect Cheney and Rove, who were clearly scrambling to discredit an opponent of the administration. Denial is laughable at this point. Congress needs to move forward with further investigation of Cheney, as it appears his backstabbing a$$ was the one in charge of the operation.

The buck did NOT stop with Libby, and neither should we.

By JP

March 7, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this

Perjury is a felony regardless of the nature of the surrounding investigation, for it strikes at the very heart of the justice system. Libby perjured himself and in doing so obstructed justice. Even a jury that was sympathetic to Libby recognized the seriousness of the crimes he committed. It doesn’t matter whether Libby was the first to identify Plame as a CIA employee or whether he was the last. It doesn’t matter whether Plame’s identity was recognized as covert. Lying to a grand jury and to FBI agents is criminal, regardless of the circumstances.

If Clinton deserved impeachment because he lied, which it appears he did, Libby’s actions were criminal.

By Peter

March 7, 2007 12:51 PM | Link to this

You gotta love the WRONG WING, and Whooten today…….

HA HA HA…..basically they say, laws, courts, and lying mean nothing, especially in this administration………

King George again……behead all…….hide the truth, and by all means, let’s totally ignore the Constitution!

HA HA HA……..and they say the left is out of touch!!!!…..HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 12:59 PM | Link to this

Captain, I just went back and read yesterday’s post, since you indicated I called for you. Although I love your antics, I was punked yesterday. That poster wasn’t me (although at least they didn’t credit me with anything offensive……) And lay off Brad please. I think he’s awesome! Saw some of his posts from yesterday too.

By REP

March 7, 2007 1:00 PM | Link to this

Jim, you make me sick. You are so blatantly partisan it is truly sad. If this was a Democratic administration, you clearly would not be in favor of a pardon. The bottom line is that the guy got convicted beyond a reasonable doubt despite that the fact that he had high priced defense lawyers. He broke the law and he needs to pay the price. Period!

By harold

March 7, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this

sure, pardon libby, as long as the search continues for the real killers

By Disgusted

March 7, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this

I hope Libby becomes the boy-toy of Bubba, the typical Georgian, when he arrives at the prison to serve his time. Libby is not a “nice guy.” He has been in the middle of the neocon efforts to undermine the Constitution and shaft the working and middle classes. Any decency he once had has long since departed.

By LMAO

March 7, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

Barbara, you just inquired about Realist’s identity.

I wonder about yours. You used to be more on the level headed side. Now you sound just like Dusty.

Dusty, have you stolen Barbara’s id?

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 1:09 PM | Link to this

LMAO, really???? I’ve always been pretty hard-core conservative. I am willing to consider other opinions, and I’ve been willing to admit a change of heart or mind once in a while, but I don’t think my posts today contradict previous posts.

It has been speculated on more than one occasion that Dusty and I are one and the same. Only I know the tru…….Uh, I mean, Only she and I know the truth.

By Captain Freedom

March 7, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this

Barbara, the Captain is crestfallen to learn that it was not True Barbara who called my name so longingly, as does poor Pedro call for Mrs. Freedom whenever he suffers from his recurring illnesses.

And the Captain agrees, Brad is indeed awesome. He makes the Captain’s work here so much easier.

But moving on to more serious concerns….

Since we have effectively dispatched and discredited that no-good liberal dumbocrat persecuter who railroaded Scooter for nothing more than a few minor memory lapses, let us now turn our attention to some other Republican-in-name-only out-of-work prosecutors who were rightly $hitcanned to make room for some of Herr Rove’s loyal friends.

Even as we write, Congress is hearing “testimony” from six “former disgruntled employees grandstanding before Congress” (as characterized by the Dept. of Justice today — though the Captain wonders if this means that they are no longer disgruntled; the grammar is unclear.). These Islamosympathizers were fired because of their laziness, lack of brains, hatred of America, and poor personal hygiene. This is well documented, but they would have you believe that they were fired due to overzealous pursuit of corrupt Republican and insufficient harassment of Democratic targets. As if!!!

Friends in True Belief, our mission is clear. Despite the fact that these miscreants were appointed by Our Leader, and despite their consistently superior job evaluations, we cannot rest until every one of these traitors is dragged through the mud and savaged as the alQuaeda puppets that they really are. Why, they’ll wish they were in Gitmo before we get done with em, the treasonous swine. Castration is too good for them. (except the not-men among them, of course, who sadly lack the necessary equipment to be eligible for castration, and who should have been home baking cookies and breeding, not out flaunting their floozie in a public courtroom).

By Duke

March 7, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this

I wonder which of Brad’s statements Barbara found to be so awesome:

The stupid assertion that Democratic presidents are guilty of political pardons, but Republican presidents are not (Bush 41 pardoned Casper Weinberger before his trial and five others involved, including Reagan’s former National Security Advisor, who had either plead guilty or were convicted for their roles in selling weapons to axis-of-evil member, Iran)?

The false assertion that Hillary Clinton lied during the Watergate investigation?

The lie about Libby and Fitzgerald having a long time rivalry?

The bizarre assertion that Fitzgerald, a G.W. Bush appointee, is giving Libby payback for the Clinton impeachment?

The misleading implication that either Sandy Berger wasn’t convicted for his crime or that Berger received a light punishment for political reasons?

Or maybe Barbara loved Brad’s advocacy of the long Republican tradition of seeking t** for tat — “Never fear, the Republicans will find a way to hit back down the road.”

Yup. Brad’s awesome.

By LMAO

March 7, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

Barbara, your sticking up for Brad is what had me worried.

However, your 1:09 post convinced me you are not Dusty. Your sense of humor gave you away. LMAO!

By JohnD(the actual)

March 7, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

ugaLAW,

I have no problem with a prosecutor doing his job - I wish more would.

My problem is with the Left and their complaints that President Pants Around His Ankles was “only lying about sex”. The argument, from the Left, never mentioned perjury is a felony, regardless of the surrounding investigation, with regard to either Clinton.

Bill Clinton lost his license to practice law as a result but where were the cries for jail time so proudly posted on this forum today?

