Slashdot Mirror
Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence
An anonymous reader notes that President Bush has decided to commute Scooter Libby's sentence after numerous appeals failed. Libby was convicted in March of obstruction of justice in connection with the Valerie Plame affair. The President's action spares Libby from 30 months behind bars."
It's true the President has that kind of power, but isn't he supposed to at least try to seem impartial and not at all corrupt?
Are there any stipulations regarding the Presidential use of power at all?
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
Once the dem's get into the white house and take both houses Bush better move outside the country since he will be up on multiple charges of: 1) Contempt of congress 2) War crimes etc oh, and you dam drugged out faggot conservatives, well you can "mod me down".
Everybody KNEW that it was coming. What I want to know is where will he work next? DOJ or White house?
Never saw that coming.
crap.
we can't trust without verifying
Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.
Unfortunately, this adequately conveys my surprise...
Whoo hoo! Time for a good-old Republican bash-a-thon! Go get 'em, boys!
Finally, at least, all of us can get away with lying to the government and not go to jail for it! Wait, this doesn't count for everyone? But two years in jail is so unfair!
This just proves that it's not what you know (or did), it's who you know!
Need I say more? So much to do with nerds? Send in your money now.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to think "profiling is worse than the slaughter of innocent people..."
For restoring my faith in the Democratic system that we pretend to practice and care about. Now hand me my club and point me to those pesky baby seals!
Enlightenment is a pipe dream. So where's the pipe?
I'm no fan of the POTUS, but why is this news here?
Right after the lawyers of course.
Someone hates these cans.
Seriously as sad as it is this doesn't surprise me. The worst part is no one will care, and the Bush regime will continue its reign of terror.
~
Who didn't see this coming; really?
'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
... and perfectly legal, in this case.
Still, I guess it just goes to show that now, perjury is OK!
I must also strongly agree with Joe Wilson: "Scooter Libby is a traitor." I certainly hope that those responsible for the egregious breach of national security are convicted as such.
Does this surprise anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
You mean nerds don't care about flagrant abuses of power? No wonder Bush got reelected. If nerds don't care about it, who the fuck does?
Using openSUSE instead of Windows since 9th of October, 2007 and liking it.
I wonder what the intersection of those two sets looks like.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
He could have pardoned Libby. Then Libby could continue to practice law and wouldn't have to pay the fine. Well, I don't think anybody thinks the fine will come out of his own pocket. And look forward to a pardon when Bush leaves office, which should not be under honorable circumstances.
Nerds are people first and nerds second, and as people, we should all be concerned about the actions of thus most unctuous and corrupt government.
Apparently our leader has decided that being shamed in front of your family and having your reputation tarnished plus being fined a nominal fee is enough of a punishment for high crimes against the government. Surely such things a possessing a few ounces of pot then deserve nothing more than a vicious finger-wagging, right? ....right?
While I sympathize with the human that is scooter and feel bad he was going to prison for a sort of derivative crime I still think he needs to go to prison. The crime while derivative is a crime none the less and he was found guilty so no arguments there. Interfering with a prosecutors investigation is serious business. Now he has to be punished even if there was no underlying crime that was the subject of the investigations. He chose to lie. That much we know because the jury said so. So tough luck for his bad choices. It's perhaps a shame but absolutely necessary.
is $250K fine a punishment? I sincerely doubt it. Money can easily be made up to him given all the fortunes involved. So I don't think it will hurt him.
Thus this is a travesty because it says high government officials are beyond reach of the law. Their subordinates can take the blame and be set free. A minor ding on their resume, assuming they get caught at all.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Right after the Marketing Department of the Sirius Robotics Corporation.
'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
Am I seeing slashdot turn into digg before my very eyes. I shudder in terror. I left digg because naive political commentary.
Scooter scooted
Outing an active agent is an act of treason which, if I recall correctly, is still punishable by death in the US. Whether Libby, Rove, or Cheney did it doesn't (and shouldn't) matter.
This so-called administration has broken, no--pulverized--their oaths of office.
It's OK when Clinton pardons drug dealers, murderers, and illegal alien bank robbers.
Libby was responsibly for conducting misinformation of the press and the public for the benefit of Bush and Cheney, and he was good at it. If Bush allows him to be punished for his crimes, he would surely begin to disclose massive amounts of information about things the administration did to deceive the country. I would be very surprised if he and Bush didn't have an agreement on this long ago, "If you ever get into trouble over this, I'll do what I can to ease your sentence." Libby's still responsible for paying a $250,000 fine (will he get an anonymous gift or bonus in that amount shortly?) and will now have a felony on his record (costs him certain rights, such as the right to bear arms).
I think it would be best to call out all the lawyers first. You get more hits on that query than Republican fanboys, crooked politicians (redundant of course), or words that begin with a letter.
Someone hates these cans.
I'm firmly convinced that we haven't had the Democracy we were promised in America since 1963.
While JFK and those before him were not perfect men, at least they tried to uphold the principals of this nation for the greater good of all Americans.
With this administration so blatent with it's lies and contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution and with FOX pundits who often say they wish they could imprison or even kill Democrats or "lefties", I am convinced this nation is under the control of anarchists who wish to push this nation to civil war. And it's not Repubilicans vs Democrat... because the Democrats are hardly a better choice, but a division vbetween those who believe in the Constitution and individual rights, and those who want a Statist system where there is no longer any accountability.
And I hope they keep pushing. Because I'm begining to believe that the time for the ballor box is nearing it's end and all we'll be left with is teh ammo box for casting our votes. The people will only be able to abide by so many offenses. If this blatent lawlessness continues to prevail, the people will sooner or later stand up, and some of those people will be Generals and Admirals within our military.
Does this view sound extreme? Yes.
But I hardly think it's far fetched.
I'm sure there are a lot of people whose frustration is turning to anger and disgust.
AMEN to Anon over here. I saw one tech community destroyed by stories like this. I come here to get away from digg. If you like stories like this feel free to hang out at digg, or it's stupider little brother reddit, but don't ruin yet another online tech community.
Just because we don't care doesn't mean we don't understand...
So conveniently close to a holiday, too. A large number of people are on vacation, and both vacationers and everyone else will be too busy playing with booze and fireworks to give this much consideration.
The Internet is full. Go away.
Halliburton owes Cheney for a lot of no-bid contracts. Cheney owes Scooter for muddying the waters in the Plame affair. Any bets on whether Scooter lands a choice position at Halliburton in the near future?
pardons and commutations since the Nixon pardon. And, perhaps, the Marc Rich pardon as well. My head is swimming. The President just commuted the sentence of a key insider to the executive branch, who committed felonies while on executive-branch time, and who hadn't even served a single day in jail. Further, he has a record of not commuting or pardoning offenders. From Carla Fey Tucker, the murderer he refused to pardon after she found Christ, to just about everyone else who has requested it during his presidency. But Scooter Libby, a man who alocuted his crimes before the court in order to receive a reduced sentence, has now just skated free.
This absolutely reeks of conflict of interest. I am ashamed of my government.
It seems to me that this is completely forgotten by the Bush government.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Perhaps the worst part of this travesty of justice is that by doing this rather than pardoning him, this traitor still can continue to appeal, and Still will have the ability to plead the 5th in other cases related to the matter. in other words he can Cover of Bush and Cheney by pleading the 5th because he case is not pardoned. How convienant.
I Need someone to rebuild a Digitech Digital Delay pedal for me....for me...for me...for me.
Clinton pardoned over 140 people at the end of his term, this is nothing new or unique to this president nor any others in the future.
Great fodder for the campaign trail... Goes to show you Bush cares more about his buddies than he does his political party as a whole.
All pass beyond reach of medicine. None pass beyond the reach of love.
Little Billy learns today the valuable lesson that you are ultimately beyond reproach assuming your friends are sufficiently powerful.
(I guess it just really goes to show that you can parade out this argument for any old thing.)
Once again, Bush the GREAT shows exactly how to chart a course for fairness, justice and truth. I think it was obvious to everyone that Scooter was the target of a Whitewater-esque witch hunt that had more to do with trying to pay back the Clinton investigations than it did any real crime, and I think the commute was fair. I used to think that history might only place Bush in the top ten of America's greatest presidents, perhaps behind Roosevelt in the last century, but now, I'm not sure that Bush might even be slighted by that.
Could it be that George W. Bush should be in the top 5 of America's greatest presidents?
THREE CHEERS FOR BUSH THE GREAT!
This is my sig.
The people around you are cows. They cannot cope with reality let alone think for themselves. It is a slim minority that “get it” in this country. Look at the news media. Look at the politicians these people elect. We are a nation of degenerates, incapable of deep thought.
I wonder if this beats the plea deal Spiro Agnew got: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiro_Agnew, called the "greatest deal since the Lord spared Isaac on the mountaintop"?
Guess the wimp factor doesn't go away. Nixon had the guts to let Agnew twist.
Dick Cheney has frequently alluded that he is above the law in every respect, do you really think that his aides are any different? More proof that rich white guys almost never go to jail.
And Bush commutes his measley 30 months in jail while still doing nothing for Ramos and Compean who are serving 11 and 12 year sentences for DOING THEIR JOBS as border patrol agents.
What a crock justice is in the country. I have no respect for the law at all anymore.
signed;
A disgusted citizen of a corrupt nation.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
What a waste of tax dollars and time. At the very least Bush/Libby should pay the expenses of this circus to the American public for this farce. I don't want to seem racist but changing my name to pedro and not paying taxes is starting to look like a good thing if this is the way our government spends our hard earned dollars.
LIBBY GOES FREE
This country is fucked up
...so I would beg you, please don't post non-relevant articles here. Slashdot is better then that...
So, it looks like Bush has commuted Libby's prison sentence once the appeals court said he would have to be in prison during his appeal. As such, we now know it's ok to give up the identities of CIA operatives. If you remember, Cruise's whole mission was to protect the NOC list, a list of undercover CIA operatives...since releasing those names now comes with almost no consequence, we can assume that MI:I was basically completely unnecessary, leveling the foundation of the entire Mission Impossible series.
How sad for Tom Cruise.
democrat?
