PDA

View Full Version : Above the law?



Qtec
07-06-2007, 03:00 AM
[ QUOTE ]
But the most significant disease highlighted by the Libby travesty is also the most obvious one. We have decided to be a country in which our highest Republican political officials can break the law freely, without any real consequence. In the United States, the law does not apply to the President and his closest aides. And there is one fact after the next which proves that.

Almost thirty years ago, the American people reacted with fury and horror over revelations by the Church Committee that every administration in prior decades had been spying on Americans for completely improper purposes. In response, they enacted a law, through their Congress, making it a felony for any government official to eavesdrop on Americans without judicial approval, punishable by 5 years in prison for each offense. Since 1977, it has been a felony in the United States for political officials to eavesdrop on Americans without judicial warrants.

But in December of 2005, The New York Times revealed that George Bush had been breaking this law -- committing felonies -- every day for the prior four years. And when he was caught, he went on television and proudly admitted what he had done and vowed defiantly to continue doing it. And our wise and serious Washington media establishment shrugged, even applauded. They directed their fury only at those who objected to the lawbreaking. The GOP-controlled Congress blocked every attempt to investigate this criminality -- with virtually no outcry -- and then set out to pass a new law making this criminality retroactively legal. In response to revelations that the President was deliberately breaking the law, official Washington fell all over itself figuring out the most efficient way to protect and defend the President's crimes.

Ever since Gerald Ford, with the support of our permanent Beltway ruling class, pardoned Richard Nixon for his crimes -- followed naturally by the current President's father shielding his own friends and aides from the consequences of serious criminal convictions for lying to Congress and deliberately breaking its laws, with one of those criminals then appointed with no objection by his son to run Middle East policy from the White House -- we have been a nation which allows our highest political officials to reside beyond the reach of law. It is just that simple. <hr /></blockquote>

A Pres is supposed to represent the people, not rule the people. Or not?

Q

Gayle in MD
07-06-2007, 07:21 AM
Great article, Q., who wrote it, btw?

I take some comfort in knowing that as slick as they thought they were, and although neocons control most of the media, Americans were not as dumb as this bunch of criminals thought.

Some of us don't get our information from radio, television news, or the RNC talking point lies. Eventho they have our country at such great risk, and will more than likely get away with all their law breaking,(I still hope they won't) they, and their supporters, have been clearly seen for the slime that they are, IMO. Most Americans are repulsed by the Republican Party, and the entire Bush Administration. Efforts by the right to rewrite history, have failed. Bush will forever be known as the lying slimebag he is, and has always been. In the years to come, when Bush's lawbreaking, arrogance, and sneaking, lying, slimy tactics, are discussed, the nutty right will still be there answering....but but but, Clinton got a BJ, and lied! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

/ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gifGayle in Md.

Qtec
07-06-2007, 08:28 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The Plame investigation was urged by the Bush CIA and commenced by the Bush DOJ, Libby's conviction pursued by a Bush-appointed federal prosecutor, his jail sentence imposed by a Bush-appointed "tough-on-crime" federal judge, all pursuant to harsh and merciless criminal laws urged on by the "tough-on-crime/no-mercy" GOP. Lewis Libby was sent to prison by the system constructed and desired by the very Republican movement protesting his plight.

But our political discourse and media institutions are so broken and corrupt that Bush followers (and their media enablers) feel free to make the completely-backwards and fact-free claim that the Libby prosecution was driven by "partisan" and "political" motives -- as though it was a mirror image of the Clinton persecution driven by Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and a purely partisan Republican prosecutor -- because they know that there is no such thing as a claim too false to be pa <hr /></blockquote>

web page (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/07/03/libby/index.html)

Q

Gayle in MD
07-06-2007, 08:39 AM
And here's a list of all the Republicans who voted to impeach Clinton, for a lie in a civil suit, LMAO!

Thursday, July 05, 2007
The 25 GOP Senators Who Voted Guilty Twice On Clinton
Based on my article this morning, people are already writing to ask who the 25 Republican Senators were -- who are still in the Senate -- who voted guilty on both articles of impeachment against Bill Clinton in 1999.

Here they are:

Wayne Allard (R-CO)
Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Kit Bond (R-MO)
Sam Brownback (R-KS)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Larry Craig (R-ID)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Pete Domenici (R-NM)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Chuck Hagel (R-NE)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)
Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Trent Lott (R-MS)
Dick Lugar (R-IN)
John McCain (R-AZ)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Pat Roberts (R-KS)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Gordon Smith (R-OR)
George Voinovich (R-OH)

Not a single one of them has made a statement regarding Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence. Not one!

Not a single argument made by Bush, or the Libby supporters, has any validity, including the straws they grab at using Clinton's pardons, since Clinton didn't pardon anyone who had incriminating evidence against him, in order to save his own ass, and avoid further investigations into the breaking of Federal Laws.

All of a sudden, a lie, isn't a lie, and treason isn't treason, and obstruction of Justice, and purgery is A-OK, with Republicans, as long as the lying SOB is a Republican, according to Fred Thompson, who also voted to impeach Clinton.