The double standard was my criticism, not the conviction or the ultimate sentence.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

Captain stop! My cheeks hurt from laughing so hard. You truly have an amazing imagination! You should write books for a living. I would read them. I know that you’re really one of those mangy libbies that I should hate, but…. if loving you is wrong, well, you know the rest of the line. If only you were a conservative…… Now twice you’ve made Barbara shed a tear.

By Freedom Fries

March 7, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this

Captain Freedom,

Don’t stay away so long…you’ve been missed.

Sincerely,

An anonymous Friend in True Belief.

(I’m sorry to confess that I don’t have the courage to reveal my true Thinking Right moniker since Brad informs that I might be prosecuted for my True Belief.)

By Noelle

March 7, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this

We all know Bush will do it on his way out of office, so it does’t really matter what we thing. But no, of course he shouldn’t be pardoned. He committed perjury, and that was proven to a jury. Nothing else matters. (Well, except that he’s obviously the scapegoat for the real criminals in the administration.)

And not that it’s germane to the discussion, but if Clinton had been convicted of perjury, I’d feel the same way.

By steve-o

March 7, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

Capt. Freedom,

In regards to the “treasonous swine” that you mentioned, I guess you should ask yourself “what would Ayn Rand do?”

By elizabeth

March 7, 2007 1:44 PM | Link to this

If W pardons Libby, he should pardon all the LIARS behind bars. After all, lying isn’t really crime, just a matter of recollection.

By Astrid

March 7, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this

Forget pardoning Libby. Cheney should just write him a substantial check for covering Cheney’s a**. We’ll call it payment for a job well done!

By Pete

March 7, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this

How can you trivialize Libby’s conviction by acting like it’s only the left versus the right? You ignore the fact that the prosecutor is a republican and the people on the jury were screened by Libby’s high priced lawyer. Have you noticed how people like Jim Wooten who belittle the verdict use labels on people on the other side? They don’t discuss or challenge the facts in the case.

By jm

March 7, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this

Regarding President Clinton, I still want to know how a special prosecutor who was appointed to investigate a dodgy real estate deal that happened before President Clinton took office spent so much time investigating oral sex in the oval office. At least Patrick Fitzgerald stayed on topic during his investigation.

By LMAO

March 7, 2007 2:06 PM | Link to this

Wow, I could have had a V-8.

Why didn’t Clinton use the “a tale of insider politics in Washington” defense?

If Libby gets a new trial maybe he could use the Dan White “twinkie defense”

Or, maybe he can pretend the glove doesn’t fit.

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this

Oh well, the day wears on and I have just returned. Maybe I can replay to a few of you.

UGAlaw..

The jury said Libby lied about “his loss of memory” and called it perjury.

Melo,

Yes, I believe competence and intelligence go hand in hand. With that in mind, I pay no attention to your posts.

Southern Democrat,

Glad you enjoy my posts. I would enjoy yours more if you could get your facts straight. I have never mentioned Bosnia and Clinton but did support that effort after seeing starving prisoners and mass graves. Bombing the Chinese embassy got a little sticky. The Samolia Conflict? You mean when some of our troops landed there complete with a battalion of news reporters and then hightailed it out of the country when there was a brief deadly encounter? I hardly had time to support that one. AlQueda bombings by Clinton?? You mean the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan and the empty training camp? Didn’t get to support that one either. Now, SouDem, you will have to show me a quote where I said treason. I have said that I think the anti-war, anti-Bush efforts in this country undermine the morale of our troops and encourage the enemy. I still believe that.

By Howard Smith

March 7, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this

Your suggestion that he be pardoned is indicative of who you are, not our justice system. Politics is one thing, lying to federal authorities during an investigation is another. And, when it involves a coverup regarding the argument for going to war, that’s another. Lives have been lost as a result and that should matter, even to you. What Libby was convicted of does not even begin to address the “politics” of deliberately misleading the American people to justify going to war. My guess is you will continue to rationalize all of this, while condemning critics of this administration’s foreign and domestic policy failures.

By JohnD(the actual)

March 7, 2007 2:24 PM | Link to this

The special prosecutor in the White Water case simply followed leads where those leads took him. The Clinton history, both Bill and Hill, is intertwined with alleged problems.

A prosecutor is charged to follow through on the possible illegal activity uncovered, whether involved in the original investigation or not. The Clintons seem to have led their lives much like the tax cheat who keeps terrible records.

The tax cheat hopes the IRS will not be able to decipher the jungle of receipts and records and the Clintons seem to feel that subterfuge, lying under oath, using their supporters as the gofer, and other diversions will keep them out of the slammer.

So far, to the Clintons credit or discredit depending on your feelings, they have been successful.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this

Duke, I agree that pretty much every President has done some questionable things during their time in office. After all they are mere mortal men. But in my opinion Slick Willie perverted the office of President more than all other Presidents combined (and I’m specifically thinking of his using the office for sexual misconduct, which, in my opinion is quite vile). I admit, two wrongs don’t make a right, but put some persective around it. And if you think Hillary didn’t lie about Whitewater, as well as many other things, why you just keep hittin’ that bong, friend.

By Middle America

March 7, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this

Should he be pardoned? No. In fact he should be joined by his cohorts, Cheney and Bush for crimes above and beyond lying to an investigator about a CIA agents name. They are responsible for the deaths of over 3000 American soldiers over false information.

Will he be pardoned? Of course he will. Because that will be the price of his silence on other matters that Bush/Cheney will want to be kept quiet.

The power to pardon was meant to be a safeguard against bias in the judicial system. But what it has been turned into is a get out of jail free card for buddies of the president, whether Democrat or Republican. The only check against the abuse of this power is that of the free press. But as you can see, bias also exists there too. Right Wooten? Wooten wants to give Libby a pass, but he will always point to how Bill Clinton was less than truthful about his affairs in a deposition. Except one event had national security implications and the other was simply fodder for the tabloids. But go on, tell us how you are morally right.

By Devastator

March 7, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this

Barbara,

The only difference concerning Clinton and other Presidents is that he got caught. Out of all the years the White House has been in existence, you think that this is the first time?

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

rarringt,

You are very lengthy. I shall try to separate the wheat from the chaff and there’s a lot of chaff.

There was no confusions about Iraq and wmds. Bush,Blair,Congress,UN, Colin Powell all saw the same reports and all decided and voted for war against Iraq. Did you forget?

Bush/military/Iraqi court disposed of Saddam. Bush still quietly stalks Osama as he crouches in some mountain cave.

Bush has listened to his generals and not one has ever been “fired”. He and Gen. Petreaus are on the same track.

The Patriot Act has hamstrung terrorists but it hasn’t listened to a word I’ve said ‘cause I’m not a terrorist.

We have had 9/11, a world natural disaster (tsunami)to supply, the natural disaster of Katrina to supply, and the war against terror and Homeland Defense to supply. But you don’t understand how and why the debt is high and you haven’t noticed our thriving economy and tax cuts. You only see what you want to see.

The undermining of Bush, the troops and the country are the greatest mishaps of our time.

By LMAO

March 7, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this

Lets see….. Lying about a BJ

VS

Lying about facts that lead us to war in which thousands are being killed to this day.

Who perverted the office more…….

By cheesebuzz

March 7, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

Jim:

We think alike on most subjects, but your logic on this one escapes me. Did you just forget to say WHY the Scootster should be pardoned?? There should be little bias involved here; difficult I know. If this bottom feeder is guily of serious crimes, which it would appear that he is; then he should cool his heels for a lot longer than the 1-3 years he probably gets.

By Mrs. RepubLady

March 7, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

Barbara, I agree with you. It’s vile! No decent woman would do such a thing, and no decent man should ask for it. Let’s make a law against asking for it, because making them sleep on the couch for a month is not punishment enough.

By Bugger

March 7, 2007 2:43 PM | Link to this

President Bush should pardon Libby now to end our long national nightmare, to coin a phrase.

Jim, your forced retirement cannot come soon enough.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

Devastator, if you would read the first sentance of my post, which states that I believe all Presidents have committed some questionable act, you would have your answer. One major difference to me was the level of arrogance shown by Bill Clinton when caught, and confronted. As I said before, two wrongs don’t make a right, and I certainly did not intend to turn this conversation to a Clinton-bashing session (for that would take a lifetime to list his offenses, and we simply don’t have that kind of time). I’m simply saying that we should put this in perspective. Let’s say George Bush does pardon Libby? As Van stated earlier, that’s his right to do so. I don’t hear any Clinton supporters pointing out the time Clinton pardoned that fellow over in Switzerland for his offenses, including collaborating with terrorists. Perspective….. I’m just sayin’…..

By LMAO

March 7, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

While in office Lincoln shared a bed with an Army lieutenant.

Was he ever impeached for that? Is he considered a moral president?

By Zeke

March 7, 2007 2:47 PM | Link to this

Dusty, you right wing fascists are the only terrorist that threaten me. Thank God above that this country got scared enough to move left into the mainstream. Thank God that moderates once again hold the key to electability in this country. And thank God that the neo-cons are dead and almost buried. This administration is done. Stick a fork in em. They are about as potent now as the cat I just had neitered. Thank God!

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 2:50 PM | Link to this

LMAO, c’mon, now….. The answer is still Clinton. And when did George Bush lie about the information he was given and the decision to go to war? You may scoff, but to this day I still believe there were WMDs. I don’t know where they are, or if they’ll ever be found, but tell me that any reasonable person who looks as Sadaam’s history could possibly believe he didn’t have those weapons. C’mon. I now question you on reasonable thought….

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Captain Freedom,

Yes, you are worth a few smiles. You were pretty good as Redneck convert. Your double entendre was entertaining but wearing a little thin.

It is nice to have the pleasant personality of Barbara. She will keep you happy. I am complimented that some would confuse us. But as she said, she is Barbara and I am Dusty and neither of us uses the ID of others.

By Lord Doom

March 7, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Hooray!!

We finally got rid of that bastard Captain America. Now its Batman’s turn.

By New Life Church

March 7, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this

Barbara, you can’t judge the level of arrogance shown by Clinton vs the arrogance of other Presidents because the other Presidents ‘indiscretions’ were overlooked, and ignored by the press.

They were never openly confronted with their “perversion.”

By Writer's block

March 7, 2007 2:56 PM | Link to this

Strange how Libby started out as Time Mag’s Person of the Year and now has fallen to convicted felon needing a pardon.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 2:59 PM | Link to this

Dusty, say it ain’t so?!?!?!?! Is Captain Freedom really the Redneck Convert? Please say it’s not so. I can’t stand that guy. In my opinion the writing skills are not in the same league, but I admit I haven’t been reading Jim’s columns much lately, so you may have more information than me. I did at one time suspect that our dear Captain might be the ID stealer though. Oh I sincerely hope that’s not the case.

By The Guy Upstairs

March 7, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

Hey, Zeke, don’t blame me for any left-wing, uh, “successes”.

By Devastator

March 7, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this

Barbara Barbara Barbara,

Sooner or later you are going to have to wake up from fantasy land. You believe there were WMDs based on what? What evidence Barbara? The evidence of Bush saying so to lead us into an unjustifiable war? The only reason you hang on to that illusion is so that you won’t have to admit that you are wrong. Its easier to be stubborn than it is to admit a mistake.

By jbmlaw

March 7, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this

Dear Southern @ 10:12, the issue of abuse by the prosecutor turns on a simple question: after Mr. Fitzgerald determined that there was no crime in the “disclosure” of Ms. Plame’s identity – the sole basis for his appointment as a special prosecutor – what should he have been investigating? When we empower search and destroy missions aimed at individuals, rather than investigating and prosecuting crimes, we destroy our republic. Here, the crime was manufactured by the investigating prosecutor, after he had already determined that the matter he was charged to investigate was void.

And, of course, I respectfully disagree with your “causation” for the investigation – a mid-level bureaucrat sought to unilaterally undermine the foreign policy of the elected leader, sent her husband to do the job, and he botched it (inadvertently confirming the Iraqis were on a trade mission to a country that has nothing to sell but yellowcake.) There is a real question of Ms. Plame’s competence to subvert governments; if she cannot subvert her own government, how could she be trusted to subvert foreign governments!

