|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Wow. What a shock. The only motive that MEM can discern just happens to be one that implicates a Republican.
Man, never saw that coming.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Instead of your usual "MEM" post G-man why not say what other motive Libby may have had for obstucting the investigation? Or if you think he's innocent of the charges, why?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Assuming he's guilty, the most common motivation for lying under oath is to save oneself from some unfortunate consequence, be it pecuniary or personal (see, eg, Bill Clinton).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Do you really think he's innocent?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Most news reports this week have highlighted the prosecution's successes. But the prosecutor must prove his case "beyond a reasonable doubt" - and the Libby team has had evident success in casting all kinds of doubt on the testimony of Fitzgerald's witnesses. So things are far muddier in Judge Reggie Walton's courtroom than the reporters covering the trial are letting on....even on Fitzgerald's own extremely narrow terms, he may not be able to establish these plain facts beyond a reasonable doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
I realize Libby could pull an OJ but I was asking if you thought he was innocent.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
I don't know if he is innocent or not.
However, you are focusing on a relatively minor point in my response.
I had indicated to you that there was little actual evidence that Libby, if guily, was lying to protect Cheney. I explained, in response to a post of yours, that it seemed more plausible that Libby had lied, if at all, to save his own skin, which is the more typical scenario in a perjury case.
Again, I have to ask: do you really read what we post?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Of course I do. I just don't agree with you. Almost a dozen people have testified that they talked to Libby about Plame before he says he "remembers" talking to somebody about it. The person that Libby says he did talk to (Russert) has flatly denied that happened. Outside of Libby admitting he lied I'm not sure what more evidence is needed for reasonable doubt.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Okay, but why not have said that in response earlier? Its not like I changed the subject. You were the one who brought up Libby's motivation as a topic and then abandoned it once I responded.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
You answered my question as to what motive you thought Libby may be operating under. I then asked another question. I guess I don't see what the problem is.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
And, another thing: you keep claiming that Libby was lying to protect Cheney, not Bush. But you keep retitling this thread "Bushgate" (after your repeated claims that Rove was guilty went down in flames).
So this is all supposition on your part and goes beyond even your current supposition.
Wouldn't that be like me retitling every thread about about Democrat who does something crooked "Pelosigate"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Bush is the person in charge & was the one to give the go ahead to deal with the Wilson problem. Either he was irresponsable & didn't keep his boys in line or has set this up so he has deniability.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Which one could also say about any democrat member of congress and Pelosi.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Actually your already doing that with Pelosi with the "snake" thread. You refer to the Sergeant-at-Arms Bill Livingood as Pelosi's subordinate & are holding her accountable for him just doing his job. The same job he did as Hastert's subordinate.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Not really. As noted on that thread, Quote:
You are either misstating, or ommitting, certain facts.
You are writing as if Pelosi was unaware of the Sergeant At Arms' request. However, it has been reported that she was told in December that a recommendation was being made that she have the much larger plane
House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood, who is responsible for the speaker's security, advised Pelosi in December...He suggested Pelosi, who is second in the line of presidential succession, inquire about the use of a military plane.
Furthermore, Pelosi, not Livingood, was the one who first brought up allowing family and friends to use the plane:
Pelosi requested clarification from the Department of Defense about plane size and whether she can have friends and colleagues catch rides on the military aircraft
So, unless and until you can show that Bush was aware of Libby's actions and first suggested at least some of Libby's actions, which is what appears to be the case with Pelosi and the plane request, the fact patterns are different.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Fact patterns? Pelosi didn't make a request while Bush did. Looks like it stays Bushgate.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Pelosi, not Livingood, was the one who first brought up allowing family and friends to use the plane...So, unless and until you can show that Bush was aware of Libby's actions and first suggested at least some of Libby's actions, which is what appears to be the case with Pelosi and the plane request, the fact patterns are different.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Fact patterns? Pelosi didn't make a request while Bush did. Looks like it stays Bushgate.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Of course. With MEM its all GOP hate all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Not true at all. I said some very nice things about Huckabee just today. I also recently said I liked the idea of a McCain/Lieberman ticket. You on the other hand have minimized Libby's trial here & put Pelosi on trial even though she didn't break a single rule.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Fox is reporting that Libby was found guilty.
I'm a little suprised, but not terribly shocked, given the decision by the defense attorneys to not put him on the stand to explain what happened.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Don't worry I'm sure Libby will get a pardon for services rendered.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Don't worry I'm sure Libby will get a pardon...
