I did not, have sexual relations, with that woman, Ms. Lewisnski

3/7/2007 10:36:19 AM

Indeed I did have a relationship with Ms. Lewinsky that was inappropriate. In fact, it was wrong.

3/7/2007 10:48:01 AM

It constituted a critical lapse in judgement (that lasted 18 months)

3/7/2007 10:50:47 AM

it depends on what your definition of "lapse in judgement" is.

[Edited on March 7, 2007 at 10:52 AM. Reason : .]

3/7/2007 10:52:29 AM

^ Many forget that the Starr investigation started with legitimate crimes that produced multiple convictions. James McDougal, a central figure in the investigation and who died in prison, was convicted in 1996 on 18 felony counts stemming from his operation of a corrupt Arkansas savings and loan; he received a lighter prison term in exchange for his cooperation with the Whitewater investigation. Former Arkansas Governor Jim Guy Tucker was found guilty on a conspiracy charge of engaging in a sham bankruptcy to avoid paying federal income tax and agreed to talk to investigators about what he knows concerning a wide array of Whitewater-related subjects. And there were others.

BTW, have you figured out what a pardon is yet?

[Edited on March 7, 2007 at 11:36 AM. Reason : .]

3/7/2007 11:35:52 AM

Quote :

"Obviously both crimes have different penalties (Libby sells crack; Berger, blow.), and caving in, admitting guilt, and apologizing gets you better results than walking around like an asshole, claiming total innocence."

BridgetSPK

Yeah, the following behavior is a lot better.

Quote :

"Law enforcement sources said archive staff members told FBI agents they saw Berger placing items in his jacket and pants, and one archive staffer told agents that Berger also placed something [highly classified documents] in his socks."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/20/berger.probe/

STFU.

[Edited on March 7, 2007 at 4:39 PM. Reason : .]

3/7/2007 4:38:18 PM

25 years??? wtf are you people reading. Everything I saw said 3 was the most likely.

3/7/2007 4:45:23 PM

^ All the invited guests on NPR today (The Diane Rehm Show) said that they would be very surprised if Libby does any time at all.

V You will note well that I didn't say anything. I simply posted the paraphrased remarks of certain political commentators--on both the left and right.

[Edited on March 7, 2007 at 8:39 PM. Reason : .]

3/7/2007 8:10:38 PM

I DEMAND BRIT HUME'S RESIGNATION


^Are you saying his lawyers can't keep the trial tied up until 2008?

[Edited on March 7, 2007 at 8:23 PM. Reason : .]

3/7/2007 8:22:57 PM

When Bush & Co. are running the show it's perfectly fine to do the crime and do no time. Grant would be proud.

3/7/2007 8:31:39 PM

Did Libby simply get caught up in a lawyer's vendetta? This from NationalLedger.com

Quote :

" possible explanation for Fitzgerald’s zealous pursuit was offered by the Wall Street Journal editorial page, which pointed to a previous intersection of interests with Libby. Between government jobs, Libby had been a lawyer in private practice, and had represented Marc Rich, the “oil trader and financier who fled to Switzerland in 1983, just ahead of his indictment for tax-evasion by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Bill Clinton pardoned Mr. Rich in 2001, and so the feds never did get their man. The pardon so infuriated Justice lawyers who had worked on the case that the Southern District promptly launched an investigation into whether the pardon had been ‘proper.’ One former prosecutor we spoke to described the Rich case as ‘the single most rancorous case in the history of the Southern District.’” Two of the lawyers who had spent years trying to make the case against Rich were Fitzgerald and James Comey, the Justice official who in fact appointed Fitzgerald to investigate the Plame case. They apparently believed that Libby’s defense of Rich somehow played a role in his eventual pardon and held this against Libby. But there is another factor. Libby was the point man when the Bush Administration was trying to get the Justice Department to sign off on the controversial NSA terrorist surveillance program. At that time, Attorney General John Ashcroft was in the hospital, and Comey, the acting Attorney General, refused to approve it. The administration then went to Ashcroft, who gave it his approval. Could this have angered Comey and, by extension, his partner Patrick Fitzgerald? "

3/7/2007 8:37:37 PM

^^ whatever. fact is, nobody really gives a shit about this except for the people who want to say "OMFG BUSH IS EVIL!!!!one" Problem is, we've got more poignant examples of that nowadays, so this one is insignificant.

and once again, if you can't convict them for actually doing it, convict them for lying about it. classic

3/7/2007 9:07:37 PM

This is a big political game of "gotcha." Plame's husband gave lots of money to Democrats, Plame hadn't been undercover in more than 5 years, and all that this witchhunt nailed was an apparently innocent man.

