Lewis "Scooter" Libby found guilty

[Doodsmack]

....for lying under oath and obstructing the investigation of the case. the case, for those who don't know, involves the leaking of a clandestine CIA operative's identiy. despite the fact that everyone knows it was dick cheney and karl rove, there has been no attempt to prosecute them. the CIA operative was valerie plame, whose husband was speaking out against the Iraq War, so cheney and rove decided to retaliate. libby and others have admitted that cheney was the one who originally gave them the operative's name. so i wonder why no attempt is made to prosecute?

kind of makes a mockery of America's claims to moral righteousness.

 

[mountjonas]

i sense he's going to get pardoned anyway.

 

[mspdfreak]

Dood, you really need to get away from the liberal blogs.

Here are the facts:

1.) Plame was not covert, so there was no crime.

2.) The prosecutor knew this before he had Jusith Miller put in jail for not revealing her source. He pursued the case, hoping he could get someone to slip up under oath.

3.) Robert Novak first made Plame's identity public in the fall of 2003.

4.) Scooter Libby was convicted for lying under oath. That was his ****-up, even there was no crime committed in the first place.

My prediction is that this will languish in appeals until Jan. 19, 2009, when Bush pardons him.

 

[Doodsmack]

my understanding is that Plame was posing as an engineer (or some other civilian occupation) when in fact she was a government employee whose job was to recruit CIA officers. as far as i know that can be considered "clandestine."

besides the release of her identity was clearly a political retaliation for her husband's activity. such a retaliation would only be effective if the release of her identity mattered. right?

 

[jersey_emt]

4.) Scooter Libby was convicted for lying under oath. That was his ****-up, even there was no crime committed in the first place.

Last time I checked, perjury was a crime.

My prediction is that this will languish in appeals until Jan. 19, 2009, when Bush pardons him.

You're probably right.

 

[smo0f]

i've been seeing/hearing about libby for such a long time and never made an effort to see who and why. i think i made a wise choice

 

[1st Gen]

She worked for a front company called Brewster Jennings. When she was outed, so was the front company/network that the CIA was using to gather intel on the region. Well never hear about the agents that died when that happened.

I believe Richard Armitage is the one that actually did the dirty.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

 

[smo0f]

damn, i think i'm gonna read into that

 

[Killer]

It just shows what this admin is really made of.

 

[Doodsmack]

and yet supporters of the bush administration honestly believe that plame wasn't covert and that no crime occurred.

 

[Killer]

and yet supporters of the bush administration honestly believe that plame wasn't covert and that no crime occurred.

They cant help themselves.

 

[mspdfreak]

and yet supporters of the bush administration honestly believe that plame wasn't covert and that no crime occurred.

Prove she was covert and that there was a crime. (except the perjury charge, which was after the investigation had begun)

Any reputable source will suffice.

I'll be waiting...

 

[jersey_emt]

Prove she was covert and that there was a crime. (except the perjury charge, which was after the investigation had begun)

Any reputable source will suffice.

I'll be waiting...

How do you prove someone was a covert agent?

It's like asking to prove the existence / nonexistence of a supreme being.

But, think about it....if she wasn't covert, why was there an investigation into how her identity was leaked?

You're asking for us to prove that she held NOC status. The only way to prove it would be to have access to the list.

 

[Doodsmack]

mspdfreak, there is nothing but circumstantial evidence to suggest that she either was or wasn't covert. no one really knows, the left and right just speculate in support of their own hypothesis.

but why would the name have been released if it wasn't intended to harm joe wilson? why did novak just happen to release her identity if she was nothing but a desk jockey?

 

[protojason]

Prove she was covert and that there was a crime. (except the perjury charge, which was after the investigation had begun)

Any reputable source will suffice.

I'll be waiting...

"Absence of proof is not proof of absence. "

-William Cowper

 

[1st Gen]

What would you call a reputable source?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame

"Valerie Plame was identified as a NOC by Elisabeth Bumiller, in an article published in the New York Times on 5 October 2003:

But within the C.I.A., the exposure of Ms. Plame is now considered an even greater instance of treachery. Ms. Plame, a specialist in non-conventional weapons who worked overseas, had "nonofficial cover", and was what in C.I.A. parlance is called a NOC, the most difficult kind of false identity for the agency to create. While most undercover agency officers disguise their real profession by pretending to be American embassy diplomats or other United States government employees, Ms. Plame passed herself off as a private energy expert. Intelligence experts said that NOCs have especially dangerous jobs.[8]"



If someone would please clarify for me the difference between right wing and left, I would appreciate it. I find a number of issues that warrant public concern being labeled leftwing propaganda, while the right wing always seems to be able to justify tragedy and betrayal.


Back to my original question, what is a credible source?

http://www.democracynow.org/

 

[Killer]

Prove she was covert and that there was a crime. (except the perjury charge, which was after the investigation had begun)

Any reputable source will suffice.

I'll be waiting...

 

[1sty]

Last time I checked, perjury was a crime.

Not if your the president apparently

 

[1sty]

"Absence of proof is not proof of absence. "

-William Cowper

Its an unknown Unknown.

- Samual L Jackson

 

[mspdfreak]

What would you call a reputable source?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame

"Valerie Plame was identified as a NOC by Elisabeth Bumiller, in an article published in the New York Times on 5 October 2003:

But within the C.I.A., the exposure of Ms. Plame is now considered an even greater instance of treachery. Ms. Plame, a specialist in non-conventional weapons who worked overseas, had "nonofficial cover", and was what in C.I.A. parlance is called a NOC, the most difficult kind of false identity for the agency to create. While most undercover agency officers disguise their real profession by pretending to be American embassy diplomats or other United States government employees, Ms. Plame passed herself off as a private energy expert. Intelligence experts said that NOCs have especially dangerous jobs.[8]"



If someone would please clarify for me the difference between right wing and left, I would appreciate it. I find a number of issues that warrant public concern being labeled leftwing propaganda, while the right wing always seems to be able to justify tragedy and betrayal.


Back to my original question, what is a credible source?

http://www.democracynow.org/

AP or Reuters would be credible..

Now to the top...That article is 4 years old. After the investigation, it was concluded she was NOT covert. If she had been, Libby would have been charged with outing her. He wasn't. He was charged with perjury during his testimony, and obstruction stemming from the perjury. He was convicted on both.

The prosecutor knew that Richard Armitage was the original leaker, but he continued, hoping he would catch someone slipping up during testimony. It worked.

I'm at work, so I really don't have time to explain the many layers of the right and left.