SCOOTER JUROR: GIVE POOR GUY A PARDON
One of the jurors who convicted Lewis "Scooter" Libby now wants President Bush to pardon him.
"I don't want him to go to jail," Ann Redington, said.
Redington told MSNBC's "Hardball" yesterday that jurors had to convict Libby based on the evidence - but said she cried when their guilty verdicts were read Tuesday.
Asked if she favored a pardon, she said, "Yeah. It kind of bothers me that there was this whole big crime being investigated and he got caught up in the investigation as opposed to in the actual crime that was supposedly committed."
"I would like him to get" a pardon, she added.
"I didn't want to see him and his wife and say he was guilty of a crime," she said.
Government prosecutors led by Patrick Fitzgerald spent nearly four years investigating the case, but never charged anyone with the leak that identified Valerie Plame, wife of an Iraq war critic, as a CIA operative.
Another juror, Denis Collins, said on ABC's "Good Morning America," "There was a frustration that we were trying someone for telling a lie apparently about an event that never became important enough to file charges anywhere else."
Libby's lawyers are likely to seek a new trial by arguing that judge Reggie Walton made several rulings they consider unfair.
For instance, prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was allowed to show jurors newspaper articles that defense lawyers considered inaccurate and inflammatory.
Also, defense attorneys were not permitted to question NBC's Tim Russert or Andrea Mitchell about televised statements on the case they made outside of court.
Not sure I agree with a pardon at this point. There's a strong case to be made for President Bush to let the appeals process run its course before deciding whether or not to pardon Libby.
Sure, it's easy enough for conservatives to say, Bush should pardon Libby this instant, and to hell with what the liberals think. But the reality is that President Bush has very little political capital left, and what little he does have, he needs to spend fighting Democratic efforts to force him to surrender in Iraq.
However justified a pardon may be, the bottom line is that most Americans would see it as President Bush using his power to let Dick Cheney's convicted crony off the hook. The media will make sure that's the case, guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
I'm sure Libby could still make some type of deal to get a better setence befitting a scapegoat.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
|
|
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240 |
I was under the impression that the jurors wanted to try Cheney and not Scooter...?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
Rich: Why Bush pardoning Libby is a slam dunk
RAW STORY
Published: Saturday March 10, 2007
According to New York Times columnist Frank Rich, it isn't a question of if President Bush will pardon a former White House aide convicted last Tuesday on charges of lying and making false statements, but when. Rich calls the prospects of a pardon a "slam dunk" proposition, which is a mocking reference to words that former CIA chief George Tenet reportedly used before the invasion of Iraq to describe the existence of WMD that were never found.
"Even by Washington's standards, few debates have been more fatuous or wasted more energy than the frenzied speculation over whether President Bush will or will not pardon Scooter Libby," Rich writes in Sunday's paper. "Of course he will."
As Rich sees it, "A president who tries to void laws he doesn't like by encumbering them with 'signing statements' and who regards the Geneva Conventions as a nonbinding technicality isn't going to start playing by the rules now."
"His assertion last week that he is 'pretty much going to stay out of' the Libby case is as credible as his pre-election vote of confidence in Donald Rumsfeld," Rich adds, " The only real question about the pardon is whether Bush cares enough about his fellow Republicans' political fortunes to delay it until after Election Day 2008."
...
RAW
Bush will definitely wait till after the 08 election but will have to pardon Libby no matter how bad it looks. Otherwise he runs the risk of Libby spilling the beans.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
A liberal blog, quoting a liberal columnist's opinion piece, as a source?
Wow. Who can argue with fair and thoughtful, factual analysis like that? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
It's an opinion piece much like when you post something from the Wall Street Editorial dept or just offer up your own biased opinion. It's entirely up to you if you want to argue the merits of the opinion offered or just give it a pass.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
the G-man already did that when he said:
Not sure I agree with a pardon at this point. There's a strong case to be made for President Bush to let the appeals process run its course before deciding whether or not to pardon Libby.
Sure, it's easy enough for conservatives to say, Bush should pardon Libby this instant, and to hell with what the liberals think. But the reality is that President Bush has very little political capital left, and what little he does have, he needs to spend fighting Democratic efforts to force him to surrender in Iraq.
However justified a pardon may be, the bottom line is that most Americans would see it as President Bush using his power to let Dick Cheney's convicted crony off the hook. The media will make sure that's the case, guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
Rich: Why Bush pardoning Libby is a slam dunk
RAW STORY
Published: Saturday March 10, 2007
According to New York Times columnist Frank Rich, it isn't a question of if President Bush will pardon a former White House aide convicted last Tuesday on charges of lying and making false statements, but when. Rich calls the prospects of a pardon a "slam dunk" proposition, which is a mocking reference to words that former CIA chief George Tenet reportedly used before the invasion of Iraq to describe the existence of WMD that were never found.
"Even by Washington's standards, few debates have been more fatuous or wasted more energy than the frenzied speculation over whether President Bush will or will not pardon Scooter Libby," Rich writes in Sunday's paper. "Of course he will."
As Rich sees it, "A president who tries to void laws he doesn't like by encumbering them with 'signing statements' and who regards the Geneva Conventions as a nonbinding technicality isn't going to start playing by the rules now."
"His assertion last week that he is 'pretty much going to stay out of' the Libby case is as credible as his pre-election vote of confidence in Donald Rumsfeld," Rich adds, " The only real question about the pardon is whether Bush cares enough about his fellow Republicans' political fortunes to delay it until after Election Day 2008."
...
RAW
Bush will definitely wait till after the 08 election but will have to pardon Libby no matter how bad it looks. Otherwise he runs the risk of Libby spilling the beans.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Oh, I get it now. When I wrote that the media would make a pardon appear unfairly as if "President Bush using his power to let Dick Cheney's convicted crony off the hook," you wanted to demonstrate they were already doing that.
Thanks, Chris.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Considering the considerable evidence that Libby did commit perjury & obstruct it would be rather odd for it to appear as anything else.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
So, just out of curiousity, if his conviction gets overturned (and I'm not saying it will, just that it might), who are you going to blame?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
The evidence against Libby makes that scenario unlikely G-man. It seems though that the system of justice is irrelavent to those that think Bush should pardon Libby. Bit of a double standard IMHO.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
As noted above, I think a pardon is a bad idea, especially unless and until the appeals process is played out. So I assume you aren't referring to me.
And, since I assume you aren't referring to me, why are you dodging my question, which was about what you would do the conviction was overturned? How is noting that the conviction could be overturned in any way showing irreverence to the rule of law?
Furthermore, far as a double standard, since most of the people calling for a pardon are people who, right or wrong, honestly believe that Libby was treated unfairly--including at least two of his jurors--where's the double standard?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Didn't the two jurors convict Libby because of the evidence?
As for dogging your question, it's a hypothetical. Some convictions are overturned because of a mere technicality. If on the next try Libby can create an arguement that gives jurors reasonable doubt however I would feel that is fair. Bush's pardon won't be.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Didn't the two jurors convict Libby because of the evidence?
Yes, but isn't the point of a pardon to show mercy to someone who was convicted? If the evidence hadn't led to a conviction, there would be no reason for anyone to ever be pardoned would there?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Besides showing mercy? Wouldn't it be a case of Bush doing the pardon to keep Libby from spilling the beans? If this was a democratic President we wouldn't even be having this conservation. I would just be embarrassed for my side when the pardon happens.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Besides showing mercy? Wouldn't it be a case of Bush doing the pardon to keep Libby from spilling the beans?
That's pure speculation on your part. Its never been established that Libby has "beans" to spill.
I will admit that it would look as if Bush was just 'helping out a crony.' However, I've already stated that. Furthermore, helping out a crony is not the same as pardoning one to help keep him from 'spilling the beans.' By that (faulty) logic, Marc Rich and all the people he pardoned had some 'dirt' on Clinton. Something I don't think either of us believe, regardless of our differing opinions on the wisdom of some of the pardons.
Quote:
If this was a democratic President we wouldn't even be having this conservation.
That's true. You'd be defending the pardon on every level, whereas I've already spoken against Bush issuing one to Libby.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,820 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Besides showing mercy? Wouldn't it be a case of Bush doing the pardon to keep Libby from spilling the beans?
That's pure speculation on your part. Its never been established that Libby has "beans" to spill.
I will admit that it would look as if Bush was just 'helping out a crony.' However, I've already stated that. Furthermore, helping out a crony is not the same as pardoning one to help keep him from 'spilling the beans.' By that (faulty) logic, Marc Rich and all the people he pardoned had some 'dirt' on Clinton. Something I don't think either of us believe, regardless of our differing opinions on the wisdom of some of the pardons.
Quote:
If this was a democratic President we wouldn't even be having this conservation.
That's true. You'd be defending the pardon on every level, whereas I've already spoken against Bush issuing one to Libby.
 My defending the pardon on every level is of course speculation on your part.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