How anyone can say there is no difference between the parties, is beyond me. I've never said Democrats were angel's, only that they're a hellova lot better than the Repubs, led by the Hypocrit in Chief! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Thanks for the link, Q. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Bobbyrx
07-06-2007, 04:02 PM
Yeah that Libby should be strung up...by the way ..who did they ever charge with outing that CIA agent? They should really throw the book at him.......

Gayle in MD
07-06-2007, 05:00 PM
They couldn't charge the criminals, Bush and Cheney, because Scooter Libby obstructed justice, with his purgerous lies under oath, to the FBI, the Republican Bush Appointed Special Prosecutor, a strict conservative Republican Bush Appointed Federal Judge, A Grand Jury, and a Jury of 12 his peers. Hence, Cheney, and Bush got off for their act of treason.

What do you not understand about the phrase "Obstruction Of Justice"

Why do you think they tried to block the 9/11 investigation?

Why do you think the British memo stated they were fixing intelligence to policy?

Why did they put the yellow cake lie, in the State Of The Union address, knowing it was false, having been told not to use it, but put it into the Address to the Nation, anyway, and then followed that up with lies on all the sunday morning talk shows about Saddam and Mushroom Clouds?

If you refuse to acknowledge that facts, there are no answers available.

The underlying crimes were committed by Cheney and Bush, and Scooter took the fall for them. Libby had been talking with Armitage, before Novak went to talk with him. It was all a White House Operation, to discredit Wilson's revealing statements about the lies Bush told to the American People in the State Of The Union address, which he had to admit later, should not have been included. If they weren't lies, why did Bush have to remove them from the official text, and admit that they shouldn't have been included.

This bunch of SOB's handcuffed, browbeat, and badgered the CIA, to try to force them to produce false intelligence, to fit their hell bent objective to make their cornies rich with oil deals in Iraq, and then turned right around and blamed the CIA for all the resulting misinformation. They're crooks. They should both be impeached, and Rove and Libby should go to jail, for treason, and Obstruction of Justice.

Gayle in Md.

Qtec
07-07-2007, 05:03 AM
If you had followed the Libby trial you would know that at least 7 admin officials were involved in outing Plame. Cheney was the one who implied Wilson was sent on a junket. It all started with the VP.
Also the post was more about GW and the neo-cons being above the Law rather than who outed Plame.

No doubt you are incapable of understanding the relevance from this quote but anyway, here it is. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]

The Plame investigation was urged by the Bush CIA and commenced by the Bush DOJ, Libby's conviction pursued by a Bush-appointed federal prosecutor, his jail sentence imposed by a Bush-appointed "tough-on-crime" federal judge, all pursuant to harsh and merciless criminal laws urged on by the "tough-on-crime/no-mercy" GOP. Lewis Libby was sent to prison by the system constructed and desired by the very Republican movement protesting his plight.

But our political discourse and media institutions are so broken and corrupt that Bush followers (and their media enablers) <font color="blue"> [ and some CCB forum members!] </font color>feel free to make the completely-backwards and fact-free claim that the Libby prosecution was driven by "partisan" and "political" motives <hr /></blockquote>

Q

Gayle in MD
07-07-2007, 07:43 AM
[ and some CCB forum members!]

<font color="red">....of the nutty 28%.

Thinking process of the Nutty 28%.


1. Disengage Critical thinking
2. Remove facts
3. Reverse blame
4. Proceed with fervor

/ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

wolfdancer
07-07-2007, 12:55 PM
Q, thanks for the original post....and good reply. If someone can't see that these abuses of the Presidential pardon privilege ....and the worst is GWB pardoning himself...if they can't see that it is Wrong, with a capitol W....then they're ready for the chip implant for thought control....they've already bought into the "Newspeak"
Personally I don't read any of the posts that try to whitewash this admin....by denying the facts/news reports/etc......or as in Ed's case trying to compare it all with the Clinton/Lewinski affair....WHF????

Qtec
07-07-2007, 10:01 PM
Wolf, the ordinary man in the street sees this for what it is. Libby agreed to take the fall in return for not doing any jail time. An extreme example would be GW shooting his wife, getting Cheney to take the blame and then pardoning him when he was found quilty! IMO a pardon is for someone who is already in jail, ie doing time for his transgressions.
What GW did was to nix the American Law system which he himself has set up. Its a total abuse of power, end of story. Libby NEVER seen one day of jailtime. They are laughing their asses off because they are untouchable, beyond the Law. GW thinks he is the Law!......and the Decider.....etc.. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

This is my view on the Plame/Wilson affair.

Cheney asks the CIA to check on a report about Iraq /yellowcake. They are desoerate for ANYTHING that will support their case.
Cheney thinks they will send a CIA agent.
CIA thinks trip is a waste of time and sends Wilson- who is not even getting paid!
Wilson confirms CIA assesment. ie waste of time. Cheney office ignores report.
Govt claims Iraq/ yellowcake ect.
Wilson makes a noise.
Cheney et al outs Plame to deflect the media attention from the real Q. ie, how could they make a claim in a SOTU Pres speech when they KNEW it was not true.