Dear Redneck @ 10:15, you justly ask Mr. Fitzgerald’s motivation in pursuing Scooter Libby, and the answer is, “there is a history there.” Mr. Fitzgerald dedicated his career to pursuit of Marc Rich, the thieving and defrauding billionaire who fled to Switzerland to avoid prosecution. Scooter Libby was one of Mr. Rich’s active attorneys in fighting the criminal case. When Mr. Libby was successful in procuring Bill Clinton’s pardon of Rich, Mr. Libby sank Mr. Fitzgerald’s whole raison d’etre. Thus, Fitzgerald had no reason to manufacture a case against Rove, or Cheney, or Armitage (the obvious choice).

Dear Southern @ 10:20, Van’s report @ 10:49 is precise; I would add only that on the 7-2 holding on the Equal Protection issue, Stevens (nominally a Republican) voted with Ginsburg in the minority.

Dear UGAlaw @ 11:32, I think Dusty analyzed the case better than you – while you are technically correct, that the prosecutor charged and the jury convicted of “perjury,” the fact is that all evidence turned on recollections – a pure swearing match, and over a purely political investigation. We see that often in civil cases, but that remains uncommon in criminal.

I am curious about your assessment of the prosecutor’s behavior: after determining, incontrovertibly, that there was no crime, the prosecutor counseled the most obvious targets of the investigation to maintain their silence, and then commenced his investigation of Mr. Libby. How do you assess the ethics there? Perhaps you answer with your 11:46 post, which paraphrased reads, “throw everything against the wall and see what sticks.” Not an honorable prosecution philosophy.

Dear Dusty @ 12:00, good line, funny, my compliments.

Dear Pothead @ 12:02, you are close in your analogy. A better case is, the FBI asks you about a murder that did not take place, and you say you saw everything, then they arrest you for possession of mj.

Dear rarringt @ 12:20, I would respectfully disagree with your analysis. After 9/11, President Bush declared war on Islamists. Unlike our leftist friends, both prior administration and current, he was able to connect the dots, saw the true threat to our society and the much larger source. Those on your side who attribute all of the attacks to Al Qaeda are missing the larger picture, which requires finding the Islamists where they are, and killing as many of them as necessary. If you limit your attack to Afghanistan, you leave us all exposed to the next cell of murderers, under whatever name they choose to operate. Just that simple, but beyond the understanding of our friends on the left.

Dear JP @ 12:48, your demand that Bill Clinton be prosecuted for perjury is untimely, the statute of limitations has run.

By Redneck Convert

March 7, 2007 3:08 PM | Link to this

Tell Sister Dusty I was never Captain Freedom, that low-life librul acting like a conservative. Sure, I checked his wife’s—I mean his—plumbing oncet when he was out of town, but there is no body else like me. Tell her I resemble her remark.

By time for the truth

March 7, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this

LAME

feck off with your utter nonsense and batter. The negligible miscalculations of judgement as excersised by Bush pale in comparison to the vastly immoral lapses of the cocaine sniffing Klinton rapist. The intellectual dishonesty of leftist pond scum has become more glaringly evident in the drive by media coverage of the Libby legal lynching!!

It’s utterly predicktible to see syphillis slithering from his hole. Evidently the marxist fa ggot glibly ignored my sound advice of doing the world a benevolent favour and ending his miserable life! It’s blindingly obvious the syphillis lacks the bollocks to carry out such a heroic task therefore I humbly offer my services in honourably filling the glorious position of the trigger man.

I promise that my aim will assure a quick and fastidious death…SMIRK

By rarringt

March 7, 2007 3:13 PM | Link to this

I wouldn’t be too concerned about Dusty. While I completely disagree with her worldview, she does have a right to say it.

No matter how assailable her reasoning might be, she seems to fully understand the First Amendment.

Regardless, her pronouncements are the final utterances of an american experiment gone horribly awry. Thanks to Bush and blind partisan loyalists like Dusty, the vast majority of Americans (and people the world over) understand the serious stakes involved with selecting a president.

I think the days of the majority of voters making their selections on who they’d “most like to have a beer with” are over.

Iraq and the region are a mess. Our economy is in trouble, and clearly increasingly reliant on folks I don’t quite trust (like the Chinese markets). The domestic agenda is a mess. None of this was a problem to this degree when Clinton (or Bush I, or Reagan, or Carter, or Ford, etc. were in office).

We now know the folly of allowing those who think like Dusty to guide our choices. I just hope that lesson, however hard learned, will be a good thing.

By Walt

March 7, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

Dusty Sends…..

“I appreciate your concern but I am doing just fine, thank you. But you better worry about our Justice System. When politics become the rule of law, even a misguided liberal like you might find it incomvenient.”

Gee whiz, if I had an expensive lawyer like Wells, I would hope he’d do better than empanel a bunch of blinking Deomcrats!

No, Dusty. We have juries to keep the politics out.

And:

Shame on you Wooten.

Walt

By time for the truth

March 7, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

Barbara

Welcome back luv.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this

Devastator, WRONG!!!. I have never had difficulty admitting when I make a mistake (as an adult, anyway. Now when I was a child, teen, and even in early 20s I was pretty stubborn, but I’ve mellowed a bit with age.) I try to teach my kids the same thing now. I believe that people don’t remember you for your mistakes as much as they remember how you handle yourself in admitting the mistake. You may continue to believe that there weren’t any weapons. I continue to believe there were.

As for accusing me of being stubborn, I could say the same of you. You choose to believe there weren’t any WMDs simply because you do not like this President and you don’t want to give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, just because they haven’t found any WMDs doesn’t mean they aren’t there, still undiscovered, or long since removed to another neighboring country. It’s quite comical how you can be so convinced that I’m wrong and you’re right when neither of us have any proof other than Sadaam’s prior track record. And you might want to go back and read up on that before you draw your line in the sand.

By jm

March 7, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this

Barbara@2:50 - If you tell the world you not only know that Saddam has WMDs but you know where they are (which both the Clinton and Bush Administrations did), and use that as your casus belli, you had better turn something up for your efforts. The UN investigators repeatedly asked both the Clinton and Bush administrations to show them their proof, which the US declined to do.

Dusty@2:38 - the UN did not vote for war in Iraq. Secretary Powell, was given his chance to convince the UN with his little show and tell but failed. Since President Bush and the US were going to lose, they decided not to hold a vote in the security council. Because many of the iraq resolutions were covered under chapter 7 of the UN charter, the Bush administration used that to justify the invasion.

