Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Condi Rice Not For President | Main | Happy Independence Day - Enjoy The Commute »

July 02, 2007

Comments

chch16

Charlice as is her continual MO quotes no surveys she just makes her statement up.

Actual Survey On Commutation Clarice was Too Lazy to Find

What Lazy Clarice is affraid to research:

Survey USA polled 825 Americans familiar with the Libby case immediately after the commutation was announced. Results are below (h/t TPM):


21% agree with President Bush's decision to commute Libby's prison sentence

17% say Bush should have pardoned Libby completely.

60% say Bush should have left the judge's prison sentence in place.

32% of Republicans agree with the President's decision, compared to 14% of Democrats and 20% of Independents.

26% of Republicans say Libby should have been pardoned completely, compared to 21% of Independents and 8% of Democrats.

Conservatives split evenly: 31% say Libby should have been pardoned. 35% say the judge's sentence should have been left in place. 31% agree with the President's decision to commute the prison sentence, but to leave the fine and conviction in place.

Surveys that have been done (this story is only a few hours old) show that a 60% of Americans understand and want LIbby's sentence to remain.

Lol ole Sue stumbled onto what scares the paranoids here--the law on Immunity I've referenced that the bozo otherTom lol has failed to uderstand with his crap about 200 plus years. Tom apparently doesn't understand what happened to Monica Goodling and compelled her to testify although she lied about not remembering. She was just one stepping stone on the way to holding Cheney, Rove, and Bush in contempt of congress.

No sue--they won't charge him again. They'll hold him in contempt for refusing to answer if they confer immunity on Libby and he continues to plead the 5th.

Then they can throw him in prison for refusing to answer their questions.

Jonah Goldberg knows no law.

@Jane--the commutation was 5 hours after the panel opinion. Everybody cared that the bond had been denied and 65% of the American people felt damn good about it in the polls.

@sara--ignorant again. Bush has no power to use eminent domain for that purpose.
\
Hilarious that rather than discuss most of you again call names whoever it is--if they're democrat they are morons right? The child in you dominates any rationality whatsoever.

Poppy I understand that most of you (although not all to be sure) aren't lawyers and you don't understand much of the nuances of the criminal justice system as established by Congress and the Judicial Conference approved by the S. Ct. because Congress has set it up this way.

I know you want to understand or I think you do.

Let me make this clear. The law establishes (and Ken Starr used this in his $166 million dollar waste of time Watergate investigation that nailed no big fish) for a limited immunity grant (they did it to Monica Goodling two months ago and others) for the questions they want to ask the individual only.

They can go to court and get it done in a heartbeat. Jeffries and Wells can't stop this; they've had a number of clients who have had this done to them.

The Immunity is for anything said in answer to questions either Congress or Fitz now before a grand jury would ask Libby.

It is certainly real. If you don't believe me, lol, and you're stupid not to, ask someone you know who does federal litigation if you have that resource.

Can you spell Judy Miller? Well it was done to her, and she refused, and she went to jail and would have stayed there for months, but Scootie had a pang of consciouence for his former lover and released what she considered an obligation not to reveal her source. Then ole Judy was sprung from 81 days in jail for contempt.

Poppy write this on the blackboard a 1000 times they are jailed for contempt if they refuse to answer those questions which they have had immunity granted to cover if either Fitz or Congress chooses to do this. I'm betting on Congress to do this by odds, but Fitz could.

Listen up. Do you have the capacity to learn?

Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, (1972). For you Poppy that's an S.Ct. cite. There are 3 conventions--I used one:

"The United States can compel testimony from an unwilling witness who invokes the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination by conferring immunity, as provided by 18 U.S.C. § 6002, from use of the compelled testimony and evidence derived therefrom in subsequent criminal proceedings, as such immunity from use and derivative use is coextensive with the scope of the privilege and is sufficient to compel testimony over a claim of the privilege. Transactional immunity would afford broader protection than the Fifth Amendment privilege, and is not constitutionally required. In a subsequent criminal prosecution, the prosecution has the burden of proving affirmatively that evidence proposed to be used is derived from a legitimate source wholly independent of the compelled testimony." Pp. 443-462.

440 F.2d 954, affirmed.

POWELL, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and STEWART, WHITE, and BLACKMUN, JJ., joined.

As to cboldt's comment from a defense standpoint, Libby has everything to gain from continuing his appeal, and he will do this because he has unlimited money from a fundraising machine of elitists who think this administration is not subject to the law, and whatever is done to protect Cheney, Bush or other White House officials is necessary at all costs including Bush protecting Bush by commutting Libby hoping he won't talk now. Bush could extend a full pardon but he didn't have the balls yesterday and it is pretty clear he did this after incessant pressure from Cheney and the base.

The D.C. Circuit will set a briefing schedule on the main appeal, although they could decide it per curiam with a one sentence affirmation. I doubt that will happen and I expect them to grant oral argument on the appeal (which they did not on the appeal bond issue). From Robbins' standpoint the commute is sad, because Robbins is about one thing--money. He would have been able to charge for an en banc motion on the appeal bond, but will not be doing one now.

@ Roger A what are you smoking. Bush and Cheney are going to be held in contempt of Congress.

There is the strong possibility that either Fitz or Congress can grant limited immunity and if Libby then refuses to answer their questions, throw him in prison for contempt.

