…For lying and obstruction of justice. Whereas Joe Wilson, for lying and attempting to undermine the administration’s case for invading Iraq, is sentenced to the lecture circuit, and given a hero’s welcome by anti-war types who believe, with Machiavelli’s parodic narrator in The Prince, that the ends justify the means.
Truth is a luxury; the message is the thing. Seems not only is Justice blind, but she’s getting a bit tone deaf to irony, as well.
From MSNBC:
Former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter†Libby was sentenced to 2 ½ years in prison Tuesday for lying and obstructing the CIA leak investigation.
Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, stood calmly before a packed courtroom as a federal judge said the evidence overwhelmingly proved his guilt.
“People who occupy these types of positions, where they have the welfare and security of nation in their hands, have a special obligation to not do anything that might create a problem,†U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said.
Interestingly, Richard Armitage wasn’t there to receive the same kind of lecture.
But we can simply write that off to neoconthuglican nitpicking.
Walton fined Libby $250,000 and placed him on probation for two years following his release from prison. He did not set a date for Libby to report to prison. Though he saw no reason to let Libby remain free pending appeal, Walton said he would accept written arguments on the issue and rule later.
Libby was convicted in March of lying and obstructing an investigation into the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.
The highest-ranking White House official convicted in a government scandal since the Iran-Contra affair, Libby has steadfastly maintained his innocence.
“It is respectfully my hope that the court will consider, along with the jury verdict, my whole life,†Libby said in brief remarks to the judge.
Sitting with Libby’s wife Harriet Grant during the sentencing were conservative commentators Mary Matalin, a former Cheney aide, and Victoria Toensing, a former deputy assistant attorney general during the Reagan administration.
—as well as the woman responsible for crafting the legislation that Fitzgerald carefully (and disingenuously) alluded to in his sentencing request—without connecting the CIA’s definition of “covert” with the applicable definition under the IIPA, therefore muddying the waters and giving the press cover to misrepresent the offense.
If, as Fitzgerald noted during trial, this case is about “perjury” and not about Plame’s status and her “outing,” than his behavior during the sentencing phase has been deplorable.
If Libby is not granted his freedom pending appeal, I will join the call for a Presidential pardon—only because I don’t think this case will stand on appeal, and I wouldn’t want to see Libby imprisoned because an overzealous prosecutor needed to convict somebody, and because leftwing ideologues were demanding the head of an administration official, even one as insignificant, in their pantheon of evil-doers, as Libby.
Not that it would do any good. After all, Bush doesn’t seem to care very much for his supporters these days.
(h/t Dan Collins; Tom Maguire. And listen to Laura Ingraham unload on W with both barrels.)
****
Jeralyn Merritt is covering the legal niceties. She notes that the 2-year probation claim being reported is incorrect:
It’s supervised release, not probation. Supervised release replaced parole in the federal system in 1987. Probation and supervised release may be similar, but they are not the same.
See also (of course) Tom Maguire.
heet and timmah will be by cackling like Macbeth’s witches in 3 … 2 … 1 …
Bush is already saying he “won’t intervene”. And I like Libby’s chances on appeal.
I’m outraged and disgusted that the only crime anyone has managed to sleuth out of this scandal turned coup attempt is Libby’s recollection of immaterial conversations.
And Sandy Berger goes free with a wrist massage. There’s irony for ya.
I guess that we can take a lesson from this… maybe…
Don’t trust anyone?
Lookit what happened to him. Libby got the shaft from everyone.
I imagine the appellate court will have themselves a fine old time with this one…
I had once thought that a judicial determination of Plame’s status might be a good thing. After readin this, not so much …
Here’s a script that will be played out in the halls of government for the forseeable future:
“Ring Ring. Good Morning Senator John Smith (R), this is Joe Blowhard from ABCBPBS. Our sources tell us that X and Y are in involved in Z. Could you confirm or deny this? Click. Hello? Hello?”
There’s irony for ya.
IRONY??!!?? Is there a stronger word in the English language for “atrocity”?
‘Cuz that’s more like it.
Major John, Jeff, and Pablo, upon what will he base his appeal? From what I have re: the trial, the Judge Reggie felt he was on pretty comfortable legal grounds and had little chance of being reversed. I read some live blogging from the trial and there didn’t seem to be evidentiary issues during the trial and he didn’t have Ollie North’s benefit of prior immunity. Particularly in in John’s interpretation since he is, albeit not a criminal lawyer, the closest thing we’re gonna get to it.
As for the Lisbon Assassin,
I take no glee in Libby falling on his sword for the VP (or amorally lying for no good reason, whatever his motivation) and I believe he will be pardoned, as is the President’s prerogative. I don’t know enough Federal criminal law to know what SOP is for in this case, but I think Libby is tiny risk for flight and should be on bond during his appeal. His chances, I think, of spending one day of that sentence in the pokey are the same as me asked to speak at the 2008 Republican National Convention.
Still, crap like this and Sandy Berger’s plea bargain just go to show how strange and Roman Republic-esque our politics is becoming. Maybe Washington was right when he spoke of the danger of parties?
Well, that’s what Libby gets for not rolling over on Cheney. You want to be a good soldier? Sometimes that means you have to take a bullet for the boss.
Timmah, do you ever read the shit you write before you hit “Submit”?
I’m sure the majority of Ninth Circuit panels feel the same way. And I’m sure they’re all surprised every time they’re overturned. And each time they blink they discover a whole new world.
You’ve got that going for you. Which is nice.
You know something definitive that Fitzgerald doesn’t, Ed? Or are you just projecting a closely held wish nestled right next to that “any minute now” Rove indictment.
That thing must be getting pretty ripe, BTW…
Yeah, jackass, I read that as saying I think the former, but other people think he lied because he had other reasons.
Twelve impartial folks and a Federal judge (who can reject a guilty verdict if he feels it is incorrect) convicted him. The issue is not whether he committed a crime, pablo. He did. I don’t know why he did it, but the first part is why I think he did it and the parenthetical part is for folks that felt the VP had nothing to hide.
Why don’t you answer the f*cking question? What basis, Pablo, Boston area legal expert, does he have for an appeal? Hell, Major John and Jeff will do better than your tantrum over the style of a post rather than the substance.
You are such a chore anymore.
If Major John was the judge, I would not mind a Judge making this determination.
I wonder what this Judge would have said if that was Armitage standing in front of him.
Hey, BJ, in court filings for Libby’s sentencing, Fitzgerald insinuates that Mr. Libby’s perjury did halt the investigation from going further. He can’t prove it…Libby ain’t gonna start telling the truth until the pardon and neither can I nor Ed nor anyone, but it is a rational basis for explaining why he perjured himself.
With that said, you are right to question Ed. No one, except Libby and people very close to him no why he lied.
Speaking of chores…
We’ve managed to go from Shine’s contention that “prosecutors are mean” to timmy’s “Judge Reggie felt he was on pretty comfortable legal grounds and had little chance of being reversed” because, hey, so few Appeals Judges feel they are on solid ground when they render a decision. Fine, fine reasoning there.
And Pablo is right. If you are stating a personal opinion, then say so. Don’t swallow it up with a goobly gook sentence that reads like an attribution. Then it won’t be quite so much a chore for us dumb ‘thugwarchickens to decipher it with the progressive Enigma box.
As far as the Cheney thing, absent any verifiable evidence as well as any “any minute now” indictments, yours and Ed’s opinion on complicity are only worth the intertube electrons that carried them and reflect a desperate longing that would be be semi cute if it weren’t so bitter.
However, I do appreciate the puppy sixed Miolk Bone you tossed me concerning Ed.
I don’t think it will do any good, but it can’t hurt. It is interesting to note that he obviously doesn’t understand his own posts, so perhaps his repeated misinterpretation of others is more ignorant than willfully malicious.
He may appeal based on the fact that the prosecutor introduced evidence at sentencing that was not adjudicated at the trial.
Here’s the link to the story I referenced: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/14/news/libby.php
sorry, for the follow ups, but “if I get reversed on that, I should probably just hang up my spurs” would imply he thought the appeal on that subject would go nowhere.
I leave the partisans to their hackery. Thanks for talking, BJ and JD (I love you in “Scrubs”) and not being hacks. I will return later to hopefully read a very erudite post from Major John or Jeff on the subject of why this appeal will be successful.
And, after reading the NYT, it’s pretty clear to me, President Bush will pardon Scooter sometime in January of 2009 (and, although I don’t have time to type about…I know the hacks are now despondent….I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing).
Uhh, if by “they” he means the authors of the Constitution, that is pretty much what they said. And the Supreme Court over the last fifty or so years has been most emphatic about it.
Primarily, Walton excluded evidence relevant to the defense, evidence I think Libby was entitled to present.
So, Mr. Indianapolis Area Village Idiot, do you really think “for no good reason, whatever his motivation” is coherent English? Or is this just a glitch in the Hive Mind transmitting it’s mixed messages through you, its lowly vessel?
Why do you think I didn’t even bother trying reason with you, Timmah!? It’s like teaching a pig to sing.
FOrget it guys. It doesn’t matter anymore. The lack of administration backbone to fight the truthers only makes it open season for anyone to project their own failings, insecurities and inferiority complexes on Bush.
Heck Bush seems to be doing the same now. I wouldn;t be the least bit surprised if he started to refer to himself in the 3rd person.
Where that leaves most rational thinking adults such as most that inhabit this space of the internet is the task of trying to logically challenge the mentally bereft. And with the administration really leaving us in a lurch, I’m really just not sure if its worth it anymore.
I am torn between holing up in the mountains with a crate or two of ammo or going home and pouring used motor oil into the storm drains. In the spirit of doing inane, stupid, illegal and self defeating activities.
I don’t get it, guys. How delusional are you, really?
You spin yourselves into a tizzy trying to imagine scenarios where Libby is innocent, Fitz is a partisan hack, the Judge is incompetent, the facts are not really facts, the Wilson’s are going to jail (that was my favorite), Armitage is going to jail, and so on for the past two years. Have you been right once? Now you are pinning your hopes on an appeal. Good luck on that one, champ.
Stop fucking reading Tom Maguire, the guy doesn’t know shit about shit. His weird rants and mobius strip theories have led you nowhere.
Screaming, pulling out your hair, and pointing at Sandy Berger is the latest, pathetic attempt at misdirection. “It’s a systemic failure! The liberals are so corrupt, they’ve turned the country against us!” What. Ever.
Doesn’t it seem rather convenient that every failure and fuckup Bush and his merry idiots commit is either a) imaginary or b) actually the fault of “leftists”. For Chrissakes, grow up and take some responsibility.
Thinking people don’t reflexively defend everything their “side” does. For example, I believe the waivers Fitz made everyone sign is a bad precedent. So was sending Miller to jail.
See how easy it is? Now just repeat after me – every Bush administration scandal CANNOT be the fault of an amorphous and imagined cabal of liberals and media.
No one has made any of those assertions in this thread, heet. How delusional are you, really?
heet – I think I can speak for the rest of the folks when I say shut the fuck up.
Nobody has argued that Libby is innocent, not that it would matter to you. We do, however, contest the noxious manner in which this has been framed by the media, and the manner in which 5itz has pursued this case.
Still waiting on you to show us how Plame was covered by the IIPA, and then if she was covered, why not a single solitary soul has been charged with “outing” her.
It’s pitiful, really. Two beautiful lives ruined. Valerie Plame was about to break the whole Iranian thing wide open. And Joe Wilson…who knows what incredible things he was about to acomplish. Now their lives are is shambles. And they had such elegant clothes, the prettiest drapes in their loft…..