Political prisoner freed, I'm sure Amnesty International will be thrilled about this. After all, we know liberal organizations like Amnesty International stand up against the taking of political prisoners, which is what Libby would have been. You can't tell me that "outing" a CIA agent that was not even covert is a crime. Great day for justice, great day for America. Scooter Libby shouldn't go to jail just because he's a Republican.
Just one question, why is this on Slashdot?
They said the same thing about a Catholic before JFK was elected.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Most stories in the politics section are technology related. Why is this story here? There are tons of political stories not reported here, but the editors felt the need to say that Bush commuted Libby's sentence. What gives? If you're going to report all political news, do so in a fair manner.
I come to /. daily to check out tech and political news. It always has the stories I want to see or heard of, and it's great to see everyones opinion on the subjects. That's what /. is all about.
If you don't want to read political news, then just skip over the headlines that start with "Politics." Problem solved.
"For every minute you are angry, you lose sixty seconds of happiness." -Ralph Waldo Emerson
Diggnation is preoccupied with the iPhone just now. I doubt they'd notice if a thermonuclear war broke out, except to try and log on to whine about how their MacBooks were not working from the massive EMP pulse, and to speculate about whether Microsoft or AT&T were to blame for that outrage.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
Nerds are people, and the personal favors done for traitors (he lied in order to cover up a breach of national security in what Bush himself calls a time of war) is something that affects everyone. Not just those in the US watching the ruling caste show everyone the law doesn't apply to them, but also to the rest of the world who see the "do as I say not as I do" attitude of the US. So you may not like such political postings, but the appearance of impropriety in the most powerful government in the world is something that counts as news for everyone, nerds included.
Learn to love Alaska
Libby outed Plame who wasn't a covert agent?? Or wait, he "obstructed" an investigation into whether someone might have committed a crime by outing non-covert agent Plame? And the guy that "outed" non-covert Plame gets off free because PLAME WASN'T A COVERT AGENT?!?
Justice was served today. Libby didn't deserve to go to jail. Bush did the right thing by pardoning Libby even though he looks bad in doing so. I give Bush credit for standing and doing the right thing even when it's unpopular. He's done that many times in his presidency. It's good to have a president that governs based on morals and convictions, not based on the latest poll from CNN.
Now that would be something Nifong could use to stop Duke's character assassination cold. There's something about a pardon that humbles the recipient and tells some affluent people to back off.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
You must have missed "Stuff that Matters"
What else can you say?
Bush just didn't explain that it was the same sort of "honor among thieves" that keeps mobsters from ratting each other out.
Someone explain to me again why impeachment is "off the table"? Why, when Republicans have clearly gone nuts, do the Democrats not have any?
I guess it's possible that most Democrats just aren't any more honorable than most Republicans - why take the political risk of punishing politicization of the bureaucracy and the destruction of checks and balances, when you'll be poised to exploit those new powers yourselves in a few years?
I think this was expected by many people, and it's fine with me. First the sentence was commuted, not pardoned. Second, while Scooter did commit a crime, everything I've read leads me to believe he has been basically a fall guy and there are others who deserve bigger sentences and to really be in trouble.
That said, whether you believe what I do above, or think Scooter is as guilty as a guy can be, is this really a surprise? You probably think he was a fall guy (like me), or that the President is a crook (blah blah blah) and expected him to give his buddy a "get out of jail free" card.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
"Mr. Libby was sentenced to thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation. I respect the jury's verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison."--President Bush.
If Bush is citing the probation office's advice, what was that advice? How long was the lesser sentence? Zero, no jail time at all? If not, then why did Bush let Libby off scot free? What is the jail term Bush thinks is appropriate for perjury and objstruction of justice, and why was Libby not required to serve that term?
And why does Bush say "I respect the jury's verdict," when he patently does not respect the jury's verdict? What could possibly constitute more disrespect than setting the verdict aside?
Does the concept mean anything anymore? I often wonder, if the day we've finally given away so many of our freedoms and allow so many injustices, that we actually notice, and stand up to complain loudly enough that something might change; if perhaps that day, we will no longer have the right to stand up and complain. Anyway, that little presidential pardon thing, never really made sense to me. What honest reason is there for the president to be allowed to pardon anyone with no regard to justice, or accountability?
this it posted under politics you retard. /. is not JUST a tech site, learn to read.
This is so bloody typical of the Bush League. They watch out for themselves first, their friends second, and everybody else can go to hell.
And "everybody else" would seem to include their own party! If I were a Republican, I'd be totally pissed. If I were a Republican who hopes to hold onto or get elected to a seat in Congress, I'd be apoplectic . And if I were a Republican who wants to be President, I'd be ready to kill somebody.
But since I'm not a Republican, I'm actually rather pleased!
Constitutional topic: Presidential Pardons.
Everything except impeachment, also civil liability can't be excused (so Libby can still be sued into and beyond poverty), and contempt-of-court charges can't be pardoned either.
"There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
This has got to be the biggest travesty of justice that I've ever seen in my life. "The punishment did not fit the crime." EXCUSE ME?! We have record labels trying to sue private individuals for $150,000+ in damages for 1 song on a $15 CD, and THIS is the punishment that didn't fit the crime? Obstruction of justice in a governmental probe and lying to investigators about a classified information leak is not worthy of prison time? What the hell?!?!?!
The only thing I have to say here is something that has already been said numerous times over the last few years.
IMPEACH BUSH
One of these days i'm going to find this 'peer' guy and reset HIS connection!
Valerie Plame was not an active covert CIA agent under the law. One of the law's author's Victoria Toensing even said so. Scooter Libby was not charged with outing her. Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was unable to charge ANYONE with outing her because no crime was committed.
this.
Not good to say the least.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
raise your hand if you ever thought you'd daydream of a world where dan quayle was president.
JESUS!
I can't believe you just said that. And I can't believe I'm actually considering it. And I can't actually believe QUAYLE WOULD'VE BEEN BETTER!
I need to wash my brain.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Y'noticed how other countries change their countries without pipebombing/shooting anyone? Have you noticed why? It's because they mass-protest. If America ever got a decent sized mob (this is america, so I'm talking millions) who protested in washington and DID NOT GO AWAY, DID NOT STAY IN PENS, NO MATTER HOW MANY ARE ARRESTED ON BS CHARGES, you'd have your changes.
the reason you can't change America by peaceful protest isn't because it's a bad method. Just look at what it does in France. Yes, France. They do something right once in a while, accept and embrace it.
It doesn't change anything in America because the protesters have no balls, and people who don't show up to the protest don't know or care that people are trying to enact peaceful change. until that facet of American life changes, you're all fucked. So fucking deal with it. In case you haven't noticed, not only is armed regime change a shitty plan, it's a shitty plan that can't possible work in a country like the states with such a massive army that HAS and WILL mobilize against its countrymen.
The offenses here seem very similar to me except that one was in a criminal case that involved national security and the other was a civil matter.
FUCK YOU G.W. I cant believe this shit FUCK!
It's not like he got off scott free. He's still got the conviction on his record, and is looking at a $250,000 fine. Oh, and two years' probation, in case he's ever in a position to perjure himself in a Federal investigation again.
I speak this in the same ironic voice that Verbal Kint used in The Usual Suspects : "Well, I do have the weapons charge; I'm looking at six whole months' hard time."
According to the President's statement, the 30-month sentence was too harsh for a first-time offender with a long history of public service. So, instead of reducing it to something he felt more reasonable, he commuted it altogether. The President didn't contest the conviction; he 'respect[ed] the jury's verdict"; he even commended prosecutor Fitzgerald for carrying out his duties professionally. He simply felt that, ah well, Scooter doesn't really need to be punished for covering-up a breach of national security. He's rewarding the fall-guy.
But, you know what, in the long run, I'm OK with this. Sure, it's a miscarriage of Justice. Such things happen often enough. Unlike most miscarriages of justice, however, this one won't be forgotten so quickly. It is an extremely revealing demonstration for everyone but the most die-hard Bush fan that this administration feels it is above the law. The deeper that message can be driven into the American People, the better. If the President believes that this will go over well with the populace, or even within the leadership of his own party, he has seriously miscalculated.
Forgot to add that. Seriously, does the States have even 1 news channel that reports on protests on a regular basis?
Based on your ability to express a coherent sentence, I think we can safely assume that Bush's "No Child Left Behind" Act was a failure.
I believe Republicans are the party of law and order. I believe Republicans support truth in sentencing. I believe Republicans support prosecutors. I believe Scooter has committed no crime since Cheney kidnapped him from the Muppets.
If Libby's penalty was too harsh, I'm sure that any moment now Bush will also be commuting the sentences of those given twenty-five to life for stealing videotapes and chocolate chip cookies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_strikes_law#Con troversial_results. I might just go snag some CC cookies right now and wait for the announcement on TV.
Not yet.
Bush hasn't yet declared martial law, and set himself up as Emperor. Until we no longer have a ballot box, we don't use the ammo box.
Or something like that. I saw it in a sig around here somewhere.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Finally, a reason to oppose this act that is actually rational. Mod parent up.
You commute in it? It runs Linux?
I'd rather argue about how awesome my iPhone is, maybe by the time I got it activated you guys can go back to being a tech site.
They found the leak early on in the investigation. It was Armitage. He himself admited it.
It just goes to show,
it isn't what you did,
but who you know.
(and how much money you have)
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
Yes, they sure will...
Come on, /. is liberal headquarters where truth doesn't matter.
There are a number of "who didn't see this coming" posts. Well, the political analysts didn't see it coming. The expectation was a full pardon after the election and before he left office. Instead, he let the conviction stand and gave him a "get out of jail free" card. Well, overall, I think it's worse for Scooter, seeing as how he'll still be a convicted felon, but at least this way he won't have to see the inside of a jail cell. But Bush claiming all sorts of moral superiority and treating his friends like the law doesn't apply to them is going to cost them in the election. Even the Republicans will be running on a "get the Republicans out of office" platform. We have surges that are not showing results from a war the administration knew was based off faulty inteligence. We have a leader who was on the "perjury is bad" bandwagon when it was the previous president, yet says it isn't a crime worth seeing the inside of a jail cell when it is a friend that does it to cover up what could have been treason.
It was always expected. It may even have been justified (Scooter took one for the team, so the team is helping him out), but it was expected that such decisions would wait until after the election. Maybe he's hoping that people will forget about it by then, or that his approval is so low that it doesn't matter anymore.
Learn to love Alaska
In my opinion a 2.5 year prison term is not excessive for a federal official lying to federal investigators in an effort to mislead the american people.
A guy can get more time than that for personal marijuana possession. Which is worse, possessing some plant leaves, or conspiring to mislead the 280 million american citizens you are sworn to serve?
For me the really depressing part is that I have zero confidence that we will ever bring these criminals to justice. They're raping our economy, our brave soldiers, our rights, and our dignity, and it really seems there is not a thing we can do about it but grit our teeth and bare it out. This news just drives home that point.
IMHO, second to getting out of Iraq, my top priority as a voter for the next administration is to prosecute these criminals until they are old and infirm if that is what it takes. We must not let them retire to the easy life of private sector profiteering they think they have to look forward to, the life that Bush Sr. enjoys.
It is the duty of this generation to send a message down through history: fool us once, shame on us, fool us agai... you can't fool us again, because this nation will pursue you to the grave; the american people not rest until you and all your cronies are made to account for the wrongs you have committed against us and against the world in our name. Never Again.
Corporations Who Own BOth Political Parties
The President
The President's Friends
Politicians in the same party as the President
----------Law Applies Below Here
Politicians in a different party to the president
Corporations who don't own political parties
Normal People with no powerful affiliations
And why shouldn't he be pardoned? All he did was lie to Congress, and then lie about the lie. It's not like he did anything really, really bad, like downloading music from the internet.
Libby, like the loyal employee he is, dutifully refused to snitch on his boss Cheney and ultimately on Bush himself, so Bush looks after Libby. Basic dawn-of-time loyalties. Everything else is secondary.
The moral? Make sure you're part of a winning team that has the guts to stick together ... and you're all but immune from pesky outsiders. Even if they happen to be waving laws.
Because they do not have the votes in the houses that would be necessary to make it happen.
Since they know this, dragging everyone through the ordeal of trying to impeach him is a waste of time. Plus, that time can be better served by continuing to force republicans to vote side with Bush, which makes '08 better for Democrats. Hopefully so much so that you get the 60 Senate votes needed to stop the filibuster.
Bush's damage is done, getting him out of office now does not help... and it certainly does not help for Bush to resign, and leave Cheney as president. The chance to help was in '04...
Remember that when your choice is to vote for a black man, or a woman in order to reclaim the White House.
I mean, how could he keep order and keep everybody lying for him if he left his loyal soldier swinging in the breeze?
... I'm sure Scooter has more then enough inside dirt to bring this administration to its knees - along with a good bit of congress. Do you think Mr. Bush really wants to piss off somebody with that kind of information?
From another direction
very few people here even know what the conviction was for.
He didn't out anyone. There wasn't even a crime committed.
Many people in the investigation changed their stories or had contradictory testimonies. Libby's sentance was pure politics.
I'm not happy with 80% of what Bush is up to these days, but this was a slap in the face of political witchhunts, nothing more.
Check out the business cronies Clinton pardoned on his way out, you'll find a much greater conflict of interest.
The CIA has explicitly stated that Plame was covert. See Plame employment report. You could also see MSNBC's commentary.
Plame WAS covert. See Plame employment report. You could also see MSNBC's commentary.
Scooter smirks while telling the press that he has turned over a new leaf. Bush tells us that he has suffered enough just by being found guilty (oops, that one has already happened). The supremes take issue with being made to look like a bunch of toothless, old nancies and they ask to see exactly the law by which Bush freed him. Bush produces a well-used cocktail napkin with a picture of a stick figure with a crown on his head, the words "As President of the United States, I hereby give myself abslute power over everything." and in teeny tiny print in the corner "ps: Even Dick and Karl." Then we get to see Scooter being driven to jail screaming "It's not fair" and crying for his mom.
Plame was covert, look it up. The CIA said she was, and that's why they pushed for this in the first place--duh. Next time you spew your talking points, do it where your audience is too dumb to know the truth, not here. Sheesh.
2165
any other bets? bueller?
The answer is yes http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179719/site/newsweek / [msn.com] Less Rush please
What's really wrong here is not that he pardoned Scotter, but that he could have used it for Paris Hilton instead. How can he live with that, is this what the world's come to now?
This may be the first major act by President Bush that is unquestionably constitutional.
The person to ask is Victoria Toensing who wrote the law .
Whoever moderated this informative is a fucking moron. By its very definition, deliberate misinformation is the opposite of informative. Falsehoods are not informative, Flat out lies are not informative.
This space available.
- During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover.
- Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.
- At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14,2003, Ms. Wilsonâ(TM)s CIA employment status was covert.
- This was classified information.
However convenient it would be for Libby and Bush if your claim were true, it just isn't.Indict.
This post includes the redundant tags of "corruption, republicans". There's no need to repeat yourself.
I don't know how this kdawson person is, but every single one of their stories of late has been about how evil Republicans are, and how pure and innocent Democrats are. I for one am voting with my preferences page, and turning off all stories posted by this DNC shill.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Tomorrow night on Countdown (8pm ET), Olbermann will call on Bush & Cheney to resign.
This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
But never once "outing" a CIA agent ...
I'd have to say that there is a noticeable difference between the two acts.
Perjuring yourself over a consensual blow job is a crime.
Perjuring yourself to cover "outing" a CIA agent if MOTHER-FUCKING TREASON.
(1) How serious people think the crime is seems to be only dependant on what colour team they support: either (blue) "Complicit in the outing of a CIA operative - bordering on treason!" or (red) "No crime (she wasn't a covert operative), no harm (he had nothing to do with the news stories), no foul". Who is right? Who cares?
(2) accusations of potentially politically motivated judicial decisions: The penalty given, and the refusal to allow appeals before incarceration has been argued to be at least marginally unusual for this sort of case (IANAL, but I've occasionally glanced at Google News), like the blue team finding a chance to make the red team make themselves look bad by drawing commutation out of wildly unpopular red team president: maybe, maybe not, but in this climate, who is to say? (hint, if you support the red team, the judgement was wrong and politically motivated. If you support Blue team, it was just and right and appropriate to the seriousness of the crime - see (1))
(3) Shrill condemnation for a completely inevitable act by the red team: but, regardless of what team is in power, what do you expect? Either they honestly believe that the judgement was a miscarriage of justice (in which case, what else is the power to commute sentences supposed to be for) or he was actually up to no good, on orders from the government (in which case leaving the guy out to dry would go past the line of unethical). See (1) for a guide on how you should fall on this.
Is this fiasco really factor for anyone? Wouldn't it be better if we stuck to what is *really* bothering us? There is plenty there, and it actually matters!
...who will commute Bush's sentence when he finally gets rung up?
As if any President has ever has been accountable for his actions. Even Nixon got off light, but he wasn't evil... just corrupt.
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
Didn't Clinton pardon over 100 people when he left office?
The DOJ says, at http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/commutation_instructio ns.htm, :
... As a matter of well-established policy, the specific reasons for the President's decision to grant or deny a petition are generally not disclosed by either the White House or the Department of Justice.
4. Completion of court challenges
Requests for commutation of a prison sentence generally are not accepted unless and until a person has begun serving that sentence. In addition, commutation requests are generally not accepted from a person who is currently challenging his or her conviction or sentence through appeal or other court proceeding. Accordingly, you should not complete and submit this petition until you have concluded all judicial challenges to your conviction and sentence and you have begun serving your sentence. You should also be aware that, in evaluating the merits of a commutation petition, clemency authorities take into consideration the amount of time the petitioner has already served and the availability of other remedies to secure the relief sought (such as parole or judicial action).
It also says, in section 10 (Exclusive Presidential authority)
Note that not only has the President gone against tradition and explained his reasoning, but also that Mr. Scooter hasn't finished his appeals and hasn't served any time.
Want a sig like mine? Join ACM's SigSig today!
But more and more it's become political. A personal political viewpoint? Global Warming? Whatever. You're wasting our time! Make up your mind. Are you a technical news website or something else?
Please make up your mind soon will you. Otherwise, eventually someone will start a competing website, a TECHNICAL website, one that we can count upon for TECHNICAL news. If you're not interested in that then please tell us so we can move on.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
What? Democrats don't have any nuts?
Well, that's different. Kennedy had the whole dead people demographic down pat.
Jesus is coming -- look busy!
Funny that you should mention Marc Rich, a financier involved in the Iran Contra affair and the BCCI banking scandal. Guess who his lawyer was?
Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
k.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
Although she's an expert on the law, her interpretation leaves a lot to be desired.
El Presidente can commute or pardon anyone he damn well pleases at risk of being publicly scrutinized (like Bush isn't used to that). This is something that lame duck presidents do frequently. Don't tell me you nerds didn't see this one coming a mile away. If he really wanted to stick it up everyone's ass he could have full out pardoned the bastard. I guess Bush thought he was being fair by just taking away the jail time. Whatever. Yes we all know the system isn't worth a damn. If you have power and money you get off scott free in this great country of ours, end of story. Move along, nothing techworthy to see here people!
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
From your mouth to God's (or FSM's) ears... ;)
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Clinton pardoned FAR worse people than Scooter. By a long shot.
Cheney is taking Scooter hunting.
Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
It comes under giving "Aid" to "their Enemies".
All you've done is demonstrate you complete stupidity. Technology is not independent of politics. If you bury your head in the sand, all you do is put you ass in the air where someone can kick it.
Think of it like a boat - just because you found one leak, it doesn't mean there's not another. She was still NOC at the time Libby divulged the information - hence it was a leak.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
And the virus just escaped quarantine.
...living a stones throw away from the National Mall, I can tell you from experience that it is VERY easy to not even notice, with or without intention, when this city's population increases by one million overnight. Oddly enough, protesters also have a knack for always showing up on Saturdays in August--when there's no one here but cabbies and hot dog vendors. Besides, we're used to a half million out-of-town yahoos on any given day showing up and making it generally miserable to live anywhere near downtown. Another half million just makes us think "Damn, parking REALLY sucks today. Should'a cabbed it or taken Metro."