To get support for war the Govt HAD to make out that Iraq was an imminent threat. Telling the folks the truth that all he had was chemical weapons left over from a war 16 yrs ago [ that were past their sell by date- totally useless] would have been pointless when you want gain support to go to war. Its no surprise to intelligent /street smart people that the damming docs turned out to be fakes!

I digress.

For me I started to get supicious when they never mentioned the A bomd directly but went over to using the term, WMD. They had no proof that S was attempting to make an Abomb so they just implied it. The same way they implied a connection between OBL and Saddam. It was another link in the fantasy chain.
I digress again.

Its all BS.

GW has reached a new low that I didn't think was possible for him.
Q...............BTW thanks for good review.............I don,t get many........
/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Qtec
07-07-2007, 10:14 PM
What can you expect when morons are elected to office.

/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

MORON (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/158960/what_are_the_10_commandments/)

Amazing. The guy couldn't flip burgers.

Bobbyrx
07-08-2007, 09:51 AM
"If you had followed the Libby trial you would know that at least 7 admin officials were involved in outing Plame." <font color="blue"> I guess I missed the part where any of them or anyone else were charged with outing her </font color>

Bobbyrx
07-08-2007, 10:01 AM
What do you not understand about the phrase "Obstruction Of Justice"
<font color="blue"> If all these other people were involved in "outing Plame" , there is no way that Libby's testimony as to what was said to whom and when should stop any further investigation if there was any proof of anything </font color>

Bobbyrx
07-08-2007, 10:07 AM
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Plame investigation was urged by the Bush CIA and commenced by the Bush DOJ, Libby's conviction pursued by a Bush-appointed federal prosecutor, his jail sentence imposed by a Bush-appointed "tough-on-crime" federal judge, all pursuant to harsh and merciless criminal laws urged on by the "tough-on-crime/no-mercy" GOP.
<font color="blue">If they knew they were guilty of the crime, why would they urge an investigation on themselves?? </font color>

Gayle in MD
07-08-2007, 11:08 AM
Hey, you can turn yourself inside out, and the entire time line, facts, judgements, and statements, and go right along with your denial of the facts. People can't give you any answers, when you refuse to acknowledge what has already been proven.

Let's try it this way, for the sake of intelligent debate, why do you think that a Federal Prosecutor would say that Libby obstructed justice, and left a cloud over the Vice President, if he hadn't had very good reason to believe that Cheney, instructed Libby, to give out classified information, knowing that Valarie Plame's identity, would be blown in the process. As the judge mentioned in his statements, that at best, gross negligence, on the part of senior officials, who either didn't bother to check, or didn't care, still amounts to a crime being committed in regards the handling of classified information, which included the very real possibility of endangering the identity of a covert agent.

Why do you think a Federal Judge would say the evidence of lies and obstruction of justice was "Overwhelming" if the case had been either flimsy, or poorly prosecuted, or there was any reason to believe that Libby didn't intentionally lie, to protect the Vice President?

The right, now, tries to frame this as partisanship, when only Republican law makers have been involved. Why? Simply to muddy up the waters. That's exactly what they always do to cover up their law breaking, or smearing of reputations, for political gain.

Twelve jurors, said guilty, of four charges, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Why do you think they convicted Libby? why did the judge call the evidence overwhelming, if it wasn't?

Here's what will happen. The oversight committee, will subpeona Patrick Fitzgerald, and his testimony will prove that Dick Cheney, launched the outing of a covert agent, as punishment for Wilson, and as a warning example to others, who might expose the administration's lies leading up to this war.

The entire matter, is about an Administration who lied us into a war, and Bush cutting a deal with Libby, to keep Libby's mouth shut! Now that is obviously irrelevant to the right wing nuts, who thought that Clinton's sex life, was fair game for partisan games, and that it was just fine for Kenneth Starr to lock up Susan McDoogle, and tell her she could stay in jail untin she'd give him some dirt on Clinton. You're the same people who hear every week about another 20 to 30 dead American soldiers, and who knows how many more arms, legs eyes and brains, gone, and still defend the liars who put them in this slaughter, and refuse to take them out, in order to try to justify having wrongly put them in, in the first place. Most of them are kids, 18 and 20 years old, and they've been left in a slaughter by a bunch of Republican Politicians, who are only willing to pull them out if they can do it in a way that will save their asses from being exposed as the heartless, stupid, criminal pieces of **** they really are.

Bottom line, you righties are hot to deny everything, because you now know that you have defended the worst president, the worst administration, the worst Vice president, the worst Secretary of State, and the worst Secretary of Defence, in history, and it's now obvious that they don't know what the hell they're doing, they lied, they have stolen, and they have broken just about every law and agreement that has come their way. They're crooks, treasonists, liars, and thieves, and the "Piece of Cake" Neocons, who said this would be a cake walk in Iraq, should be gagged, and jailed, yet there they are, still on Fox, giving their irrelevant opinions as though they ever knew what they were talking about. They didn't. The William Kristols, insanityhannity, Charles Krauthenheimers, MAN Coulters and Stuffed Limbaughs, now look just like the idiots with no common sense that they always have been.

As we all well know, the nutty right, has nothing to fall back on now. They've been duped, by an oil crook, an X alkie/druggie cheerleader, and a few thugs who did their dirty work for them. Don't expect the rest of us to think you could possibly keep up with a court case!

