Report: Libby withheld key info from investigators.
By on Oct 11th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Report: Libby withheld key info from investigators.
“In two appearances before the federal grand jury investigating the leak of a covert CIA operative’s name, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, did not disclose a crucial conversation that he had with New York Times reporter Judith Miller in June 2003 about the operative, Valerie Plame.” (National Journal)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Libby will be the fall guy… the White House will throw him to the lions in exchange for no more indictments within the administration… of course, it sounds like Fitzgerald doesn’t cut deals… let’s hope that’s the case…
October 11th, 2005 at 4:29 pmNot to parse words for the administration, but when you say “withheld” do you mean “he was asked and said there was no such conversation” or “he was never asked and he didn’t volunteer the information”? Latter seems less damning than the former.
I can’t imagine that Fitzgerald didn’t ask, however.
October 11th, 2005 at 4:38 pmRove -> indictment pending (we hope)
Libby -> indictment pending (pretty sure)
This goes well beyond what the meaning of “is” is.
Fortunately these greedy war mongers are arrogant enough feel they are above the law. Fitzgerald may prove them to be oh so human. I hope Rove and Libby don’t mind spending time in jail.
October 11th, 2005 at 4:42 pmGiven all the info that has come out recently pointing to a balkenization in the WH — Prez office vs VP office — it’s possible that libby will turn on rove. This is speculation, but I think we are about to see a really interesting game of fingerpointing ala the Watergate.
October 11th, 2005 at 4:43 pmThe FBI HATES lies of ommission as much as lies of commission. I’m sure he was asked questions like “Have you ever talked to a reporter about naughty things you ought not too have like TOP SECRET information?”
October 11th, 2005 at 4:52 pmLibby will be charged with obstruction of justice for effectively keeping Miller in jail. Everyone else is going to get off scot-free (I would say there is a tiny chance that Rove will be indicted).
October 11th, 2005 at 4:53 pmGet the latest PlameGate news, briefings, timelines, statutes and other essential documents in the Rove/PlameGate Scandal Center.
October 11th, 2005 at 4:54 pmYou people need to understand that deliberately outing a spy tasked with protecting the country from WMDs in order to smear her husband who was telling the American people the truth about WMDs is far less threatening to our nation’s safety and security than a president’s marital indiscretions.
I’m not sure how, but it just is. IT JUST IS.
October 11th, 2005 at 4:55 pm“Given all the info that has come out recently pointing to a balkenization in the WH — Prez office vs VP office — it’s possible that libby will turn on rove.”
I find it more likely that Rove just turned on Libby. Fitzgerald was just talking to Rove the last few days.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:06 pmWhat will be interesting to to see how the cadre of Bushies holds together once the fit hits the shan. It’s easy to be loyal when everyone is fat, dumb and happy at the trough; it is much harder to remain loyal when it involves actually taking heat for a group’s illegal activities.
I say throw their asses in a typical Max security federal prison. These *are* the law and order types – so have them experience the end result of both.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:09 pmThis stuff is boring. Let’s talk about how Clinton got a blow job.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:11 pmI wouldn’t be surprised if they put it on Cheney. He’s a likely culprit to begin with, and, even if he’s just a fall guy, there’s not much left to Cheney these days in terms of political future. I would be more surprised, but not astounded, to see it put on Bush, since he looks like a lame duck at this point, but this would only work if Cheney could escape scrutiny for what George gets impeached on.
If “roots turn together”, then putting aside the above, if Libby is hung out to dry, and propositions Miller to “turn together”, who are they turning on? Who else is turning? Are they turning on Rove, or, in concert with Rove, who has always been about self-interest, are they turning on Cheney and/or Bush?
October 11th, 2005 at 5:12 pmThe question is the same as in Watergate: “What did they know, and when did they know it?” I think Dubya and Dick know way more than they’ve led us to believe. If the evidence exists to back that theory up, however, does Fitzgerald have the courage to indict them too? I hope he does, but I doubt he has the guts to.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:13 pmwhat does theora mean by “you people?”