Why isn't your ass riding a tank in Iran--Roger? Your committment to the occupation is keyboard/mouse LOL.

Clarice as a purported lawyer, seldom thinks like one.

If Clarice is in fact a lawyer in D.C. she is aware that two of the major problems in Immigration law are

1) The bureaucracy is broken in handling legal INS applications for citizenship taking 10-15 years and thousands of dollars.

2) INS Judges are not appointed on the basis of experience and talent--they are appointed now by DOJ as political plumbs vetted and hired by the likes of Twit Monica Goodling whose only concern is loyalty to the Republican party--even if they are dumb as a rock on immigration law and its application.

Libby is not bankrupt. He inherited millions from his daddy the investment banker. He is being given money from the committee who has raised 7 milion and growing for him, and Cheney connections will take care of Libby finacially for the rest of his life.

He should have considered legal expenses when he lied to protect Cheney and Bush, and stopped lying. I doubt seriously if Clarice understands that Libby could still face jail liability if found in contempt after immunity has been conferred on him to answer questions at this point.


What Clarice has just written is ludicrous and it's being written on hundreds of Republican Conservative blogs and I suspect Clarice reads them and paraphrases them. I don't know how many original ideas she gets--but the problem for Clarice and people who read her is that she polly-parrots misperceptions of the law--not unusual for a Republican lawyer (if she is) who is very inexperienced. The big buzz going around now for Republicans is the Bill Clinton comparison. I suspect, but am not sure that Clarice knows the English word "distinguish" and Clarice and the sites she parrots completely fail to distinguish the marked differences in the Bill Clinton and Scootie situations:

Tim Noah has written a ridiculous article at Slate comparing Clinton and Libby that people like Clarice parrot and paraphrase from their fave sites.

Clinton was tried and acquitted of lying about a blow job and a cigar.

Libby's sentence was not excessive, because he was sentenced to the minimum for which he was convicted--a real 24 months would have been served. It's not routine for a convicted federal felon to get bond pending appeal. Clinton didn't leak the identity of a CIA/NOC--Libby did. Libby was sentenced because he lied about Cheney's role in leaking. Armitage was just one of the leakers. Cheney was puppet master in getting scores of people to leak and Liby tried to cover this up.

I agree with OtherTom's reasoning and in context with Cboldt's comments, Libby has nothing to lose and everything to gain by going forward with his appeal as he will from a defense standpoint.

If he is granted enbanc review, I predict they will affirm the panel and I seriously doubt the S. Ct. would give Libby a Rule 21 review. There are so many similar petitions they turn down and I doubt they would find a close question or compelling reason they need to look at it.

OtherTom--you're showing your ignorance however on a limited immunity grant from Congress or from Fitz that would compel Libby to testify or face contempt. I cited it and documented instances of it, and you fail to comprehend them. Ignorance is bliss for you.

Limited immunity is granted frequently--this happened to Monica Goodling two months ago or were you dead then?

Try booting up 18 U.S.C. 6005 (c) and reading it Other Tom. Besides the S. Ct. opinion it's the "Otherway" this gets done.

A two-thirds vote of the panel is required to approve the resolution, which would direct the House counsel to apply to U.S. District Court for a grant of one of the types of immunity and Senate Judiciary can do the same thing.

windansea

From a former Uk Jihadi:

When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network - a series of British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology - I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.

By blaming the Government for our actions, those who pushed this “Blair’s bombs” line did our propaganda work for us.

More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.

The attempts to cause mass destruction in London and Glasgow are so reminiscent of other recent British Islamic extremist plots that they are likely to have been carried out by my former peers.

And as with previous terror attacks, people are again saying that violence carried out by Muslims is all to do with foreign policy.

For example, on Saturday on Radio 4’s Today programme, the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: “What all our intelligence shows about the opinions of disaffected young Muslims is the main driving force is not Afghanistan, it is mainly Iraq.”

I left the British Jihadi Network in February 2006 because I realised that its members had simply become mindless killers. But if I were still fighting for their cause, I’d be laughing once again.

Syl

I loved tony snow today mentioning there are still some issues with Joe wilson's veracity. You could hear the gasps from the pressnut gallery!

I saw one (CNN gal as I remember) rolling her eyes at something tony said. LOL

Oh, and I saw melanie sloan on MSNBC last night. Grim is the description that comes to mind.

windansea

Everyone, especially those who think getting out of Iraq solves the problem, should read this article by the former UK Jihadi

I was a fanatic

DrJ

My response to the continuing posting of verbal dysentery here can best be summarized as

Ich sitze in dem kleinsten Zimmer in meinem Hause.
Ich habe ihre Kritik vor mir.
Im naechsten Augenblick wird sie hinter mir sein.

Other Tom

Thanks, Sue. I'm familiar with the Kastigar ruling, and I think it was on the basis of that case that Ollie North's and John Poindexter's convictions were reversed (haven't gone back to check).

But the issue here is a bit different: Libby has already been convicted, but is on appeal. Obviously nothing he says in front of congress will be part of the record on appeal, but on the other hand the hearings will be public, and the daily accounts of the testimony will certainly be read about in the newspapers and seen on tv by every judge in the D.C. Circuit. That may not provide a technical ground for declining to testify, but if I'm Libby I'll just tell them I'd be happy to talk after the appeal is determined, or when an appellate court (or my own lawyer) tells me that I have to.