If the right couldn't tell the difference between leadership, and cheerleading, the least you could do now is show a little humility for such poor judgement. Bush can't continue to stall with his cheerleading, and denial. The Republicans, who looked the other way for over four years while our boys and girls were slaughtered, are now having second thoughts, IT"S ELECTION TIME, TIME TO BRING THEM HOME... WHATS LEFT OF THEM!

[ QUOTE ]
If all these other people were involved in "outing Plame" , there is no way that Libby's testimony as to what was said to whom and when should stop any further investigation if there was any proof of anything <hr /></blockquote>

This is where you righties have no central argument to justify Cheney's actions, by bringing up Armitage. There is no connection between Cheney, Rove and Libby, with the President's approval, making a choice to reveal, or confirm, or even discuss, a covert agent, with reporters, and any action taken by Armitage. Novak had two sources, not one, and the second source, was Rove, and Libby talked with Armitage, before Armitage talked with Woodward, IOW. Armitage, wouldn't have know a thing, about Plame, without the White House stirring up the waters around Valarie, saying she was "Fair Game" and such, in the first place.

Gayle in Md.
You're turn to answer questions....

Gayle in MD
07-08-2007, 11:15 AM
Do you know anything about this case? The CIA requested the investigation, not the POTUS.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
07-08-2007, 11:21 AM
<font color="red">No. You missed the part where the case hit a wall when Libby started lying to protect Cheney and Bush, it's called Obstruction of Justice. Meaning, justice couldn't be served, because of Libby's lies. Now, it can't be served, because of Bush's cover up, cummutation, to buy off Libby, and protect his own ass. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

Bobbyrx
07-08-2007, 06:45 PM
just quoting Q

Bobbyrx
07-08-2007, 06:55 PM
Libby was not the only leaker remember. There is no reason to stop just because they didn't get the answers they wanted from him. Go after Armitage, Rove, Bush, Cheney, Fleisher etc.

Gayle in MD
07-08-2007, 07:54 PM
Who do you think leaked her name to Armitage?

Armitage didn't know she was covert, but the White House knew. Armitage didn't have a motive, either, he's just a guy who the Administration knew, had a tendency to gab about what he knows, in ordcer to look important. Armitage didn't say, that wilson's wife was game. Do you know who did say that?

The case against Rove couldn't be proven because this White House has been breaking the law, using political e-mail accounts at the RNC, to cover up their illegal behavior.

Novak, has been leaked to by Rove, for decades. They have one of the closest relationships in Washington, and Rove was fired from Bush Sr's re-election compaign, for leaking a slime story to Novak, years ago.

Scooter Libby let Judith Miller sit in a jail cell for three months, before he officially agreed to allow her to reveal him as her source. Why?

Rove, Libby and Cheney, all lied to their own White House Press secretary. Why? What were they covering up?

White House aides testified that Cheney, Rove and Libby, were completely focused on discrediting Wilson. I guess we know why, since we know the president lied to all of us in his SOTU address.

Did you read what the judge said, what the prosecutor said, and the comments the jurors made? They all knew who was behind the leak, and that Libby was covering up for Rove and Cheney. They know more about the case than anyone.

Bush, admitted that Libby was guilty, that the prosecutor was professional, and that that he respected the jury's decision. Not a word about the Wilson's, and what they did to Valarie's career. No apologies.

I saw a documentary long ago, about how Rove operates. Saw a grown man cry, over how they had ruined his, and his father's lives, and reputations, in Texas, because they saw him as a man they couldn't use to do their dirty work. Their common, dirty behavior has been consistant, throughout their political lives. They stole two elections. Thumbed their noses at the whole country, the United Nations, and the rest of the world. They've broken law after law, and done so for evil purposes. And what has America gotten out of them? Not one single department in this government is functioning properly, not one.

I hope they all get what's coming to them, for what they've done to this country, to our troops, to the innocents in the Middle East, and to America's reputation, all over the world. And I hope that every damn Republican who allowed this carnage to continue, and never spoke out against what they did to our soldiers, and the lies they told, gets run out of town.

There are only two decent Republicans in Washington, Gordon Smith, and Chuck Hagle.

Gayle in Md.

Bobbyrx
07-09-2007, 07:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Who do you think leaked her name to Armitage?

<font color="blue">I thought he got her name from a memo. "I had never seen a covered agent's name in any memo in, I think, 28 years of government," Armitage said in CBS news interview. So if he was asked under oath where he found out and he didn't say Libby, then he should be in the same boat with Libby by lieing and obstructing justice. But Fitgerald didn't go after him at all.............or anyone else
</font color>

Gayle in MD
07-09-2007, 07:58 AM
If you would read the two laws involved in the matter of outing a covert agent, you'd understand why. I believe I have explained this to you several times. Also, you don't bother answering any of the question I pose, regarding the matter, which I believe, most people could easily see through.

Your focus on Armitage is off base. While I realize that the right wing media, and neocons, have used him as their point of distraction, his involvment did not meet the legal criterion in the two laws involved. He could not have outed her, because he did not know that she was secret. He admitted his mistake, apologized, co-operated with the investigation, and beheved in a lawful manner. He did not set out to out a covert agent.

