OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
says...

"jps" wrote in message
...

His testimony doesn't square with his own notes, contemporaneously
recorded when Cheney told him about Valerie Plame.

He testified that Russert told him about Plame...not the other way
around.

And his notes show that Cheney told him about Plame at least several
weeks prior to Russert.

So? He did not testify that he hadn't heard it before. He said that he
could not recall where he first heard it. But he's not being charged for
forgetting where he heard it. He's being charged for obstruction of justice
and perjury because he told the FBI and grand jury that Russert first
mentioned Plame to him...not the other way around.





He also testified that he told Russert that he didn't know it to be true
or
not. Did he lie to Russert? Perhaps.

Who care? Folks in this administration lie all the time.

Lying to reporters that have it in for you is not really lying. It's just a
technique for throwing the hyenas off the scent.




Did he lie to Fitzgerald? Maybe

Oh yeah. Sho enoff.

It's amazing that you can conclude that without seeing any of the Grand jury
evidence and without a trial. And I thought you liberals were concerned
about civil rights and due process and all that stuff.



not. But is it a crime to lie to a news reporter?

No, and he's not being charged for lying to a news reporter. He's being
charged for lying to the investigators of the leak.

Like I said, if you read the indictment, the perjury charges stem from what
he told the FBI and the grand jury about his conversation with Russert, and
what Russert told the Grand Jury. Perhaps Russert is lying.





Especially a reporter who
is fishing for a story by pretending to know the answer to the questions
he's asking?

Oh jeez, Scooter went to college and became a lawyer. He's been at the
top of his game for quite some time. You feel sorry for him because a
reporter asked him leading questions?

Libby knew what Russert was doing, and that's why he neither confirmed nor
denied Russerts claim that "all the media knew" Wilson's wife was with CIA.
Of course, Libby never counted on Russert lying to a grand jury about their
conversation.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:
In article . net,
says...
"jps" wrote in message
...

His testimony doesn't square with his own notes, contemporaneously
recorded when Cheney told him about Valerie Plame.
He testified that Russert told him about Plame...not the other way
around.

And his notes show that Cheney told him about Plame at least several
weeks prior to Russert.

He also testified that he told Russert that he didn't know it to be true
or not. Did he lie to Russert? Perhaps.

Who care? Folks in this administration lie all the time.

Did he lie to Fitzgerald? Maybe

Oh yeah. Sho enoff.

not. But is it a crime to lie to a news reporter?

No, and he's not being charged for lying to a news reporter. He's being
charged for lying to the investigators of the leak.

Especially a reporter who is fishing for a story by pretending to know
the answer to the questions he's asking?

Oh jeez, Scooter went to college and became a lawyer. He's been at the
top of his game for quite some time. You feel sorry for him because a
reporter asked him leading questions?

Whew.

I expect our president is that stupid but not the folks surrounding him.

jps


What is sad is that Libby is taking a fall for Cheney.

Libby is taking a fall because an insidious cabal of folks from the CIA,
State Dept. and news media decided that they didn't agree with Bush's
policies and took it upon themselves to destabilize his administration.

My prediction: Libby walks.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

In article ,
says...
jps wrote:
In article , PocoLoco415
@hotmail.com says...
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 13:00:53 -0800, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...

Yeah......try remembering the order and content of your conversations from a
year ago.........
Pinhead,

He had copies of notes that he turned over. Don't you think he was
smart enough to have a look at them before testifying?

Either he didn't think the investigators were smart enough to find the
evidence in his notes or he was purposefully lying to protect his boss.

Either way, the cocksucker lied.

In your book, that means he's a liberal, right?

jps
Now you're throwing 'cocksucker' into the fray. My gosh, what do you guys do
with each other?

It's a Deadwood thing. Ever watch it? Brilliant writing. Lots of
cussing. Favorite word around town is cocksucker.

If you haven't seen it, the first and second seasons are out on DVD.
Incredibly well done with a great cast.

jps


Jim Beaver, a first-rate fellow and actor who has a role in Deadwood
(Ellsworth), posts frequently in the alt.obituaries newsgroup. His late
wife appeared on Star Trek frequently, and his father in law was the
wonderful Don Adams.

