Libby Indicted, Resigns

DawnCt1 said:
The investigation of a non crime. The only one who should be investigated is Joe Wilson, who has repeatedly been proven to be a liar.
Just the kind of attitude that led to Libby's indictment - those that expose us must be silenced. Always spouting talking points
 
bsnyder said:
A question for you, that I've never seen asked. Why do you think Joe Wilson waited until July to publish his NYT Op-Ed? If he was so concerned that the White House was "manipulating" the Niger intelligence, in the President's January SOTU speech, why didn't he speak out then and there?
Why do you think he waited until July? Learn the facts; read the indictment. Whoever is feeding this talking point to ya'll is misleading ya'll as usual
 
Further to the point that political accountability remains for matters not addressed through the legal process, Sen. Rockefeller is now calling Sen. Roberts on actually completing the promised investigations. Roberts was actively trying to cover Admin. perfidy on these issues, and the political climate looks like he won't be able to maintain that role
 
sodaseller said:
Amazing to see a professional prosecutor with integrity after Starr, isn't it?
Why is it that when a special prosecutor is investigating Republicans he is credited with professionalism and integrity, while a special prosecutor investigating Democrats is accused of partisanship, unprofessional behavior and dishonesty? :confused3
 

Tigger_Magic said:
Why is it that when a special prosecutor is investigating Republicans he is credited with professionalism and integrity, while a special prosecutor investigating Democrats is accused of partisanship, unprofessional behavior and dishonesty? :confused3


Because they behaved very differently. Let's looka at a few differences. Fitzgerald sought to my knowledge, one expansion of jurisdiction, and he doesn't lie to get it (Starr did - the Vernon Jordan supposed tape), and he didn't even go there. His office didn't disseminate a lot of salacious leaks for political purposes. He didn't put out a report which was intended to get every politically damaging detail out that was irrelevant to whether a crime was committed. One thing is for not known yet, but I bet he doesn't lose the case he brings - Starr was 0-4 in trials (one he got reversed on appeal and retried with success). No eveidence,a nd I doubt there will be, that Fitzgerald has set up back channel leaks to partisan Democrat type, the equivalent of the "Elves". Many more
 
sodaseller said:
Logic suggest that the outing was at Cheney's behest. Anyone that followed the war between the OVP and the CIA in that timeframe knows that to be true. Even after all this time, few have understanding of the basic facts

Logic suggests? That could just as easily read "Democrat fantasy suggests". And Libby is not charged with outing her. The indictment never says outing her was a crime.

Lying to the grand jury certainly is.
 
sodaseller said:
Why do you think he waited until July? Learn the facts; read the indictment. Whoever is feeding this talking point to ya'll is misleading ya'll as usual

I know why he waited until July, and I suspect you do to. Why don't you take a stab at it?

The timeline of his op-ed has nothing to do with the indictment.
 
This about sums up where I am in the Plame matter (and he's a Democrat, imagine!) I'll let Lanny have the last word for me for the rest of the weekend - I'm headed out of town. Ya'll have fun without me.

Op-Ed Contributor
New Scandal, Old Mistakes

By LANNY J. DAVIS
Published: October 29, 2005
Washington

FOR those of us who lived through the Clinton White House, it's déjà vu all over again.

The indictment against Lewis Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, by the special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald presents a challenge in political-crisis management not just for the White House, but for the Democrats as well. And based on recent evidence, both are falling into the same old mistakes.

First, each side seems unable to resist applying a double standard, doing and saying exactly what only recently it criticized the other side for doing and saying.

Even before yesterday's indictments, Howard Dean and the Democratic National Committee were accusing the Republicans of being responsible for a "culture of corruption." But I remember the outrage within the Democratic Party when Republicans rushed to the microphones to accuse the Clintons of "corruption" over Whitewater, the F.B.I. files, the travel office, campaign finance and so on - all issues that turned out to be rabbit holes without any findings of guilt, much less indictments. In the end, using an isolated scandal to tie up an entire administration only hurts the nation (and tends to come back to haunt the scandal-mongering party).