(kidding!)
October 11th, 2005 at 5:14 pmOh hey, did I forget to mention that?
You know, that whole conversation I had with that one reporter about that spy lady? What!!? I did?!? My bad, dude. But hey, no harm no foul, right?
October 11th, 2005 at 5:14 pmBye, Scooter.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:16 pmWithholding evidence that contradicts with statements could easily be turned into a ‘perjury’ indictment. This is what they basically convicted ‘Martha’ on, and is certainly worth a perp walk considering the shoe is on the other foot now…
October 11th, 2005 at 5:21 pmLibby is definately going to be charged with obstruction along with his attorney (Tate). Millers attorney (Abrams) put that nail in the coffin.
More than likely Libby will also be charged with outing a CIA operative.
Libby = two indictments, his lawyer = one, there will be plenty more.
The Miller testimony has blown this case wide open.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:21 pmA new generation of Americans will learn the meaning of the word ‘nolo-contendre’.
Republicans are good for the education of Americans.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:22 pmScooter is toast. I only hope that Rove gets toasted along with him, and more than a few others as well.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:25 pmBuzzflash says there is a feud between Andy Card (White House) and Rove (Bush loyalist) which was reported by Howard Fineman.
While I will be happy to see anyone from the admin. go to trial, I really want to see all the criminals pay for their crimes, not just Libby.
How ’bout them Aspen roots? Did the leaves change yet?
October 11th, 2005 at 5:27 pmJeez, I am old enough to remember the nolo contendre from Spiro Agnew, and the entire Watergate fiasco that brought down Nixon later, but this is far more dangerous to America, its Constitution, its foundation, with the exposure of a CIA agent, and the cover up to the feds – all for foolish partisanship. Not unlike Watergate.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:30 pmThis is politics at its worst; it involved war, lives, treasure, credibility, and international stability.
In light of all of this criminality, Clinton’s BJ is laughable.
One of the many ironies in all this is that this case is much larger than a stained blue dress. An entire CIA NOC was revealed and agents in the field died as a result.
If Fitzgerald is as today’s editorial (commented on elsewhere on this site) states, then the truth will be revealed and any number of people will need to pay for their involvement and crimes.
Anyone remember the rigged game shows? And anyone remember what DA Joseph Stone was only interested in uncovering the truth? What he found was that so many people so easily perjured themselves. That was just a simple rigging of TV games. Now we have something far more serious. So perjury in the Plame case will carry far greater weight, and with it far greater consequences.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:32 pmNo a Libby fan, however, just because he did not mention these conversations does not necessarily mean he is any deeper doo than he found himself before this week. Keep in mind, to be able to name the date and time of your conversations 6 months ago, especially when you are incessantly dishing out borderline indictable piles on everyone under the sun 24/7/365, is quite difficult. He could easily state that he forgot that particular conversation.
If he stated unequivocally that such a conversation did not take place is a different story. Then he might be in a little deeper than before.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:38 pmSo Scooter is the reason I had to be spend months without the love of my life. Throw him to lions, or whatever you do in your country…
October 11th, 2005 at 5:44 pmReading all these insightful comments makes me realize this is like Watergate all over again. My only question: does it go to the guy at the top. I was outside the White House the day Nixon flew out in the Presidential helicopter. Is it too far out to immagine another similar Presidential exit. Okay, I just getting carried away!
October 11th, 2005 at 5:48 pmtbhull, don’t forget that Libby and his lawyer are saying that they never cared if Judy Miller testified yet they insinuated that the release to testify was coerced. Thats why Miller sat in jail. That in itself is obstruction. Judy Miller is testifying now that she didn’t feel she was released by Libby to testify.
Personally, I think her life was threatened by the thugs.