Love Ellsworth. He had a great vibe when he first appeared and doesn't
ever disappoint. First time I saw it I was totally taken aback.
Watched the full episode and was hooked. Doesn't happen to me much.

Watched the first season on tape from my brother, two episodes a night.
It was like feasting on a rich meal. I was giddy with delight with the
clever dialogue, great characters and gritty setting.

I've been calling my friends cocksuckers ever since. "Feed him to to
the pigs!!!" Love reliving the scenes with other Deadwood junkies.

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

In article . net,
says...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:
In article . net,
says...
"jps" wrote in message
...

His testimony doesn't square with his own notes, contemporaneously
recorded when Cheney told him about Valerie Plame.
He testified that Russert told him about Plame...not the other way
around.

And his notes show that Cheney told him about Plame at least several
weeks prior to Russert.

He also testified that he told Russert that he didn't know it to be true
or not. Did he lie to Russert? Perhaps.

Who care? Folks in this administration lie all the time.

Did he lie to Fitzgerald? Maybe

Oh yeah. Sho enoff.

not. But is it a crime to lie to a news reporter?

No, and he's not being charged for lying to a news reporter. He's being
charged for lying to the investigators of the leak.

Especially a reporter who is fishing for a story by pretending to know
the answer to the questions he's asking?

Oh jeez, Scooter went to college and became a lawyer. He's been at the
top of his game for quite some time. You feel sorry for him because a
reporter asked him leading questions?

Whew.

I expect our president is that stupid but not the folks surrounding him.

jps


What is sad is that Libby is taking a fall for Cheney.

Libby is taking a fall because an insidious cabal of folks from the CIA,
State Dept. and news media decided that they didn't agree with Bush's
policies and took it upon themselves to destabilize his administration.

My prediction: Libby walks.

My prediction: Libby talks or is defrocked.

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

In article . net,
says...

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
says...

"jps" wrote in message
...

His testimony doesn't square with his own notes, contemporaneously
recorded when Cheney told him about Valerie Plame.

He testified that Russert told him about Plame...not the other way
around.

And his notes show that Cheney told him about Plame at least several
weeks prior to Russert.

So? He did not testify that he hadn't heard it before. He said that he
could not recall where he first heard it. But he's not being charged for
forgetting where he heard it. He's being charged for obstruction of justice
and perjury because he told the FBI and grand jury that Russert first
mentioned Plame to him...not the other way around.





He also testified that he told Russert that he didn't know it to be true
or
not. Did he lie to Russert? Perhaps.

Who care? Folks in this administration lie all the time.

Lying to reporters that have it in for you is not really lying. It's just a
technique for throwing the hyenas off the scent.




Did he lie to Fitzgerald? Maybe

Oh yeah. Sho enoff.

It's amazing that you can conclude that without seeing any of the Grand jury
evidence and without a trial. And I thought you liberals were concerned
about civil rights and due process and all that stuff.



not. But is it a crime to lie to a news reporter?

No, and he's not being charged for lying to a news reporter. He's being
charged for lying to the investigators of the leak.

Like I said, if you read the indictment, the perjury charges stem from what
he told the FBI and the grand jury about his conversation with Russert, and
what Russert told the Grand Jury. Perhaps Russert is lying.





Especially a reporter who
is fishing for a story by pretending to know the answer to the questions
he's asking?

Oh jeez, Scooter went to college and became a lawyer. He's been at the
top of his game for quite some time. You feel sorry for him because a
reporter asked him leading questions?

Libby knew what Russert was doing, and that's why he neither confirmed nor
denied Russerts claim that "all the media knew" Wilson's wife was with CIA.
Of course, Libby never counted on Russert lying to a grand jury about their
conversation.

"Could not recall"????

You've got to be kidding. He didn't have time to review his own notes
before testifying in front of a Grand Jury?

Man, you are willing to suspend disbelief in a heartbeat when it
involves another Republican.

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 13:32:33 -0800, jps wrote:

In article , PocoLoco415
says...
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 13:00:53 -0800, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...

Yeah......try remembering the order and content of your conversations from a
year ago.........

Pinhead,

He had copies of notes that he turned over. Don't you think he was
smart enough to have a look at them before testifying?

Either he didn't think the investigators were smart enough to find the
evidence in his notes or he was purposefully lying to protect his boss.

Either way, the cocksucker lied.

In your book, that means he's a liberal, right?

jps

Now you're throwing 'cocksucker' into the fray. My gosh, what do you guys do
with each other?

It's a Deadwood thing. Ever watch it? Brilliant writing. Lots of
cussing. Favorite word around town is cocksucker.

If you haven't seen it, the first and second seasons are out on DVD.
Incredibly well done with a great cast.

jps

Oh. I thought maybe it was a Kevin, Harry, jps, et al, kind of thing (with the
bukkade kid thrown in of course).
--
John H

"It's *not* a baby kicking, bride of mine, it's just a fetus!"

HK

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:

Skipper says...
bb wrote:

Obstruction for What?
Libby is charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed.

Last I checked a bj wasn't a crime.

Many prostitutes wish it were so.

That's right Snippy. Clearly, you've never had sex you haven't had to
pay for.

Last I heard Monica didn't charge, unlike your wife.

Clearly? Now if that's an example of a Dem's cognitive skills, it's no
wonder they're so screwed.

It's funny - your wife disagrees with most of what you say about Democrats.
Why, just this morning, I rolled off of her, we shared some strawberries
dipped in melted chocolate, and we started discussing politics. I'll bet you
have no idea what she says about you while you're out at Victoria's Secret,
gettin' yourself a new supply of panties.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:19:51 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


" *JimH*" wrote in message

Speaking of DVR's...........how do you like yours? Do you have to
subscribe to TiVo?


I like it. It's part of my Dish Network satellite receiver.


Tivo is GREAT!! It's been said to be the crack cocaine of TV. We've
had Tivo for over four years now, and have had a second Tivo for a
year now in the computer/exercise room. A good CSI/Cold Case makes
time go by quickly on the treadmill.

Did I say Tivo is wonderful? Nah... it's better than that.

Do you like the Discovery Channel, or the History Channel, or shows
about boats? Tivo records what you tell it to, when the shows come
on, automatically. Then you watch them when you want to, without
commercials, and with the ability to pause, rewind, etc. And pausing
live shows... great for the football game.

Tivo. Get it.

:-)

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

In article ,
says...

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:

Skipper says...
bb wrote:

Obstruction for What?
Libby is charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed.

Last I checked a bj wasn't a crime.

Many prostitutes wish it were so.

That's right Snippy. Clearly, you've never had sex you haven't had to
pay for.

Last I heard Monica didn't charge, unlike your wife.

Clearly? Now if that's an example of a Dem's cognitive skills, it's no
wonder they're so screwed.

It's funny - your wife disagrees with most of what you say about Democrats.
Why, just this morning, I rolled off of her, we shared some strawberries
dipped in melted chocolate, and we started discussing politics. I'll bet you
have no idea what she says about you while you're out at Victoria's Secret,
gettin' yourself a new supply of panties.

Oh man, that's rich. Thanks for the hearty laugh.

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:20:40 -0800, jps wrote:


My prediction: Libby talks or is defrocked.

Or, he keeps his mouth shut awaiting a Presidential Pardon.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

Harry,
Why do you automatically believe everyone else would also lie about their
boat ownership? I would guess that you are the only person in rec.boats who
does fabricate fictitious boats to impress people in UseNet. You used to
say JimH really didn't buy a new runabout, now you think Skipper never owned
a Bayliner. You seem to do way to much " projecting"

No one else needs to boost a damaged weak ego, so they do not have to
pretend they own pretend boats.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:
In article , says...
Harry Krause wrote:

Try to find something you know and entertain us with that, eh?
Certainly. Let's talk lobsta boats.

What would you know about lobster boats?

Ever own anything other than a bayliner?

jps

It's questionable whether he ever owned that Bayliner. For some time, he
bragged about taking long voyages in that little boat, until it was
pointed out that its fuel tank didn't provide much range. Then he
portmanteaued on those jerry cans, and started discussing multiday trips
out of the sight of shore.

Of course, to get to those waters, he had to pull a boat trailer close t
1500 miles.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:35:33 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Libby said something that blatantly contradicted Russert's testimony. One
of them is lying about that conversation. The indictment suggests that it
was Libby who lied...but the trial should show where the truth really
lies.

I'm starting to worry about you, NOYB. You are losing touch with
reality. You have read the indictment. Libby not only contradicted
Russert, but Cheney, a senior CIA officer, the Under Secretary of State, a
CIA briefer, Judith Miller, the White House Press Secretary, the Assistant
to the Vice President for Public Affairs, and the Counsel to the Office of
the Vice President, and that is only on one of the counts in the
indictment.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:48:54 -0500, P Fritz wrote:


Yeah......try remembering the order and content of your conversations from
a year ago.........

If he couldn't remember, he wouldn't have been charged. He was charged
with "remembering" things that did not happen.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 11:27:54 -0800, jps wrote:


And there was no "outing" of a CIA agent either.

You, again, prove what an uninformed pea brain you are.

Valerie Plame was working in a company that was purposefully set up to
provide cover for a handful of CIA agents. Her specialty was WMDs.

Not only was her cover blown but the cover of all her associates in that
company were blown. The outing ruined several people's careers.

The hell with careers, lives may have been lost, and we won't know it for
some time. The CIA hasn't done it's risk assessment yet, but it is a
guarantee that the bad guys are doing a database search on Valerie Plame,
and Brewster, Jennings. Plame is safe, and hopefully our other CIA agents
are also, but what about their foreign assets? It is quite possible
people have died because of this leaking.

That's treasonous.

Libby, Rove and Cheney should be keel hauled somewhere around where the
Republicans were going to build the bridge to nowhere. During December.

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:35:33 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Libby said something that blatantly contradicted Russert's testimony.
One
of them is lying about that conversation. The indictment suggests that
it
was Libby who lied...but the trial should show where the truth really
lies.

I'm starting to worry about you, NOYB. You are losing touch with
reality. You have read the indictment. Libby not only contradicted
Russert, but Cheney, a senior CIA officer, the Under Secretary of State, a
CIA briefer, Judith Miller, the White House Press Secretary, the Assistant
to the Vice President for Public Affairs, and the Counsel to the Office of
the Vice President, and that is only on one of the counts in the
indictment.

So, you've seen the secret GJ testimony? All you have in the indictment is
what Fitzgerald wants you to see.

Tim Russert, NBC's Wash.D.C Beaureu Chief, is contradicted by his on staff
on NBC Wash.D.C. correspondent that had a report published saying that every
one in DC knew Wilson's wife, Plame, worked at the CIA.

10 years ago I thought Russert to be a moderate, 5 years ago he started to
show left-wing leanings and today he has joined the left-wing of the
Democratic party.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 11:27:54 -0800, jps wrote:


And there was no "outing" of a CIA agent either.

You, again, prove what an uninformed pea brain you are.

Valerie Plame was working in a company that was purposefully set up to
provide cover for a handful of CIA agents. Her specialty was WMDs.

Not only was her cover blown but the cover of all her associates in that
company were blown. The outing ruined several people's careers.

The hell with careers, lives may have been lost, and we won't know it for
some time. The CIA hasn't done it's risk assessment yet, but it is a
guarantee that the bad guys are doing a database search on Valerie Plame,
and Brewster, Jennings. Plame is safe, and hopefully our other CIA agents
are also, but what about their foreign assets? It is quite possible
people have died because of this leaking.

What about the covert CIA agent Sen. Kerry outed a few months ago. Are you
going to have him brought up on charges too? If not, then your bias is
showing.