Equally remarkable, some Republicans are now suggesting that perjury is not such a big deal. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas said last weekend that perjury before a grand jury is only a "technicality," comparing Mr. Fitzgerald's investigation to that of Martha Stewart, "where they couldn't find a crime and they indict on something that she said about something that wasn't a crime." (To their credit, the editorialists at The Wall Street Journal had the intellectual honesty this week of admitting that perjury is perjury.)

Second, both sides seem too quick to attack the motives of their adversaries rather than dealing with the facts. Already we hear Republican leaders suggesting that Mr. Fitzgerald has "lost his way" or is "criminalizing" ordinary politics. I often wonder whether those of us in the Clinton White House who attacked the motives of Kenneth Starr, the Whitewater special prosecutor, and tried to demonize him personally would have been better off if we had focused solely on his professional misjudgments and his disproportionate expenditure of time, effort and money.

Similarly, the Democrats are playing up the idea that White House officials may have endangered national security in playing hardball politics. Well, I can remember all the times I picked up the phone and talked "on background" to reporters, "pushing back" against rumors damaging to President Clinton and citing information that I thought was "out there." I don't remember ever worrying about whether the facts that I felt were public knowledge might have been classified. But even if I had, I would probably have rationalized that anything I had heard on the grapevine couldn't possibly be a state secret. If every political aide was prosecuted for those kinds of conversations with the press corps, I'm afraid there wouldn't be enough jails to hold us.

Third, both sides seem to believe that deny-deny-deny is the only option - rather than dealing with the facts as they are, accepting responsibility as quickly as possible, and moving on. Certainly, in retrospect, most of us who remain great believers in the Clinton presidency wish that the Monica Lewinsky matter could have been concluded much earlier, so that the last two years of the administration could have been more productive and fulfilling for President Clinton and the country.

Now President Bush must do something that for him, it seems, is the most difficult task: admit a mistake. First, he must send his press secretary, Scott McClellan, into the White House press room to apologize for his misleading the American people - probably based on incomplete or inaccurate information he was given - when he denied involvement by White House officials in the disclosure that Valerie Wilson was a C.I.A. officer.

More important, President Bush should follow the ultimate rule of White House damage control: the buck stops here. He should admit that this entire mess could have been avoided had the White House, including the vice president, criticized Ambassador Joseph Wilson openly and directly, rather than whispering "on background" into the ears of certain reporters that his wife was responsible for sending him to investigate possible Iraqi attempts to buy uranium in Niger.

And then, after reminding everyone that Mr. Libby is entitled to the presumption of innocence, Mr. Bush should focus on the people's business and the far more serious problems facing America.

The best result of this latest scandal, and the hypocrisy and finger-pointing exhibited on both sides, would be for voters to say, "A pox on both your houses," reject the scandal culture and gotcha politics of both parties and seek new politics of common cause, collegiality and the public interest. The alternative is that most people will conclude that in American politics today the only standard is the double standard, and the cycles of conflict and rancor will continue.
 
bsnyder said:
I know you don't care. You don't care about anything other than nailing Republicans. You proved that with your statements about Ronnie Earle and the Tom Delay indictment.

Let me see if I can put this is in language you can understand.

I don't want to nail Republicans: Just the money launderers, the perjurers, the insider traders, the ones who obstruct justice, the ones who lie to grand juries, the ones who fabricate WMD intelligence and caused the deaths 2010 Americans, etc.

Whoa, you're right............I do want to see Republicans nailed. :rotfl2:
 
DawnCt1 said:
The investigation of a non crime. The only one who should be investigated is Joe Wilson, who has repeatedly been proven to be a liar.

You gotta stop listening to Pill-Popping Daddy Limbaugh. :rolleyes:
 
Tigger_Magic said:
Why is it that when a special prosecutor is investigating Republicans he is credited with professionalism and integrity, while a special prosecutor investigating Democrats is accused of partisanship, unprofessional behavior and dishonesty? :confused3

Because Starr was rabidly partisan, unprofessional, and dishonest........and Fitzgerald isn't.
 
bsnyder said:
This about sums up where I am in the Plame matter (and he's a Democrat, imagine!) I'll let Lanny have the last word for me for the rest of the weekend - I'm headed out of town. Ya'll have fun without me.

Forget about Lanny Davis, I'll let Ann Richards have the last word: Stick a fork in him, he's done. :rotfl2:
 
MizBlu said:
Let me see if I can put this is in language you can understand.

I don't want to nail Republicans: Just the money launderers, the perjurers, the insider traders, the ones who obstruct justice, the ones who lie to grand juries, the ones who fabricate WMD intelligence and caused the deaths 2010 Americans, etc.

Whoa, you're right............I do want to see Republicans nailed. :rotfl2:

Did you hear about the convention of Honest Republicans? They had to cancel it, because both of them called in sick that day ;)
 
Tigger_Magic said:
:confused3 Gee, "e", why get so rattled about getting called on practicing your creative editing skills and then try to rationalize it by saying "everyone does it" :rolleyes: ). Sort of a sad response.

But you are correct, I do have better things to do today. Taking the kiddos to the zoo, so TTFN!

Still gnawing on that bone are we? I repeat, when you have finished correcting my posting skills and actually have something intellegent to add, I'll be happy to debate. I have cleared this up with the poster, apologized for my unintentional wrongdoing, and we have moved on. I suggest you do the same :rolleyes: .
 
Viking said:
Did you hear about the convention of Honest Republicans? They had to cancel it, because both of them called in sick that day ;)

They found 2 !!!!! ;)

Sidebar: They tried for 3, but Jesus told them he was non-partisan. :rotfl2: :rotfl2: :rotfl2: :rotfl2: :rotfl2:
 
eclectics said:
Still gnawing on that bone are we? I repeat, when you have finished correcting my posting skills and actually have something intellegent to add, I'll be happy to debate. I have cleared this up with the poster, apologized for my unintentional wrongdoing, and we have moved on. I suggest you do the same :rolleyes: .

I say we move on to a new topic: Now that Fitzgerald lifted the Republican rock, how many more are going to come crawling out. :rotfl2:
 
MizBlu said:
Because Starr was rabidly partisan, unprofessional, and dishonest........and Fitzgerald isn't.

Exactly! They are having a hard time trying to pin anything on Fitzgerald, try as they might.
 
MizBlu said:
Let me see if I can put this is in language you can understand.

I don't want to nail Republicans: Just the money launderers, the perjurers, the insider traders, the ones who obstruct justice, the ones who lie to grand juries, the ones who fabricate WMD intelligence and caused the deaths 2010 Americans, etc.

Whoa, you're right............I do want to see Republicans nailed. :rotfl2:

I think you would do better to look at the previous administration. 61 indictments on all of those issues that seem to concern you. On the other hand, Wall St. had its second best day of the year yesterday on the good news that Karl Rove wasn't indicted. This is about criminalizing a non crime. Nothing more.
 
eclectics said:
Exactly! They are having a hard time trying to pin anything on Fitzgerald, try as they might.

Lets, see. When a prosecutor is going after Republicans, they are the "prosecutor's prosecutor, above reproach". When however, Democrats are being investigated, the left comes up with the worst names and descriptions that their imaginations can contrive. During the entire investigatory period of the Clinton White House, Starr was visciously maligned by the White House, the dems in the House and Senate and the targets of the investigation themselves. All of the charges against Ken Starr were groundless and unfounded. During this investigation, there were no attacks, no accusations. I think that has more to do with the character of the current administration than anything else.
 
DawnCt1 said:
Lets, see. When a prosecutor is going after Republicans, they are the "prosecutor's prosecutor, above reproach". When however, Democrats are being investigated, the left comes up with the worst names and descriptions that their imaginations can contrive. During the entire investigatory period of the Clinton White House, Starr was visciously maligned by the White House, the dems in the House and Senate and the targets of the investigation themselves. All of the charges against Ken Starr were groundless and unfounded. During this investigation, there were no attacks, no accusations. I think that has more to do with the character of the current administration than anything else.

No attacks? Dawn, one day you actually have to point that remote at the tv and switch from Fox! There's a whole world out there!
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer

New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom