Scooter guilty! Miss Piggy in Tears!

John Denver to Write New Song for Special Edition of Muppets!!

Read all about it!!!

Yep. Guilty on 4 of 5 counts. Possible sentence of 20 years or so, more likely to get what, maybe 18 months out in 2 weeks?

I’m glad he was found guilty. I hope he gets the maximum sentence, but Jaboney’s probably right that his actual time served will be a joke. No doubt the Republicans will have some cushy job set up for him when he gets out as a reward for his efforts. Or maybe he can go back to writing mystery novels about bear rape. Heh.

I wonder if we can have a real trial involving the actual culprits who leaked Plame’s identity now. If this perjury trial is really all we see from the whole investigation, then I am going to be very angry. Beyond that, we have the following results:

  1. It becomes acceptable to oust undercover intelligence officials for partisan revenge.

  2. Anybody who has been harmed as a result of the outing –from Plame herself to her foreign assets who might have been imprisoned or killed to her cover company which is now marked- will not have the justice they deserve.

  3. The reputation of the CIA and the United States government in general is tarnished.

  4. Beyond simply the reputation, the sacred code of honor cherished among the intelligence community to never, under any circumstances, reveal the identity of an undercover operative, has been broken.

I posted an article written by William F. Buckley on that last point, and MFGR has already noted George H.W. Bush’s statement that the worst kind of traitor is one who reveals the identity of an undercover operative. So what do you think folks? Will we have the arrest and trial of the real perpetrators now?

I have many differences with Republicans, but like MFGR I never thought it possible they would resort to treason for political ends.

don’t worry! they’ll appeal it forever. then bush’ll pardon him. remember, this is the prez who said “the constitution is just a g** dam* piece of paper”.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Bush pardons him before he leaves office.

Libby is the thread and the whole neoconservative construct of reality that ‘it’s not a lie if you believe it’s true’ is the garment.

[quote=“gao_bo_han”]I wonder if we can have a real trial involving the actual culprits who leaked Plame’s identity now. If this perjury trial is really all we see from the whole investigation, then I am going to be very angry. Beyond that, we have the following results:

  1. It becomes acceptable to oust undercover intelligence officials for partisan revenge.


[/quote]

Why do you think that Plame was mentioned as some kind of “partisan revenge”, gao_bo_han? That particular meme never made any sense to me.

No one is more surprised than I at the severity of the sentence. I guess it shows that the system works despite all the evil Republican machinations to keep it from doing so. In this case, a major Republican figure has “gone down.” Can we assume therefore that MFGR and others of his ilk will now stop suggesting that somehow evil Republican interests are able to gin the system and stop important inquiries and prosecutions at will. I abide by the decision of the jury.

We have always known who leaked Plame’s name. It was Richard Armitage. So why don’t you go after him now and prosecute him to the full extent of the law? Why hasn’t Fitzgerald?

There was question as to whether she was undercover or not. Regardless she had had a desk job for nine years. AND it was most likely that after she married an American ambassador that her career as covert was pretty much over. That is how it works. Given this level of outrage, will you then be hopping mad regarding the fiasco in Italy where the names of 25 COVERT really COVERT operatives were released to the public by an Italian judge, directly endangering many of the contacts that these men may have established in the Muslim community?

Doubtful that this has happened. More likely that it would have happened in the case of Wilson who went to Niger on a mission for the CIA talked to all manner of Nigerien officials and then basically revealed in a highly public manner when, how and why he was sent there. Anyone involved could easily have figured out the timeline, who he talked to and then what happens to those people. I ask because I am trying to figure out when and how you “truly” care about things.

Yeah. That is what happened all right. My goodness and the Constitution is in shreds too because of the Patriot Act. No one can ever accuse you people of lacking an ability to engage in hyperbolic nonsense.

Not worthy of comment.

You still do not seem to understand what this case was about so put your hysteria back in the box. ARMITAGE is the one who “outed” Plame, NOT Libby. It is not against the law for senior US officials to discuss covert operations especially when they were thrown back in the face of the administration as was the case with Wilson’s salvoes. Wilson was found to have lied repeatedly about his findings, he lied about the “counterfeit” documents, he lied about who sent him there and he also lied in that what he had uncovered did in fact reveal that Iraqi agents were attempting to buy yellowcake from Niger. This is ALL in the Senate report on said matter. It has been posted repeatedly already. Even MFGR has never chosen to go head on regarding these matters because he knows that he does not have a leg to stand on. Therefore, he keeps sniping about “suckerpunching” some guy’s wife. A statement that I love for all its unintended chauvinistic bravura.