BobS

Syl: I wished I would have seen that. You can't tell me that FINALLY a Republican had the stones to mention Joe Wilson's, well, lying problem.

Jane

There is a good article about how Congress doesn't have the authority to police the Executive via show trials over at Pajama's media:

http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/07/
the_bully_congress.php

Seems like Libby would be smart to decline any invitation offered.

Pal2Pal (Sara)

Jeff G. is on a roll this morning:

Who, exactly, is unwilling to accept the jury verdict — Bush or Wilson?

“They owe my wife and my family an apology for having betrayed her,” he said.

No, Joe. You betrayed her. Or perhaps she betrayed herself. Fact is, only you two know how that really played out — or what the underlying intentions were behind her pulling the strings to get you sent on that fact-finding mission. But it was no secret that Plame was a CIA agent — at least, not in any conventional sense of the meaning of “secret.”

That many on the left continues to lap up the cynical pap that drips from this guy’s mouth is all the evidence necessary to conclude that these partisan ideologues are beyond caring about the truth — and beyond the kind of shame that comes from embracing someone they know to be both a serial liar and a lazy foreign service bureaucrat — and that they will embrace, at least temporarily, anyone that serves to further their agenda as a way toward achieving their ends: demonize and then marginalize the (fluidly-described) “right wing,” gull the American people (with the aid of a media elite striving to define and reinforce its own narrative), and return the reins of power to their “rightful” guardians, who will commence implementing policies designed to protect the masses from themselves.

The Thing that wouldn't leave

chch16

What Charlice conveniently ignores or doesn't understand (probably both) is that the only thing blood thirsty in the Libby case was this:

Libby blocked that Cheney directed him to leak and endager the Wilson family and none of them had any regard for the safety of a covert CIA officer.

chch16

Charice is pulling comments off Conservative blogs like crazy, paraphrasing them,and failing to appreciate their inherent ignorance like the point ignoring that Libby and his superiors endagered the Wilson family.

chch16

CLARICE--

Each comment is more ridiculous and devoid of facts than the last. She can guarantee that.

hoosierhoops

Hoosier hoops you're naive:

Defendants convicted don't have a choice of how to configure the installment. That's up to the judge and most of them have their resources exhaustd by the end of a trial.

They don't have rich white Republicans raising 7 million dollars to fund fines and appeals like Scootie does.

If you didn't remember to send a check whatever your fine was, the probation office would promptly haul your ass before the judge and you would be remanded to serve out the rest of your probation term.

This happens every day in Indianapolis and other Hoosier federal courts. Welcome to the law Hoops.
-Chocho16

Quit wetting your pants chocho.. I was only teasing..you know goofing? joshing? Parody?
To insure i don't turn Naive on you..I hired the best sounding, longest 3 name lawyer in the book...mmmm well, maybe that was naive...
************************************
for the rest of JOM'ers here...
We welcomed our first granddaughter into the world yesterday at 3:02 pm, Her name is Riley, 7lbs 1oz and 20 in. she is healthy and oh so beautiful.....

Syl

windandsea

Haven't read it yet, but is that Butt?

jane

The worst do-nothing congress in history. :)
It's all about the elections and keeping the base fired up.

Note how aggressive the Democrats are lately? It's human nature to become more aggressive when you think you are 'winning'. Happens in sports too.

It is also happening with the jihadi movement because they think they are beating America. Just wait to see what happens if we turn tail and run from Iraq. Nothing will stop them.

Remember bin laden truly believes it was the muhajadeen who brought down the Soviet Union. And that gave him courage and confidence to try to bring down America too.

If we pull out of Iraq before conditions on the ground warrant it, al Qaeda would believe it has won and the jihadi movement will get a tremendous boost. Simple as that.

If al Qaeda (bin laden and Zawahiri's own words) believe Iraq is the central front in the war why don't the democrats? It would have been so easy for the Democrats to join with Republicans to support Iraq. Then the anti-war crowd on the Left could have joined with the isolationist crowd on the Right to oppose the war.

Instead we have an unnecessarily divided nation. That is bad for America and bad for the world.

PeterUK.

The Endangered Wilson Family at a secret location.
Valerie Plame Wilson,siad,"Where's my Fatwa Dude?"

windansea

Haven't read it yet, but is that Butt?

yep...if the appeasement crowd would just read what AN ACTUAL JIHADIST has to say they would understand why they want to kill us all, libs included.

Ahminadinnerjacket just refused Olvier Stone request to make a movie about him, basically told him "even though you are a lefty you are still an infidel"

Carol_Herman

Ya know, citing Judith Miller's compulsory testimony; now, that was a doozy.

Yeah. She served 85 days. And, the New Yuk Times absorbed all her legal fees. They're still paying. And, she's still laughing.

As to her "compulsory" testimony at Libby's trial, wow. That's what I call judges, who ought'a be swinging frozen mackarels, instead of gavels, around, get from her, NOTHING USABLE!

That's okay. Pinchie is still paying.

It feels like a good day. The scolds think Americans are gonna join their side because they proclaim "it's good for Amerika." Horse shit. What's good is that you get opinions from everywhere. And, up above. Late at night, Bill from AZ, (12:25 PM) put up a hilarious link.

Oh, for those who aren't sure who they'd vote for? There's Mike Gavel.

And, the president won't say if he's gonna commute the entire mishigas. Let 'em scream and yell. It gives them away in their hiding places.

I think, Dubya, in the foreseeable future, will be bouncing up. WHEW! Last place sucker is still Jimmy who?

windansea

just for chi chi

CH

The ONLY thing I like about "chch16" and other crazies of his kind on this "site"
(yes, I've been thoroughly corrected!) is that I can touch the speed scroll on my keyboard and quickly move on to the sane posts that follow.

windansea

Gordon Brown has banned ministers from using the word “Muslim” in ­connection with the ­terrorism crisis.

The Prime Minister has also instructed his team – including new Home Secretary Jacqui Smith – that the phrase “war on ­terror” is to be dropped.

The shake-up is part of a fresh attempt to improve community relations and avoid offending Muslims, adopting a more “consensual” tone than existed under Tony Blair.

yikes...

clarice

If I were Hillary! I'd take Conyers aside and "persuade' him to dump his planned heraigs. If I were Fitz, I'd consider my big mounthed post-commutation remarks just brought more pressure for my testimony at those playhouse hearings part II.
If I were the President I'd look forward to the House wasting more of its time, money and capital on crap like this.

BTW, with respect to a real traitor, Pollard, Chucky Schumer asked for clemency.

BobS

Carol, CH: When lefty's are wrong on facts and substance they often attack the messanger, call names and call intelliegence into question. Clarice clearly has struck a nerve thats why the nuclear oions are being utilzed.

The left-or should I say demleft-usually go after the people with the voice and one's with ideas.

windansea

Jane

Don't give into the trolls. There is only so much bandwidth available, and I want Sunny Day back!

hoosierhoops

Windansea.. The list of Clinton pardons read like a crime novel..Conterfeiting, Drug transportation, selling speed ( oh those late nights at the white house ) stolen cars, embezzlement, selling gun silencers, gambling, Cocaine ( no wonder his state of the union speeches were 3 hours..)Well, really the only unfair charge was the poor guy in possesion of untaxed whiskey. ( as i eye my box of Cubans )
This almost sounds like the Indiana Pacers rap sheet...
Clinton Lied and the Dealers High five'd..

topsecretk9

Hoosier

--We welcomed our first granddaughter into the world yesterday at 3:02 pm, Her name is Riley, 7lbs 1oz and 20 in. she is healthy and oh so beautiful.....

Fantastic news - congratulations! Riley is my sons name and for the record it was the only name I decided on, boy or girl!

Paul

All this scrolling I have to do to get past ChiChi's posts makes my finger sore.

Anyway, of course Libby should continue with his appeal. There are big issues here.

topsecretk9

--Libby blocked that Cheney directed him to leak--

Che Che Guevara keeps saying this - leak what? Link please.

Enlightened

OT -

Is it another coinkydink that the lefties and their leader Jabba-the-Mikeymoore, are pushing for national health care and terrorists have infiltrated the UK national healthcare system.....just sayin'

Don't respond to the teenage mutant.....it will morph back into the fever swamps soon enough.

topsecretk9

Now, I am sure there are good reasons pending an appeal for not, but if I were Libby i'd (in a few days of course) book my butt on every talk show known to man to tell my side and reiterate what a lying sack of crap blow hard Joe Wilson is - and DEMAND Joe Wilson apologize to my family for lying about everything in the first place.

SlimGuy

If GW's commutation of sentence put them into a tailspin yesterday, this is gonna drive them totally bezonkers.

 

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Tuesday refused to rule out a pardon for former White House aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a day after sparing him from prison in a case that helped seal his Iraq legacy and gave ammunition to Democrats.

Bush, who angered Democrats but reassured conservatives by saving Libby from serving a 2-1/2 year prison sentence, told reporters who asked about an eventual full pardon for Libby: "As to the future I rule nothing in and nothing out."

Rick Ballard

"All this scrolling I have to do to get past ChiChi's posts makes my finger sore."

Everyone show the Ch-Chombie your sore red finger!

..!..

RichatUF

Everyone have a great July 4th weekend!!!

RichatUF

RichatUF

weekend->holiday

You all knew what I meant!

SlimGuy

With that, you are pushing your luck with me, Hit. I may switch affections elsewhere.

Posted by: clarice | July 03, 2007 at 12:35 PM

At this point I should tell Clarice that I'm not free but I am reasonable.

But I know it's just all those house mods getting to her head and she's just leading me on that she could desert H&R who is staying in his bunker in an undisclosed location just like TM who hasn't been around to take out the trash.

PeterUK.

London car bombs meant to kill women?

Pal2Pal (Sara)

I guess Al Gore isn't as influential in Britain:

Poll: British Public Rates Global Warming As Lesser Problem Than Terrorism, Graffiti, and... Dog Crap

Jane

TM needs to get back from the beach and start a new thread!

clarice

Iowahawk has a doozy on the London bombers:

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2007/07/that-didnt-go-s.html

topsecretk9

--Everyone have a great July 4th weekend!!!--

You too Rich!