Seriously, if you really want to effect change in Washington, don't get a million people to stand around looking like belligerent slobs on the Mall (we don't care). You want Washington to snap to attention? Get a thousand people to book up Citronelle and the Capital Grille for six months straight. Hell, if you booked out the Willard and the Hay Adams for a year, you could pretty much veto-proof anything you wanted.
Where the hell was slashdot before this story? What other Scooter Libby stories have you seen here? There has been talk of pardoning or commuting him for awhile. Where was slashdot before this action of the "most unctuous and corrupt government? Nowhere, that's where.
kdawson is a lefty troll using slashdot as his personal soapbox. Someone must stop this offtopic trollfest.
Amazingly enough, 12 people were unanimously convinced otherwise. Have you considered the fact you're being fed lies?
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
How nice of Dubya to pardon a guy who was probably holding a lot of dirt about his administration in his back pocket.
In the meantime, some kid in his 20s is rotting in a Georgia jail for having consensual sex when he was 17 and she was 15.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/11/teen.sex.case/
Obstruction of justice okay. Getting a blow job, no. Consistent with the Republican party's approach to Clinton I guess.
And Kerry, as much as I didn't want to.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
Finally, the words make sense.
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
Politics is an arena of corruption and intrique. You have a lot of people jockeying for power, money, and ratings. A lot of things happen in politics that isn't fair and you get people doing their best to do their jobs getting put into hard situations. You've got constant pressure from reporters, political spies, higher-ups etc. There are laws in place, but there are also balances in place to make sure that they law is fairly applied. I have no problem what happened here. The whole thing got started by a politically motivated investigation. It ended up with the Judicial Branch of government finding that Scooter Libby had broken the law and they sentenced him to jail for 30 months, imposed a fine, and by being a convicted felon is now classified as such. George Bush is now using his constitutional power to overturn the jail portion of the sentence. If the President of the United States feels that jail time isn't warranted from the crimes this man committed, then he's within his right to make it so. Presidential Pardon has been used by most of the recent presidents to clean up the records of those found in others political crosshairs. President Clinton pardonned many people from both sides of the political spectrum on his way out. Let's not forget that Bill himself committed perjury to the Grand Jury during the whole Monica situation.
Let's not forget Stanley Tookie Williams.
Twinstiq, game news
The CIA asked for the investigation, the DOJ got Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to do the investigation. They (the CIA) also were a bit miffed by the outing of not just their agent but the cover company and all their contacts.
1 052798,00.html
y Id=4764919
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,
See: Sept. 28, 2003: CIA Director George J. Tenet calls on the Justice Department to investigate the leak. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?stor
Why didn't Fitzgerald prosecute HIM? ARMITAGE is the one who leaked the name.
I don't follow this. He posted the anonymous submitter's straight facts. There is no opinion or bias in the story at all. You may want to be a little more open to the truth yourself, or so it seems.
Everyone knows that no one is perfect, political parties included. People make mistakes, some bigger than others. You can see that in the Lousiana Governor is now doing time for taking bribes.
As far as Mr. Libby goes, I think the report leaves it up to the reader to decide whether the President's action is right or wrong.
Just because you can, does not mean you should.
Funny how stuff only matters to slashdot when it involves those evil, nasty republicans, corporations, or conservatives doing something bad or good liberal causes to get press.
Guess you haven't been here before slashdot turned into slashkos, courtesy of kdawson and zonk.
Who is going to commute Bush's sentence?
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Can you say Richard_Armitage
I fail to see how reddit is "stupider" than Digg. Perhaps that's because I generally stick to the programming, science and infosec subreddits, but I find it hard to believe that any site has Digg beat when it comes to blatant stupidity. Even when you stay strictly in the programming section, the comments are atrocious and the stories are on the same level I'd expect from someone who just started learning to program earlier in the day.
programming.reddit.com is definitely one of the sites I've been visiting most lately. Sure, it's not perfect, but I still find a lot of very interesting articles there.
"A Lisp programmer knows the value of everything, but the cost of nothing." - Alan Perlis
that Libby represented Marc Rich, wrote his request for a Presidental Pardon, personally called Marc Rich and congradulated him when he was pardoned and has testified, under oath, that he felt Marc Rich was innocent.
(I personally believe it was this testimony that stopped the Congressional Investigation into Clinton's pardon).
He who has the gold, makes the rules.
This action by the US president concerns many Nerds. and It certainly "matters" And is rightfully posted in a place where the distinct opinion of us "Nerds" can be voiced without all the politicos drumming in.
My nerdly opinion, It sucks. Abuse of power and all that.
Special Note to Congress and future Independent Prosecutors, wait until after the election to go after the rest of the slimy law breaking, contitution ignoring bastards.(This does not include the entire administration just the ones fitting this description, as I'm sure there are a few good public servants Monica Goodling hasn't had fired.)
Good News, you cannot pardon/commute an impeachment can you?
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
So, he was convicted of "obstructing justice" in an investigation where the official conclusion was that the crime under investigation (ie, "outing" an undercover agent) never even really happened.
I've no love for Bush, or the Republicans in general, but this whole Plame deal stank of witch hunt and red herring from the beginning. On the scale of D.C. corruptions, this is small time, at best.
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
Skull and Bones is an occult organization. Do you think an occultist, Bush, would ever pardon a Christian?
No way.
Hah! Speak for yourself buddy!
wrong! slashdot is digg now. what do you really think the firehose is all about? it's about absolving slashdot fuhrers from the blame for turning a once decent technology site into a troll fest. this place is sinking fast but let me ask... will this kind of thing go on once bush is out of office? where were the political scandal stories when clinton was in office?
i just want for this to be kept in mind who scream "but this is important" when they're the once howling that politics have no place on slashdot when it's their boy in office.
boycott slashdot's advertisers!
A pardon (commutation) that impedes the prosecution of obstruction of justice is a "high crime" because it further obstructs the ability of the justice system to do its job.
It's because he found out that Libby wasn't going to be sent to a 'white-collar resort' prison. No, he was going to a federal 'pound me in the ass' prison.
And Libby didn't want to go to any prison.
Isn't it a wonderful country where people who are convicted of a crime don't have to serve the time but American citizens can be held in military brigs for years before they are even charged with a crime?
God bless America...
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Whenever I see corruption like this I remind myself of our Founder's absolute GENIUS. The legislative branch creates independent prosecutor to investigate executive branch -> the people convict -> the judicial branch sentences -> the executive branch commutes -> the legislative branch goes nuts. It's a perfect series of checks and balances.
Meanwhile, we go about our lives content with the knowledge that our government is far too involved arguing about whether some exec in the Vice-President's office lied about an investigation in which a crime may or may not have actually been committed (no one was ever charged) to actually scheme up ways to consolidate power and threaten the Peoples' freedom. And in the end, no branch got too much say and it was the people who were required to actually convict the dude.
Thank you Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, and Hamilton. This was the true gift of our Founding Fathers; not a perfect government. They knew that men will never change.
The enemies we speak of are the ones in the whitehouse.
You got modded funny, I agree he's one of the bestter presidents and I believe history will judge Bush very kindly. He saw the nation thru 9/11 and helped prevent further terrorist attacks on our soil, continued to lead a strong and growing economy, and kept terrorists on the run. True, Iraq and Afghanistan is still a work in progress, but I think in the future they'll be successful nations in the model of post-WWII Japan or Germany.
Bush is indeed greater than most people give him credit for.
Exactly! Reddit is mostly political chaff now. If/when Bush pardons Libby, I do not want to read about it on slashdot or any technical web site. But I am stunned that the comment is an anonymous reader saying Bush is going to pardon ... How could this have been posted???
I find it interesting that even after Richard Armitage was found to be the original leaker, everyone here still buys the old media line. Sure Libby had revenge on his mind but he never leaked the information to Novak. This has always been about politics nothing more.
a ge/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/leak.armit
Why is this on /.?
"Written on the pages is the answer to the never ending story..."
it was lying to a grand jury. Folks go to jail over that one fairly regularly.
And the reason why outside of marriage sex and presidents is such a big deal, is because of the potential blackmail potential. And for all we know to this day he *was* blackmailed over it initially. (I think he was, and the whole deal with the fat intern was a mossad honeypot trap)
Here's the response I sent to someone who argued that the commutation was just:
He was an extremely high ranking government official who lied to the FBI to protect the guilty. When that sort of thing is treated lightly, it sends a clear message to the public that our government is about politics and power, not about justice.
FWIW, I also think Rep Jefferson (D-LA) should be put under the jail.
The reason is this: a fine to Scooter Libby means exactly nothing. The PNAC will pay it for him. Moreover, for every Jefferson or Libby that gets caught, fifty scurry free through the halls of DC. And furthermore, the stakes are enormous. Libby will have power beyond yours or my imagining for the rest of his life for what he did. The only way to disincentivize the behavior, when one in fifty get caught and the rewards are frankly beyond my comprehension, is to make the penalty leviathan.
Why do you suppose our politicians are so corrupt? Is it because they are bad people? No. It is because they are human and they are faced with enormous profit and zero downside. No one could be expected to maintain their moral integrity in the face of that. We have to help them stand their ground, by making corruption unthinkable.
The only other option is to let it keep happening, and watch our nation continue to erode.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
You know you can go to your prefs->homepage and turn off any/all story types you don't want to see, right?
But being a TECHNICAL user I'm guessing you know that and this is more a political statement?
I think her interpretation is from the point of view of the person who wrote the law ;
I think that trumps others interpretation.
ya'know, you'all can take a ride over to MoveOn any time you want to. What's this crap doing here? Is SlashDot gonna be another vent site for the uninformed? Isn't that what CNN and NPR are for?
cause when bush gets convicted he's going to need em!
Boo fucking hoo. It's obviously a (bad taste) joke. Thanks to your lengthy copy pasta I took notice of the fellow's nick. Probably never would have otherwise.
Trolling is a art,
Libby's commutation was obviously part of the deal he made with Bush and Cheney to lie to Plame prosecutor Fitzgerald so Fitzgerald wouldn't catch Bush or Cheney for their conspiracy in the original case. Libby lied to cover up Bush and Cheney's outing Plame to cover up their lies about fake Niger/Iraq uranium "yellowcake". So Bush made sure that Libby would never go to jail, or otherwise be punished, to ensure Libby would never tell the truth about the rest of their conspiracy.
Libby hasn't told, so he's not going to jail. And his fines, left in place, are getting paid by Tucker Carlson's father's Republican committee friends. While the rest of his career is guaranteed to be rich in book deals and/or speaking fees for Republican audiences.
This commutation isn't just a technical stunt. It's central to Bush/Cheney's conspiracy to lie us into war and get away with even more power than anyone expected.
--
make install -not war
Not only in 2000, but also in 2004: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30349.
I lie is a lie, no matter how much bold text you use. Plame was a covert CIA operative. To quote from an official document supplied by the CIA to clarify Plame's status:
7 0529_Unclassified_Plame_employement.pdf
"At the time of the initial unauthorized disclosure in the media of Ms. Wilsons employment relationship with the CIA on 14 July 2003, Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for whom the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."
"When traveling overseas, Mz. Wilson always traveled under a cover identity, sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."
For the full document see:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/0
She was an undercover agent for the CIA, and revealing her status did significant harm to the security of the country. To try and deny this fact is to put partisan politics ahead of the national well being. You are disgusting. By some measures, in a time of "war on terror", your position is close to traitorous.
No. The law and logic trump her opinion. If you read the link, you see that the law and logic do not agree with her. Rather, she's misrepresenting the law and what it says.
imagine that! this was modded down as overrated! the slashdot modding system is corrupt. all editors should step down now!
boycott all slashdot advertisers! it's the only way to get this fucking bullshit to end.
And have been beaten at least once by other prisoners despite a promise to keep them separate which was not upheld.
I am so angry. I can't type what I'm thinking.
If we can't get justice in the courts or through the law, what are we to do?
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Global warming is a technical issue. Political attacks on scientist have technical ramifications.
Argentina 3 Columbia 1 in the second half.
What part of "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government" do you citizens of the USA not understand? There must have been a time the sentence meant something. You seem to have forgotten it.
The exception to the corrupt politician list is US Rep Ron Paul of Texas. You can check is voting record and he votes "no" on almost everything.
To get the government under control again, we need to vote for him for President.
Libertas in infinitum
I'm sorry. Sometimes they are not as much stooges as folks think.
But the single biggest story of the day is Libby being commuted and all they are talking about is Benoit's roid rage.
CNN isn't mentioning the story either. This is wierd.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
And every week we lose more of them.
That's mother-fucking TREASON and he should have been SHOT like we used to do with traitors.
Bush can pardon his corpse.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
I hate Bush in office as much as any other Slashdotter, yet I agree with his decision here.
I don't think it's fair that Libby goes to prison while the others in the administration do not. I'd rather have Libby get away with it than for only him to take the rap. Washington scapegoats are a tradition, and I'm glad to see it not perpetuated here.
The real culprits, Dick Cheney and several others, should be impeached and charged.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
I'm a nerd first.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
So should
Is that relevant "News for nerds"?
Hmm... never mind, apparently it is. Carry on. Nothing to see here...
Caution: May contain nuts.
I hate cheyney..
I hate condi..
I hate the American double standard..
Each and every American citizen is 100% pure unadultered pussy hole
Our 'forefathers' would laugh at us, a bunch of pussies..
Power of the people? No.. power of the pussy holes who don't do shit to change anything
Pussies..
Susan McDougal? Anyone? You guys act like this stuff never happened before.
Since Clinton was impeached for perjury and Libby was pardened for perjury by Bush, then doesn't that mean that Bush has pardoned Clinton?
Gee... There is a whole section for Politics that has been there for several years now. Are you saying it should be blank? Despite whatever you may think, American politics do make a difference to nerds whether you pay attention to them or not.
Just because you can, does not mean you should.
Or does the fact that it was a commutation of sentence rather than a full pardon speak to Cheney's diminished influence? If Cheney still had the sway in the White House he once did, would Libby have gotten a full pardon?
Interesting questions, but on a larger note: what does it say about our supposedly transparent Democracy that we have to resort to Kremlinology to find out who's calling the shots in our government's most powerful branch?
In case you haven't been following the news, George Bush has been pushing amnesty for 12-20 million people in the US illegally and for blowing the top off of the H1-B quotas. To make a long story short, two border patrol agents shot a cocaine drug smuggler (in the rear) and have been sent to prison for doing their job and protecting our country.
Bush has been asked to pardon and/or commute the sentences of these border agents but has made excuse after excuse. Bush has said the process to pardon someone is complicated and takes many years. However, when a real criminal is sent to prison, but potentially threatens the Vice President, the pardons come easy.
In my opinion, Bush is a disgrace not only himself but to our Nation and Democracy. The world press will run this story and it will further erode the credibility of US Democracy and show once again how corrupt our leaders truly are. I am angry, sickened, and amazed. I just wanted to scream today when I saw this news story. It's a very sad day for America, but it has been a very sad 8 years and undoing the incompetence and damage of the Bush/Cheney era is going to take another 20-years as we are still stuck in Iraq and the national treasure has been given to Haliburton. All we have left is debt and shame. Thank you Mr. President, now please resign and go live in Mexico!
Some text for the body.
My Babylon
Some are good. Some are bad. Some are terrible. Terrible being worse than pardoning someone like Scooter Libby who was nothing more than the dems scapegoat because they had no balls.
h tm
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.
If it was a political story related to tech I'd understand it being on slashdot.
But what the hell is this story on the front page of Slashdot for?
President Cheney.
See Clinton, Bill.
I mean, heaven forbid someone commutes the sentence of someone who got incidentally caught up in a vindictive prosecution that had absolutely nothing to do with the non-crime of leaking Plame's name.
Of course, if you think leaking Plame's name was a crime, why don't you ask Fitzgerald why on God's good Earth Armitage has never been charged? Hell, why don't you ask Plame's husband why he LIED about what he found happened in Niger - that Saddam Hussein had indeed sent one of his WMD experts there to try and buy yellowcake.
And yes, the person Saddam sent was the Iraqi ambassador the the Vatican. BFD. Some of his earlier jobs include representing Iraq on the IAEA in the 1980s, and actually HEADING the Iraqi organization that dealt with UNSCOM after the 1991 war.
Yep, that's right - the guy Saddam sent to Niger was in charge of all Iraqi efforts dealing with UNSCOM and WMDs after the 1991 conflict. Do your really think someone like that gets sent to Niger for any reason other to buy yellowcake? (Hint: research Niger's "economy"...)
And Wilson noted that in his brief. Then he went out in public and LIED about his conclusions. All this after his wife nominated him for the job.
You can see how one might think Plame set the Bush administration up. Especially given her history of contributing to the Dems. And given that CIA had just approved a book from a TRUE covert operative that was highly critical of Bush just before an election, you can see how Bush administration political hacks would be EXTREMELY pissed at CIA.
Plame went swimming in the political shark tank and got bit.
And if leaking her name was a crime, Armitage would have been charged.
Please, start smoking your crack on a planet with a blue sky.
Suggestion:
Click on Preferences, then Homepage. Scroll down to the section entitled, "Customize Stories on the Homepage". Find "Politics", and click on the leftmost radio button. Do the same to any other subject areas you don't care to see.
Personally, I find it interesting to see fellow techies' takes on politics. But if you don't, it's easy to screen out any stories you don't want to read.
-Mike
I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
The president should have just asked Richard Armitage to serve Libby's sentence since he was the leaker that caused this whole dragged out investigation.
a Mormon? A divorced Italian? A trial lawyer? An ex-POW?
This is the beginning of the end. Here's the evidence: 1) We now have a supreme court willing to overturn decades old precedents on a 5-4 majority just because they can do it. Maybe at some point the 5-4 goes the other way and we'll start seeing overturning precedents at will. This represents the end of judicial independence and a modicus of stability of the laws at the highest level. 2) We have an executive branch that believes it has imperial powers and can do whatever it wants, whenever it wants, regardless of the actual law and regardless of ethics or morals of any kind. 3) This added to the lack of consideration for science and empirical evidence (intelligent design, manipulation of EPA data on all grounds, etc) and a populace who is as ignorant as any since the dark ages. What can I say... in 50 years we'll be the subjects of the Chinese empire, I guess. Considering the organization of their government there is very little to hope for. I guess we'll be back to the dark ages for perhaps a century or two before things improve (hopefully) for future generations. This is sad, very sad.
That this yet, another one outragesous thing Bush and his administration will get away with. Geez and Clinton was almost impeached for a blow job.
Like a true mafiaa clique Bush administration follows criminal "respect" laws and doesnt give away his fellow co-criminals.
Geez and I emmigrated from Russia because of blatant corruption - I kept saying it is not THAT bad in US yet. Well I guess it is THAT bad (or worse) now.
The Russians?
Funny to see our would-be patriots tying themselves in knots trying to defend this one.
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
Obama criticized Bush for pardoning Sooter Libby. Nancy Pelosi said Bush cannot be trusted.
Where these two clowns come from? With stupid fools like them who need idiots?
Clinton pardoned around 400 criminals during his two terms. These criminals included friends of his contributors, drug pushers, and thefts.
If Obama and Nancy Pelosi do not know history, they should at least have the wisdom to remain quiet.How do these clowns made it to the top of our government?
The liberals are all talking about New Age...the Age of enlightenment. Is this the kind of enlightenment they are talking about?
Is twinsting fact and logic enightenment? Is absence of self criticsm self-enlightenment?
During the entire Katrina debacle...not a single liberal come out and say..."Hey, it is not Bush fault because Bush is so far remote from the scene. We should take a look at our systems and fix it."
No...they all blamed Bush...every single one of them.....not an exception.
If you accept this, you cannot possibly be enlightened. You do not even have a tiny bit of justice in you.
Nature sent us a hurricane, Bush was blamed. Nature sent us a drought, Bush is to blame. What's wrong with them?
If this is enlightenment, then what is dark age?
I honestly think this is the darkest of all dark ages when facts are twisted for political purposes an the intelligent are taking advantages of the not so intelligent by lying to them and brain washing them. When lying is alright and the the honest ones are put to jail.
This is the darkest hour before the dawn.
If you want to fill a crock with clean nice food, you must empty out the crap in it first.
Are you ready for the purge?
I am.
Even if it stinks high heaven, but I am ready.
I've read so many great comments. Sorry, if I missed one or two, but there were all wonderful.
But there were wrong, and their findings might be somewhat misplaced.
Sure Libby lied, he also did some other bad things. He's not a nice man, and can't be doing his job. Also, you might tell us about abuse of the pardon power...
That is all dandy, and all, but...
It's your fault. Yes, you, if you can vote in the USA. You did this. You allow it to continue. You broke it, now you fix it. Go on.
-- Prepared at the direction of, or to be sent to Legal Counsel, in anticipation of litigation. Attorney Client Pri
Except the bit "Plame went swimming in the political shark tank and got bit." I don't think Ms. Plame has suffered anything.
Libby's never even been accused, let alone convicted, of leaking Valerie Plame's identity. He was accused of obstructing the investigation into that leak, but not accused of the leak itself. It later emerged that Richard Armitage leaked the name accidentally, but he isn't being charged with a crime and it's unclear he would be convicted if he were.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
In this day and age, it is never too soon to laugh in the face of tragedy. Get used to it because the damn is breaking and there is so much more to come.
Try doing a search on Clinton's no bid contracts to Halliburton. Try getting informed rather than using magic buzz words to make your point.
Possession of drugs is by far worse. Consider the following points:
1. How the drugs are grown
Contrary to popular belief, not all marijuana is obtained from sterile lab-like grow-ops. A lot of it is grown by poor Mexican farmers who have the crops stolen by men with guns. Who will the farmers complain to - the cops? Victim number 1: farmers.
2. How the drugs get distributed
Distribution channels for marijuana are fairly complex. You have at least 5 middle men from the time that the buds are picked off to the time that they reach the end user. On occasion, the police will bust the people selling the drugs and put them in jail after a conviction. Who do you think foots the bill for this? You guessed - Victim number 2: tax payers.
3. How the drugs are bought
Often, users will steal, mug and burglarize to support their habit. Victim number 3: decent working folk.
4. How the drugs are used
Marijuana is often called the gateway drug. While many people don't go beyond smoking a joint in college, a lot of others find themselves on a slippery slope, heading straight for stronger drugs and higher highs. Sometimes, these highs result in overdoses. Most of the time, they result in ruined lives. Victim 4: Drug users.
5. How profits are used
Someone benefits from the sale of drugs. Gangs can buy weapons, terrorists can fund their activities, the mob can pay hit men to kill someone, and the list just goes on. Victim number 5: society as a whole.
So the next time you claim that owning some weed or smoking a joint in the privacy of your home has no effects on anyone but you, think twice before you open your mouth. There weed doesn't just magically appear in your pocket - a lot of people suffer just so you can enjoy your high. And this is much worse than what Libby did.
This was called a couple of weeks ago by Jeff Lomonoco, see Brad Delong's analysis here for the full text of the analysis. Yet another depressing episode in this administration, blegh.
The Bush regime is no stranger to well-timed pardon/commutation. Remember that Bush the First pardoned Cap Weinberger on the Iran-Contra scandal, relieving any potential leverage for Cap to explain Bush I's essential role in that illegal process. That deftly put the Iran-Contra investigation at a standstill.
Obama criticized Bush for pardoning Sooter Libby. Nancy Pelosi said Bush cannot be trusted.
Where these two clowns come from? With stupid fools like them who need idiots?
Clinton pardoned around 400 criminals during his two terms. These criminals included friends of his contributors, drug pushers, and thefts.
If Obama and Nancy Pelosi do not know history, they should at least have the wisdom to remain quiet.How do these clowns made it to the top of our government?
The liberals are all talking about New Age...the Age of enlightenment. Is this the kind of enlightenment they are talking about?
Is twinsting fact and logic enightenment? Is absence of self criticsm self-enlightenment?
During the entire Katrina debacle...not a single liberal come out and say..."Hey, it is not Bush fault because Bush is so far remote from the scene. We should take a look at our systems and fix it."
No...they all blamed Bush...every single one of them.....not an exception.
If you accept this, you cannot possibly be enlightened. You do not even have a tiny bit of justice in you.
Nature sent us a hurricane, Bush was blamed. Nature sent us a drought, Bush is to blame. What's wrong with them?
If this is enlightenment, then what is dark age?
I honestly think this is the darkest of all dark ages when facts are twisted for political purposes an the intelligent are taking advantages of the not so intelligent by lying to them and brain washing them. When lying is alright and the the honest ones are put to jail.
This is the darkest hour before the dawn.
If you want to fill a crock with clean nice food, you must empty out the crap in it first.
Are you ready for the purge?
I am.
Even if it stinks high heaven, but I am ready.
The sentence was commuted. Libby is still a convicted criminal, and he still has something like two years of probation. The president is not questioning Mr. Libby's guilt. He is simply saying that he believes that the jail time was an excessive punishment for the given crime, and he has the power to do something about it.
In point of fact, Bill Clinton was impeached and disbarred for the same crime. He did not spend any time in jail, nor was he given probation or removed from office. In retrospect the situations seems to have worked itself out. It's also interesting to note that in both cases the perjury conviction resulted from trying to cover up an activity that was not even criminal. (unless there's some law against "smoking a Monica")
The Clinton situation opened the door to a near decriminalizing of perjury. The outrage over this Looks like another helping of the "good intentions" double standard. Either way the conviction still stands.
Move along. Nothing to see here.
Two hypothetical reasons why Bush commuted Libby's sentence rather than pardoning him altogether:
1. It polled well. There's a sense of justice while Bush demonstrates his commitment to loyalty to those who are loyal to him. Bush can't exactly drop further in the polls, but he can keep his inner circle dedicated, and rally the most hardcore of his base.
2. It prevents further compelled testimony. Libby has already been convicted and is being punished, so he may not have Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. Thus, he may be compelled to testify against Cheney, et al. I do not know whether an outright pardon would prevent future prosecution of the same offense, though (and I suspect it would).
IANAL.
"Mother, should I run for President? Mother, should I trust the government?"
No, he was going to a federal 'pound me in the ass' prison.
I simply don't understand why this is a humouous meme in our culture.
To the right, one would think that gay male rape would be regarded as a sin and a gross violation of manhood.
To the left, one would think that prison abuse happening on a widespread scale should be something that a civil society should abhor.
To the notion of American individual rights, one would think that being sentenced to rape is a cruel and unusual punishment.
As is, it is treated flippantly.
Shame on any of you who think this is funny. Prison rape is NOT a fucking joke! It is a disgusting violation of human rights and the persistant and wicked idea that it's either funny or representative of justice that someone be sentenced to RAPE is the primary reason why it continues.
If you think my condemnation of you rape advocates is unfair, then I would like either a "liberal" or a "conservative" to make a strong, compelling case why any crime which merits prison time be "rape by default". Please tell me how exactly that represents "justice" to you.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
How come Bill gets a pass? Oh yes, liberal mainstream media only goes after conservatives.
The portion of the act grabbed onto by many right-wing radio talk show hosts in the past few years has been the extra-US service portion. It states that in order to qualify as covert, an agent has to have served outside the US in the 5 years previous to the outing.
Well, news flash, Plame did serve overseas in the 5 years prior to her outing. She traveled overseas at the specific behest of the CIA many, many times during the 5 years prior to her outing. Sometimes she even traveled under an assumed name.
Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
"The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
Plame was not only covert at the time of her outing, by working overseas for the CIA whilst under cover, she was most definitely covert under the terms of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
I know I'll get modded down for this, but I don't care.
Look, if you want to fix this stuff there is only one voice that we all have. Get out there and vote. And if you think your vote doesn't count, think again.
If you don't vote, it doesn't count. If you vote Dem, it barely matters... if you vote Rep, it barely matters. There is only one thing that matters.
VOTE THIRD PARTY! I don't care which third party... constitution, green, libertarian, pot smokers... just vote 3rd damnit! We can change this. It will take years of lost elections, but if the whole of you whiners just voted 3rd party it would have a good showing this election and stand a chance of winning next election.
There, I said it.
You're not supposed to draw attention to yourself in the press, especially in a situation where everyone will ask "why did the CIA send this retarded Joe Wilson guy to Niger?" when the answer is "because his wife at the CIA got him the job." She put her politics over her job and her cover.
"Progressives" have finally found a traitor they want to persecute.
Adam Gadahn? No. (How Islamophobic of me to suggest that!)
Jose Padilla? No. (How racist of me to suggest that!)
Why, it's that America-hating turncoat Scooter Libby, of course!
Give me a break. You only care about Scooter Libby because of the possibility of going all the way up to your least-favorite bete noire: Dick Cheney.
I thought that Time magazine was really honest about this desire. To wit (I love that, it sounds so snotty):
Source:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,15
So stop harping about this "treason" bullshit. You hate Cheney more than you hate anything and your hatred is completely transparent. Fine, Cheney's a bastard! But there are plenty of people out there giving "Aid and Comfort" to jihadist pieces of shit who merit the T-word before that insignificant choad Libby does.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
it points out how hypocritical many of those who are beating up Bush over this are. Apparently it's ok for a liberal President who has admitted lying while under oath in a matter not related to his official duties to pardon his cronies. Bush, so far, is only commuting a sentence.
A President who won neither election that put him in power, ignores the constitution and the law at whim, and pardons the other corrupt officials in government.
This is nothing but a dictatorship dressed as a democracy.
Americans deserve better.
I so strongly dislike the Bush administration. I dislike it even more than I dislike the Clinton administration. But the only thing I find stupider than the Bush administration is the conspiracy-addled sufferers of full-blown Bush Derangement Syndrome. Every problem in the universe is caused by Bush (or by Cheney with Bush as his puppet, in another equally paranoid version of BDS).
So the nice thing about this commuting is that it has put between five and six handfuls of sand into the vaginas of the BDS retards. And now they're flailing in their own piss. Mmm... Schadenfreude!
BUSH CHEATS!!!!
In point of fact, Bill Clinton was not convicted of the same crime. The reason being that he technically did not perjure himself. Yes, there was a "lie of omission", but that is not perjury. So really there's no decriminalization due to Clinton since there wasn't an actual crime.
(The bar association has ethics rules that DO ban "lies of omission". Hence Clinton's disbarrment)
Many out outraged over this because the people campaigning for and cheering Libby's pardon were the same people who were claiming perjury and obstruction of justice were serious enough to impeach Clinton, when he hadn't been charged with either crime. Now that a "loyal Bushie" has been convicted of these crimes, it's no big deal.
..and America is watching TV.
I have long suspected it, but this "discussion" clenches it.
The majority of the slashdot community are as wild eyed, harebrained, frothing at the mouth, confused, conspiracy nutty as Keith Olbermann.
Just look at the facts...
Anything Keith Olbermann says is laced with venom and hate...ditto the Bush Hating slashdotters.
Keith Olbermann is usually quite confused about the facts...ditto slashdot lefties.
Keith Olbermann is rude, ignorant, and annoying...yes, slashdot "Liberty" zealots are the same.
Finally, Keith Olbermann is an arrogant ass who thinks he is the ultimate authority of right and wrong. If I had a penny for every Slashdotter who thought like that, I could pay someone else to cull through this tripe for useful information.
All you have to do is read about his diatribe concerning Libby and then read this thread...I swear Olbermann wrote all the comments.
The President should be impeached and here's why.
evanchik.net
When something is simply not funny, anytime is too soon. It's not like you have some great low UID you need to preserve. Find a handle that better represents your personality than something from the ramblings of a mentally ill murderer, or else nobody on Slashdot will take you seriously. (or was that your intent all along?)
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.h tm
Vote for the guy who told you so.
There is no constitutional requirement for the state of the union to be a speech.
From Article 2 Section 3
Sounds to me like the president has the power to convene Congress for the purpose of giving a speech. George Washington thought so too; the timing & manner of delivering the State of the Union dates back to the Washington administration.
He's just the man for our much-needed governmental house cleaning.
America; the land of free:
Where convicted criminals get pardoned, while innocent blacks and hispanics spend 20 years in jail until the DNA test frees them.
It is high time this lame dems led congress start impeaching Cheney first.
Cheney is the real brain and bush does only what cheney wants him to do.
Going after bush does not serve any purpose.
However since republicans still have some people in congress and senate, Pelosi should start cutting funds to executive offices to fire the first salvo.
Request for funds can get tied up in committees... etc.
Just like McCain, another stupid republican, cheney will be forced to pay from his own pocket for his staff which is a good way to impeach him.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
Sorry, but "Ricard McBeef" is funny. And I don't measure my cock size by my uid. I have much, much lower uid accounts that I no longer use simply because I don't want to.
"Stuff that matters."
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
We have the CIA lying to the FBI, convicted by the Supreme court yet pardoned by the President, who initiated a War of Terror.. err that is War on Terror which resulted in PATRIOT and homeland security (uber alles) acts partly to stop the CIA and FBI lying to each other and various other laws which eat into our digital freedoms, hence making it geeky.
Not too much of a stretch there.. ok I almost snapped.
I wish I could go around committing crimes and getting away with it...
I guess I'm just not important yet. Or rich. Or a friend of someone in power. Or a lobbyist. Or (insert your favorite here). I'm just your average 9-5 Joe.
And this pisses me the hell off.
If you were offended by anything I said... No, I'm not sorry. Please lighten up.
Expecting /. to mod a post properly is like expecting that George Bush will pronounce nuclear right.
Fuck 'em.
if Bush waited
I.e., if Libby was to serve normally, he probably would have gotten as much time as Paris Hilton...does it make sense to send anyone to jail with so much overcrowding that they are let out after a token stay? The system can't do anything solid to prevent crime. The upshot of it all is you could easily be a victim if the system is too weak to deter, and you want to think of either protecting yourself or presenting people with better options so they don't even consider bothering you in a bad way.
It's harder for an individual to make a difference nowadays because one meets more strangers than ever before, as one has more ability to get about achieving numerous little goals, and it's all too easy to overlook a sneak. The government with all its power has too many problems to look after the little guy, who has to reproduce a microcosm of the security that used to be run by government. It doesn't look like it will get any easier in the next 5-10 years.
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
This is what the Republican party is all about.
"In point of fact, Bill Clinton was impeached and disbarred for the same crime."
As I see it, perjury is different from treason. Yes... that's what Mr. Libby did - a conspiracy to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA agent is treason... and the he should've been punished accordingly.
We shall be hearing "I don't recall" a lot more now.
Libby's conviction was for testimony in front of a grand jury. You don't have an attorney present and are not permitted to check documentation, and you get no cross-examination of opposing testimony. But if what you say is inconsistent...Bam! Criminal liability.
The precedent of Libby's conviction makes the lesson clear. Whatever you do, never, ever co-operate with a grand jury investigation. Deny your memory, take the fifth, halt the proceedings to consult your attorney (the only way to see an attorney is to stop everything and exit, then come back in), answer every question minimally, and generally drag your feet on every point. In other words, the way to avoid charges of obstructing justice is to obstruct justice, but in a passive-aggressive way.
That by itself is adequate reason to pardon Libby. Not because Libby necessarily deserves a full pardon, but because this conviction screws the grand jury system up even more than it already is.OK, enough idle talk then!
...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is in the Right of the People to alter or abolish it
By not moving to impeach, Congress has failed in their duty to provide oversight of the executive branch.
Therefore it is up to the citizens of the United States to end this peacefully and legally by arresting Bush and Cheney directly, thereby removing them from power, and providing them with a fair trial, clean conviction, and safe jail cells for the rest of their lives.
We hold these truths to be self-evident...
But we don't need to abolish our government, just arrest and remove from power this corrupt administration.
To summarize my non-legally qualified view: arrest them for criminal negligence (how the Iraq was has been managed) and criminal incompetence (lying to start the war) resulting in death, i.e., manslaughter, of American troops and Iraqi civilians.
A mass citizen's arrest is in our power and is our duty to protect our constitution, our way of life, and, importantly, to protect our troops who risk their lives for us but are subject to a military law that requires them to follow orders of the civilian leadership (the president). Only we, the citizens, (and congress) can directly challenge the president and act to remove him from power.
Oh really? So when will we see a conviction for violation of the IIPA then?
The reason why the Judge wanted Libby to go to jail NOW is to force the President to pardon him now
Sorry but as an non-US citizen I really don't understand why he would not go to gaol immediately once he is found guilty and has been sentenced. Is it normal practice for the convict to bring out his appointment book and arrange with the judge the best time for his sentence to start?
"Well your honour, I really can't fit anything into July and then I'm on holiday in August so how about we start in September? Now what about a couple of weeks off at Christmas?"
Last I checked, the NY Times isn't a court of law. It may be unethical to lie in the NY Times, but it's still legal.
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
Why is this tagged with "corruption" when the President has exercized the legal powers afforded him? If you don't like the system, change it. It is not like he's the first President ever to pardon a scum bag. For recent history, just look at Clinton's presidential pardon. Hell, his own FAMILY is on there, and a good-ol'-boy NASCAR buddy (with fake cancer). Let's not foget the best worst all-time pardon ever of Nixon. Come on people, this is nothing new. Let's get back to griping about all the iPhone stories already.
Should the taxpayers bear the burden of this man's retirement?
Please, impeach Bush.
Worst president ever.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
You have heard of disinformation?
Being the CIA expert that you are
i wonder if this cia covert "agent"
is a joke?
fake agent gets exposed!?
i find it hilarious, good agents, kill outside of presdental limits. 8)
Sorry, you're wrong. Bill Clinton did in fact commit perjury during the Paula Jones deposition on January 17, 1998. In his testimony, he denied having "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky. One can try and argue that oral sex is not "sexual relations". But ask yourself, if your significant other was blowing someone else, would that fall under "sexual relations"? None of this excuses Libby's perjury, I just wanted to point out that Clinton did perjure himself.
FWIW, I also think Rep Jefferson (D-LA) should be put under the jail.
That seems a tad extreme. I think *IN* the jail would be sufficient. :)
We'll only see a conviction for the outing of Plame when White House staffers stop perjuring themselves and stone-walling the investigation.
In other words, never...
The real reason Libby was prosecuted is lost on many of the administration's defenders. Many have deluded themselves into believing that Libby's prosecution was some sort of political witch hunt.
This would have to be the first political witch-hunt in history where a Republican politico was prosecuted by a Republican prosecutor, sentenced and jailed by a Republican Judge, and refused bail by an appelate court, the majority of whom were Republicans.
Libby's prosecution wasn't a witch-hunt. Libby was prosecuted because he blocked Fitzgerald's investigation. Libby lied and stone-walled, preventing Fitzgerald from ever getting to the bottom of why Plame was outed.
The "why" is very important. This is because the Intelligence Identities Protection Act only allows prosecution of those who knowingly reveal the identity of a covert agent. Fitzgerald had to prove they knew, but he couldn't reach that level of proof without honest testimony from those involved.
But because Libby lied to the grand jury and FBI, because Karl Rove stone-walled and nearly found himself similarly prosecuted for perjury, Fitzgerald was unable to get enough proof to prosecute any IIPA violations.
Libby's lies probably saved some in the administration from prosecution under the IIPA. That is why Libby was prosecuted for perjury and why no one has been (or probably ever will be) charged for outing Plame under the IIPA.
I don't think your parallels work in this case. Clinton was impeached by the House, but wasn't convicted by the Senate, so why would he have spent any jail time or been removed from office? Libby was indicted and then actually convicted. For the situations to be parallel, Clinton would have needed to have been convicted or Libby to have not been convicted.
Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
The only way for politics to remain sane is that parties stand on the toes of each other as often as possible.
I do not want to see parties making cosy dealings and being all friendly and cooperative to each other.
We need oversight, and that is only achieved when you are scrutinizing with the finest of coms what your political opponents are doing.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Is it too implausible that somebody affected by her covert operations in the past, may wish to exact some revenge?
Anyway you want to slice it, you only oust somebody like that if you are a despicable piece of shit.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Recall vote, anyone?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
You don't ever understand the terms you are using to make your case.
Pathetic.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The masses have bread and circus. BigMacs and Paris Hilton.
They do not care about anything else. If people really cared Bush would have not been elected at all, since it was plain to see he has never been fit for office.
If you think that people are going to risk their lives when they can't be bothered to elect the best person for office, you frankly are truly derided.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Open a bloody dictionary.