By Walt

March 7, 2007 3:22 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw sends:

“…while you are technically correct, that the prosecutor charged and the jury convicted of “perjury,” the fact is that all evidence turned on recollections – a pure swearing match, and over a purely political investigation.”

So the problem you have is with a legal system based on jury trials.

Hypocrite. Unamerican.

Wooten: Shame on you.

By jbmlaw

March 7, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

“A bipartisan investigation by the Senate intelligence committee subsequently established that all of these claims [by former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV] were false — and that Mr. Wilson was recommended for the Niger trip by Ms. Plame, his wife… The [Libby] trial has provided convincing evidence that there was no conspiracy to punish Mr. Wilson by leaking Ms. Plame’s identity — and no evidence that she was, in fact, covert… The former ambassador will be remembered as a blowhard. Mr. Cheney and Mr. Libby were overbearing in their zeal to rebut Mr. Wilson and careless in their handling of classified information. Mr. Libby’s subsequent false statements were reprehensible. And Mr. Fitzgerald has shown again why handing a Washington political case to a federal special prosecutor is a prescription for excess. Mr. Fitzgerald was, at least, right about one thing: The Wilson-Plame case, and Mr. Libby’s conviction, tell us nothing about the war in Iraq” — Washington Post editorial.

By rarringt

March 7, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw,

Can you not see the inherent fallacy of declaring war on an idea? Like the “wars” on poverty and drugs, which cost countless billions, didn’t really result in much change, and are now in their 3rd and 5th decades, respectively, the war on terror is an endless struggle against a constantly morphing, nonascertainable bogeyman. The only thing real are the astonishing costs in blood and treasure.

As a libertarian lawyer (heh, heh), you should be completely aghast by the commitment of so many (uber-expensive) government resources in pursuit of an open ended campaign, which is led by a commander in chief who has lost even the confidence of his cwn party.

I understand Dusty thinks that she and Bush alone are right, and the other seven billion of us (minus the Iraqi casualties) are delusional, but I’m surprised by your perspective.

By Magneto

March 7, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

Dusty is @@.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this

Hey TFTT! Long time - no chat. I see you’re still keeping the liberals on their toes!

jm, I’ll give you that point. And one for courteous eloquence too. And I admit, I’m frustrated and disappointed that they did not uncover the WMDs. I truly believe they were there, and I believe that Sadaam posed a true threat to the US, and to the world, and we are so much better off with him pushing up dasies. I actually believe that Bush 1 should have taken care of the problem years ago, and then we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place, but, hindsight is 20/20, I guess.

By jbmlaw

March 7, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this

Dear TFTT, an aside – not that anyone ever goes off topic here - there is an affectionate and funny essay on Cricket by Tunku Varadarajan today. You have never reflected interest there, but I understand Cricket is burned into the soul of Englishmen: http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110009755

By Curious Observer

March 7, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this

Ain’t it strange how the “law and order” crowd is all for packing the prisons and death chambers until one of the “packees” is one of theirs? Then it’s all “political,” of course.

By Jackie

March 7, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this

Same right wing cognitive dissonance, “do what you’re told instead of following the law.” Those folks that believe that Libby was railroaded by the “system” are facisits. Whatever happened to the Constitution and having a trial by your peers to decide the truth?

By jbmlaw

March 7, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this

Dear Walt @ 3:22, I have written often of my distrust of juries. I always have bench trials.

Dear rarringt @ 3:24, my libertarianism is not contaminated by isolationism – I have more in common with the Jewish conservatives our leftist friends disparagingly call NeoCons than I have with the Libertarian Party. As to the futility of the battle against those forces that would subjugate freedom, I agree that such battles require a Reaganesque frontal assault on the heart of the evil ideology; I credit President Bush with that assault. I agree with your implicit argument that this battle may well require 40 years, and have published that number on this blog many times.

By Walt

March 7, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

“By jbmlaw

March 7, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this

Dear Walt @ 3:22, I have written often of my distrust of juries. I always have bench trials.”

So it is our judicial system going back to Magna Carta that is stuck in your craw.

AND:

Wooten: Shame on you.

By Southern Democrat

March 7, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this

Jbmlaw,

You are aware, of course, that Fitzgerald confirmed with the Acting Atty Gen that his mandate included investigating any illegal acts that were related to the disclosure of Plame’s identity?

I would assume you would take issue with Capone’s indictment for tax fraud instead of murder?

I am quite troubled by your commenting today as it seems to display a much more skewed partisan perspective than you normally convey… I would think that as an officer of the court (and I’m not being sanctimonious here, my tone should be interpreted as baffled / bewildered) you, like me, would be troubled by ANY perjury, whether it be by President Clinton or the Vice President’s Chief of Staff.

By Brad

March 7, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this

I didn’t mean to become a focal point on this blog a few hours ago amongst bloggers. What is the next step in drawing leftie wingnut ire here, have my name stolen? Duke, I have a few questions for you in response to Barbara about me.

The stupid assertion that Democratic presidents are guilty of political pardons, but Republican presidents are not.

Did I say that? Both Republicans and Democrats do it as they always have. I just find it amusing how you wingnuts only complain when a Republican president does it, not unlike only complaining about homelessness and poverty when a Republican is president. To rephrase, there are no absolutely zero problems out there when Democrats are in charge of things.

The false assertion that Hillary Clinton lied during the Watergate investigation?

Did I say that? You wingnuts are great at lying about what others say on this blog. I specifically said Hillary Clinton put these three words in this order together a lot during Whitewater: I don’t recall. That said, I don’t believe she was honest. She definitely was not honest when a White House assistant magically found some papers that were originally subpoenaed during the Whitewater investigation and she claimed to have no knowledge of them previously. Both of the Clintons are pathological liars. When the campaigning soon-to-be junior senator from New York said she grew up watching the Cubs play, she said she would get depressed when they played bad. Then she said she would switch over and watch the Yankees play. She said that made her feel better. That’s very interesting. I didn’t know Arkansas had cable TV or satellite TV back in the 1950s. Naturally, nobody in the media questioned her. Well, you leftie wingnuts lied yesterday that Bush had already cut VA funding, so everything that comes from your craniums is taken with a grain of salt on this end.

The bizarre assertion that Fitzgerald, a G.W. Bush appointee, is giving Libby payback for the Clinton impeachment? Or that Fiztgerald and Libby go way back.

I don’t mean to shock your monkey, but Bush actually appointed leftists. Whether he knew it or not is another story. Further, there are still a lot of holdovers from the Clinton administration from the CIA on down. What did you think, when W got in office that everyone would be fired and a new crew would come in? Perhaps like the Clintons did to the White House travel department? Regarding the Fitz-Libby issue, look up Marc Rich, Scooter Libby, and Patrick Fitzgerald. Find out what all three had in common and please post your findings.

The misleading implication that either Sandy Berger wasn’t convicted for his crime or that Berger received a light punishment for political reasons?

No, Sandy wasn’t really punished because the Republicans were too wimpy and nice. Let’s not forget that Berger initially lied when questioned. But, the Bush administration didn’t want to cause a bigger rift with the Democrats than was already there. Of course, the Republicans always have the foolish thought that being nice to Democrats will reap reciprocation. Further, anyone who thinks that more damage to national security was done by a Republican lying about his involvement in a non-event than from destroyed subpoenaed documents relating to the 911 Commission investigation is a wingnut. Did I mention that some of those classified documents that Mr. Berger stole were destroyed? Yes, they were. The ones that weren’t found under that construction trailer anyway.

The long Republican tradition of seeking t* for tat — “Never fear, the Republicans will find a way to hit back down the road.”*

It’s called politics. No bad deed goes unreturned. Do you think that’s new in Washington, or are only Democrats allowed to seek retribution? But let’s make no mistake about it, Libby did lie and rightfully so will pay the price. All of this to go after one of Bush’s men when knowing full well there was only a leak by gumflapper Armitage. The truth of the matter is that it should have never been pursued this aggressively by Fitzgerald. Well it’s over now. It’s the end of the story. The firestorm that leftie wingnuts thought was on the horizon to bring more Republicans down has flamed out. Or is that Plamed Out? Oh well, I’m out. Enough time has been wasted here with leftie wingnuts.

By LMAO

March 7, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this

Barbara, Bush 1 did not go into Baghdad for exactly the lesson Bush 2 is learning right now. “You break it you fix it.” Brent Scowcroft knew what we would encounter when we took possession of Iraq. All hell would break loose.

It has. Its a no-win situation that has cost this country with the loss of life, the draining of the treasury, the loss of respect. It has emboldened the terrorists, emoldened Iran and depleted our military.

Nothing has been gained from it. Nothing. Not one thing.

By THE INFAMOUS DK

March 7, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this

Be careful.. Hitler believed in Freedom too.. To all those that looked like him and believed what he believed.

By time for the truth

March 7, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this

jbm

Cheers for the article mate! Cricket is and always has been a more tactical and physically rigorous sport. However years have passed since yours truly forcelfully swung a cricket paddle. Unfortunately the sport has been nefariously hijacked by racist pakis and blacks!!

Barbara

I have been obliged to endlessly wank myself due to your unfortunate absence. Yours truly had to assume responsibility and reflect the puerile abuse back to the resident leftist afterbirth scum who ominously terrorise this blog with witless posts and intellectual dishonesty!!

By For the Record ...

March 7, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this

So launching the war in Iraq was based on a policy

” … which requires finding the Islamists where they are, and killing as many of them as necessary.”

By that “logic”, why didn’t Bush/Cheney invade the frontier regions of Pakistan, which actually was — and still is — awash in truly dangerous Islamists (including, in all probability, Osama bin Laden), as opposed to Iraq, where there were virtually no al Qaeda operatives until we invaded?

It is frightening that some ostensibly rational individuals continue to adhere to the neo-conservative fraud and deceit perpetrated by a corrupt and incompetent government that was used to launch this disasterous war in Iraq .

Thank God they are in a dwindling minority.

By Dusty

March 7, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

Now now rarringt,

Don’t get all hot and bothered because there are others who think that Bush is making an all out effort. Just say the magic word “Retreat” and you will see your imaginary opposing numbers fall into dust where they belong.

Conservatives take presidential elections very seriously. That is why we Americans elected Bush a second time. He is strong and we knew it. If he will not run away and cry like you want him to do, that is your problem. He continues to lead in difficult times.

Now I must leave. In the meantime, here’s to the joy of free speech, just as you suggested.

PS to Barbara…..Yep, I do think that RedNeck is your ever loving Captain. At 12:21 Capt’ said he had been mocking Dusty all that time. How did he do that when he wasn’t here? But it doesn’t matter one way or the other. Have fun.

By jm

March 7, 2007 4:12 PM | Link to this

Barbara@3:32 - You might find some WMDs, like the sarin shells that turned up, if for no other reason that I don’t think anyone in Iraq knows where everything is. Shoot, I doubt even the US could account for “every” weapon classified as a WMD in their arsenal (inventory ain’t an exact science). I seriously doubt any large scale caches will turn up, even in other countries. Where would Saddam hide them? Both Syria and Iran were allied against him, I doubt they would let him hide his WMDs on their soil. The leaders of those countries are crazy, not stupid. The Saudis and Jordan had no use for him either. I think between the UN investigators and iraqi generals (only because they feared the US more than Saddam) the weapons were destroyed.

Now did Saddam plan to start it back it up if he was let out of his box? Who knows but my magic 8 ball says “signs point to yes”

By Captain Freedom

March 7, 2007 4:15 PM | Link to this

Of course, those who wish to believe otherwise are free to do so, but the Captain is the Captain, and has no history of and no desire to post under another moniker. Between his gainful employ, the ongoing and seemingly endless plumbing work at Casa Freedom, and the demands of the sainted Mrs. Freedom, the Captain barely has time to shine his light of wisdom into the cobwebbed corners of Mr Wooten’s charming little tea party under his own glorious banner.

But be that as it may…I never for a moment confused the winsome and delightful Barbara for Sister Dusty, who resembles nothing so much as Zell Miller in drag (her opinions are similar to Zell, too), shrieking on a street corner with her wordly posessions dribbling slowly from the torn seams of a tattered WalMart shopping bag.