Pal2Pal (Sara)

Frank J, guest posting over at Right Wing News, has put up a guide for appealing to the left-wing blogosphere aimed at 2008 Democrat candidates.

TIPS TO APPEALING TO THE LEFT-WING BLOGOSPHERE

OUT: Pride in this country.
IN: Apologizing effusively to the rest of the world for America’s very existence.

OUT: Harsh rhetoric directed towards terrorists.
IN: Harsh rhetoric directed towards Joe Lieberman.

OUT: A gruff demeanor that exudes authority.
IN: Silky hair and a winning smile.

OUT: Respect for the military.
IN: Making sure those brainwashed, kill-bots don’t turn on the public.

OUT: Soaking ourselves in the blood of our enemies.
IN: Pretty red ribbons.

OUT: Death for Islamic extremists.
IN: Hugs for Islamic extremists.

OUT: Concern for large national threats against our very way of life.
IN: Broadband internet for the poor.

OUT: New weapons for devastating our enemies.
IN: Collages of America’s injustices.

OUT: Vowing to bring terrorists to justice.
IN: Vowing to bring the Bush Administration to justice.

OUT: Fighting real problem like Islamic extremism and nuclear weapons.
IN: Fighting made up problems like global warming or any other threat that can be fought through recycling instead of bullets.

OUT: Testicles.
IN: Rainbows.

windansea

The Massachusetts Republican also used the issue to take a shot at Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, who criticized the president’s decision Monday night while campaigning Iowa with her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

“Wasn’t it Bill Clinton who was handing out pardons like lollipops at the end of his administration,” Romney said, “and isn’t there some recognition that you might look a little silly if you didn’t have anything to say when he was handing out pardon after pardon after pardon for political purposes only?”

topsecretk9

I posted this last night about the detained doctor in Australia and then searches --

"Certain material has been taken possession of which obviously will be subject of extensive examination, but beyond that it wouldn't be appropriate to go into detail," he said.

"No explosive material has been located by police."...

in a cursory search I did not see anything about the non explosive material - does anyone know what the "material" is yet?

PeterUK.

Dr Death by Dr Sanity

Pal2Pal (Sara)

Windansea - everyone mentions the Mark Rich pardon or the FALN pardons, but forget Henry Cisneros and his 18 felony counts plea bargained away and then his last minute pardon.

Bill in AZ

TS - I don't think Libby could get on a talk show even if he paid. The MSM's very simple template that virtually every piece of news filters through is: "anything that moves us towards socialism, we run with it. Anything that moves us away from socialism, we bury".

Anything Libby would say chips away at the house of cards that schumer, comey, fitz, wilson, plame built, chips away at lefty credibility, and moves us away from socialism - therefore anything he says will be buried.

I hope he still has fight left for exoneration - it will be dutifully buried by MSM when he succeeds, but even a few lib heads exploding is better than none.

decayd

I still have a number of questions about this case which have never been answered and probably wont be because they are more political than legal. Here they are.

1. Why did Fitzgerald keep the identity of Armitage, the leaker responsible for Novak's publication, secret for years, instructing Novak and Armitage to keep this secret?
There had been a public controversy, with the Democrats maintaining that the leak had come from the White House to hurt Plame, and the White House claiming otherwise.
Fitzgerald knew the truth about this controversy and kept it quiet for years through two elections. Why? Was there a political motive to this odd behavior?
2. We now know that Armitage had leaked to Woodward, who told others, long before Libby said anything at all about Plame. Yet Fitzgerald has fairly recently claimed that Libby was the first leaker. How come?
Was Fitzgerald unaware of this leak? Had Armitage not been asked about it? Did he tell of it?
3. Judith Miller was jailed for refusing to testify, and it became apparent when she did testify that she was protecting someone other than Libby. That is, she agreed to testify only if allowed to testify only about contacts with Libby. Who else was she protecting? Was it a reporter or someone at the New York Times?
4. Libby testified about hearing first about Plame from official sources. He was convicted of lying (with reference to Russert) only in reference to claiming that he heard again about her from Russert and was surprised to hear it. This would have been in a second conversation with Russert on July 11. Russert asserted that he did not know about Plame until Novak's article became available. Novak's article got on the wire where NBC news people could read it late on the morning of July 11. Did this second conversation between Russert and Libby occur before or after the appearance of Novak's article on the wire? If it occurred after there was no contradiction between the testimonies of Russert and of Libby.
5. Had Libby been accused of suppressing information by failing to reveal official sources, this could have delayed on impeded or otherwise obstructed an investigation, by deflecting the investigation from those sources. But he did not do so. He was accused of lying by claiming to hear something from Russert. By what train of reasoning can such a claim whether true or false be judged to obstruct an investigation? What would the FBI or the Grand Jury have been enabled to do more efficiently had Libby not made this claim?
6. After the trial, Judge Walton has been quoted as claiming that the evidence was overwhelming for Libby's guilt, presumably of obstructing an investigation. How can this possibly be an unbiased judgement under the circumstances here?

decayd

I still have a number of questions about this case which have never been answered and probably wont be because they are more political than legal. Here they are.