October 11th, 2005 at 5:49 pmRove turned on Libby, and Libby will turn on Rove, and Fitzgerald will nail them both. He’s ballsy enough to do it, and these hacks own a lot of Washington, but not all of it…
October 11th, 2005 at 5:51 pm#24 JCGOW, did this outing result in deaths to other operatives?
October 11th, 2005 at 6:01 pmI think that there should be more focus on Cheney, I think he’s at the root of it all, a real war profiteer. The outing of the CIA agent is just the tip.
October 11th, 2005 at 6:01 pm[...] Think Progress reports Libby withheld key info from investigators. [...]
October 11th, 2005 at 6:06 pmThese guys change the subject each minute. Scooter and Rove and Bush if he knew should be tried for treason for this. Wilson was the best choice for the job, having been the Ambassador there previously, and also to Iraq during Desert storm. This guy is a patriot’s patriot. He was in Baghdad protecting members of his and the other embassies when Desert Storm began and Saddam had threatened to kill every foreigner in Baghdad. This guy is almost above reproach, in my mind. He has every reason to hate Saddam. He told the truth to the American public when the administration LIED to us. He is going down in History if all of these crooks get what is coming to them. Death Penalty for whoever pulled this shit. 2000 dead Americans are a direct result of Rove and Libby’s actions to Smear this guy who was just telling us what they dont want us to hear; The truth
October 11th, 2005 at 6:10 pmLet’s just hope and pray Libby squeals before he is killed. Let’s see… will it be a heart attack? Car accidents? Plane? Watch Libby die before the truth ever gets out. Then again, he’ll probably keep his mouth shut if he knows what good for him and his family.
http://members.cox.net/cowicide/
October 11th, 2005 at 6:11 pmScuttlebutt has it that lots of folks are angry with each other inside the fortress.
Reportedly when Rove discovered that leaking Plame’s CIA link to the press was a potentially treasonable offense, he turned to Cheney and LIbby and said they were going to have to clean things up because they started the whole thing. If true, that suggests that Cheney was directly involved in the strategizing on Wilson and Plame.
Second rumor (and again these are hearsay reports) indicates that Cheney is “fed up with Bush,” saying he cannot reach decisions and when he finally does, leaves Cheney to clean up the mess with a stance that “It’s in the hands of the Lord” as far as he is concerned.
Also seems clear that one of the ongoing sources in all of this has been Powell and the folks allied with him. Powell calls his UN presentation a low point of his career and apparently is disgusted that despite repeated attempts to vet all of the information for his presentation (including repeatedly ordering some of the zealots from the Iraq Information Group to cut stuff he said was clearly crap, too much crap remained in the final product and he deeply regrets having been “used” by the folks he repeatedly counseled to go slow on an Iraqi invasion.
Looks like a circular case of finger pointing.
October 11th, 2005 at 6:19 pm#33 Very good point! Seems everybody is forgetting that the real story here is that Wilson is a hero. Wilson tried to prevent our nation from going into an illegal war.
The outing is small potatoes compared to the lies BushCo told the American People.
Impeach Bushie Now!
October 11th, 2005 at 6:23 pmStill a mystery is how the name of Valerie Plame came up in the first place. If it came from the CIA they are playing both ends against the middle, which they are very good at by the way.
Remember, Novak said he did not know her name, that it was given to him by “people in the White House”. The plot thickens. Just a hunch, but I dont think Rove has the clearance then to pick up the phone, call the CIA and ask them if Wilsons wife was an agent.
So – who did. Had to be someone with more power than Rove had at the time. Could be Bush, could be Cheney.
I hang my hat on both of them. Remember, when they were interviewed about this matter they used “high powered criminal attorneys”. Maybe Miers knows something because Bush might have gone to her, and she told him he needed a criminal attorney.
Oh well, it will all come out in the wash in a few days.
October 11th, 2005 at 6:40 pmAbsolutely the TIP OF THE ICEBERG. Imagine if there’s reason to go after Cheney Energy docs. Everybody runs for cover then. The WHOLE SYSTEM is corrupt……and that’s why the deafening SILENCE from the corporate media.
October 11th, 2005 at 6:43 pm#30 – Emphatically, YES! Deaths did indeed occur based on the revelation that Valerie Plame was a NOC working out of a front company named Brewster-Jennings & Associates.
October 11th, 2005 at 6:45 pmper·ju·ry
n. pl. per·ju·ries
1. Law. The deliberate, willful giving of false, misleading, or incomplete testimony under oath.
October 11th, 2005 at 6:51 pm2. The breach of an oath or promise.
If the evidence exists to back that theory up, however, does Fitzgerald have the courage to indict them too? I hope he does, but I doubt he has the guts to.
Comment by BlastFurnace — October 11, 2005 @ 5:13 pm
I don’t think he has the authority to indict the Prez or VP; that’s why Nixon was considered an unindicted co-conspirator. Only the Congress and Senate can impeach a President, and then only for high crimes and misdemeanors. I think this qualifies, and there are some Repub congressmen and Senators that will be hard pressed to make a case for them if they are unindicted co-conspirators. I think by the time that happens, we the people get to have our say to our elected officials in an election year. Should be interesting!
October 11th, 2005 at 6:51 pmWell, that nut didn’t fall far from the tree.
October 11th, 2005 at 6:52 pm#38 gets the prize.
check it out:
October 11th, 2005 at 7:04 pmhttp://www.kahak.bolgspot.com
sorry,
that’s
http://www.kahak.blogspot.com
October 11th, 2005 at 7:05 pmThis shows my ignorance of the law, but after any trials that might occur, can’t the preznit just pardon all or most of them? Especially with a friendly SCOTUS?
October 11th, 2005 at 7:06 pmSusan,
Libby’s refusal, whether insinuated or real, to relase Miller from her confidential communications with Libby itself is not obstruction, otherwise, the 1st Amendment’s protection of the press is worthless.
If a prosecutor could indict a interviewee with obstruction simply based upon the interviewee’s refusal to release a journalist from a promise of confidentiality, even in the face of a court order compelling the journalist to relase the substance of the interview, the 1st Amendment, among others, would be gutted. Second, obstruction of justice requires an affirtmative act or an act of comission, not an act of omission, such as refusing to do something.
With that said, with other evidence of obstruction/perjury, Libby’s refusal to release Miller and his cryptic communications to Miller releasing her could have some probative value, though not determinative of crime standing alone.
October 11th, 2005 at 7:14 pmtbhull:
>> Keep in mind, to be able to name the date and time of your conversations 6 months ago, especially when you are incessantly dishing out borderline indictable piles on everyone under the sun 24/7/365, is quite difficult. He could easily state that he forgot that particular conversation.
October 11th, 2005 at 7:24 pmHow annoying. The comment system simply ate the actual substance of my post. What I meant to say in response to tbhull was:
Scooter, like every West Wing employee, has an agenda (a physical diary) in which every meeting is recorded. He has a call log that keeps track of every phone conversation. He has e-mail that is archived. He has a groups of secretaries who manage these things for him.
He is expected to review all of these records before testifying. To claim he has not done so is disingenuous. That means “perjuring oneself.”
October 11th, 2005 at 7:28 pmLegal question:
Suppose Cheney resigns, pleading ill-health or being chronically mean or something, can Bush appoint a replacement? Or does the office stay empty? If Bush can choose someone does that person have to go the confirmation route first?
Let’s speculate: Condi, Harriet, Laura, Bush I? No, not Dad. Jeb, maybe? Hmmmm
October 11th, 2005 at 7:44 pmSid Fish,
Did Fitzgerald subpoena these diaries/logs?
e-mail was clearly requested and received by Fitzgerald.
October 11th, 2005 at 7:55 pmMarcy,
Following Nixon’s lead (appointiing Michigan Senator Gerald Ford to replace the indicted VP Spirow Agnew), Bush could appoint the fine Senator from Tennesssee, Bill Frist.
October 11th, 2005 at 8:05 pmtbhull, read this portion of the article. Libbys lawyer (Tate) adamantly stated to Fitzgerald that he gave Miller a waiver.
Miller’s lawyer (Abrams) states that Tate felt the waiver was coerced. In other words Tate says he did give a waiver but he didn’t. To me thats obstruction.
“Mr. Libby did voluntarily provide your team with the written waiver immediately when it was presented to us, well over a year ago”, Tate wrote to Fitzgerald. Tate also asserted that he repeatedly “assured” Miller’s attorney Floyd Abrams that “Mr. Libby’s waiver was voluntary and not coerced and [Miller] should accept it for what it was.”
However, on September 29 Abrams wrote to Tate challenging that assertion. Abrams charged that Tate had indicated to him that Libby had considered the general waiver by its very nature to have indeed been coercive. “In our conversations,” Abrams wrote to Tate, “you did not say that Mr. Libby’s written waiver was uncoerced. In fact, you said quite the opposite. You told me that the signed waiver was by its nature coerced and had been required as a condition for Mr. Libby’s continued employment at the White House. You compared the coercion to that inherent in the effective bar imposed upon White House employees asserting the Fifth Amendment. A failure by your client to sign the written waiver, you explained, like any assertion by your client of the Fifth Amendment, would result in his dismissal. You persuasively mocked the notion that any waiver signed under such circumstances could be deemed voluntary.”
He reluctantly signed the waiver to save his job, period. Justice had nothing to do with it.
October 11th, 2005 at 8:06 pmWhile Judith Miller is sitting in jail she is being told thru her attorney that Libby really does not want her to testify. Obstruction.
October 11th, 2005 at 8:11 pmSusan,
In your opinion would Libby be obstructing justice if Libby simply and consistly stated, even after the judge ordered Miller to reveal her source and all her appeals were exhausted, “I do not release you”?
At that point it is Miller’s choice to ignore the judge’s order, which she did at her peril. The press has to make that choice, not Libby. In my opinion (and we all know what that is worth) Libby cannot be forced to release Miller, when a judge has already ordered her, release or no release, to spill the beans. The Judge’s order is enough. Libby can say “I release you” just as he can say “I do not release you”. Either way, Miller has to speak.
Forcing him to say the “I release you” does not subject him to obstruction charges if he refuses.
If this voluntary/coerced release is an issue for Miller, why would Libby’s release of Miller under a real threat of obstruction charges be any less coerced than a release given because Libby feared the loss of his job. Methinks the latter threat proves far more coercive than the former.
October 11th, 2005 at 9:07 pmOoops!
Last sentence of prior post should read:
“Methinks the former threat proves far more coercive than the latter.”
October 11th, 2005 at 9:10 pmI’m not a lawyer tbhull but the article clearly states that Libby would have lost his job if he didn’t release Miller. The “coerced” waiver came long before Miller went to jail.
My opinion on the obstruction is: Libby did sign a waiver but made it very clear to Miller’s attorney that it was coerced and he wanted her to keep her mouth shut.
October 11th, 2005 at 9:46 pmWhy? What did she have to say that would incriminate him? Meanwhile a judge orders Miller to jail with Miller thinking she has to stand by her obligation to conceal her source. Which we all know now that the orignal waiver was satisfactory and she could have prevented jail and Fitzgerald could have gotten the testimony that he requested. Libby obstructed Fitzgerald from having access to Miller.
I guess the real question is tbhull, if Miller had a waiver over a year ago then why did she go to jail? What was in it for her?
October 11th, 2005 at 9:51 pmNow that is a good question.
What are your thoughts on this?
My take is she has more than one very important source in the White House on this and many other issues.
October 11th, 2005 at 10:02 pmMiller believed before the Court order that she, under the 1st Amendment, did not have to reveal her source. Libby could have beleieved the same and exercised his right not to release her by staing that his “waiver” was not necessarily purely voluntary.
The Court then tells Miller her idea of the 1st Amendment is legally incorrect. It was Miller’s choice not to testify at that point. Libby is not then required to make his release clearer, though he evetually does to some degree. He still gets indicted imo.
They want him to flip on big Dick Cheney. He will not imo.
October 11th, 2005 at 10:09 pmHmmm, that fits in with the latest news on Huffington POst — the WSJ is looking into a link between Cheney and the leak; that would mean Libby might be pressed to flip.
October 11th, 2005 at 10:12 pmSince she never actually wrote a story about Valerie Plame I think she was the funnel to spread the leak. Maybe they were going to say they only talked to her and that Novak and Cooper got their info from someone else. Who knows? They probably don’t even know what they said anymore because of all the lies on top of lies swept under a rug woven with lies.
October 11th, 2005 at 10:18 pmThe problem with omitting the Jun 23, 2003 meeting is that it is a crucial fact. It is not “cumulative” as, say, a third meeting in late July would be. The entire point of the conspiracy investigation is “did they conspire to get Wilson BEFORE Wilson’s OpEd hit the street.” This, when acompanied by a single criminal act by even a single conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy, becomes big-time felony stuff. And leaking classified material of any kind is still a crime; even if it is seldom prosecuted as such, it certainly qualifies to “perfect” a criminal conspiracy.
So this “omission” is as big a deal as they get in Grand Jury land. Separately, there is a duty to testify with “the whole truth.” Also, consider Scooter’s love letter to Judy; “I’m sure you already know that all of the other reporters have freely discussed our JULY conversations.” More evidence rebutting any protest of “an honest mistake.”
Even if Fitz never asked about a “June 23″ conversation, he no doubt asked for “any other relevant information regarding the Wilson trip and the White House reaction to it” or some such catch-all; he is a professional prosecutor after all. Usually this would elicit a response that is the truth (data dump) or a lie (there is no more information). A lie makes the “omission” into a perjury.
October 11th, 2005 at 11:57 pm#20, its actually spelled – Nolo contendere.
October 12th, 2005 at 12:02 amI agree intentionally failing to mention the 6/23/03 is a big deal, however, Libby will never admit his failure to mention was intentional.
He’ll simply say I forgot about it. If all the prosecutor has is that Libby failed to mention this meeting to support a perjury charge, then a Libby indictment will not follow imo. Perjury, though serious, is weak standing alone and usually says the prosecutor tried and tried but could not get anything with meat.
This commission can be used as cummulative and probative evidence to support more numerous and substantive charges, perhaps including perjury. This will happen to Libby imo.
October 12th, 2005 at 12:25 am#57 susan:
I read that judy sat in jail because she wanted to strike a deal to narrow the scope of her testimony to the plame leak. why, I am not exactly sure.
October 12th, 2005 at 12:25 amJudy’s husband is a reichwing NeoCon publisher. Who knows why she did what she did.
October 12th, 2005 at 1:03 amI think Fitzgerals doesn’t have the guts to go after the President and the VP. I think he will punk out and only go for Libby. Small fish after all and he will just cross the street and put on a lobbyist suit and make more money then he ever dreamed possible. I am afraid Fitsgerald doesn’t have the guts to leave Bush alone in the white house without traitor Rove.
October 12th, 2005 at 1:06 amstephen,
Unfortnately I fear you’re right – but then again apparently the investigation is widening based on 9/11 and the Iraq war case. We’ll see how much he ACTUALLY does.
October 12th, 2005 at 1:57 amI say send Rove, Libby, Cheney, Bolton, whoever to the same prison and stack ‘em in naked pyramids, sic dogs on ‘em, the whole Gitmo country club experience.
October 12th, 2005 at 2:00 amHe reluctantly signed the waiver to save his job, period. Justice had nothing to do with it.
Libby has no excuse. He should have left his job if he was unwilling to testify, not dishonorably sign a waiver to cooperate.
I don’t know the timeline, but one wonders if Ari refused to sign such a waiver, and instead offered up his resignation (which would have been phased out so not to seem conspicuous). If so, at least Ari did the honorable thing, and best acted in his own interest, and that of his family.
October 12th, 2005 at 2:02 amDid anyone working for the White House refuse to sign the agreement? This is an interesting question…and, if they didn’t, what would this have indicated to the FBI investigators?
October 12th, 2005 at 2:03 amOne wonders what Larry Franklin, a key player in the Office of Special Plans, knows about the White House Iraq Group, and Rove, Libby, Bolton, and Miller’s role in it.
Or, what FBI officials may have inadvertently learned from him while tailing him on the AIPAC spy scandal.
Is Franklin “turning”? Do the “roots” possibly include Franklin and perhaps even Bolton?
One thing we know…Franklin is facing major time, and has recently struck a deal and guilty plea. The same day Miller was walking, and Libby was musing about roots turning…
October 12th, 2005 at 2:22 amMy hat is off to those providing this vigorous discourse. It is refreshing!
My comments will be focused on the fundamental issues of the need for an honest press and the state of the american mind.
It may be possible that the owners/managers of the New York Times could be indited based on extending the deception of their “reporting” supporting the Iraq War. Perhaps this could include obstruction of justice (lost notes for Judy, etc.). This question and the questions enumerated above need to be addresed by professionals.
It is the media that has fed lies to the american people allowing they to still believe 911 and Iraq were connected. We need to procecute the meda to to the full extend of the law and other nonviolent means to ensure long term accuate reporting. We also need to change the brainwashing of our children in schools. Instead of teaching them to be reflexibly obedient to authority, we need to teach discernment and the value of personal integrity.
Regardless of the inditments to come, the media and education must be transformed if we are to succeed in reversing the tide of corruption, murder, and torture.
I feel that the diverse organizations need to work togeher to make this dream come true.
October 12th, 2005 at 8:22 amIsn’t this all likely to end in presidential pardons…especially if Rove is the one. I mean, is a man to whom loyalty is so important … and by that comment, I mean, Bush….going to let Rove risk jail (or even trial, which is not in Bush’s interest).
October 12th, 2005 at 9:29 amThe question was asked earlier about who Bush would appoint to VP in case Cheney resigned.
The Speaker of the House is next in line and would become VP. Bush would not just appoint anyone, he must elevate the speaker.
October 12th, 2005 at 10:48 amWeren’t some Presidential legal protections weakened
as a result of Starrs’ mucking about?
Howbout a class action lawsuit brought against these bozos? “The people of the U.S. vs Bush and Toadies?”
I love the smell of flop sweat in the morning!
October 12th, 2005 at 11:45 amHay! flint, a good idea, if our impeachment doesn’t work fast enough, how do we accomplish this.? Woulden’t that be something. Of course we have a bit of a mess with Roberts and maybe Miers in the court. Off point here ..The white house mouth piece is getting grilled about Miers and their relegious selling point…Sick wh bast***……Blessings
October 12th, 2005 at 1:49 pm[...] Scooter Libby lied to FBI. [...]
October 12th, 2005 at 8:36 pmImagine if all this was happening without the internet to discuss and exchange information? Thanks be to Al Gore! Just kidding.
October 12th, 2005 at 9:07 pm[...] Scooter Libby lied to FBI. [...]
October 12th, 2005 at 9:08 pmPablo in Mexico,
You are incorrect. If VP goes down, for whatever reason, the Prsident appoints the replacment.
Check history. Nixon’s VP, Spiro Agnew, had to resign while serving as VP. Nixon appointed Michigan Senator Gerald Ford to serve as VP.
October 13th, 2005 at 10:01 am