That's treasonous.

Libby, Rove and Cheney should be keel hauled somewhere around where the
Republicans were going to build the bridge to nowhere. During December.

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:

Skipper says...
bb wrote:

Obstruction for What?
Libby is charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed.

Last I checked a bj wasn't a crime.

Many prostitutes wish it were so.

That's right Snippy. Clearly, you've never had sex you haven't had to
pay for.

Last I heard Monica didn't charge, unlike your wife.

Clearly? Now if that's an example of a Dem's cognitive skills, it's no
wonder they're so screwed.

It's funny - your wife disagrees with most of what you say about
Democrats.
Why, just this morning, I rolled off of her, we shared some strawberries
dipped in melted chocolate, and we started discussing politics. I'll bet
you
have no idea what she says about you while you're out at Victoria's
Secret,
gettin' yourself a new supply of panties.

Oh man, that's rich. Thanks for the hearty laugh.

jps

He's probably gonna report me to my ISP now. I'll be obsessing about this
for a minute.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:
In article . net,
says...
"jps" wrote in message
...

His testimony doesn't square with his own notes, contemporaneously
recorded when Cheney told him about Valerie Plame.
He testified that Russert told him about Plame...not the other way
around.

And his notes show that Cheney told him about Plame at least several
weeks prior to Russert.

He also testified that he told Russert that he didn't know it to be
true
or not. Did he lie to Russert? Perhaps.

Who care? Folks in this administration lie all the time.

Did he lie to Fitzgerald? Maybe

Oh yeah. Sho enoff.

not. But is it a crime to lie to a news reporter?

No, and he's not being charged for lying to a news reporter. He's
being
charged for lying to the investigators of the leak.

Especially a reporter who is fishing for a story by pretending to
know
the answer to the questions he's asking?

Oh jeez, Scooter went to college and became a lawyer. He's been at
the
top of his game for quite some time. You feel sorry for him because a
reporter asked him leading questions?

Whew.

I expect our president is that stupid but not the folks surrounding
him.

jps


What is sad is that Libby is taking a fall for Cheney.

Libby is taking a fall because an insidious cabal of folks from the CIA,
State Dept. and news media decided that they didn't agree with Bush's
policies and took it upon themselves to destabilize his administration.

My prediction: Libby walks.

Yeah.....as soon as Libby's lawyer starts issuing subpeonas. :-)

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

I see the liebrals are drinking the koolaid by the gallon

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 11:27:54 -0800, jps wrote:


And there was no "outing" of a CIA agent either.

You, again, prove what an uninformed pea brain you are.

Valerie Plame was working in a company that was purposefully set up to
provide cover for a handful of CIA agents. Her specialty was WMDs.

Not only was her cover blown but the cover of all her associates in
that
company were blown. The outing ruined several people's careers.

The hell with careers, lives may have been lost, and we won't know it
for
some time. The CIA hasn't done it's risk assessment yet, but it is a
guarantee that the bad guys are doing a database search on Valerie
Plame,
and Brewster, Jennings. Plame is safe, and hopefully our other CIA
agents
are also, but what about their foreign assets? It is quite possible
people have died because of this leaking.

What about the covert CIA agent Sen. Kerry outed a few months ago. Are
you
going to have him brought up on charges too? If not, then your bias is
showing.

That's treasonous.

Libby, Rove and Cheney should be keel hauled somewhere around where
the
Republicans were going to build the bridge to nowhere. During
December.

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 08:43:47 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:35:33 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Libby said something that blatantly contradicted Russert's testimony.
One
of them is lying about that conversation. The indictment suggests that
it
was Libby who lied...but the trial should show where the truth really
lies.

I'm starting to worry about you, NOYB. You are losing touch with
reality. You have read the indictment. Libby not only contradicted
Russert, but Cheney, a senior CIA officer, the Under Secretary of State,
a CIA briefer, Judith Miller, the White House Press Secretary, the
Assistant to the Vice President for Public Affairs, and the Counsel to
the Office of the Vice President, and that is only on one of the counts
in the indictment.

So, you've seen the secret GJ testimony? All you have in the indictment is
what Fitzgerald wants you to see.

That's right, and all of the above was in the indictment. It is *not* a
case of Libby's work against Russert's. It is a case of Libby's word
against *all* of those other sources. The only thing NOYB said that was
accurate was, "the trial should show where the truth really lies". That
is, if there is a trial.


Tim Russert, NBC's Wash.D.C Beaureu Chief, is contradicted by his on staff
on NBC Wash.D.C. correspondent that had a report published saying that
every one in DC knew Wilson's wife, Plame, worked at the CIA.

10 years ago I thought Russert to be a moderate, 5 years ago he started to
show left-wing leanings and today he has joined the left-wing of the
Democratic party.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 08:45:35 -0500, Bert Robbins wrote:


What about the covert CIA agent Sen. Kerry outed a few months ago. Are you
going to have him brought up on charges too? If not, then your bias is
showing.

LOL, my bias? Both Sen. Lugar and Sen. Kerry "outed" the very same agent.
Why didn't you mention Sen. Lugar? It appears your bias is showing. But
hey, go for it. Bring them both up on charges.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

jps wrote:

It's funny - your wife disagrees with most of what you say about Democrats.
Why, just this morning, I rolled off of her, we shared some strawberries
dipped in melted chocolate, and we started discussing politics. I'll bet you
have no idea what she says about you while you're out at Victoria's Secret,
gettin' yourself a new supply of panties.


Oh man, that's rich. Thanks for the hearty laugh.

jps

Doug's pretty sharp for such a late hour.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

In article , "Dr. Dr. Smithers"
Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com says...

fabricate fictitious boats to impress people in UseNet.

I'm with Smithers on this one Harry. Why would Snippy fabricate owning
a Bilgeliner?

jps

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

Harry,
It sounds like you are doing some projecting here. Does your barber have
many boating magazines?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:
In article , "Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask
Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com says...

fabricate fictitious boats to impress people in UseNet.

I'm with Smithers on this one Harry. Why would Snippy fabricate owning a
Bilgeliner?

jps


Easy. Snippy was getting a haircut one day in Derby, and while sitting in
the barber's chair, he perused a boating related magazine. He saw the
Bilgeliner, decided he wanted to be a "boater," and imagined owning one,
and trailering it all over the free world.

Ever been to the Derby, Kansas - Wichita area? I have. A jon boat or bass
boat would be sufficient.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

IMHO
Sounds like what Billy Jeff Clinton was charged with: lying about consensual
sex.
Fredo

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

Obstruction for What?
Libby is charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed.

Saturday, October 29, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation took nearly two years, sent a reporter
to jail, cost millions of dollars, and preoccupied some of the White
House's senior officials. The fruit it has now borne is the five-count
indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the Vice President's Chief of
Staff--not for leaking the name of Valerie Plame to Robert Novak, which
started this entire "scandal," but for contradictions between his
testimony and the testimony of two or three reporters about what he told
them, when he told them, and what words he used.

Mr. Fitzgerald would not comment yesterday on whether he had evidence for
the perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement counts beyond the
testimonies of Mr. Libby and three journalists. Instead, he noted that a
criminal investigation into a "national security matter" of this sort
hinged on "very fine distinctions," and that any attempt to obscure
exactly who told what to whom and when was a serious matter.

Let us stipulate that impeding a criminal investigation is indeed a
serious matter; no one should feel he can lie to a grand jury or to
federal investigators. But there is a question to be asked about the end
to which the accused allegedly lied. The indictment itself contains no
motive. And Mr. Libby is not alleged to have been the source for Robert
Novak's July 14, 2003 column, in which Valerie Plame's employment with the
CIA was revealed.

Rather, according to the indictment, Mr. Libby did a little digging, found
out who Joe Wilson's wife was, and apparently told Judith Miller of the
New York Times, who never wrote it up, and Matthew Cooper of Time
magazine, who put it into print after Mr. Novak's column had run. What's
more, he allegedly did not talk to Tim Russert of NBC about it, although
he claimed that he had. Mr. Libby then didn't tell a grand jury and the
FBI the truth about what he told those reporters, the indictment claims.

If this is a conspiracy to silence Administration critics, it was more
daft than deft. The indictment itself contains no evidence of a
conspiracy, and Mr. Libby has not been accused of trying to cover up some
high crime or misdemeanor by the Bush Administration. The indictment
amounts to an allegation that one official lied about what he knew about
an underlying "crime" that wasn't committed. And we still don't know who
did tell Mr. Novak--presumably, it was the soon-to-be-infamous "Official
A" from paragraph 21 of the indictment, although we don't know whether
Official A was Mr. Novak's primary source or merely a corroborating one.





To the extent that the facts alleged in the indictment can be relied upon,
the story goes something like this. Sometime in May 2003, or slightly
before, Nicholas Kristof, a columnist for the New York Times, was informed
of Joe Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger to investigate claims that Saddam
Hussein had attempted to buy yellowcake there. Mr. Kristof wrote a column,
and Mr. Libby began to ask around, to determine why a Democratic partisan
had been sent on such a sensitive mission in the run-up to the Iraq war.
He allegedly learned in the course of his inquiries that Mr. Wilson's wife
worked for the CIA.
Mr. Fitzgerald alleges that Mr. Libby informed Judith Miller of the New
York Times about Mr. Wilson's wife in June, but she never wrote it up. In
the meantime, Mr. Wilson went public with his own account of his mission
and its outcome, without reference to his wife's employment or possible
involvement in his trip.

Mr. Libby also spoke to Mr. Cooper of Time about it, who did write it up,
but only after Mr. Novak's column had run. In this same time period, he
had a conversation with Mr. Russert, which may or may not have covered Mr.
Wilson and his wife, depending on whom you believe.

So, we are left with this. Did Mr. Libby offer the truth about Mr. Wilson
to Mr. Cooper "without qualifications," as Mr. Fitzgerald alleges, or did
he merely confirm what Mr. Cooper had heard elsewhere? Did he, or did he
not, discuss Mr. Wilson with Tim Russert at all?

On this much we can agree with Mr. Fitzgerald: These are "very fine
distinctions" indeed, especially as they pertain to discussions that
occurred two years ago, and whose importance only became clear well after
the fact, when investigators came knocking. In a statement yesterday, Mr.
Libby's counsel zeroed in on this point when he said, "We are quite
distressed the Special Counsel has now sought to pursue alleged
inconsistencies in Mr. Libby's recollection and those of others' and to
charge such inconsistencies as false statements." He added that they "will
defend vigorously against these charges."





On the answers to these questions hang a possible 30-year jail term and
$1.25 million in fines for a Bush Administration official who was merely
attempting to expose the truth about Mr. Wilson, a critic of the
Administration who was lying to the press about the nature of his
involvement in the Niger mission and about the nature of the intelligence
that it produced. In other words, Mr. Libby was defending Administration
policy against political attack, not committing a crime.
Mr. Fitzgerald has been dogged in pursuing his investigation, and he gave
every appearance of being a reasonable and tough prosecutor in laying out
the charges yesterday. But he has thrust himself into what was, at bottom,
a policy dispute between an elected Administration and critics of the
President's approach to the war on terror, who included parts of the
permanent bureaucracy of the State Department and CIA. Unless Mr.
Fitzgerald can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Libby was lying,
and doing so for some nefarious purpose, this indictment looks like a case
of criminalizing politics.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/weeken.../?id=110007476

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A policy dispute indeed! One that culminated into treason committed by
bureaucrats in State and the CIA who worked in concert to destabilize a
President.

OT--Charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed?
 

"FREDO" wrote in message
.. .
IMHO
Sounds like what Billy Jeff Clinton was charged with: lying about
consensual sex.
Fredo




No, he was charged for lies in a Sexual Harassment suit.