1. Why did Fitzgerald keep the identity of Armitage, the leaker responsible for Novak's publication, secret for years, instructing Novak and Armitage to keep this secret?
There had been a public controversy, with the Democrats maintaining that the leak had come from the White House to hurt Plame, and the White House claiming otherwise.
Fitzgerald knew the truth about this controversy and kept it quiet for years through two elections. Why? Was there a political motive to this odd behavior?
2. We now know that Armitage had leaked to Woodward, who told others, long before Libby said anything at all about Plame. Yet Fitzgerald has fairly recently claimed that Libby was the first leaker. How come?
Was Fitzgerald unaware of this leak? Had Armitage not been asked about it? Did he tell of it?
3. Judith Miller was jailed for refusing to testify, and it became apparent when she did testify that she was protecting someone other than Libby. That is, she agreed to testify only if allowed to testify only about contacts with Libby. Who else was she protecting? Was it a reporter or someone at the New York Times?
4. Libby testified about hearing first about Plame from official sources. He was convicted of lying (with reference to Russert) only in reference to claiming that he heard again about her from Russert and was surprised to hear it. This would have been in a second conversation with Russert on July 11. Russert asserted that he did not know about Plame until Novak's article became available. Novak's article got on the wire where NBC news people could read it late on the morning of July 11. Did this second conversation between Russert and Libby occur before or after the appearance of Novak's article on the wire? If it occurred after there was no contradiction between the testimonies of Russert and of Libby.
5. Had Libby been accused of suppressing information by failing to reveal official sources, this could have delayed on impeded or otherwise obstructed an investigation, by deflecting the investigation from those sources. But he did not do so. He was accused of lying by claiming to hear something from Russert. By what train of reasoning can such a claim whether true or false be judged to obstruct an investigation? What would the FBI or the Grand Jury have been enabled to do more efficiently had Libby not made this claim?
6. After the trial, Judge Walton has been quoted as claiming that the evidence was overwhelming for Libby's guilt, presumably of obstructing an investigation. How can this possibly be an unbiased judgement under the circumstances here?

Jeff Dobbs

SG:
that she could desert H&R who is staying in his bunker in an undisclosed location


'Tis a very disclosed location.

Tom Maguire

I have heard there is more news on Libby so I have a new thread.

Mr. Au Courant.

clarice

Those are very good questions decayd. As for the lat one, Beldar blog raises the same point today--that the sentence was indeed improperly bumped up on the mistaken notion that anything Libby said could have impeded an investigation into an actual crime.

RogerA

I go away from this blog for a bit and find it infested with Cha Cha boy--. Wow, cha cha--ya think Congress might hold Bush and Cheney in contempt? that is SO scary I bet W and the dark lord of the sith are awake every night in terror.

As for the chickenhawk argument: I rode my ass in a tank for 25 years including two tours in viet nam. If the army let old guys like me serve, I would be over there in a second--I like killing bad guys, and would love to whack some ragheaded terrorists-makes me feel warm all over reuniting them with their 72 virgins.

JM Hanes

Slim:

I think we're talking more bunk bed than bunker here....

SunnyDay

thank you Jane. I peek in to see who's posting occasionally. SOB caca's posts, when I see a few good men (and women).

Decayd, I was justt trying to decide who should be the recipients of my questions about this. I would hope that individual citizens writing their own letters asking these kinds of questions might incline someone to consider an answer at some point.

I see Fitzfong. How could he be allowed to prevent Libby's discovery on points he brought in later? How could he be allowed to lie to the public in his presser's. It's Nifong all over again, just done by someone who is so far up the foodchain of DOJ that no one looks closely or cares to get involved. Or cares period.

But I'm just an ordinary citizen. I'm not a lawyer, and I don't read legal. I want to know why this is OK because it just seems so wrong.

Could this be done to me - just on a smaller scale in a different court over a matter of less importance to the nation?

What if I were the first person at the scene of a murder and they couldn't find the perpetrator, but the pressure was on? Could I be railroaded like Libby was?

If this is equal justice, I would like not to have it, OK?

SunnyDay

RogerA - hang on, we might need your tank skills at home, who knows. If the dems keep it up the fighting will be here, not there.

I will be a little old lady who no one suspects runs the underground resistance. :D


Paul

decayd,

Essentially, Fitzfong was looking only for what he termed "bad leaks" as opposed to "good leaks." Thus it didn't matter how many dozens (hundreds?) of people Joe IV and Mrs Joe IV themselves told at cocktail parties and press interviews about super secret agents. It's also why people like Corn were never interviewed. He would automatically be "good" because he was anti-Bush.

Armitage was from a "good" part of the administration, the Powell part, so he could not have done anything "bad" by definition.

Fitzfong was looking for leaks only where he could damage the Bush administration with it. Otherwise he actively did *not* look, because to do so would mean he would find exculpatory evidence and he would be bound to turn over such evidence. By actively *not* looking, he could play dumb.

Poppy

On come now chch16, endagered the Wilson family, are you kidding.

If Joe Wislon wasn't busy bragging his wife was CIA in the green room, he was bragging to reporters.

Plame herself outed herself to Joe Wilson on the second date. Boy that must have been some secret...

In addition, if you knew ANYTHING, you would know that a cover agent doesn't send their civilian spouse on CIA missions and then let him write OP-EDs in the NYT attacking the President with lies.

The far left has a long history of being proud of outing CIA agents, look it up sometime.

Cecil Turner

I like killing bad guys, and would love to whack some ragheaded terrorists

I think you're not supposed to admit that in polite company. But I can relate.

Why did Fitzgerald keep the identity of Armitage, the leaker responsible for Novak's publication, secret for years [. . .] ?

Because he knew, if it were made public, that he'd get more supervision than he could stand (i.e., he'd have been fired for pursuing tangential issues, once the actual leak dynamics were known).

Poppy

Besides chch16, Armitage was the lone gunman on the grssy knoll spilling to Bob Woodward.

Where is the lefts hatred for Armitage? Why isn't he being drug before Congress as a danger to CIA children??

I think the compenency of Plame and Wilson shows alot about why Clintons CIA was sooooo wrong on WMD.

Clinton liked the good looking chicks and didn't care much if they were sending their spouse on boon doggles and writing up super-bad intelligence reports.

This maybe why you have such a deep hatred for Goodling, she got promoted and you believe yourself more capable???

RogerA

Cecil: I really do have a softer and gentler side, but I like to go out of my way to confirm Cha Cha's preconceptions. It would be nice to depress the butterfly triggers on a Mod 2 50 Cal MG again. I love the way the brass sounds as it bounces off the armor. :)

Jeff Dobbs

Poppy:
Clinton liked the good looking chicks and didn't care much if they were sending their spouse on boon doggles and writing up super-bad intelligence reports.

Heh, Clinton=David, Plame=Bathsheba, Joe=Uriah the Hittite*?

Who was Joab and what accounts for his miserable failure? (cf, here)

-------------
*My only hesitation in this analogy is that it would make Joe Wilson a Hittite. And for that I apologize to all hit and run devotees who collectively call themselves Hittites.

chch16

Congrats on your grandaughter. Have a good 4th.

Roger grow up and be a man. Call him yourself. I'm posting facts; most of your type are fosting base cheerleading that is indiscriminate when Bush harms this country.

McCain is down and we're moving you out in a big way.

Republicans are the small tent of running this country into the ground and you all are the base who would rather cheer on corruption, Bush thinking his gang is above the law, and most tragically feeding poor people into Dover coffins in Iraq.

Roger the paranoid, can only cheer to keep thought off this blog and offer no thoughts himselves. It's a mazing that Republicans who can turn on a computer are so ignorant.

chch16

Joe Wilson is a hero. He was protecting your cowardly ass HIT and so was his wife.

Not only does this scandle go up through Rove, Cheney, and Bush but it shows how they rejected reliable CIA info to sculpt a scenario where they would waste billioins and help kill thousands of American soldiers who continue to pile up in Dover Coffins.

chch16

It would be nice to depress the butterfly triggers on a Mod 2 50 Cal MG again. I love the way the brass sounds as it bounces off the armor. :)

It would be nice Roger if you could address issues with facts, but that's not in your makeup.

You want Bush to kick me off these comments? Why don't you call the WH and see what you can get done.

Maguire is one of the few of you who deals in facts. You think he wants commentors who jus pat their selves on the ass over their delusions? Who read the base blogs and say "yeah that Jonah Goldberg (who knows nothing about appellate law) he sure done posted good." LOL

chch16

Clinton didn't plan the failure in Iraq and he didn't lie about WMD. Clinton tried to strike what he thought were biological weapons, and it appears that he hit the wrong place.

Clinton lied about a cigar and a blow job; Libby was one of many leakers at the direction of Cheney and Bush and there were over a dozen leakers. I would have liked to see all of them punished.

This administration has hidden and redacted more docs than any in history, and it leaks when it thinks it's politically convenient and the leaks haven't helped them politically.

Republicans are the underdog in this upcoming election in case it hasn't sunk in yet. Obama can raise more than McCain can raise in a month in one day.

Keep calling him Hussein Obama and he'll raise more for your abuse. For those of you who went to school in the U.S., Obama went to as American a school as you did.

Where he differs with most of you is that he went on to edit the Harvard Law review and teach constitutional law.

We need someone in the White House who knows law; not who breaks it and hides.

PeterUK.

Slam Dunk - reliable CIA info.

JM Hanes

chch16

"I'm posting facts"

LOL! You're posting tediously long winded stream-of-consciousness ramblings that defy sensible organzation or response, interspersed with paste-ups of entire articles in flagrant violation of fair use. You monopolize so much real estate in the process that trying to follow or develop a conversation with anyone else is like looking for needles in haystacks.

Jeff Dobbs

hoosierhoops, I am neglectful for not saying anything until this point and I apologize, but CON-GRAT-U-LATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What a blessing...and what joy.

chch16

Topsecret--Good to see you rambling dumb as a rock. Libby still on appeal, won't be talking until he's forced to talk by a Congressional or Senate committee, probably Judiciary. If he refuses, he'll be talking to cell mates. A hearing is already scheduled in the House.

RogerA I can provide you with the map to recruitment. If you join guard or reserves, you can get back to riding a tank. I'd like to see you there. Cheney and Bush as well.

How are you living with the massive neuro trauma that has impacted your thought processes?

@ Hanes you can't discuss any of this can you?

Flagrant violation of fair use is going to be fixed. It's nauseating 91% domination of right winged radio. You wouldn't know fair use from the hole in your ass.

The length of my posts is about equal to the length of many of the paranoid delusional ramblings up here.

We get it Haynes. You're the base. You think Libby did nothing wrong and you cling to the delusion that Plame wasn't covert although the CIA has said she was in black and white.

And you can't refute me can you Haynes--you just launch your laugable feeble attempt at ridicule without response to the facts. Here are some facts for you below. Pretend they aren't happening in your senile delusional universe.

And the last word is not as Mr. Magurire said in his newer post that Bush may pardon Libby; it's this:

Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. announced that he will be holding a full committee hearing next week titled, "The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials." The hearing will be held next Wednesday, July 11, at 10:15 am in the committee’s hearing room, 2141 Rayburn House Office Building.

"In light of yesterday’s announcement by the President that he was commuting the prison sentence for Scooter Libby, it is imperative that Congress look into presidential authority to grant clemency, and how such power may be abused," Conyers said. "Taken to its extreme, the use of such authority could completely circumvent the law enforcement process and prevent credible efforts to investigate wrongdoing in the executive branch."

The hearing begins next Wednesday, July 11 at 10:15 a.m. Eastern.

The code section that allows this type immunity to be granted is 18USC 6005. Your homeboy Prof. Balkin has blogged on it and he said:

"DOJ can't prohibit immunity when it's offered by a congressional committee. Nor can a district court judge: 18 U.S.C. 6005 requires that a judge "shall issue" the immunity order if Congress follows the proper procedures in voting for one."


The hearing will be live blogged from FDL for all you paranoids who make up the facts.


Goodling wasn't a proper professional Poppy the Idiot; she had no legal training at all as a prosecutor. She was a political hack. Her ass is gone; she has a large legal bill to pay the former White House Associate Counsel.

I know you don't understand this but any Congressional committee; any Senate committee; and any Special Prosecutor which is now Fitzgerald can haul Libby before them now and can grant him immunity for the questions he will ask them, and if he refuses to answer them, he can be thrown in prison for nearly as long as his sentence would have actually been.

These hearings and forcing Libby to talk or go to jail are based on the laws for transactional, versus limited, versus limited use immunity.

Kastigar v. United States 406,US. 441 (1972)

and Poppy you get my nomination for supreme idiot standing out among the rest of the idiots--I explained to you like you would explain to a child that the concepts of immunity are not "immunity for all the crimes Scootie committed." The types of immunity (you didn't read the case law obviously that I provided for you) cover questions that would be asked of Scootie after he was hauled before a committe or a grand jury (either is possible) and pleaded the 5th for the purpose of forcing him to testify.

An investigation that could do this has already been scheduled as I posted above. You can pretend it's not happening as you have with your wacky posts all along. Whatever you do to feed your face, it ain't law.

Wednesday July 11 starts the first hearing that could force Libby to answer questions for which he would be covered by some type of immunity per the S.Ct case and code section


JM Hanes

chch:

Great news that. I'm delighted to know that Conyer's has got plenty of busy work lined up, the higher the profile the better! I can see why you're so fond of him.

chch16

Walton's Hearing Held Monday July 9 Regarding Application of § 3583 to Libby

Your traitor Libby may not have to serve probation. Reggie Walton has scheduled a hearing on this topic. Imagine Walton questioning Bush's knowledge of the law. LOL

The federal judge who sentenced former vice presidential aide I. Lewis Libby for lying to federal investigators and a grand jury on Tuesday raised the possibility that Libby might not have to serve two years on "supervised release" after all. In a two-page order (found here), U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton told lawyers on both sides to file briefs on the issue by Monday.

When President Bush in granting clemency on Monday nullified the 30-month prison sentence Walton had imposed, the President said he would leave intact the part of the sentence that required two years of supervised release -- a form of probation. But Walton on Tuesday noted that the federal law governing such a requirement states that it is to be served "after imprisonment."

The judge said in his order: "Strictly construed, the statute authorizing the imposition of supervised release indicates that such release should occur only after the defendant has already served a term of imprisonment....It is therefore unclear how [the statute] should be interpreted in unusual circumstances such as these."

Lawyers were ordered to file papers by Monday on "whether the defendant should be required to report to the Probation Office immediately, whether he should be allowed to remain free of supervision until some later, more appropriate time, or, indeed, whether the plain meaning of [the statute] precludes the application of a term of supervised release altogether now that the prison sentence has been commuted."

chch16

I suspect JM Hearings in Congress will not be in short supply in the next several months. There will be several leading up to the House and Senate's possibility of holding Cheney and Bush in contempt of Congress.

There will be parallel hearings in House and Senate Judy. It will be hard to make up for the complete lack of oversight during 6 years while the Katrina White House flew the country into the ground.

JM Hanes

If they want to spend their time investigating a lame duck Prez instead of legislating, we're all probably better off. It's kind of like watching you flailing away here, instead of trying to get Democrats in Congress to producing something other than talking points. BTW, just FYI, I only read your short posts.

battery

She'd just gotten her preordered copy of Halo III delivered to her the day before it was to be officially released.

Nerdiness knows no color barriers.

sophy

I will thank for my friends bringing me in this world. I am not regret to buy Hellgate Palladium .

The comments to this entry are closed.

Traffic

Wilson/Plame