|
|
#21
10-28-2005, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
Indictment available here. Prediction: plea or pardon (or both). No way this goes to trial, since the WH will not be able to avoid having Cheney testify. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about. Cheney is basically 100% cleared of any wrong doing with this indictment. The dude even said that Libby started the disemination of infomation about Plame. Even if Cheney told him, there is NOTHING wrong with it. 
|
|
#22
10-28-2005, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
I don't know what you're talking about.
"You people" Who are you talking about? To suggest that liberals had anything to do with some guy lying is really sad. You better come up with better spin than that.
|
|
#23
10-28-2005, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
What I think is interesting in this is that he wasn't charged with anything directly related to slipping Plame's name. The charges center on what he did once the probe started. So does anyone think that perhaps this verifies what the republicans have been saying all along that no crime was actually committed? [/ QUOTE ] Based upon Fitz's press conference, it can't be argued they are clear of not having outed Plame. To commit a crime takes an act and intent. What the prosecutor said was there WAS disclosure of a covert agent's identity (the act), but because of the alleged lying and the cover up, he was unable to tell whether the intent requirement (in this case a knowing or reckless violation) was satisfied.
|
|
#24
10-28-2005, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What I think is interesting in this is that he wasn't charged with anything directly related to slipping Plame's name. The charges center on what he did once the probe started. So does anyone think that perhaps this verifies what the republicans have been saying all along that no crime was actually committed? [/ QUOTE ] How about the Kenneth Starr investigation? He did bring indictments to certain folks if memory serves regarding Whitewater but never could pin anything on Bill or Hillary yet Bill gets impeached for lying to a grand jury about Monica and such. There's no way these special prosecuters are going to spend millions of $ on an investigation and not come up with at least some indictments. I don't know but I see some similarities between the Starr episode and this one. Clinton apparently had no involvment in a crime until he lied about his dalliances which weren't related to the possible crime being investigated. SOP for inside the beltway politics. [/ QUOTE ] Way to not answer the question.
|
|
#25
10-28-2005, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Indictment available here. Prediction: plea or pardon (or both). No way this goes to trial, since the WH will not be able to avoid having Cheney testify. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about. Cheney is basically 100% cleared of any wrong doing with this indictment. The dude even said that Libby started the disemination of infomation about Plame. Even if Cheney told him, there is NOTHING wrong with it. [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about? He is talking about Cheney being a probable witness.
|
|
#26
10-28-2005, 03:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know what you're talking about. "You people" Who are you talking about? To suggest that liberals had anything to do with some guy lying is really sad. You better come up with better spin than that. [/ QUOTE ] Dont think for a second that this was not politically motivated. This was a failed political attack on Carl Rove. To think otherwise is just plain ignorant. The Libs failed, yet again. Perhaps if they actually had a message people would vote for them. Instead, its all character assassination and lies and complaints. No talk about what to actually do about issues, just a litany of complaints with no offer of solution other than, "Vote for us, we wont kill the elderly, enslave blacks, or banish homosexuals". The Democratic party has been taken over by idiots. Typical Democrats are NOT represented by the party as it is today. It's a shame too, because I don't mind Democrats, I simply can't stand liberal/socialists.
|
|
#28
10-28-2005, 03:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Indictment available here. Prediction: plea or pardon (or both). No way this goes to trial, since the WH will not be able to avoid having Cheney testify. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about. Cheney is basically 100% cleared of any wrong doing with this indictment. The dude even said that Libby started the disemination of infomation about Plame. Even if Cheney told him, there is NOTHING wrong with it. [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about? He is talking about Cheney being a probable witness. [/ QUOTE ] Not at all what was insinuated. What was insinuated was that the WH didn't want Cheney to testify because he had something to hide. Why else would the WH not want Cheney to testify?
|
|
#29
10-28-2005, 03:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
You're pretty sad, but sometimes humorus. Give me facts, not your own silly insinuations. [/ QUOTE ] Give me complete thoughts with some depth and substance, not typical Cyrusesque responses. What facts do you want?
|
|
#30
10-28-2005, 03:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Libby indicted - five counts
[ QUOTE ]
Not at all what was insinuated. What was insinuated was that the WH didn't want Cheney to testify because he had something to hide. [/ QUOTE ] I'm sure he does, but who knows if it's anything that could be considered a crime. To suggest that he doesn't have anything to hide is pretty funny, though. All people, especially politicians, have something to hide.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
