RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Bushgate

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

---

I'll wake you up if/when the indictments are handed out

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

---

I'll wake you up if/when the indictments are handed out

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Much of it is speculation, though we do know some things. Early statements made by Rove & Libby don't match the accounts given by reporters Cooper & Miller after they testified.

---

Well, then Rove and Libby MUST be lying. After all, it is not as if a reporter has ever been caught in lie or mistake.




And, of course, if Rove or Libby's statements were inaccurate, it MUST be that they were lying. It COULDN'T be faulty memory, misunderstanding or any of the usual, non sinister, reasons that people get things wrong.



Seriously, however, it there is good evidence that either of these guys lied under oath, they should be prosecuted. But at the same time simply having "he said she said" discrepancies is not particularly good evidence, just because the "he" is a Republican.

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
...
Seriously, however, it there is good evidence that either of these guys lied under oath, they should be prosecuted. But at the same time simply having "he said she said" discrepancies is not particularly good evidence, just because the "he" is a Republican.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
...
Seriously, however, it there is good evidence that either of these guys lied under oath, they should be prosecuted. But at the same time simply having "he said she said" discrepancies is not particularly good evidence, just because the "he" is a Republican.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
I agree with you on that point. Hopefully you would apply the same reasoning if it was a Democrat in a similar position.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
...
Seriously, however, it there is good evidence that either of these guys lied under oath, they should be prosecuted. But at the same time simply having "he said she said" discrepancies is not particularly good evidence, just because the "he" is a Republican.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
I agree with you on that point. Hopefully you would apply the same reasoning if it was a Democrat in a similar position.

---

I seem to recall at least one prominent democrat who was prosecuted for lying under oath, and was found to have lied under oath and fined by the court. Where did you stand on his prosecution?

---

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's CIA-leak inquiry is focusing attention on what long has been a tactic of U.S. President George W. Bush's administration: slash-and-burn assaults on its critics, particularly those opposed to the president's Iraq war policies.

If top officials are indicted, it could seriously erode the administration's credibility and prove yet another embarrassment to Bush on the larger issue of how he and his national security team marshaled information--much of it later shown to be inaccurate--to support their case for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

Quote:

---

....As the White House braced for a decision by Mr. Fitzgerald, Republicans began suggesting that they would pursue a strategy of minimizing any charges as technicalities or the product of an overzealous prosecution.

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," compared the leak investigation to the case of Martha Stewart, "where they couldn't find a crime and they indict on something that she said about something that wasn't a crime."

Senator Hutchison said she hoped "that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars."...

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Sounds like tomorrow is the day. While there is of course the chance that nobody gets indicted, it doesn't sound likely. Libby & Rove are looking like indictment recipients for lying their asses off to Fitzgerald. (unless there is a conspiracy amongst the reporters)

It's been fun googling for new news tonight. Limbaugh was just happy it wasn't Wednesday. Coulter apparently declared that Plame's neighbors were lying and that they needed to be prosecuted. (I suppose they could be in the conspiracy with the reporters) The Wall Street Journal offered an editorial that suggested that because Fitzgerald has taken a full 2 yrs that he must not have anything worthy to call a crime. It must be a bitch being part of the GOP smear machine. Fitzgerald definitely looks like a "No Spin Zone."

Happy Fitzmas!

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:I should mention that Indictment Day was a seperate thread but G-man tacked it onto the Rovegate one. Despite that Indictment Day deals with what may happen to far more than just Rove. There can only be one thread pertaining to Rove (Libby & the rest just have to share)

---

Quote:

---

On Fri Sep 30 2005, on this very thread,
Matter-eater Man said:It appears that Scooter libby was the source being protected.

---

Quote:

---

On Tue Oct 18 2005 Matter-eater Man said:
Early statements made by Rove & libby don't match the accounts given by reporters Cooper & Miller after they testified.

---

Quote:

---

On Wed Jul 20 2005
Matter-eater Man said:
Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis libby, also was a source for Cooper on the Plame story.

---

Quote:

---

On Wed Jul 20 2005 Matter-eater Man said:
libby & Rove could still be the sources Miller is protecting.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Actually somebody could be guilty of perjury in addition to outing CIA agent intentionally couldn't they.

---

Vice President Dick Cheney's chief aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby (search) was indicted Friday by a grand jury in relation to the investigation of a leak of a CIA operative's name to reporters two years ago.

The indictment charges Libby with two felony counts for making false statements to mislead the grand jury. He was also charged with obstruction of justice and and two perjury charges. Five indictments were handed down in total.

Each count carries a maximum of five years in jail, meaning a guilty verdict could mean a maximum 25-year jail sentence. Federal prison has no parole. The odds of Libby, someone without a prior record and with years of public service, getting a maximum sentence are pretty low.

Karl Rove, President Bush's top political aide, was spared from criminal charges on Friday

Quote:

---

Calls for White House shakeup focus on Karl Rove

By Randall Mikkelsen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush, whose top adviser Karl Rove remains in jeopardy in a CIA-leak probe, needs to shake up his White House staff if he hopes to revive a presidency reeling from multiple setbacks, Republican and Democratic lawmakers said on Sunday.

The lawmakers also urged Bush to investigate the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, whose chief of staff, Lewis Libby, resigned on Friday and was indicted on perjury and other charges in connection with the probe.

Bush should take Cheney "to the woodshed" if necessary, a Democratic lawmaker said, and the Senate's top Democrat said Rove should be fired or quit.

"I think Karl Rove should step down," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said on ABC's "This Week."

Mississippi Republican Sen. Trent Lott said the Bush administration needed "new blood, new energy, qualified staff," and that he expected the president to address his problems.

"I'm not talking about wholesale changes, but you've got to reach out and bring in more advice and counsel," Lott said on "Fox News Sunday."

Rove remains under investigation in the probe into who leaked the identity of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame, whose diplomat husband is a prominent Iraq war critic. The White House's credibility has been hurt by disclosures that Rove and Libby leaked Plame's identity, despite earlier official denials attributed to the two men.

Reid said Bush and Cheney owed the public an apology. "They should come clean with the American public," he said on ABC....

---

Quote:

---

Captain Sammitch said:
So we can only hope that at least a few Slate.com reporters will be getting theirs soon?

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

---

I'll wake you up if/when the indictments are handed out

---

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
Rove has been spared so far.

Thank Christ for the Moral Administration.

This is the Administration America re-elected. I hope to fucking hell they're happy.

---

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

---

I'll wake you up if/when the indictments are handed out

---

You forgot to wake me. They were handed out. Is Rove going down or did they get teh big dog himslef Cheney.... Ooh now that the iddictments are out, I bet the whole Bush complex is going down in flames, right?

---

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
Rove has been spared so far.

Thank Christ for the Moral Administration.

This is the Administration America re-elected. I hope to fucking hell they're happy.

---

We are and thank you.

























Should I point out that you refered to America as "they" or just let it hang out there on it's own?

---

Quote:

---

r3x29yz4a said:
51% of voters put Bush in (an embarassing margin for a sitting president) because he scared them and lied to them.

---

Attorneys for Lewis "Scooter" Libby are likely to question whether the political bias of news outlets involved in the Leakgate case played a role in testimony by their reporters against top White House officials, reports the Wall Street Journal.

"Just wait until defense counsel starts examining their memories and reporting habits, not to mention the dominant political leanings in the newsrooms of NBC, Time magazine and the New York Times," warns the Journal in an editorial on Friday.

NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert - the star prosecution witness against Mr. Libby - should offer particularly fertile ground on this count.

His "Meet the Press" broadcast was among the first to showcase claims by Leakgate accuser Joe Wilson, the disgruntled former Clinton official who famously charged that the White House lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

After Wilson's wife was allegedly "outed" as a result of leaks now attributed to Libby and others, the Wilsons posed for two pictorial spreads that ran in Vanity Fair magazine, where Mr. Russert's wife, Maureen Orth, has served as special correspondent since 1993.
Another problem for prosecutors: Russert's claim that he had no way of knowing that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA before his conversation with Libby - when senior NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell, who works under Russert, has described Plame's CIA connection as "widely known."

Time Magazine's Matthew Cooper offers another troubling indication of political bias that defense attorneys could cite as evidence of a lack of objectivity by some of Libby's media accusers. Cooper is married to Mandy Grunwald, a longtime advisor to Hillary Clinton - who bashed Libby's alleged crime last week as "reprehensible."

Then there's the New York Times own Judy Miller, who finally gave up what she knew about Libby after an 85-day stint in jail.

"Rest assured," says the Journal, "that Ms. Miller's evocative self-description, 'Miss Run Amok,' will surface on cross-examination."

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:
No, it won't..... wanna take bets?

---

I don't gamble. I will enjoy the show though

Some Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence are wondering what it is Democratic member Rep. Rush Holt (NJ) thinks he's doing by so publicly discussing issues related to the Joe Wilson scandal. Particularly since Holt, like other Democrats, has been receiving information that little to no damage appears to have occurred as the result of Wilson's wife's name having become more publicly known. Holt has appeared on a number of TV shows, including an embarrassing 60 Minutes advertorial for Wilson.

Holt has claimed that he knows almost certainly that damage was done to intelligence resources as a result of Valerie Plame's name being further disseminated. But the CIA has briefed both the House and the Senate Intelligence Committees that thus far that does not appear to the case at all.

Of course, that information would be confidential, and Holt shouldn't discuss it.

"The fact is Holt shouldn't be talking at all to anyone, especially the press," says a Republican House colleague. "More important, if he is going to talk, he ought to be honest, and what he is telling the media right now is not accurate. It's what they want to hear, but it's not accurate or complete."