I know, folks … I have a better chance of teaching applied quantum physics to my 5 year old than of heet paying attention to annoying things like facts.
No one asserted they were Bush supporters, either. Can I assume you are all liberals, then?
“the facts are not facts” indeed.
heet comes late, screams at everyone, accuses commentators of making assertions they didn’t make, screams some, thumps his chest, flings some poo, screams one more time and exits, stage left, trailing monkey farts in his wake.
Now that is a dancing simian that entertains me! If only he’d wear a little fez…
There is no greater irony across the length and breadth of teh intertubes than heet accusing us of being blind, obessive partisans.
Being lectured on “facts” by PW regulars is rich. So are appeals to civility by same, which I’m sure will begin shortly. Lemme just head that one off – bite me, morons.
Yes! Yes, heet!
Dance. little monkey, dance!!!
Sorry, just got back from food shopping. Here you go, timmy. I’m no lawyer, but those defending Libby are.
But from here on out, do your own Googling, would you?
Heet —
This new article on Berger is a “misdirection”? How so?
The parallels may bother you and force you to question your own belief that you maintain a tenuous hold on consistency and fairness—hell, they may even force you to write “What. Ever”—but there they are, spelled out for you in black and white.
Instead of blaming the messenger, howsabout you try to deal with the differences. And tell me why we should be more concerned with Libby and his faulty memory (HE WAS PROTECTING CHENEY—from what? Plame was not covert under the IIPA) than with Berger stealing classified material, destroying it, and then surrendering his law license voluntarily to keep from having to explain himself?
Particularly since, in one instance, Joseph Wilson got the ball rolling by lying about his findings while his wife lied about who recommended him for the job; and in the other, well, the ball got rolling when Islamic fanatics flew planes into our buildings.
B Moe, you are not trying to say the judge was incompetent when you highlighted his “reversible error”; error, so “unreversible” in his mind that he said he should resign if it were reversed?
And, even if I were to grant you meant something else, are you telling me the great rightwing snit over the Libby cannot be addressed on this thread? Heet has to limit his responses to this thread alone? Seems rather blinkered, arbitrary, and par for the course. I love you, B Moe.
Heet, I can say it “every Bush administration scandal CANNOT be the fault of an amorphous and imagined cabal of liberals and media.” Except for Iraq, that clearly where the AP has united with Sunni insurgents and Al Queda to bring down America, because THEY WILL FOLLOW US HOME.
More on the 12 disinterested jurors thing.
As I pride myself on my personal restraint it pains me to write this (okay, not really):
Shut the fuck up, heet.
It’s pretty obvious you can’t attempt to make a point without hyperbole. Clearly, you aren’t capable of embarrassment, either. Otherwise you wouldn’t post these stupid screeds based ever-so-loosely on exaggeration and sweeping generalizations, inventing premises that weren’t made, and topping them off with a sticky syrup of snide.
I can’t be the first to tell you that you come off like a jackass.
Poor, poor timmah and sheet, still no pony under the traditional pile of Fitzmas horseshit.
Oh, and timmy? Sarcasm isn’t your strong suit.
You can try to ironize away all the instances I and others have pointed out where known falsehoods have been repeated in an effort to weaken this administration—and pretend that such things don’t have an impact on the electorate, foreign policy, ties with allies, etc.
But your smirking only hides your fear that history is going to hold you down and beat you like a whore who came in $150 short.
Timmy doesn’t have a strong suit. Heet does, and it has arms that tie around the back.
For timmah, that’d be 150 tricks, right?
You know, Fitzgerald might be insinuating just that…maybe he was on the very cusp of discovering exactly who that pesky leaker really was. (Good thing for Richard Armitage that he has remained undiscovered.)
More likely the investigation stopped at Libby because he finally found someone he could pin something to. After all that fishin’ it would be a waste to go home with nothing.
heet and timmah – If I am so wrong on the facts, then it should be very simple, exceedingly simple, for you to show how Plame was covered under the IIPA, and why nobody has been indicted for “outing” her. While you are at it, why don’t you tell us who “outed” Plame to begin with, first, if you will.
Jeff, I like this line from your “googled” article: “Libby’s defense team had previously planned to request a new trial, bids for which are rarely granted.”
I remain unconvinced there is any strong basis for appeal here. With that said, one has to try.
P.S. Sarcasm is your strong suit? I thought it was righteous indignation and partisanship.
P.P.S. Libby’s lawyers had a chance to strike your one dude during voi dire. hard to make the case afterwards. Unless he’s firing counsel and asserting he was done in by poor representation.
Did you defend Clinton this much when he admitted to perjurying himself? Or North, when he lied to Congress. PW seems to have a warm spot in its collective heart for felons…
Let’s try this again, timmah. Nobody is defending the lying. Nobody. Except in your imagination.
Who’s defending Libby? It’s just that, well, he’s not guilty of what you accuse him of—of “outing” Plame.
Then there’s that little bit of law quoted above, about intent being required for perjury. I still don’t see how anyone can prove that so-and-so remembers X, and whats-his-name remembers Y means so-and-so committed perjury.
Oh, well. Not the biggest injustice ever done. The Berger case is a much, much bigger injustice, IMHO. Bastard should be in prison until he’s carried out on a plank.
Incisive!
From what I understand a defense request for a new trial is SOP and almost invariably denied. And despite your unconvincibility, requests for appeal are also so requested.
Congrats, you’ve stumbled onto something that Byron York posited months ago: perhaps the jury pool was so bad (from the defense standpoint)that defense kept from striking Dennis the Juror because it would have meant seating someone worse.
Anyway, put a fork in me, I’m done. If you and your fellow travellers can’t discern the glaring differences betweent the Berger fiasco and Scooter’s, you’re beyond reasoning with.
JD, I can’t speak for heet, but Fitzgerald found no one vioolated the IIPA, as I’ve written at least three times on this site, you have to show the person knew the agent was covert and that is a difficult bar to hurdle. Impossible in this case.
And, I’m not sure who outed Plame first. Novak used Rove and Armitage as his sources. Cooper used Rove and Libby. And, Miller didn’t write about it all, since Ahmad Chalabi wasn’t involved. I think the operative question, is who lied to the grand jury about it. Armitage came clean on day one, Rove needed 5 trips a hat tip from Vivica Novak to come clean and Libby never did.
So, Libby might have been second in the race to leak, but he was first in the race to perjure. Good for him.
Must go to class now. You boys enjoy the parsing and I will read you tomorrow.
Or he simply forgot. It happens.
Can anyone explain this to me? It appears timmah’s bipolar.
Armitage came clean on Day 1 ? Why, then, was there a Day 2 of the investigation ?
Wasn’t she actually compromised in the Aldrich Ames fiasco ?
Fitzgerald found that nobody violated the IIPA ?! Really. Because in his sentencing brief, he argued that Plame was covert. During Libby’s trial, he argued that whether or not she was covert was irrelevant to the obstruction and perjury charges.
Apparently, her covert status is entirely dependent on the level of proof required. She is not covert when you need an indictment. If you have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, her status is not relevant. Sentencing brief, with less rigid standards, covert again.
I am saying he was wrong, and perhaps prone to hyperbole. Being wrong doesn’t imply incompetence, unless you are wrong consistently and repeatedly.
Seems like the only way to hold a reasonable debate to me.
Because you just have to be one or the other.
JD, there is a difference. Let me try to explain (and I’m nor patronizing you; I just think you missed it). To violate the IIPA a person must knowingly reveal the identity of a covert agent. Fitzgerald admits that he cannot prove “knowingly.” So, covert or not, he cannot charge anyone with violating the IIPA. The Act requires two elements and he doesn’t have both.