3/7/2007 9:19:25 PM

He was so innocent that he was found guilty in a court of law.

3/7/2007 9:27:03 PM

Of perjury, for not remembering whether he had a conversation about Plame or not after the fact. BFD. The guy said he couldn't remember, and you're partisan enough to suggest this guy should be hung for it since it's a time of war.

3/7/2007 9:30:35 PM

Yep. And? Sucks for him that his memory blows or that he was lying.

3/7/2007 9:34:10 PM

^ Yes, and Libby should receive some punishment for lying and he will. Note well, however, that no one was convicted of--or even charged with--leaking the name of a supposedly covert intelligence operative, which is what the investigation and the indignation was supposedly about.

3/7/2007 9:34:53 PM

Still sucks to be him for lying under oath whatever you think this whole thing was supposed to be about. I hope his boyfriends in jail treat him as well as he deserves.

3/7/2007 9:42:51 PM

Sounds like he'll be living your fantasy if he winds up in prison.

3/7/2007 9:51:04 PM

The whole investigation was a croc. Richard Armitage already came out and told Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald that he was the source of the leak. Nonetheless the witch hunt continued. While Sandy Berger was stuffing top secret documents down his pants at the National Archives, throwing them away, then "forgetting" where he put them, Libby was being scrutinized over a case that already had its conclusion. Libby faces 15 - 20. Berger got a few days of community service.

After the conviction, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had the audacity to request that Bush vow not to pardon Libby for his criminal acts (be careful Harry... can anyone say "land deal?"). First of all, it is not the place of a senator to tell the President what he should or should not do with his Constitutionally guaranteed powers. Secondly, do we really want to hear a Democrat talk about lying to an investigator? (I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky).

Meanwhile, Vice President Cheney has had some health problems historically and a few have popped up lately. It wouldn't be total surprise if he decided to step down to nurse his health, would it? Besides, his friend Rummy is gone and his Chief of Staff just got convicted of lying to federal investigators. It might be a good time to bow out gracefully.

The current Senate is split 49-49-2 with the two Independents caucusing with the Democrats essentially making the balance of power 51-49. With Cheney's ailments, maybe Bush would want to seek a Senator to replace Cheney. John McCain? A good independent, he would make a good Vice President. What about Kansas Senator Sam Brownback? He would also be a great choice. But, alas, the governors of both Arizona and Kansas are both Democrats... if only we could find a good, viable candidate from a state with a Republican governor...

Enter Joe Lieberman. Lieberman recently stated that he's not against "joining the Republicans." Why wouldn't he? The Democrats threw him under the bus after he lost the Connecticut Primary. Maybe he would also like a little taste of this revenge...

President Bush should nominate Joe Lieberman to be the Vice President allowing Republican governor Jodi Rell to choose Lieberman's replacement. This would tip the balance of power in the Senate to 50-49-1 with the one independent (Bernie Sanders) caucusing with the Democrats... 50-50 with the new Vice President being the tie breaker. This would change Senate leadership and demote Harry Reid to Senate Minority Leader.

Then Bush should pardon Libby.

3/7/2007 9:59:29 PM

One of the jurors stated on Hardball tonight that she would support Bush pardoning Libby.

But OMG he's so guilty for having a faulty memory about a non-covert agent's husband, who is a proven liar in the 1st place (claimed his wife sent him on a mission to Niger, which BTW never happened). Hang 'em high, right RomanHockey?

If this were truly about outing Plame then the actual guy who did "leak" her name would have been indicted on day one.

3/7/2007 10:50:23 PM

You forgot to tell us that Clinton killed Vince Foster

That's the best part!

3/7/2007 11:39:09 PM

Back when Clinton had a faulty memory, conservatives called it lying.

3/7/2007 11:49:59 PM

Don't forget when Ronald Reagan "couldn't recall" whether or not he authorized the sale of missiles to Iran during the Iran Contra scandal. Don't worry kids, if you don't want to answer a direct question when you know you did something wrong, just say you don't remember and it will all go away!

3/8/2007 12:52:38 AM

Ah yes, Iran Contra, that 7 year investigation that landed nobody in prison.

3/8/2007 7:24:12 AM

thats not fair. ronald reagan couldnt recall because he was senile.

3/8/2007 10:23:09 PM

Received NO jail time.

3/9/2007 3:24:43 AM

neither will Libby.

3/9/2007 3:26:46 AM

^^ Was not found guilty in a court of law. QQ more.

3/9/2007 3:28:56 AM

we have the same post count.

oops. well, not anymore.

3/9/2007 3:30:37 AM

Quote :

"Received NO jail time."

hmm... funny how it works like that. when you're never convicted of anything, you never go to jail.

i swear to gawd, that fucking legal system, right?

(^^ good point, you)

3/9/2007 3:32:45 AM

^^^ and ^ That is so fucking disingenuous. Berger admitted his crime(s), cut a deal with federal prosecutors to avoid jail time, and was sentenced by a court. Split hairs much, comrades? Un-fucking-believable!

Quote :

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger was sentenced Thursday to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them [emphasis added]. Berger must perform 100 hours of community service and pay the fine as well as $6,905 for the administrative costs of his two-year probation, a district court judge ruled. 'I deeply regret the actions that I took at the National Archives two years ago, and I accept the judgment of the court [emphasis added],' Berger said outside the courthouse after his sentencing. Berger reached a plea deal with federal prosecutors in April to avoid a jail sentence [emphasis added]."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/08/berger.sentenced/

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 3:44 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2007 3:41:23 AM

So shut the fuck up about Sandy Berger then. He commited a crime, pled guilty and was sentenced. Sorry you weren't the judge who could throw him in the slammer for 374627989193 years. At least he had the balls to admit his mistake.

3/9/2007 3:45:54 AM

^ YOU FUCKING DUMBASS! I point out that you are wrong and you attempt to shift the argument--yet again?

The asswipe Berger admitted his "mistake"? Are you fucking shitting me? (1) Berger only admitted it after he was caught; (2) BERGER STOLE HIGHLY CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS AND DESTROYED SOME OF THEM--WE PROBABLY STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT INFORMATION THOSE DOCUMENTS CONTAINED; and (3) in case you don't understand this, 2 + 3 = 4 is a mistake, what Berger did is just plain wrong--there's a big difference.

BTW, I continue to bring up Berger here to contrast the media frenzy over Libby's actions with the mere ripple over what Berger did. If you had an ounce of sincerity, you would see the problem.

PS: And you're wrong about something else: If I had my way, anyone who stole highly classified documents would be not be jailed--he or she would be shot.

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 4:04 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2007 3:58:38 AM

You pointed out that he pled guilty and was punished not anything about me being wrong. Pleading guilty != being found guilty by a jury. And by constantly bringing up someone totally different than the person titled in the thread you are the one sidetracking the issue of which you like to claim others are doing.

3/9/2007 4:21:16 AM

Quote :

"BTW, I continue to bring up Berger here to contrast the media frenzy over Libby's actions with the mere ripple over what Berger did. If you had an ounce of sincerity, you would see the problem."

3/9/2007 4:23:17 AM

Quote :

"And by constantly bringing up someone totally different than the person titled in the thread you are the one sidetracking the issue of which you like to claim others are doing."

3/9/2007 4:28:03 AM

hmm. well, good call Hooksaw.

i should check the facts before concurring.

to be honest, i dont remember the Sandy Berger thing too well. I guess I was too much of a youngun to be payin attention.

but the point is, and i'm being totally cynical here, when you say Berger did no jail time, I say:

Quote :

" Neither will Libby "

Libby is essentially an innocent man. he was found guilty on a technicality. Cheney and Bush threw him under the bus, because they cant afford the hit on their dwindling political capital.

Berger made a plea bargain with prosecutors.

tell me that no one ever makes plea bargains and gets reduced sentences.

tell me also, that berger did anything that ever endangered the missions and lives of CIA field agents and their families

which is what Cheney -- oops i mean Libby -- did when he squealed the name of a covert op to the press.

so... you know... just quit being such a partisan turd, mmkay?

3/9/2007 4:32:15 AM

^ Notice that I never posted that Libby shouldn't serve prison time. I posted that he probably wouldn't--based on the expert opinions I have read/heard/seen from commentators on both sides of the aisle.

I will now offer that, when compared to the Berger situation and considering that Libby was NOT convicted of "endanger[ing] the missions and lives of CIA field agents and their families," as you put it, Libby probably should NOT serve time. Just about anybody can get snagged for lying to a federal agent--just ask Martha Stewart.

Concerning the "partisan turd" comment, it is, of course, ridiculous. I have pointed out time and again here that I am NOT a Republican. I value fairness: Libby has not been treated fairly in this situation and conservatives in general are treated unfairly by the Fourth Estate. I simply choose not to buy the brand of baloney that most of the public press is usually selling--you'll find that I'm quite consistent on that point.

3/9/2007 4:55:13 AM

^^ she was not a covert agent. it is irrelevant.

3/9/2007 10:11:15 AM

Sandy Berger stole documents that were damaging to national security. I can make the case that Berger endangered every US family.

3/9/2007 10:23:13 AM

put them both under the fucking jail then.

PUT THEM ON TRIAL AS POOR BLACK MEN AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

3/9/2007 10:25:09 AM

Quote :

"I can make the case that Berger endangered every US family."

Without knowing what the documents contained you can not. All you can do is sensationalize what you think they contained. And no one is going to buy the "but they were classifed documents for a reason!!!1" Oh noes Sound the panic alarm. The turrists are going to winz now.

3/9/2007 4:25:41 PM

Quote :

"Sandy Berger stole destroyed documents"

so quit making it sound worse than it was.

3/9/2007 4:40:58 PM

Quote :

"she was not a covert agent. it is irrelevant. "

she WAS a covert agent.

she was not currently working in the field.

she DID have longstanding contacts of other covert ops in the field, american and friendly foriegn, and by revealing her identity, it very likely comprimised the identity of current, working agents that she had contact with around the world.


how about you stick to commenting on shit you know something about, and save your bullshit for your local bible study group?

3/9/2007 4:45:16 PM

^^ Berger stole highly classified documents and destroyed some of them. Yeah, I'm sure the ones that were destroyed were just recipes for bundt cake.

^ You cannot demonstrate Plame's secret classification. If anyone could, Armitage would be in jail right now.

3/9/2007 5:29:49 PM

*cough cough* Unless he made a deal for immunity. *cough cough*

3/9/2007 5:31:34 PM

^^ her covert status is a fact that was first reported in the newspapers then borne out by testimony.

i never claimed to have eyes only knowledge of WTF she was doing specifically. but someone, somewhere, in foreign intelligence circles, connected the dots from her to some other agents that she had contact with.

and theres no telling where that went.

3/9/2007 5:36:23 PM

^^ Evidence? Link? Anything--other than your apparent case of keyboard tuberculosis?

^ Evidence? Link? Anything?

3/9/2007 7:48:49 PM

Quote :

"joe_schmoe she WAS a covert agent. she was not currently working in the field. she DID have longstanding contacts of other covert ops in the field, american and friendly foriegn, and by revealing her identity, it very likely comprimised the identity of current, working agents that she had contact with around the world. how about you stick to commenting on shit you know something about, and save your bullshit for your local bible study group?"

Maybe you could show me a single verified source that she was a covert agent in the field somewhere near the time of the leak. As I recall she had not been in the field for a number of years at the time of the leak. Moreover, if it really was so terrible for her to get publicity then maybe she should have tried to get out of the limelight, keep her husband from lying about the whole affair, and not pose for magazine covers.

Of course since you said it and apparently you read it in a newspaper sometime so it must be true. Nevermind that it is obvious that this uberagressive prosecutor didn't punish anyone for the "crime" he was preported to investigate. That alone points to the fact my position is the correct one.

We now know that he knew she was not an active agent about a week into his investigation, yet Fitzgerald continued it and Armitage didn't bother to bring to light the fact that it was him, not Rove, Cheney or any of your other favored targets that was the source of this non-criminal leak.

Quote :

"^^ her covert status is a fact that was first reported in the newspapers then borne out by testimony. i never claimed to have eyes only knowledge of WTF she was doing specifically. but someone, somewhere, in foreign intelligence circles, connected the dots from her to some other agents that she had contact with. and theres no telling where that went."

what testimony? The defense was not allowed to discuss her covert/noncovert status in the trial from what I heard. Do you mean testimony to the media?

its amazing how concerned you are that someone's cover may have been blown indirectly throught this affair. I guess you don't take into account that she has not been an active field agent recently.

maybe try feigning the same concern for actual current intelligence actions concerning terror. The same newspapers you seem to endear are responsible for blowing the cover of how many different operations in the last few years. Of course those programs are just political, its not like there are terrorists ploting to attack the US, and besides its not fair if they don't know how our intelligence community is hunting them down.

3/9/2007 7:49:32 PM