The White House had the notebook of classified information, straight from the CIA, including Valarie's name, and designation, with a big red S, next to it, and the eintire notebook marked Secret, Classified. Knowledge of an agents covert status, is required in the legal questions. The Administration hastily de-classified certain parts of the NSE, to cover their asses, and did so in an extremely unprecedented manner, skirting along the edges of the legal implications, as usual, in order to obstruct justice, in their own actions.

The Special Prosecutor's investigation lead him to conclude that Libby was lying to cover up for Cheney, and "Others". Lying to legal authorities in the midst of an investigation is a felony. What they did was bad enough, the cover up, added insult to injury, in the eyes fo the court.

Bush, definately broke the law, bu did so in a way which is standard for this bunch. By de-classifying, and extending the power to de-classify, to Cheney, he attempted to skirt the law, as he has done in so many other illegal actions he has commited, such as refusing to abide by the law, by using signing statements to skirt the law.

Since you seem hell bent on defending the Administration's actions, rather than absorbing the words and actions of the CIA, which requested the investigation, the FBI, a Special Prosecutor, A Grand Jury, four Federal Judges, and a Jury of twelve citizens, I suggest you look up the laws involved. Libby lied, and obstructed justice, and hence, belongs in jail. So say all of those listed above. He did so to cover up the illegal actions and true intentions of Cheney, and Bush, when they took part in outing a Covert NOC CIA Agent. In this country, that amounts to treason, as does lying intentionally to the Congress and the Senate, to build a false case for war.


Regardless of the legal implications of all this, there should be no doubt about the low down, common, incredibly arrogant nature, and bahavior of Bush, Cheney, Rove and Libby, and others in the White House, and their usual filthy, vicious, unprecedented, behavior, and above the law mentality. The President said he would fire anyone involved. I supposed he's talked to God and decided to give himself a by, since he didn't resign, and medals to all those WH comrades involved in helping him to skirt the law, and attack two people who have distinguishedly served in Government for most of their adult lives.


Gayle in Md.

Qtec
07-09-2007, 08:36 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bobbyrx:</font><hr> Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Plame investigation was urged by the Bush CIA and commenced by the Bush DOJ, Libby's conviction pursued by a Bush-appointed federal prosecutor, his jail sentence imposed by a Bush-appointed "tough-on-crime" federal judge, all pursuant to harsh and merciless criminal laws urged on by the "tough-on-crime/no-mercy" GOP.
<font color="blue">If they knew they were guilty of the crime, why would they urge an investigation on themselves?? </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

Firstly Plame WAS covert. web page (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/)
[ QUOTE ]
NBC News
Updated: 4:24 p.m. ET May 29, 2007

WASHINGTON - An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003. <hr /></blockquote>

Secondly,
[ QUOTE ]
Criminal prosecution beat national security
After the Novak column was published and Plame's identity was widely reported in the media, and according to the document, "the CIA lifted Ms Wilson's cover" and then "rolled back her cover" effective to the date of the leak.

The CIA determined, "that the public interest in allowing the criminal prosecution to proceed outweighed the damage to national security that might reasonably be expected from the official disclosure of Ms. Wilson's employment and cover status."

The CIA has not divulged any other details of the nature of Plame's cover or the methods employed by the CIA to protect her cover nor the details of her classified intelligence activities. Plame resigned from the CIA in December 2005. <hr /></blockquote>

Got it now? Cheney and possibly GW punished Wilson by destroying his wife's career. Libby lied and blocked the investigation and he got caught. He threatned to call Cheney to the stand then suddenly he decided not to. A deal was made. HE KNEW THAT EVEN IF HE WAS CONVICTED HE WOULD NEVER SPEND A DAY IN JAIL.

Even a blind man can see this.


Q

Bobbyrx
07-09-2007, 11:47 AM
Got it now? Cheney and possibly GW punished Wilson by destroying his wife's career. Libby lied and blocked the investigation and he got caught. He threatned to call Cheney to the stand then suddenly he decided not to. A deal was made. HE KNEW THAT EVEN IF HE WAS CONVICTED HE WOULD NEVER SPEND A DAY IN JAIL.

Even a blind man can see this.


Q <hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue">I never said she wasn't covert. Libby wasn't Novak's source but no one seems to want to go after him. The CIA asked for the investigation after the Novak column and the special prosecutor was named to investigate the leak. He knew it was Armitage before he even got started so why am I blind to question this? </font color>

Bobbyrx
07-09-2007, 11:52 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Who do you think leaked her name to Armitage?
<font color="blue">
I don't know. Why don't they ask him under oath and see what he says since his leak lead to Novak's story that outed Plame? </font color>

DickLeonard
07-10-2007, 12:37 PM
Wolfdancer I am reading an article in the Jan 13 2005 of the New York Review of Books on Death in Texas by Sister Helen Prejean. It seems George W Bush the Compassionate Conservative sent 152 prisoners to Death without commuting anyones sentence even Karlya Faye Tucker. He usually spent a half hour with Albeto Gonzales going over each sentence. I think they played rummy instead even killing the retarded man with the 3 grade mentality.

Now is the time to show him the Death Penalty for his Treasonist Acts.

DickLeonard
07-10-2007, 12:48 PM
Gayle I think it should be Time to restrict the owning of Tv Stations,Radio Stations,Newspapers no more Rupert Murdocks. When the Media lies there is no hope for a free press. It is the tear in the Ballon of what we call Freedom. ####

wolfdancer
07-10-2007, 01:41 PM
Dick, he now sends more then that out each month to die....and while we are concerned more about our soldiers getting killed and maimed.....how many innocent Iraqis have been killed in order to free them......???

wolfdancer
07-10-2007, 01:52 PM
We once had a law that restricted ownership of the Media by Foreign Nationals....whatever happened to that...?
Fox reports only "managed" news....they are the spear carrier for the radical right that wants to impose their "moral standards" on everyone else...while placing themselves above such restrictions.
O'Reilly is a ****joke, and a bad one at that......I'm hoping and praying that he gets caught with his "pants down"
****** pond scum

Gayle in MD
07-10-2007, 02:36 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Armitage didn't know she was covert, but the White House knew. <hr /></blockquote>

The law states willful intent. He couldn't out her, when he didn't know she was covered. He made a mistake. All at the White House, did know. They had intent.

READ THE LAW.

eg8r
07-10-2007, 03:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
how many innocent Iraqis have been killed in order to free them......??? <hr /></blockquote> There is no reason to ask a question if you really don't care about the answer.

eg8r

MikeM
07-10-2007, 04:10 PM
We also once had a law that restricted the number of radio and tv stations as well as newspapers that one company could own. And that law was done away with by.......







Ronnie Reagan

wolfdancer
07-10-2007, 05:22 PM
Problem is I do care....
while you celebrate each new body count...all I see is a country ravaged, children being slaughtered, and the ones left, living in terror, with no chance of a safe, normal life.
And who the *** are you to be telling me what I care about????
Your just a pos agitator, with some smug, self-serving superior attitude. you never dispute any facts, news stories that someone posts....you just try to twist it around until it doesn't even resemble what the message was about.
I try to avoid reading any of the crap that you post...because rather then some meaningful discussion...it's just a barrage of insults from you. Get off of your ***** high horse...and take a clue from both Dee and Steve...whom I usually disagree with, but they express their side in a civil way, and have the respect of many others here, who haven't bought into the policies of this corrupt admin.
As we used to say...."Go p*** up a rainpipe"
not sure what that means, but it should get by the censors...

wolfdancer
07-10-2007, 05:34 PM
Gayle, are people here still disputing the fact that on orders from the WH, Valerie was "outed" to lessen the impact of the no **** yellow cake, etc...paper.
First they want to deny it....and failing that,then it is suddenly not a crime???
It's about as useless a discussion as "was Paris Hilton framed?"
Problem is we all have our own political beliefs, and don't want to believe that our side has done anything wrong. It then becomes a case of denial, fact adjustments, witch hunts by the other side....or when all is lost, and you ain't got a **** clue...bring up the Clinton/Lewinski affair....
They been milking that cow for some 7 years now....

Bobbyrx
07-10-2007, 06:14 PM
I understand the law. You are the one saying that there is all of this proof and you know exactly what happened. If all these people in the White House knew, then why not go after their testimony. Libby is not the only person that they could go after to find the truth.

Sid_Vicious
07-10-2007, 11:21 PM
Well said...sid

pooltchr
07-11-2007, 06:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Problem is we all have our own political beliefs, and don't want to believe that our side has done anything wrong. <hr /></blockquote>

Wolf,
I think the problem is that while we have our political beliefs, that there really isn't an "our side" for either of us. Personally, I don't find a lot of Democrats that represent my beliefs, and the percentage of Republicans that would fit that description is pretty slim as well.

What I seem to see is "our side" being the average Joe that just wants some security for his (or her) family, to be able to pay the mortgage, send the kids to college, and live their lives with minimal government interference. The "other side" is the people who get into office, and then think they know what is best for the people, and go hell-bent out to control the tax money and spend it as they see fit.

I think the original idea was to have "representatives" in government to represent the wishes of the people. What we have now is power-hungry people who think their election to office makes them our bosses rather than our representatives.

Case in point...the overwhelming majority of people seem to want our boarders secured. We have immigration laws in place that provide a process for others to come into our country, and even gain citizenship. Yet, the idiots in office want to tell us they have a better idea.

This country is supposed to be "for the people". That concept seems to have fallen by the wayside in favor of "government by the governors, for the governors".

I honestly don't feel that I have a "side" in politics any more.

There is a line in one of my favorite movies (The Hunt for Red October) where Sean Connery says "A little revolution now and then can be a good thing." I think he may have a point.

Steve

eg8r
07-11-2007, 07:05 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Problem is I do care.... <hr /></blockquote> If you really cared, then you would have agreed to go in and remove Saddam. Problem is...you didn't. You whined like crazy.

[ QUOTE ]
...while you celebrate each new body count... <hr /></blockquote>
I have not celebrated anything about this war and I would challenge you to find an example of me celebrating bodycount. On the other hand, finding examples of you whining is quite easy, it is every post about politics.

My guess is the rest of your post is more whining, untruths or twisted words so there is no reason to continue reading.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
07-11-2007, 08:12 AM
You just proved everything Wolf said about your pointless posting methods.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
07-11-2007, 08:27 AM
I never said I knew exactly what happened, only that one would have to be blind, and in complete denial, as you seem to be, in order to justify the idea that because Armitage, who didn't even know Plame's status, talked to Novak, whose other source, was Rove, who did know her status, that Armitage was the leaker. Faultly thinking, given that knowledge of the covert status, is a required circumstance, in the eyes of the law.

Then, there is also, in the eyes of the law, and in all cases, the issue of motive, which Armitage did not have.

The law also looks at the level of responsibility, how high a position in Government, did the law breakers have, particularly regarding their ability to find and know the facts of their failure to ensure that their actions, do not result in compromising National secuirty, resulting in putting a covert agent, at risk, and all those with whom she worked.

Then, there is also the issue of Bush's spoken word, which proved later to be just more lies, since he has not fired either cheney, or Rove, who were both involved, according to the vast documentation, which caused the judge to deem, overwhelming evidence.

The law, also looks at past behavior, in determining motive. You'd have to be living on another planet, not to acknowledge the many lies that this bunch of crooks have told to this country, and their corrupt methods, and on-going denial of facts, and illegal bahavior, and using unprecedented methods for going around the law, hair splitting their behavior, in order to commit treason.

As I have stated before, your hair splitting questions show me, atleast, that you'll rearrange the facts, either through ignorance of them, or through partisanship, any way you can think of, in order to justify the illegal, immoral behavior of this most corrupt administration in history.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
07-11-2007, 08:30 AM
Novak's sources were Rove, and Armitage, Rove knew she was covered, Armitage didn't.

Gayle in MD
07-11-2007, 08:43 AM
Gayle, are people here still disputing the fact that on orders from the WH, Valerie was "outed" to lessen the impact of the no **** yellow cake, etc...paper. <font color="red">Incredible, isn't it? The nutty right has no shame, as John Dean write, Without Conscience. </font color>
First they want to deny it....and failing that,then it is suddenly not a crime??? <font color="red">True, as Bob Woodward wrote, their in a State Of Denial,along with their leader, the chimp, Without conscience.and their arguments, are always full of Hubris,along with their case for the war, which was the Greatest Story Ever Sold, and like their cheerleader in chief, they use the same method of confusion, much like Satin is said to use. </font color>


It's about as useless a discussion as "was Paris Hilton framed?"
Problem is we all have our own political beliefs, and don't want to believe that our side has done anything wrong. It then becomes a case of denial, fact adjustments, witch hunts by the other side....or when all is lost, and you ain't got a **** clue...bring up the Clinton/Lewinski affair....
They been milking that cow for some 7 years now....

<font color="red">Very True. What I find so disgusting about the right, is that their denial of proven facts, along with their rearranging of facts, and their use of propaganda to distort the facts, is consistant from their right wing press, to the Republican Administration, to the Republican Representatives, straight down the ladder to the nutty 28 %. The all use illogical, false methods, to distort the truth, and without any connection to reality. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

eg8r
07-11-2007, 09:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
You just proved everything Wolf said about your pointless posting methods. <hr /></blockquote> Explain to me how your post is not pointless? Your methods are just as pointless, if you don't agree just reread this last post of yours.

However if wolf mentioned anything about this and you did not twist anything then my post was quite clear I missed it. No sense in reading a long-winded post about nothing. He said that I celebrate the body count. That is an outright blatant lie and a jab at my character, I would think a person who is comfortable with threats like yourself would have recognized that.

eg8r

Bobbyrx
07-11-2007, 10:14 AM
Then go after Rove....and you and I both know that if there was a way to do this, if they had any proof, they would have.

Bobbyrx
07-11-2007, 10:17 AM
PRES. GEORGE W. BUSH: "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of." Where is the lie in this? /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Gayle in MD
07-11-2007, 10:33 AM
Wrong. Rove destroyed the evidence, when he used the improper e-mail account, for performing his illegal activity.

Lack of proof, due to destroying evidence, and using a fall guy, does not mean the law wasn't broken.

Also, a promise to Take care of a treasonist in the White House, who blew the cover of a covert agent, doesn't usually mean commuting their sentence for obstructing the indictments, convictions, and/or impeachments, of the others involved, in this case, Rove, Cheney and Bush himself.

The Special Prosecutor, launched an investigation into the illegal outing of a covert CIA agent. he stated, Scooter Libby Obstructed Justice, and lied to a range of Federal investigators. A judge and jury, agreed with him. No one else has been charged with the crime, because Libby, obstructed the process of the law.

Spin it any which way you like, your grabbing at straws to support illegal activity by this White House, and making yourself, IMO, a person who supports illegal activity, out of blind, partisan and misplaced loyalty, along with delusional theories to back up your false assertions.

Also, in another statement, Bush said anyone involved in leaking the information, would be fired. It's quite clear that Rove, Libby and Cheney, were all involved. He didn't fire any of them. He lied, yet again.

BTW, are you sure your not related to Eg? You seem to think a lot alike!

/ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

eg8r
07-11-2007, 12:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. Rove destroyed the evidence, when he used the improper e-mail account, for performing his illegal activity. <font color="red"> If his actions were illegal why isn't someone going after him for the illegal actions? Is it as simple as no one can "prove" anything? If so, then he is innocent until proven guilty. I am not giving him a free ride on purpose in this case, but if everyone wants to really do due diligence in bringing justice to this administration why do they continue to trample over a very simple legal position of the presumption of innocence?</font color>

Lack of proof, due to destroying evidence, and using a fall guy, does not mean the law wasn't broken. <hr /></blockquote> Why not go after him for obstructing justice? Where is the real proof that he destroyed the evidence? If there was real proof he destroyed the evidence put him in jail.

eg8r

wolfdancer
07-11-2007, 01:03 PM
Ed, GFY....again you have twisted everything around, you're just a real ***** a-hole and not worth the **** time it takes to type out a reply to your ***** insane take on anything.
Nobody could find anything logical in your post, nobody.
Again just GFY.....

wolfdancer
07-11-2007, 01:16 PM
Is this guy really for real?????
Read what he wrote...and the logic escapes me...he's *****
delusional.
I once thought the posts were written by some 14 yr old, to just stir up some s**t here.....now I believe they are written by a man with the brain of a 14 yr old...his engineering degree aside....might be an idiot savant????
I've seen him do this so many times...try to change the meaning of what people write, to make himself look good..AND
this is even more telling....this allows him, he believes to now judge us morally.....it's the same thing many religious fanatics use to prove they are righteous...that works until there own foibles are exposed..... Do me a favor...please...
Tell Ed to GFH...thanks!!

eg8r
07-11-2007, 02:52 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Ed, GFY <hr /></blockquote> Truth hurts doesn't it. Your history proves me correct.

No one is surprised by your childish response, I wish you would have chosen to act like an adult.

eg8r

DickLeonard
07-11-2007, 04:05 PM
Wolfdancer a 5 million dollar donation to the Republican party during the first Bushes Presidencey and that law bit the dust. Even Rupert got moved to the top of the list ahead of all the Mexicans and is now a citizen.

We also had a law restricting the President and Vice from being from the same state. That was solved by Vice changing his address to Montana. What a waste of money passing a law that all one had to do was change PO Boxes from one state to another.####

eg8r
07-11-2007, 04:08 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Wolfdancer a 5 million dollar donation to the Republican party during the first Bushes Presidencey and that law bit the dust. <hr /></blockquote> It must have not been that important or enforced to get bought off for such a low amount. Those Bushies don't care about a measly 5 million dollars. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

Gayle in MD
07-11-2007, 07:48 PM
I'm sure they think OJ is innocent, too. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Do you think either of them ever even read the prosecutor's statements?

Like I said, some time ago, when people line up to vote Republican, we should hand them a paper children's menu from Denny's, and make them prove they can connect the dots, to make a picture! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Qtec
07-11-2007, 08:19 PM
<font color="red"> If his actions were illegal why isn't someone going after him for the illegal actions? <font color="blue"> LMAO. I guess you missed it. The investigation was stopped in its tracks because Libby wouldn't give a straight answer.[ something endemic in this Admin] How can you have an investigation if people lie to you [ a Special Prosecutor] and you do nothing about it? What if everyone you question lies to you and you do nothing about it? An investigation would be pointless!</font color> Is it as simple as no one can "prove" anything? If so, then he is innocent until proven guilty. </font color>

<hr /></blockquote>
eg8r

LMFAO. What a hypocrite you are.

Q

Qtec
07-11-2007, 08:23 PM
Wolf, don't let eg8r get to you. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Its not worth it. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I know this from experience! /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
jesus said it,
"Father forgive them for they know not what they do.".........or something like that! /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif



Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif..not particuarly religious but more 'Christian' than any of those SOBs in the WH.

eg8r
07-12-2007, 06:03 AM
[ QUOTE ]
An investigation would be pointless! <hr /></blockquote> The whole point behind the investigation was pointless.

eg8r

DickLeonard
07-12-2007, 08:10 AM
Eg8r that was just the down payment, getting the dimwit elected President was payment in full.

I am still made as hell with Major League Baseball for not appointing him Commissioner. That decision cost us Trillions, could you imagine him tucked safely away in Cooperstown. I always joke what was on his resume that prevented him from getting that job but made him eligble for the Presidency.####

wolfdancer
07-12-2007, 09:59 AM
Q, it just felt good letting a little anger out...AND I couldn't let that asinine post of his go unanswered....which is why I try to avoid his posts. It's an old debating trick that he uses...make wild, crazy accusations, to get the other side to defend itself against those charges, and thus avoid the real issues....
They might call themselves Christians in the WH.....but they sure don't practice the covenants of Christianity.
They are totally corrupted by both power and greed, and responsible for the thousands of deaths and ruined lives of our soldiers.

wolfdancer
07-12-2007, 10:01 AM
he's grasping at straws....while denying the facts...

Bobbyrx
07-12-2007, 11:48 AM
"the take care of" was a real quote, but I posted it as a joke I thought you might appreciate, thus the /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif