Home / Libby Indicted

Libby Indicted

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

libby_scooter.jpg CBS News reports that the scuttlebutt was correct: The federal grand jury investigating the White House leaking of the identity of a covert CIA operative has handed down indictments against vice-presidential chief of staff Lewis “Scooter” Libby. The man known as Dick Cheney’s alter-ego faces charges on five counts: two counts of making false statements, two counts of perjury, and one count of obstruction of justice. Arraignment will come at a date to be determined. Libby immediately handed in his letter of resignation; according to CBS News, he has left the White House.

White House senior adviser Karl Rove was not indicted today and continues on in his position. He may still be in legal jeopardy, however, as he remains under investigation.

More is sure to come, and this opens up scrutiny of how the White House maneuvered in order to invade Iraq.

But this ought to serve as a lesson. When a grand jury asks questions, tell the truth. What is interesting is that Libby isn’t being charged for what he said about Valerie Plame — the indictment comes because the grand jury determined that he was not being honest, that he tried to cover up what happened. That is the same thing that brought down Bill Clinton, Martha Stewart, and now, Scooter Libby. Honesty, certainly when one is talking to a grand jury, is the best policy.

Powered by

About NR Davis

  • Eric Olsen

    thanks Nat – you are quick! This whole milieu is startign to feel more and more like Watergate, I have to admit

  • Well, on the brightside of things, having a name like “Scooter” in the political arena is now a death knell.

    Scooter? For crying out loud, I thought those preppy names went the way of the alligator back in ’88.

    Forgive me, but I refuse to have either pity or respect for a man who goes by the name “scooter.”

    “Bubba” on the other hand screams ethics and morals!!

  • “Scooter” and “Bubba” stand for the same thing, apparently: Deception.

  • Ahhhh, maybe that’s what I meant Natalie. All those silly nicknames are hard to keep track of. Tricky Dick’s a personal fave – but it would be much cooler if it had a literal meaning.

    Who doesn’t like dicks that can do tricks?

  • JR

    I think his first name is Irving.

  • “I” stands for “Indicted.”

    “Who doesn’t like dicks that can do tricks?”


    No, I’ll take that back: I love ones that disappear.

  • Shame on him forgiving up a perfectly respectable name like Irving for a goofy name like “Scooter”. What a douche.

    As for disappearing dicks, well that depends on where they disappear to.

    Yikes, I better get back to studying before this gets off topic.

  • They can disappear to where they like, so long as the somewhere is far away from me.

    And here’s a segue: Same goes for Scooter.

  • As Jimmy Neutron’s friend, Sheen might say “Libby-licious”!

  • gonzo marx

    Dateline: the Oval Office…

    reports state that Bush and Cheney were found this afternoon, crying like schoolgirls in each other’s arms…

    then Laura entered the room and stated…
    “don’t cry boys, we can get you a new Scooter”

    film at 11


  • It’s always the guy you never heard of.

  • Cunning Linguist

    Ah I see today’s news has kept all you rabid liberal kooks out of the welfare lines and instead posting here today.
    Didn’t bag the the big ones though did ya guys. Better keep your fingers crossed that Cheney and/or Rove will be indicted at a later date huh?

  • Mr. Linguist, it would be a waste of time to engage with you.

    Moving on to something worthwhile…

    Gonzo Marx!!!

  • Nancy

    No, dear – we’re hanging out for the Big Guy: Bush Indicted, details at 11. But thanks for the best wishes, lol.

  • tommyd

    Libby indicted? YEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

    One down, about 7 more to go! (including Dubya)

    This is what happens when a CONSPIRACY takes place and ends up backfiring. Couldn’t happen to a “nicer” bunch of people.

    I am ashamed of the US Government.

  • gonzo marx

    why thanx, Ms. Davis, for the warm welcome Home…

    it is interesting that most of the neocon theofascists aren’t stepping away from their insider trading on chinese child labor companies or supervising their illegal alien house servants, to comment on this….

    i wouldn’t hold my hope up for much more than these INdictments…however Rove is still under investigation…and if enough is determined to hand down Indictments on him…well, then i will be one happy gonzo…

    i’m still hoping to see someone take the hit for actually breaking the Law and outing the covert Operative…

    yer humble Narrator sez that you, gentle Readers, shall see spin from the neocons such as has yet to be heard/seen before…

    fun stuff, eh?


  • Nancy

    Gonzo – we missed ya, babe. Where’ve you been? I think CL is already working on neofacist spin on another thread here. Haven’t really seen the rest out yet. Maybe it’s a little harder this time around because Fitz is a lifelong Republican & they have to figure out how to make him out to be anti-Republican and/or corrupt.

  • I think the White House / Republican establishment reaction to the indictment and ongoing investigation will be truly fascinating. How the conventional wisdom changes based upon this reaction will be equally fascinating.

  • tommyd

    Gonzo is right:

    We ain’t seen nothing yet. Listen for the “Mother of all Spin Zones” from the Neocon Zionist Fascist Media belching out of a tv or radio near you soon.

    Get out the disinfectant now.

  • Zionist?

  • Indictment trifecta:

    1. Scooter Libby
    2. Tom Noe
    3. Marion Berry

    If your name ends in a long-“e” sound, watch your ass.

  • Cunning Linguist

    Yay Scooter was indicted. Maybe he will get the same treatment slick Willie got, a slap on the wirst and a big fat book deal.

  • >>Ah I see today’s news has kept all you rabid liberal kooks out of the welfare lines and instead posting here today.
    Didn’t bag the the big ones though did ya guys. Better keep your fingers crossed that Cheney and/or Rove will be indicted at a later date huh?<< Relatively unlikely given that this Grand Jury has been sent home and a new grand jury would have to hear all the evidence again. If that happens no one is getting indicted until the administration is almost over. Be happy with Lying Libby who could have just told the truth and gotten a slap on the wrist, cause that's all there is folks. Dave

  • Indictment trifecta:

    1. Scooter Libby
    2. Tom Noe
    3. Marion Berry

    Aw, Councilman Barry getting in legal trouble is old news. Here in DC we don’t even look up anymore.

  • gonzo marx

    hurm..let’s see…

    lying about a blowjob…


    lying about “outing” a covert Intelligence operative that specialized in WMD…

    is it just me, or is this like comparing a mouse to a wooly Mammoth?

    yet one took over 4 years and over $42 million tax dollars in a partisan witch hunt…and today’s bit was by a Republican prosecutor doing his job, by the numbers

    and remember…for those that want to think it is all “over” now…

    Fitz did say Rove was still “under investigation”

    curiouser and curiouser…

    your mileage may vary


  • Nancy

    LOL, Michael J. – ! That’s the truth. Gotta be the only mayor in the world with an inside knowledge of sniffing cocaine, doing time, then coming back & resuming his political career. What a clown. I can’t believe he keeps getting re-elected. He was trying to finagle a deal with the IRS to avoid a jail & a fine – guess he couldn’t swing it? I’d like to see him do time for his cheating. He just never learns to ever do anything the honest way; he’s always trying to cut corners … and getting caught.

  • Right-wingers are already moving on their talking point, and here it is: I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby was “unknown” to most Americans, so his indictment isn’t a big deal. It’s just perjury, after all, and that’s not much of a crime (unless you’re Bill Clinton).

    What’s hilarious about the “unknown” angle is that Libby was one of the founders of the group Project for the New American Century and was, in fact, one of the architects for planning the Iraq war.

    Strangely, others seem to think the investigation is over.

  • Scott — I agree. What many don’t see or are unwilling to see is that this may be the very very beginning.

  • nugget

    eric: you are right. This is crazy, and it’s only the beginning.

  • Clinton lying about a bj is only the tip of the iceberg. If he is willing to lie about that then what else did he withold from us???

  • Anthony, you can talk about Clinton all you like, but the real question now is what did Libby also withhold from us?

  • Nothing, because nothing happened accept him lying to protect his country. Let’s crucify him.

  • According to the Prosecutor, he lied about telling reporters that Wilson’s wife was a covert CIA operative.

    He betrayed the sanctity of CIA anonymity.

    How is that “lying to protect his country”?

  • RogerMDillion

    “Didn’t bag the big one”

    No, but that’s because Libby lied and obstructed justice. You seem happy about it like you got away with something when you should be embarrassed about the stain on The White House and the country. Your partisan rantings show how small-minded your side is, but keep bringing up Clinton. I’m sure that will be Libby’s defense.

    Obviously, a lawyer as smart and accomplished as Libby wouldn’t have lied if he was only going to get a slap on the wrist. He also had plenty of time to go back and correct his testimony, which he didn’t.

  • No, Libby lied about where he got his information. Cheney gave him the information. But it turned out that there was nothing illegal in what the information was about. Nevertheless, he lied about it to protect Cheney, our Vice-President. He pulled an Oliver North.

  • I take it, Mr. Grande, that you didn’t hear or read the special prosecutor’s statements on what happened. Mr. Dillion is correct: Because of Libby’s lies, the grand jury couldn’t get to the truth to the extent that would permit them to indict anyone other than Libby. For now.

  • RogerMDillon

    Nancy, don’t even bother. If Nalle doesn’t understand, there is no way AG will.

  • Nevertheless, he lied about it to protect Cheney, our Vice-President. He pulled an Oliver North.

    Said as though it was a heroic thing to do.

  • >>No, Libby lied about where he got his information. Cheney gave him the information. But it turned out that there was nothing illegal in what the information was about. Nevertheless, he lied about it to protect Cheney, our Vice-President. He pulled an Oliver North.<< No, Libby apparently lied just because he likes to lie and lie and lie. He didn't just lie a little, he made up a big whopping confused story about what happened which was contrary to what 7 other witnesses told the grand jury. He was wrong about who told him, when they told him and what he told reporters and when. And yes, Cheney told him about Plame, but do did multiple other government figures. And there was nothing wrong with telling Libby about Plame, because he had the clearance to know about her. The fault was in telling reporters about it. Dave

  • Dave — Do you really believe that Libby lies because “he likes to lie”?

    Don’t you think that if he could have fallen on his sword early on to end the proceedings, he would have?

    Now, we’re left with trickle trickle trickle of Scandal News for this administration — the kind the media loves, just like liberal-loving, pinko commie media skewewed Clinton in the 90s day after day on far lower stakes — that smacks of Watergate and will only shed the administration in a negative light for many many months to come.

  • Imagine if any of you were under this much scrutiny for what you said when and to whom. You’d all be in pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

  • There was nothing illegal about telling the reporters the way he did. There was nothing illegal about him having this information. What was illegal was him lying to protect Cheney and our country even though it was a good deed.

    Let’s Crucify Him!!!

  • Suss: admit it, you just wanted to write “pound me in the ass prison.”

    PS: I love that movie too.

  • Anthony — So you’re saying it’s okay to break the law as long as you’re protecting your boss?

  • Nancy, Barry isn’t mayor anymore. Hasn’t been for six years.

  • It’s easier to use in context than “PC load letter.”

  • Eric, no it is not o.k. to break the law. He will go to jail, pay a fine or what ever the hell he has to do. But I am saying that he is an American hero just like Olly North.

  • Okay Anthony, you’re welcome to an addition to your Martyrs of the Right club.

    Suss: Highly recommended next reference…

    “No talent ass clown.”

  • ok..let’s have a look for a second here..

    Ollie North…a hero?

    this was the guy that made a deal with the Mafia to import cocaine to raise money to buy guns frmo Iran (while they were holding the hostages) to sell to the Sandanistas (which Congress passed a law against) and then lied about it, shredded documents…copped a plea, and kept lying in front of Congress after he had been granted Immunity from further prosecution…

    if that is considered to be a “hero” then i mentally vomit at the mere conception of what woudl be considered a “good guy” by those Standards…

    as for Scooter et al…

    as the Prosecutor stated, his lying and obstruction was enough to stop further Prosecution…so obviously, Scooter did his “job” there, and is the sacrificial neocon(Scooter was recruited into the neocons by Wolfowitz when Wolfie was his teacher in college..Wolfie is a Disciple of Strauss , who created the neocon “philosophy” including the “Noble Lie”)

    time will tell how this all plays out..i highly doubt Cheney will ever be directly implicated…hence the purpose of Scooter’s sacrifice…but Rove ain’t out of the woods yet

    we shall see what the next grand jury brings, eh?

    ( oh yes, and to Nancy…i’ve been under the weather, and not much for news or writing..starting to be a bit better now…thanx fer Asking!)


  • troll

    good to read you again Gonzo – you’ve been missed


  • Olly North and Reagon are both heroes.

    You need to get your info straight. We did not give to the Sandistas (communists). We gave to the anti communist rebels, the Contras, the good guys.

    Congress would not let Reagon give to the Contras. But we had to give to the Contras.

    Iran was fighting Iraq. It would have been a good thing for Iran to win. So we sold weapons to Iran and used those funds to support the Contras.

    The Contras won thanks to Reagon. Nicaragua is not a Communist country today, thanks to Reagon. If Sandista would have won they would have spread to the rest of Central America. So Reagon also saved a few other countries.

    But back in the States heat was coming to the Reagon adminstration. So to save the country from turmoil and protect the hero, Reagon, Olly North lied. He sacrificed himself for the country. He is a hero. I stand by my statement.

  • troll

    *Iran was fighting Iraq. It would have been a good thing for Iran to win. So we sold weapons to Iran and used those funds to support the Contras.*

    now that’s a stunning re-write of history…

    but AG’s underlying point is correct: US intelligence agencies have funded operations through illegal activities


  • Congress would not let Reagon give to the Contras. But we had to give to the Contras.

    You have consistently advocated breaking the law (and violating the Constitution) for things you consider good or important.

    So I take it you advocate a lawless country? Such a position is that of an anarchist.

  • First of all, if Reagan is your hero a nice way to show your admiration of him would be to spell his name right.

    If North is a hero for breaking the law under the ends justify the means argument then by that logic it’s ok for the military and police to torture and kill innocent people because the ends – something good might come of it – would justify the means.

    Oh, wait, you probably agree with that too.

    Hmm, better think of a new analogy…

  • The whole Republican dirty-tricks machine gets unmasked in the end. Lie, cheat, steal and break the law. DO whatever it takes to win. Enron-style morality. If I don’t get caught, then it isn’t wrong. Which would be fine if they didn’t sell themselves as stand-up Christian goody-two-shoes.

    It’s FITZMAS!!!!

  • to Ant G…

    mea culpa, mea maxima….it was the Contras…i lay the blame on pain and medication adding to my already addle pated imbecility

    that being said…

    if you look closely , you will find that the eagan administration was on the Iraqi side of that War….even going as far as sending Rumsfeld over to sell WMD’s (chemical, conventional) to Saddam

    talk about playing both sides of the fence…

    Wallace makes an excellent point..it seems that these “born again” politicians cannot grasp the simplest lession of the Passion…that the Ends NEVER justify the Means, but that the Means are the End in and of themselves…

    nuff said?


  • oh yes…and troll, my Brother of Myth..

    is there room under that Bridge?


  • RogerMDillon

    For Anthony:

    How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live.
    -Henry David Thoreau

  • demabloggery

    if you look closely , you will find that the eagan administration was on the Iraqi side of that War….even going as far as sending Rumsfeld over to sell WMD’s (chemical, conventional) to Saddam
    Actually,as much as I hated Reagan, that’s actually a myth. The US never sold any weapons to Iraq. While Iraq may have bought dual-use chemicals from the US like they did with The Euros, it was mainly the Russians and the French a few others who sold billions of dollars worth of weapons to Hussein.

  • MCH

    Re comment #12;
    “Ah I see todays news kept all you rabid liberal kooks out of the welfare lines and instead posting here today. Didn’t bag the big ones though, did ya guys? Better keep your fingers crossed that Cheney and/or Rove will be indicted at a later date.”
    – Cunning Linguist

    CL, it doesn’t surprise me that a Chickenhawk like yourself would hold up draft dodgers like Cheney and Rove as role models.

  • No, I do not advocating breaking the law.

    First, the Iran-Contra deal was never proven (thanks to Olly North).

    Second, there is a time when we have to do what is right. We had American lives in Lebanaon at stake and we had a Communist country trying to expand influence in Central America. The Democrat controlled congress wouldn’t let us take care of these two problems even though the had to be taken care of. So we took care of it.

    Third, Wallace, how can you say that Reagon did the Iran-Contra to win??? He did it behind the scenes. No one was supposed to know. How would he get votes by doing that???

    He did a good deed behind the scenes, what a modest man!!! Can you imagine Clinton or Carter doing that???

    Fourth, Scott, how is torturing and killing innocent people equal to spreading democracy and freeing American hostages???

    Fifth, I do not advocate anarchy. If caught North and Libby should be tried and pay for breaking the law. They would be martyrs. If I advocated anarchy then I would also advocate legalization of Marijuana and support abortion(click on my URL if you don’t know my position of abortion).

  • MCH

    BTW, welcome back Gonzo…one ex-swabby to another! Nice to see your rationale on BC again.

  • There you are MCH. You still haven’t answered my question: What do you think about Clinton hiding from the Draft???

  • MCH

    What’s that noise? Sounds like a mosquito…oh, it’s only you, Grande.

    Bill Clinton was a draft dodger, yes, using student deferments to evade service. Which is why I never voted for him (George Bush, Sr. in 1996 and Bob Dole in 2000).

    Since you’re interested in draft dodgers, here’s a few more:
    Dick Cheney (7 deferments), John Ashcroft (student deferments), Karl Rove (student defermemts), Tom DeLay (student deferments), Lewis “Scooter” Libby (student deferments), Paul Wolfowitz (student deferments), Bill Bennett (student deferments), Newt Gingrich (student and family deferemtns), Dick Armey (student deferments), Rush Limbaugh (medical deferment, pilonydal cyst on ass), etc, etc, etc.

    It is surprising how many of the self-proclaimed macho pro-miltary blowhards ducked the draft when it was their turn to serve; but now that they have the power to do so, have no qualms sending those braver than themselves to their deaths in Iraq…

    BTW, isn’t it past your bedtime, Grande?

  • demabloggery

    Third, Wallace, how can you say that Reagon did the Iran-Contra to win??? He did it behind the scenes. No one was supposed to know. How would he get votes by doing that???
    I didn’t say that, but since you dragged me in here, I will comment on it. The hostages were released on inauguration day. You can believe it is a coincidence, or whatever you want.

  • MCH, I believe a student deferment is o.k. Clinton was a different case though: link

    Clinton also took part in Anti-war demonstrations, overseas and at home, which ultimately led to the Communization of Vietnam (I believe we won the Vietnam war, but failed one objective).

  • Wallace, yes, the hostages were freed on inaguration day (it might have been a coincidence).

    But what about the Contra part of the deal??? The public wasn’t supposed to know about that part. That was a modest good deed. Something a Democrat President is incapable of.

  • I think the Big Picture for Anthony is to try to talk about past Democratic administrations and change the subject while current bad news besets his beloved Republicans.

  • Eric, I only mention the Iran-Contra deal. You guys made it a full fledge discussion.

    I will discuss Libby for you:

    He lied to protect the adminstration (like North). He will and should be convicted, but will and should go down in history as a hero.

    Eventhough it turns out it was unnessary since no laws were broken, he did lie to protect others and sacrifice himself.

    I also believe that there will be no more idictments since no laws were broken.

    If there are any more indictments then there will be some acquittals.

  • “I believe we won the Vietnam war”

    And you believe that GWB “is one of the greatest Presidents EVER.”

  • If no laws were broken, why would Libby have to lie himself into an indictment?

  • Or simpler, if no laws were broken then why is he indicted?
    He’s indicted because he broke the law.

    That’s not nothing.

    And why are people bringing up Clinton now? What does he have to do with whether or not laws were broken?

  • Anthony — My point is, in part, that you or I or anyone outside the inner circle of the White House can know which, if any, laws were broken. Libby was clearly caught in the lies for which he was indicted. It seems very likely to me that he was trying to cover for something else going on and someone(s) involved.

    We may not find out what really happened, but what we do know is that Libby may go to jail for up to 30 years for lying to a grand jury about matters of national security.

  • Maybe it was something else. I don’t know. I believe every administration does stuff behind the scenes.

    I should know this, I read alot about Organized Crime and I know about several deals the Mafia has done with past administrations. And that is just the Mafia there is probabally so much going on that we don’t know about.

    Libby lied about his source. It turned out that he didn’t need to lie because nothing was wrong with what happened. We now know that. I don’t see where “something else” would fit in this.

    i doubt anything Bush, Cheney, Rove or Libby has done behind the scenes but help national security.

    I will say that that women that Rove supposedly “leaked” was hurting national security. She was lying about what our little freind Saddam was doing in Nigeria to make our president look bad.

  • Scott, Eric’s question is more relevant and it makes more sense but I will answer both.

    Eric, that is just the thing. At the time he lied Cheney and Rove, everyone thought, were in trouble. And how do we know that there wasn’t more to it…???

    Scott, no laws were broken except Libby lying about something that turned out to be legal.

    Also Scott, the Clinton thing was unfinished business between MCH and I.

    Bennett, we did win the Vietnam War.

    If we did not enter the war the entire Southeast Asia region would be answering to Communist Dictators as we speak. The Gooks would have influnced out, but we weakened them and showed force.

    We did fail in liberating South Vietnam though, but that was only one objective.

    P.S. George W. Bush IS one of our greatest presidents.

  • I believe every administration does stuff behind the scenes.

    This is okay with you?

    I will say that that women that Rove supposedly “leaked” was hurting national security. She was lying about what our little freind Saddam was doing in Nigeria to make our president look bad.

    You equate “hurting national security” and making “our president look bad”?

    We don’t live in a dictatorship, Anthony. People, even at the highest levels of government, have to abide by the rule of law. To advocate differently is to advocate lawlessness, anarchy, and despotism.

    I doubt that’s what you’d really like to see.

  • No I am not O.K. with every administration going behind the scenes.

    But it ii something that just happens. There are cetain things that need to be done that the country wouldn’t understand. Like the Iran-Contr deal.

    But you are right. This is not a Dictatorship. Which is why when or if the administration is caught there could and should be an effort put into getting to the bottom of it to keep the administration from going over board in under the table dealings. It is called “checks and balances.”

    I think it is dirty and underhanded for an administration to do things without us knowing unless it is a life or death situation and it is the only way to solve a life or death situation.

    The Iran-Contra deal was the only time I believe that what the administration did was justified and O.K. The Bush administration hasn’t done anything under the table that we know about or have any idea about.

  • You can’t have it both ways, Anthony. Either a government can break the law or it can’t. Who knows what “goes on behind the scenes” that hasn’t been fully sussed out, including the leak case.

    That kind of moral relativism is contrary to what it means to have a nation of laws.

  • The Bush administration hasn’t done anything under the table that we know about or have any idea about.

    Libby was indicted for lying and obstructing justice. Therefore, we don’t know what’s “under the table.”

  • We know what Libby lied about, right??? We know that the whole “leak” thing was not illegal, right??? Go back to the drawing board and cook up something else.

    Good Night, Eric.

  • The Vice President’s Chief of Staff just resigned after being served with indictment that included five counts of perjury and obstruction of justice.

    I didn’t cook up a thing, Anthony.

  • bhw

    If lying about blow jobs under oath is impeachable, then lying about anything under oath is indictable.

    It’s the character question, remember?

    And if lying about a stock trade that itself doesn’t result in a charge is good enough to send Martha to jail, then lying about a CIA agent leak that itself doesn’t result in a charge is good enough to send Libby to jail.

    [You think Martha will be giving Libby any pointers on how to survive in the klink?]

  • bhw

    The Bush administration hasn’t done anything under the table that we know about or have any idea about.

    Then why are they lying?

  • troll

    Gonzo – plenty of room down here and a tasty bullshit stew too…AG has been most productive of late with his revisionist histories


  • Eric, Libby will probabally be convicted. But he wasn’t your main goal. You guys wanted either Rove or someone hire up and a HUGE leak case. Instead you guys got someone a little lower on a not so big case. That is why I said go back to the drawing board and cook up something else.

    Libby claims that he didn’t remember what happened two years ago. So he says he wasn’t lying, he just didn’t know. He might even be acquitted.

    Bhw, you got to remember that Clinton was never convicted. They let him go because if we got him it might disrupt the country. Us Republicans weren’t blood thirsty, we thought what we did out.

    Libby lied about something that, at the time, was under investigation.

  • Anthony, you’ve exhibited a pattern of making vast assumptions about things you can’t pretend to know about.

  • Well, Eric, I thought the point of Blogcritics was to allow people to express their opinions.

  • You’re certainly entitled. Some opinions — by you, by me, by everyone — are more informed than others.

  • Plus, Anthony, Mr Berlin was not interfering in your expression of your opinion. He was simply expressing HIS opinion that your opinions are not sufficiently substantiated.

  • RogerMDillon

    Libby was lying. “I don’t know” is a legitmate answer in a deposition. He is an attorney and would know that. Also, he would have had an attorney who would advise him of that, and Fitzgerald would have told him that as well. Nobody wants people guessing.

  • Yes, that’s why I think “I didn’t remember it correctly” defense is in no way going to fly.

  • bhw

    That and the fact that he repeated the false statements over and over again on the record. He had plenty of time to go back and say he actually wasn’t sure he was remembering correctly. Instead, he continued to tell the same story, AFTER turning over the copious notes that contradicted his very testimony.

  • Libby lied. He will go to jail or pay a fine or get off (I don’t know the punishment for perjury, Clinton got off).

  • bhw

    Anthony, post under one name, please.

  • MCH

    Isn’t it true that [edited]

  • RogerMDillon

    Well, MCH, he has at least admitted to “not having Intercoarse[sp] with the computer.”

  • MCH

    I think [edited]
    What do ya think, bhw?

  • bhw

    MCH, I think you should behave. 😎

  • Bush’s chickens come home to roost:poll

    Latest poll reported in Washington Post Oct 30 shows Bush administration is plummeting in public opinion. A combination of events are dereailing Bush’s second term. Bush’s chickens are coming home to roost. The indictment of Cheney’s Chief of staff is just the tip of the iceberg. Combined with the Iraq debacle and the inept handling of Hurricane Katrina, the ethical issue is now posing major problems for Bush and his cronies.

  • Spam is spam.

  • MCH

    Re comment #98;

    OK…(lower lip protruding)

  • Sometimes, I’d like to say what I really [self-edit] but then I reconsider.

  • How are you guys able to edit your posts?

  • You can edit your own posts for up to 48 hours after its published, Scott. After that, contact an editor about making changes. If you have a problem with a comment, you should also contact the appropriate section editor.

  • Scott Butki

    Sorry, I should have said how can you edit comments, not posts.

    Like here:
    I think [edited]
    What do ya think, bhw?

  • bhw

    Commenters and BC members can’t edit comments, only the editorial team, Eric and Phillip, etc. We get rid of spam, phone numbers, etc. with it, and a handful of us are authorized to edit comments that violate the policy.

    But Eric B was just pulling your leg.

  • Isn’t there a section about editing policy somewhere?

    Re Suss waaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in Comment 45: Barry isn’t DC mayor anymore but he is a DC councilman, therefore an elected official.

  • Nancy

    Yes – Eric, would someone please set up a POLICY site or blog that could run permanently? I’ve been called recently on some pretty mild stuff, told it was “against policy”, but I’ve never seen any policy any where, & I’m getting tired of guessing. Thanks.

  • Nancy, it’s that big ol’ red text right above the comment box.

  • Nancy

    Thanks, Matt; my bifocals ain’t what they used to be; tiny red letters did not register.

  • David

    The grave Libby indictment is more proof of Bush’s (and Tony Blair’s) massive fraud to justify the illegal, unprovoked and aggressive invasion of a practically defenseless Iraq that was no threat to the US or Britain. Their fraud was based on a massive campaign of fiction, deception and misrepresentation, which included the forged “Iraq wants to buy uranium from Niger” document that set in motion the events leading to Libby’s indictment.

    Patrick Fitzgerald’s dogged approach should worry the Bush administration and the warmongering neo-conservatives. This is already the worst presidential crisis since Nixon’s Watergate and Reagan’s Iran Contra. And Fitzgerald’s investigation and its fallout are not done yet. Remember that at least Karl Rove remains under investigation. Fitzergerald is also looking into the forged Niger document.

    The White House has already lost one of its top three officials in Libby. But others including Rove, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld may be gobbled up by the unraveling scandal exposing their conspiracy of lies to start an illegal war. Bush’s deceit about going to war is not only an abuse of power. It is a federal crime under the US Code Section 371 which prohibits conspiracies to defraud the United States. This is a far worse fraud in scope and consequences than other frauds such as Enron or the Watergate break in. As such, this scandal can open the floodgates, and end up being far worse than Watergate.

    Libby’s indictment and the Iraq war are connected. The Fitzgerald investigation into Libby’s crimes was a consequence of the Bush administration’s dirty tricks campaign to cover up another possible set of crimes against US and international law. It’s Bush and Blair’s fraudulent behaviour, fraudulent rationale for war and conduct of the war itself that are the far greater crimes. In addition to their war crimes and crimes against humanity against Iraq, “to initiate a war of aggression… is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime, differing from all other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” according to the Nuremburg Charter that convicted the Nazi leaders. The Geneva Conventions and UN Charter were also violated. As well, the US War Powers Act was violated when Bush gave Congress false information to for US military action against Iraq.

    The Acting Attorney General gave Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald “all the authority of the attorney general” to investigate and prosecute “violations of any federal laws related to the underlying alleged unauthorized disclosure.” What if it turns out that the amateurish forgery was done by Cheney’s office or Sharon’s office or the Italian intelligence working at the behest of Cheney’s office? What if Cheney is caught lying as a witness during Libby’s trial? What if illegal activities by the White House Iraq Group are exposed? What if a deeper inquiry or its fallout reveals that the Bush administration manipulated or misrepresented the prewar intelligence to start a war? If Fitzgerald found evidence of violation of “any criminal laws” he is required to investigate and prosecute.

    Regardless, a special prosecutor should be formally appointed to investigate the Bush administration’s lies and deceptions about the war. As well, the Senate Intelligence Committee must complete Phase 2 of the investigation of whether the Bush administration manipulated or misrepresented the prewar military intelligence.

    At minimum, the fact is that Bush and Cheney’s closest White House officials, Libby and possibly Rove, lied to FBI agents and/or a grand jury. For Libby, his serious crimes can tally up to 30 years in prison. Bush and Cheney’s closest White House officials leaked the identity of an uncover CIA agent as part of their dirty tricks campaign to silence whistleblowers and punish an official who had exposed the Bush administration’s misrepresentations to the public. That behaviour alone is unpatriotic and unethical, if not treasonous. Libby had actively gathered information on Joe Wilson and his wife, and spoke to a number of people about what he knew outside and inside the White House. Among his sources was Vice President Cheney who told Libby that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA in the counterproliferation division. Experienced officials such as Cheney and Libby, both of whom dealt extensively with the CIA, should be aware that CIA agents working in the counterproliferation division are usually undercover agents.

    Fortunately, there is the possibility that the Bush administration may not even be around to pardon Libby (if he’s convicted) when Bush’s presidency is ending, which they will probably do otherwise. Criminals, when convicted, should not be pardoned and let off.

  • Dave Nalle

    >>Criminals, when convicted, should not be pardoned and let off.<< You should take that one up with Bill Clinton and Mark Rich. Dave

  • David

    What Clinton did, though wrong, is irrelevant to what I said about Libby. Libby’s likely crimes are much worse than Rich’s. In addition, just because one criminal got pardoned in the past doesn’t mean that another criminal — this a far bigger criminal — also has to get pardoned. Republicans should do the right thing, and not look to Clinton as the convenient model when things go wrong.

  • RogerMDillon

    “You should take that one up with Bill Clinton and Mark Rich.”

    And Rich’s attorney at the time, Scooter Libby.

  • It’s amazing to me that people still try to bring up Clinton.

  • what’s amazing about it eric? it’s a known fact that only democrats in office can commit genuine crimes.

    republicans never, ever, do wrong.

    i swear, they could catch dick cheney and president bush in the back room giving condoleza rice a brazilian wax and the response would be: “please shut up you america-hater”.

  • That’s quite an image, Mark!

    But yeah, you’d think the hypocracy would become at least somewhat self-evident at some point.

    But then you realize: nope, it’s really not.

  • Steve Moss

    The real president Cheney and his sidekick Georgie could be caught on TV giving Condi a Brazilian wax, but they and their neocon minions would still deny it happened and label the both of you as “conspiracy theorists”. After all, both Cheney and Bush have busy schedules and can’t remember whose’s shaver was used. Likewise, if one of their their neocon cabal committed mass murder, they’d still demand he be pardoned because some handicapped old man was pardoned for a parking violation.