No indeed. Barbara is a paragon of Republican womanhood and Godly virtue. I trust she has spent her time away from the Wooten Blog on more appropriately feminine pursuits than grappling with current events and political concerns, which pasttime has been known to lower estrogen levels in female bonobos and lab rats.

I blush to think she reads my humble opinions, and pray mightily to one day meet her in person.

By rarringt

March 7, 2007 4:15 PM | Link to this

Reagan’s “ideological battle” was the culmination of 40 years of effort to dimantle the former Soviet Union.

His contribution was to make it so expensive for the Soviets to keep up with the arms race as to undermine their economy. He picked an actual enemy and set concrete, attainable goals. He succeeded.

The only fallout from that, of course, was Iran-Contra, where we supplied the Iranians with weapons.

Oh, and the Balkan war, which destabilized SW Russia, providing 1) training grounds and 2) access to heavy weapons up to and including WMD to the highest bidder.

Oh, and Afghanistan, where after the Russians left, we bailed and effectively and knowingly giving carte blanche to a bunch of Islamic radicals named the Taliban.

Speaking of Afghanistan, guess where Osama bin Laden got his training, weapons and logistical support from?

My point: A supporter of Reagan’s ideology must be rooted in a concrete battle plan, and understand the long ranging repercussions. Bush has done neither.

By rarringt

March 7, 2007 4:21 PM | Link to this

Dusty said,

*Now now rarringt,

Don’t get all hot and bothered…*

My, you are a bit delusional, aren’t you? I’m not upset; quite the contrary. I merely accept that there will always be people like you who adopt an extreme worldview that doesn’t work in the real world.

Fortunately, while you have a strong voice on this blog, you’re pretty marginalized when you step outside the door.

There’s something to be said in favor of moderation, in all things.

By Onlooker

March 7, 2007 4:25 PM | Link to this

Quick question.. What exactly happened to the separation of church and state?

By co-signer

March 7, 2007 4:36 PM | Link to this

Add Scooter to this list: Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, Bob Ney, Mark Foley, Brian Doyle, Claude Allen, David Safavian, Bob Taft and Ernie Fletcher. These republicans have all been indicted, convicted or resigned in the 6 years the Bush administration has been in power. The residue of Jack Abramoff still lingers. Is there any credibility left for Republicans in DC? Do you believe anything Cheney says anymore?

By melo

March 7, 2007 4:36 PM | Link to this

Washington Post editorial-JBMLAW

And these are the people who have ‘my’(jbmlaw) brain!!

Understood!!!!

By Van

March 7, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this

I have been sitting here most of the day, working and just watching the left spew chunks with glee about “Scooter” Libby.

Libby was convicted for not remembering as clearly as some thought he should.

Libby did not “out” a non-covert CIA employee, he just did not remember the sequence of events and/or who he talked to and when.

Libby did not lie like Joe Wilson. He did not claim to be sent to Africa by the V.P.

Libby did not write a report to the CIA and then write an editorial that said something different.

From the Senate Select Committee On Intelligence “Conclusion 13. The Report On The Former Ambassador’s Trip To Niger, Disseminated In March 2002, Did Not Change Any Analysts’ Assessments Of The Iraq-Niger Uranium Deal.”

Wilson keeps denying that his wife sent him to Africa, but, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Received Not Only Testimony But Actual Documentation Indicating Wilson’s Wife Proposed Him For Trip.

I am waiting for the indictment of Tim Russert for “forgetting” what he told the FBI during the investigation. He “forgot” under oath at the trial.

I guess from now on, any elected official that can not remember correctly, will be tried and convicted.

By Van

March 7, 2007 4:50 PM | Link to this

Onlooker,

Check the First Amendment, then look at what Congress has done.

By getalife

March 7, 2007 5:04 PM | Link to this

Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, Guilty.

When they write about cheney, this is his legacy.

The hate, convicted felon party will be in the history books for your grandchildren to read.

Deal with that wingnuts.

By Captain Freedom

March 7, 2007 5:07 PM | Link to this

Now Van, no need to concern yourself with the legal threat to Monsignor Russert. No one rolls on the Cheney gang and lives to tell the tale for very long. He’ll soon be “up there” listening to Big Russ’s insipid old natterings…sorry, I meant to say his inspirational tales of honor and redemption.

Look for Russert to find a horse head in his Nantucket master suite real soon. Yellow Elephants like Shotgun Dick have long memories. And a good thing it is for us, too. If Cheney hadn’t nursed all those grudges from his Nixon years, we’d likely not have quite the robust and highly respected form of democratic governance we currently enjoy.

Scooter was a good soldier…he fell on the grenade for his chief. A coupla years and out, and he’s right back in the gang.

By MrLiberty

March 7, 2007 5:08 PM | Link to this

Fine, pardon Libby.

Impeach Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, and everyone else responsible for the war. Then strip them of their citizenship, turn them over to the international criminal court, and let them stand trial as the war criminals they are.

Maybe send Mr. Wooten too - just for his tacit support of the war crimes.

By Jackie

March 7, 2007 5:08 PM | Link to this

It appears that Libby “forgot to remember” the timeline laid out to nine different people about Valerie Plame. It appears that Valerie Plame’s CIA identity was revealed, it was the CIA that asked for the prosecution of the persons that outed her; Valerie Plame did not have a black passport, therefore, she was an undercover CIA agent working for the United States. Libby was found guilty by a jury of his peers. All of those who think this defense of “not remembering” defense will work, why don’t you try it to determine it’s efficacy. Wonder why those who still support Libby are always making the most noise about being patriots and supporting this country? What is that truism about “…pants on fire?” All those supporters should find the nearest fire extinguisher!

By michelle

March 7, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this

i will be mad as hell if president bush pardons libby. not only would that be a complete waste of tax-payer money because i’m sure much was spent on the trial, but it would completely undermine our justice system.

he went through trial just like any other citizen, surprisingly i might add, because of his stature. it’s heartwarming to know that people are not untouchable. that being said, he is not untouchable and pardoning him would make it so.

if libby gets pardoned, bush ought to pardon clinton too….and clinton’s wasn’t even of national security.

By Captain Freedom

March 7, 2007 5:17 PM | Link to this

“First of all, this was a lengthy trial on a serious matter, and a jury of his peers convicted him,” Mr. Bush said in a brief interview with CNN En Español. “And we’ve got to respect that conviction.”

My God, is there no one we of True Belief can rely upon? Doesn’t he realize that when he talks this way, the terrorists have already won?!?! What next???? Bush the Elder saying nice things about the Clintons?

The Captain sheds copious tears as he begins to believe he has been duped by His Leader all these years. Mr Wooten, please, come to our aid and clarify this confusing apostasy from Our Leader.

By KR

March 7, 2007 5:21 PM | Link to this

Brad, let me help you out here. Hillary Rodham grew up in Chicago. She did not move to Arkansas until after she met/married Bill Clinton.

As to the topic at hand: sure, go ahead and pardon him. He’s hardly a menace to society and there is plenty of precedence for it (see Rich and Weinberger as two examples).

By abc

March 7, 2007 5:23 PM | Link to this

Separation of Church and State isn’t something explicitly stated in the Constitution. It refers to the 1st Amendment, which prohibits establishments of a ‘state religion’, show preference for any one religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe on free speech and press, and limit the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The phrase “seperation of church and state” is strictly interpretive.

By Barbara

March 7, 2007 5:29 PM | Link to this

jm, you make a fine arguement. In fact, you may be right that the weapons could have been destroyed. If that were the case, we’ll never really know. But that’s okay with me. Sadaam was dangerous, and I believe he needed to be unseated, caught, tried, convicted, and put to death for his unspeakable prior acts, as well as the potential he had for future threats. And we did that. Now we’ve got quite the mess on our hands, and I am troubled that it has not been resolved, but I’m also convinced that we must see the job through to the end. I sure am glad I don’t have to make those kinds of decisions.

Onlooker, you make the classic liberal mistake in asking about separation of church and state. I don’t really see how your comment applies to this particular blog, but when I read the first amendment, it seems to me that the intent was to keep government from creating a religion or discriminating against one. The founders of our constitution wrote many comments pointing to Christianity being a critical foundation of this nation. But again, I don’t understand why you bring that up in this blog.

Captain, I know you’re mocking, but you have no idea how close you are to right about me. I really don’t trouble myself with politics the way many on here do. And I do think ladies have certain roles to fill while men fill others. All part of my conservative beliefs. You’re funny, but not altogether wrong about those speculations. You will never find any femminazzi comments coming from me. I enjoy being a woman and love to be around good old fashioned gentlemen. If we had more who were willing to set aside their egos and assume the gender roles God made for us, the world would be a much more peaceful place.

By Captain Freedom

March 7, 2007 5:33 PM | Link to this

Barbara,

I only tease because I care.

xoxox The Captain

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

March 7, 2007 5:40 PM | Link to this

Greetings, trash, from the Green Mountain State. It is good that We are far from the deluded trash of Georgia and the Woo-ten Klan. Today their brainless leader advocates leniency towards people who played fast and loose with our national security, who decided to talk with reporters and the press about classified and top secret information in a matter that jeopardized ongoing operations related to nuclear proliferation.

The Pope, before We were made Pope, held secret clearances numerous times. People who are privy to secret information know that what Libby, Cheney, Rove and Armitage did was a breach of security, whether the information regarding Plame had been recently de-classified or not - information regarding secret activities of our intelligence forces are not for the papers or television, especially information regarding programs involving nuclear terrorism and proliferation.

The rednekkk cowboy and his friends are ruining the future of this country. Dumbya is the American Nero, fiddling away while the future and security of his country go up in smoke and flames.

Libby is small potatoes. Expect stories in the paper on Cheney’s blood clot - expect it to get worse. Expect Cheney to resign. In the bitter end, Dumbya will be as loyal to Dick as he was to Rummy….

Scooter will serve his full sentence, or close to it. Dumbya will never pardon him.

By K-Squared

March 7, 2007 5:41 PM | Link to this

If you missed it, read Brad’s post at 3:48 for a good laugh. Here are some of my favorite excerpts:

“I don’t mean to shock your monkey, but Bush actually appointed leftists.”

“Sandy [Berger] wasn’t really punished because the Republicans were too wimpy and nice.”

“It’s called politics. No bad deed goes unreturned. Do you think that’s new in Washington, or are only Democrats allowed to seek retribution”

That Brad guy is hilarious. Thanks for the laugh, buddy.

By Avery

March 7, 2007 5:49 PM | Link to this

The comments on this story only go to show how short the memories of most Americans are.

No one seems to recall that Clinton pardoned 140 people on his last day in office and it didn’t doom the DNC.

Nor does anyone recall that the number of people Clinton pardoned is comparable with other Presidents.

By January 2009, Scooter will be a free man….like it or not.

By Van

March 7, 2007 5:56 PM | Link to this

Captain Freedom,

I say no more than 3-5 years at the same country club prison the Clinton gang and groupies served at.

By Walt

March 7, 2007 5:57 PM | Link to this

Steve Martin, in one of his real early routines had a thing: “When the judge asks you why you committed this heinous crime, tell him, ‘I forgot it was against the law!’”

Scooter should have tried that.

By steve-o

March 7, 2007 6:04 PM | Link to this

I leave for most of the day and rush back only to find that Markus hasn’t ranted today. I am truly disappointed. I mean…what a freaking letdown!

Maybe he’ll hear this…

MARKUS…PLEASE COME BACK AND PUT US NEOSTALINIST RAT FREAKS IN OUR PLACE! WE ARE IN DIRE NEED OF YOUR GREAT WISDOM AND PROSE! WE’RE LOST WITHOUT YOUR GUIDANCE!

By SpaceyG

March 8, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

Score one for the beautiful people (Wilson and Plame). Scooter had to take one for Shooter. Ugly people lose again. Ain’t that America.

By Varga

March 8, 2007 9:45 AM | Link to this

Republicans are such hypocrites! They impeached Clinton over the same charge and now they are crying “unfair” when it is done to one of their own. Libby was convicted by a jury! In the eyes of the law he is guilty and if he accepts a pardon he must admit to his guilt. A pardon is not an expungement.

By Veronica

March 8, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this

SpaceyG, that is such a copout!! Oh yes, Libby was convicted because of his looks. Right! Tell us another one. Geez, talk about denial!