When did perjury and obstruction of justice become treason. You guys like to play awfully fast and furious with words such as these. TREASON? Give me a break. AND as I have said, Armitage is the one who outed Plame. THAT was the crime. Discussing Plame or examining confidential reports is not out of the ordinary for White House officials. It is the norm. The crime occurs when one of them KNOWINGLY outs a covert operative and even poor Armitage is not accused by anyone of doing so.

Armitage and Rove outed Plame. And President Bush once pledged to fire any staffer who was found to have revealed her covert status. :slight_smile:

Rove as well? How do you figure? Okay, I am game. Let’s have all the hysterical anti-Bush fans here call for Armitage’s head. He outed the woman so let him take the responsibility for doing so. Why isn’t anyone demanding as much?

No one is more surprised than I at the severity of the sentence. I guess it shows that the system works despite all the evil Republican machinations to keep it from doing so. In this case, a major Republican figure has “gone down.” Can we assume therefore that MFGR and others of his ilk will now stop suggesting that somehow evil Republican interests are able to gin the system and stop important inquiries and prosecutions at will. I abide by the decision of the jury.

We have always known who leaked Plame’s name. It was Richard Armitage. So why don’t you go after him now and prosecute him to the full extent of the law? Why hasn’t Fitzgerald?

There was question as to whether she was undercover or not. Regardless she had had a desk job for nine years. AND it was most likely that after she married an American ambassador that her career as covert was pretty much over. That is how it works. Given this level of outrage, will you then be hopping mad regarding the fiasco in Italy where the names of 25 COVERT really COVERT operatives were released to the public by an Italian judge, directly endangering many of the contacts that these men may have established in the Muslim community?

Doubtful that this has happened. More likely that it would have happened in the case of Wilson who went to Niger on a mission for the CIA talked to all manner of Nigerien officials and then basically revealed in a highly public manner when, how and why he was sent there. Anyone involved could easily have figured out the timeline, who he talked to and then what happens to those people. I ask because I am trying to figure out when and how you “truly” care about things.

Yeah. That is what happened all right. My goodness and the Constitution is in shreds too because of the Patriot Act. No one can ever accuse you people of lacking an ability to engage in hyperbolic nonsense.

Not worthy of comment.

You still do not seem to understand what this case was about so put your hysteria back in the box. ARMITAGE is the one who “outed” Plame, NOT Libby. It is not against the law for senior US officials to discuss covert operations especially when they were thrown back in the face of the administration as was the case with Wilson’s salvoes. Wilson was found to have lied repeatedly about his findings, he lied about the “counterfeit” documents, he lied about who sent him there and he also lied in that what he had uncovered did in fact reveal that Iraqi agents were attempting to buy yellowcake from Niger. This is ALL in the Senate report on said matter. It has been posted repeatedly already. Even MFGR has never chosen to go head on regarding these matters because he knows that he does not have a leg to stand on. Therefore, he keeps sniping about “suckerpunching” some guy’s wife. A statement that I love for all its unintended chauvinistic bravura.

When did perjury and obstruction of justice become treason. You guys like to play awfully fast and furious with words such as these. TREASON? Give me a break. AND as I have said, Armitage is the one who outed Plame. THAT was the crime. Discussing Plame or examining confidential reports is not out of the ordinary for White House officials. It is the norm. The crime occurs when one of them KNOWINGLY outs a covert operative and even poor Armitage is not accused by anyone of doing so.[/quote]

Obfuscating again Freda. Bit sensitive with your pants down by your ankles, eh?. Pull 'em up and let’s hear some OUTRAGE.

BroonArmitage

Obfuscating again? How so? Was Libby the source of the leak? No. Did Libby out a covert agent? No. Who did? Armitage. So why is Libby getting 18 years? Incredible to me. And Armitage is not even being prosecuted? Does this make sense to anyone? Really? Anyway, the jury made its decision and I will have to respect that. I don’t know why (yet) it came to such a conclusion but the jurists must have had some reason for doing so.

Let’s see what happens to Fitzgerald. We’ve seen that other federal prosecutors have been asked to resign, fired or now apparently threatened with bodily harm where they haven’t toed the GOP party line. I can’t help but wonder whether Fitzgerald is going to face some troubling times ahead – the possibility exists that he pursued Libby despite strong pressure or that he abandoned cases against other key White House figures under strong pressure.

Good question… and let’s get some of these other guy responsible as well. Libby’s defense implicated Cheney as well.

Sounds like you’re squirming here. When there’s any possibility of giving up the name of an intelligence officer, the only sane way to proceed is to assume that it is NOT OK to blab it around. Seems like you’ve been in Taiwan too long to understand that “cha-bu-duo” ain’t good enough.

Did you marry an American ambassador once? Just curious what basis you have for these bold statements.

I am not at all happy that the Bush adminstration pursued extrajudicial kidnappings, torture and imprisonment overseas that pretty much ensured that somebody in the EU would take action. That Bush would so foolishly expose our CIA officers and their contacts and their covers and their colleagues to this sort of a prosecution is asinine, but that’s what we’ve got.

Doubtful that this has happened.[/quote]

Again with the “cha-bu-duo” attitude. I suppose that in your world if a tree falls and nobody reports on it the tree didn’t fall. Why don’t you go back to laughing at wounded American soldiers again – you do it a lot better.

The legal and correct way to do so was to make remonstrations to the US government. Doing otherwise directly endangered the lives of these agents and any contacts. I thought you would be highly sympathetic to that. Apparently? Not?

Only if you believe that the European governments in question did not really know and that this (incredibly given treat commitments) was being done without their permission or knowledge (laughable).

And rendition is such an interesting word isn’t it? Are you saying that it is wrong to return these individuals to the nations where they hold citizenship? Happens all the time for other kinds of criminals. Do terrorists have special rights to asylum? for what? the threat that they may be imprisoned in their nations and possibly tortured because of their “political aims?” Think that over please. I am looking forward to some of your trademark wisecracks on THAT subject. haha

Rove as well? How do you figure? Okay, I am game. Let’s have all the hysterical anti-Bush fans here call for Armitage’s head. He outed the woman so let him take the responsibility for doing so. Why isn’t anyone demanding as much?[/quote]

"Ms. Wilson’s name first appeared in a newspaper column by Robert Novak on July 14, 2003, just days after The New York Times published an Op-Ed article by her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV. In his article, Mr. Wilson asserted that the Bush White House had willfully distorted intelligence about Iraq’s efforts to acquire uranium in Africa to bolster the case for going to war.

Testimony at the trial showed that Mr. Wilson’s criticisms had alarmed and angered Bush administration officials because they amounted to a direct attack on what had been the principal reason for invading Iraq: the claim that Saddam Hussein had an active program of developing unconventional weapons. Critics charged that Ms. Wilson’s identity as a C.I.A. officer was leaked to punish her husband for his criticisms.

At the time Mr. Fitzgerald was named to be a special prosecutor in the investigation of the leak, investigators had already learned that Mr. Novak’s sources were Richard L. Armitage, the deputy secretary of state, and Karl Rove, the president’s chief political adviser.

In remarks to reporters today, Mr. Fitzgerald said he nonetheless had no choice but to seek an indictment when he took over the investigation in December 2003, because he also had information that Mr. Libby had told a false story to the F.B.I. and to the grand jury about his conversation with Mr. Russert.

“It’s inconceivable that any responsible prosecutor would walk away from the facts that we saw in December 2003 and say, ‘There’s nothing here, move on,’ ” Mr. Fitzgerald said. . . ."
NY Times

[quote=“fred smith”]No one is more surprised than I at the severity of the sentence. I guess it shows that the system works despite all the evil Republican machinations to keep it from doing so. [/quote]Has he been sentenced, fred? No, no. That comes June 5. And the Post is saying 1 1/2 - 3 years.

That’s called a ‘Fredian Slip.’ It’s when your conscience gets the better of you. Fred doesn’t have many of those but when he does they’re doosies.

Rove told Armitage but as an administration official that would not be a crime. Armitage revealing that to an outside source would. Anyway, if the sentencing is 1.5 to 3 years that would seem far more reasonable and he should get out on good behavior on three months. THAT would be the FAIR and JUST thing to do in this whole sad fiasco.

I notice however that Spook has not disputed my assertion that the Senate found Wilson to have been lying on numerous counts including not finding any evidence of Iraqi intent to purchase yellowcake in Niger. Right? MFGR? No comments on that? Unfortunately, for both, the Senate report has already been provided repeatedly here. Wonder why we continue to read in the new therefore that Wilson’s claim is given credence despite being discredited. Strange, eh? For such lapses in factual information? Must be simply a slip of the computer keyboard? Maybe? haha

It’s an interesting assertion, but that has nothing to do with Plame. If the administration wanted to do something about Wilson that would have been easy enough to do … but exposing a serving CIA officer’s identity is traitorous. Just ask George H.W. Bush.