What he argued in sentencing referred to aggravating circumstances. It’s like if you were prosecuting some guy who shot another guy (this is for hypothetical purposes, not a comparison to Libby) and as prosecutor you add that the victim’s wife has developed an anxiety disorder and his children are now impoverished. It’s the circumstances surrounding this crime that make it worse from just run of the mill shooting someone.
Fitzgerald was arguing that Libby’s crime had the consequence of damaging national security. It’s an argument; not a finding and the judge can ignore it or accept it. So, Fitzgerald’s “Plame was covert” has nothing to do with the actual perjury, but could, he thinks, prove the extent of the crime was greater than just perjury.
The world is f!#@%#$^$%%^ insane. In this corner we have Libby who has given up his livelihood to
protect this country; being convicted on the word
of duplicitous newsmen, to cover up a reputed crime that did occur. In another ring, you have Sandy Burglar doing the old Ministry of Truth,
deal, getting the softest deal image. Next you
have the spectacle of William Jefferson, who was trying to bribe a Nigerian official (Isnt that what the CIA is for)Finally, a Canadian national
of Afghan beackground kills a US Marine and the
presiding authority, refuses to convict him, because I guess the Taliban are lawful combatants.
You know, at least Gerald Ford had the guts to pardon Nixon. Right away. Ending the “long national nightmare”.
Why do I get the feeling GWB does not even have the guts to pardon a former WH assistant, if it comes to that, down the road? “Well, Scooter, thanks for taking the bullet, hope they don’t rape you too much in prison.”
Is it because Ford played varsity football? Fought in the war? Lost his birth father? Help me out here.
Meg: Bill Kristol seems to have an idea:
I don’t believe I’ve ever seen Kristol as angry. Bush has really fucked up.
timmy – thanks for a civil, yet wrong, response. If she was covert, and Libby “outed” her, then he should be punished for that. Since he did not “out” her, it should not be relevant. Occam’s Razor, and the known facts, would suggest that she was not “outed” because she was not covert according to the statute. Though the CIA says she was covert, unless I have missed something, they are not capable of broadening statutory language unilaterally. Since they could not prove an “outing”, or that Libby was resppnsible for the “outing”, I fail to see how her allegedly, and I stress allegedly, covert status is relevant at sentencing.
Why Libby was betrayed by judicial activists, imho (continued focus on Iraq/ME proves America is far from the most evil racist nation on earth in history): Sowell, “Liberals, Race, and History: Left’s House of Cards Threatened”
I do not understand Kristol’s anger. Were Libby covering for somebody, I can see how loyalty would be an issue. Up until today, there was not a whole lot that the President could have done. I suspect he will be pardoned, but ultimately, that is between Libby and Bush/Cheney, and not likely to happen until the nd of the term.
I have seen that Kristol quote on several leftard sites. He is quoted as being representative of Republicans, since they agree with him. Kristol and this President have been at different positions more often than not, in my recollection. I guess the intensity of his quote surprised me the most.
He doesn’t have either.
HATER!!!! VILE OBNOXIOUS PRICK!!!1111!
Fitzgerald didn’t “find” anything, tim. He isn’t the judge.
Put away your bias for a second and admit that in your world, to penalise someone at sentencing for an unproven assertion which the prosecution refused to allow the jury to consider at trial is not just.
Furriskey, I love you, you ol’ bugger, but you’ll have to defer to me on this part of US law. Fitzgerald is the person who brings a charge, seeking indictment,before the grand jury. If , in his prosecutorial discretion he determines no crime has been committed, then there is no indictment or charge. I direct you to his press conference where he announced the indictment of Libby.
Remember Nifong? A case of where a prosecutor did NOT show discretion. Fitzgerald found he could not make a case upon the two required elements of the crime, so he did not charge it. Doesn’t mean he doesn’t or didn’t think Plame was covert. Go read the transcript of the press conference. he addresses possible violations of the IIPA.
What amazes me is you guys get lost in Fitzgerald’s claims re: her covert status. Doesn’t matter. That was for sentencing. He was guilty. Who cares what the sentence is. He won’t spend a day of it in the pokey.
The sentence was excessive. From an appealable error standpoint, that may be sufficient to at least have his sentence reduced. IN addition, Fitzgerald withheld information during the case in chief from the defense (ie specific information about Plame’s status) and then reliedo on that information in sentencing. I looked up the judge, to see what his biases might be- 2 years in jail and a 250k fine for a questionable conviction is ridiculous- he’s a black judge so presumably may lean left but he was a Reagan appointee so I can’t imagine there’s too much of a bias unless his political philisophy has changed substantially. And never underestimate the power of BDS.
Second, our hangup, heet, timmy etc is that this case should never have been brought in the first place. We know who the “leaker” was. He wasn’t prosecuted. Libby was prosecuted on a criminal count seperate f rom the entire PLame situation BUT which would not have occured if the LEFT hadn’t pushed and pushed and pushed for an investigation into the non-outing.
So in summary, the prosecution was absurd from the getgo and was 100% driven by liberal media and those trumpeting the Wilson-Plame “findings” in Nigeria as proof that the president “lied”. This was ap olitical prosecution from the word go and justice was hardly served.
He was found guilty of lying to cover up something he may simply have misremembered—after the “leaker” had been discovered—and you act as if this trial, conviction, and sentencing is no big deal, just a soap opera for your enjoyment.
This guy has a family and is, by all accounts, a remarkably dedicated public servant. He never should have been put through this show trial. You know it, I know it, Martha Stewart knows it—and, in his private moments, Fitzgerald likely knows it, too.
People like you and heet just needed somebody—anybody—to scapegoat, because it keeps alive your grand conspiracies about the Bushies’ near infinite evil powers of manipulation and control.
It allows you to point and say, “See? Dark doings!”—and then to pat yourself on the back for keeping the “heet” on a “corrupt” administration. You fancy yourselves heroes. And—ironically—you almost have to, otherwise you’d have to admit that you’ve spent the last several years lusting for Republican blood on the word of a liar like Joe Wilson, who has been so thoroughly discredited that the left considers it a mission to sanctify him—more to insulate themselves from shame than to protect him.
You live in a world of funhouse mirrors. Don’t go believing you’re fit and trim simply because you found one that makes you look thin.
Bush shows Nixon how to silence leaks. Libby takes one for the team. Congress and the Judicial system self distruct.
I don’t understand why we don’t just do away with judges and juries and all that nonsense. Seems such a waste of money, eh, timmy?
By the way, have I reminded you of what a profoundly pretentious moron you are lately?
Comments like that won’t get you into the “Good PW People List,” that timmy is developing BMoe.
This is one of those times that my envy at your inate talent rises up like bile from a feast of refried beans.
24 carat solid gold
I’m sorry, tim, but you are using the word “found” incorrectly, whether under English law or what passes for law in this judge’s court.
You are also deliberately not addressing my point, which was to challenge you to admit that you know there is no justice in a case where the prosecution first conceals evidence from the jury and subsequently seeks to rely on that evidence in order to increase the severity of sentence.
And if you say that you are concerned not with justice but with “the law”, I doubt I shall be the only one not surprised.
furriskey – They do not give a rats ass about the law or justice. This has always been about a political scalp.
Possibly OT, but does anyone recall a HuffPo piece written by Denis Collins, one of the jurors in the Libby trial? It’s gotten linked by a number of websites like Talkleft and newsbusters (even HuffPo, internally), but for some very odd reason, it no longer exists at the link location. Searching HuffPo doesn’t turn it up. Googling “Inside the jury room” Denis Collins doesn’t turn it up. It’s gone. It’s even gone from Google cache. The wayback machine…well…it seems stymied, too.
Which I think is interesting, if it means something. Could be happenstance, I suppose.
The wayback machine…well…it seems stymied, too.
Oh. Things only come up on the wayback machine 6 months after they’ve been published, and they’ll remove things if you ask them to.
I think I’ll have to leave the question to someone more skilled than I at internet forensics.
Congratulations, Jeff, for reading my mind. I needed this, and thus I ordered Fitzgerald to bring an indictment and those 12 men and women and that judge to find him guilty. I NEEDED it.
Frankly, and, presuming you could get off of your snark horse long enough to do so, you could, instead of going Marcotte on me, actually read my comments. I could give a shit about Libby, because I’ve already had Stage One of the only trial I care about, i.e. the 2006 elections. The 2008 Presidential election will be Stage Two. Stage three will be the domination of the Democratic Party for the next 20 years, thanks to all the American of Hispanic decent you all are nice enough to push our way.
So, what happens with Libby is not my concern. Apparatchiks falling on swords may tug at your heart strings (who made him lie, Jeff? It wasn’t Fitzgerald. Rove told the truth and is walking free and he has a family too), but my heart strings are tugged by 60 seat Senate majorities and your President is playing the role of Herbert Hoover very nicely.
As for funhouse mirrors, I like the ones that make me look tall.
Thanks for your time
JD, Fitzgerald, a Republican-appointed US attorney, was appointed by a Republican AG to investigate the leak. He brought a case to a Federal judge appointed by Ronald Reagan. It’s a strange form of partisanship that ignores those facts.
Are you being intentionally obtuse, timmah? I was referring to the political soap opera played out by Plame, Wilson, and the media. From now on, I will spell everything out for you.
As timmy illustrates, this has all been about power, power, and power, and the lengths the left, with the help of the media, will go to in order to secure that power.
Are you suggesting that a Republican judge would find differently on the same facts from a Democrat judge?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – you should turn some of your powers of insight onto yourself.
Every other post here is a delusional rant about a leftist conspiracy to change the language and take away your freedom of speech. Or a media conspiracy (along with the leftists!) to take down the Bush admin. All with zero evidence but plenty of snark, goofy images, and witticisms. It plays to the dead enders but at some point, you have to admit that these nefarious and invisible enemies can’t be responsible for all your problems. Again, like I said above, take some responsibility.
If I might do a little armchair psychiatry myself – you suffer from paranoia brought on by massive cognitive dissonance. You and your compatriots who just can’t catch a break in these awful, liberal times need to lighten up.
BWWAAAAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! WHEW!
**wipes tears**
That is one of the funniest things I have read in the last 6 months. Irony dripping from every crevice like Cheez Whiz from a Philly cheesesteak.
Have you ever argued a point of fact in your life or are you just dedicated to generalized, rage filled ad hominem attacks?
But thanks for the laughs, that was special!
“Physician, heal thyself!
I thought we were keeping the decent ones, but what do I know.
I like cheesesteak…
JD, sorry for misunderstanding what you meant. I think your broader point was mistaken, but I apologize for missing the context.
heet seems to be taking the shine approach of being so vague and incoherent no one can really respond to you.
BMoe; Keep your eyes peeled and your discernment on its highest setting…..
shine = alphie?
INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW!!!
He reminds me more of actus, although actus usually was trying to make some kind of point. alphie was never vague, just stupid.
Catch a break? If you knew just how much we are stripping out and stuffing away in Liechtenstein, you would need oxygen. I tell you, heet, these are great days for agile conservatives.
Anyone else think this is a fair characterization of what gets written here? Not to be a suck-up, but it seems to me that quite a lot gets written that is reasonable and cogent, if given over to cock-slapping and other equally unpleasant imagery.
Maybe I’m just lazy. Or maybe I’m just tired of people screaming about “facts”.
Ah, yes. Poor timmyb and heet. Still trying to make the most of the lump of coal they got for Fitzmas.
Sad to be them.