Whoever told you republic and democracy are mutually exclusive concepts was lying to you.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
And read the FAQs for bunnies sakes.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
... sometimes are more vicious than others when dealing with Mexicans (they want to convince other USians of their real allegiances).
Whenever I have dealt with US police officers or immigration people, the Mexican-USian ones were always the worst to deal with.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
But thanks for playing.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
this story has no technology tie and the only reason for its appearance here is because the editor is an idiot...
You can hide any articles related to politics if so you wish, nobody is forcing you to click in the politics articles anyway. /. was born as a technical site, and is still mainly that, but geeks wanted to discuss politics and Taco provided for that here.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
There is a difference: A right to do something does not make it the right thing to do.
I have the right to stand on a soap box and shout in NY Central Library.
It does not mean am right in doing so.
I have the right [in texas] to use deadly force to kill somebody who enters my property. It does not mean am right in doing so without giving a warning and being attacked.
I have the right to lie to a judge. Does not mean iam right to lie though.
Presidential pardon was provided as a way to make presidents pardon draft dodgers and AWOL during and after civil war.
However as with all other tools, we have twisted it to political ends.
What pains is the fact, some republicans and Leiberman still continue to cheer Libby.
These are the guys who should be shooed out of office.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
Running for president introduces a new barrier, money
. stm
;-)
I'm sure it's been that way for a while but the recent headline on the BBC freaked me out: "Obama leads in campaign funding"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6259702
Not "Obama most popular" or "Obama reaches the heart of the issues that Americans care about" - but "Obama leads in campaign funding". As in, he's in the lead to be the Democrats representative because he's got the most money. Plain and simple. Damn, your system is at least blatently corrupt in line with countries like Nigeria. Ours (UK) is still based on hidden string-pulling... I guess you beat us for transparency...
Obstructing the course of justice is always a crime, irrespective if an alleged crime was committed or not.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
It was quite some time since politics was considered "stuff that matters", this frankly merits the treatment.
If it aggravates you so much fix your preferences, or stop clicking.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Oh for Pete's sake. Mods, stop smoking crack.
... Well, news flash, Plame did serve overseas in the 5 years prior to her outing. She traveled overseas at the specific behest of the CIA many, many times during the 5 years prior to her outing. Sometimes she even traveled under an assumed name. "
As for you, Mr. Reynolds -
1. "The CIA revealed in May of this year that Plame most certainly DID qualify as covert under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. "
So, out of curiosity, did you actually read my "very wrong" post? Perhaps you skimmed it, and missed the part where I pointed out that it is not relevant what the CIA thinks.
2. "The portion of the act grabbed onto by many right-wing radio talk show hosts in the past few years has been the extra-US service portion. It states that in order to qualify as covert, an agent has to have served outside the US in the 5 years previous to the outing
So, because that portion was "the" portion grabbed onto by "many" radio hosts, that's the one we should use to determine whether Plame was covert? You are aware that there are *more than one* criteria, right?
Believe it or not, I'm not arguing that Plame wasn't covert. I don't even care. My point was a very narrow one -- the grandparent poster was wrong (as are you) that the case is open-and-shut, yes-she-was-covert. It's not. Fitzgerald would have some good arguments, but so would Libby's defense team, and ultimately a judge would have had to make a judgment call. And the CIA wouldn't get a vote.
- Alaska Jack
Almost as weird as slashdot posting this story the front page? Does anybody remember what this site used to be about before editor like kdawson hijacked it for their political purposes?
Well you keep telling us that America is land of the free, maybe your President really believes in it and decided Mr Libby had to be free? :-)
I don't really understand the details, as far as I can work out some really important guy broke a law that would put you or me behind bars for 20 years or so but instead they fined him, ooh, something like a month's wages, and he's on probation which I think means they'll be *really* angry if he does it again. Probably he's had to say sorry as well.
Your statement is almost as galling as Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence. The Bush-Cheney cabal have subverted the Constitution and the governmentis NOT working as intended. VP Cheney now claims he is some hitherto unknown fourth branch of government (WTF?). They led us to war on false pretenses. They have ignored the Geneva convention. They are torturing people. They let people drown in New Orleans. They have suspended Habeas Corpus. I don't know what delusional planet you live on but it must be in the 21% that still thinks the Sun shines out Bush's ass.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Enter chancellor Adolf Hitler...
OK, I know you want SOMETHING done by SOMEONE, just... be very careful with what you wish for. The frustration and eagerness for radical changes that prevails after two Bush mandates is very dangerous one. Great reformists are rare. Beware of your hope and wishes luring you into unfounded trust. Someone wrong may exploit the opportunity and ride the wave of dissent into seizing absolute power. Good system is far more important then good leader and building such system is not something that can be expected from any leader to do on own free will.
This is an insight into a sad reality (granted, the first reaction to these is usually to laugh). However, it's not a joke, nor is it actually funny when you think about the reality of it. Please mod parent as insightful.
the point isn't really that it's funny, i think.. the point is that everyone else has to suffer through it (probably because your prison system is deficient in some way, and the fact that you've got the highest number of inmates in the world next to china probably doesn't help either), and libby doesn't have to..
:p
if people really cared to fix the rapes going on there, i'm sure it could be done.. i can't say we (i'm dutch/european) have this happening here all the time quite the way that your culture seems to. then again, we're terribly liberal, so you might just think that our prison system is worse off because of it
that's not to say that it doesn't happen here, i wouldn't have a clue if it does.. but i somehow doubt it, because the only place that comes to mind when i'm talking to my fellow countrymen and we start talking about rape in prison/as part of a sentence is the Land of the Free [and Noble?]. i'm sure that stands for something
anyway, whether rapes happen more often in state prisons or in private prisons, what i don't understand is why prisons are privatized.. at least in state pens there's a sort of incentive to reintegrate people into society/get them a job.. but privately owned prisons (per your silly corporate profit maximization legislation) would actually benefit from not trying to get people to adjust to living in society (never mind if the project works or is doomed to fail in the first place). Obviously, nobody would be unscrupulous enough to think that way, but isn't it something of a conceptual problem at the very least?
Ha ha ha!
I'd also like someone to explain why Capital Punishment is acceptable.
The rest of the civilised world has done away with it, but this US and A we are talking about... Maybe Mr Jesus dad decide REAL punishment after criminal die?
Every single one of the comments I've read so far is confusing "pardon" with "commute".
The President can either pardon, which is to say that the crime was OK and it effectively did not happen or result in a guilty verdict, or commute, which is to absolve some of the sentence.
Libby still has a fine of nearly $250,000, or more money then the average Slashdot reader will ever make on welfare given the level of reading ability I've seen thus far.
Bush will "find the leak" when OJ "finds his wife's murderer"
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
Actually as a pretty centrist republican I thought and told most of the more extreme people around me that Clinton shouldn't have been impeached (though I believe if he had any respect for the office he would have resigned). Incidentally, if he had resigned Al Gore would probably be President right now. Also I don't think Libby should be able to be convicted of obstruction of justice without the prosecutor actually prosecuting the crime that he was supposed to be obstructing.
Now that would be something Nifong could use to stop Duke's character assassination cold. There's something about a pardon that humbles the recipient and tells some affluent people to back off.
This was suggesting that Nifong could use the same kind of deal Libby got (if not a full pardon) to clean things off. The other purpose would be to signify that further demonization is going overboard(that is, rabid bloggers and Duke Elois to back off).
With "lacrosse-does-no-wrong" Duke, seems that their "honor" stops well before they get attacked - given the dirt on them as well.
As for Libby and his case, we'll probably have to have an Administration and Congress clean of those connected before there's any definite answer. At least if Nifong gets a crack at the Federal level, he'd better take good notes on how to keep Duke from being a thorn in his side.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
What you or I consider sexual relations is irrelevant. During the case in questions, the exact boundaries of what constitutes sexual relations was laid out. BJs were excluded (not considered sexual relations). Clinton asked his council about this before answering the question. His answer was accurate, and not a lie. There was no perjury.
"(unless there's some law against "smoking a Monica")" Actually, I think it would be "smoking a Clinton".
Armaments, 2-9-21 And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, 'O Lord, bless this Thy hand grenade' N
Upon further research, I stand corrected. Bill Clinton cut a deal to avoid felony conviction. He paid 25K and gave up his law license to make the whole thing go away.
However, that doesn't change the fact that he perjured himeself. My point is still that the Democrats, in arguing that perjury for a non-crime is acceptable, have opened the door for this. It's disingenious to argue that some perjurers are less guilty than others because of the nature of their perjury.
Many [are] outraged over this because the people campaigning for and cheering Libby's pardon were...
It's interesting that we are arguing with the same point. Perjury is a serious crime. And people, for political reasons, are minimizing its import when their particular cargo cult is involved. The issue is not that it's "no big deal." The issue is that it was no big deal under Clinton, and now it's supposed to be a big deal because a Republican is involved. I say again, perjury is a serious crime. Clinton should have gone to jail, and so should Libbie. However, if you're going to let one off, the other goes with him.
These double standards are destroying the rule of law. We need to punish criminals, and there's no shortage in either major party. It used to be that Democrats could pick-off Republicans by exposing their foibles and prompting their resignation. Republicans have learned to behave like Democrats and shed any sense of shame. Democrat outrage at this exposes the double standard.
I called them both cargo cults above. By promoting a double standard you help to illustrate my point.
....who knows why
The modding of the parent post as "Flamebait" is exactly the reason why Slashdot shouldn't have a moderating system. It's because left-wing political dongs use it to their advantage to mod down any right-wing opposition. I challenge anyone on Slashdot to point out what, in that post, constitutes "flamebaiting".
This site is disgraceful for the way people abuse its peer-moderation system. If anything, it mirrors the attitude of the nation in that if somebody disagrees with you, they should be squelched and discredited. There's a reason why there is no "-1, Disagree" rating.
Mod parent up.
It seems to me that all Presidents do is pardon their friends and business associates (particularly Clinton). Since Presidents keep totally misusing the power, it is a power that should be totally removed. If the majority of people in the US have to face the justice system, then the rich, powerful and friends of Presidents should have to face it too, with no get out clause.
Lying about treason someone else committed still wouldn't be treason. Nail the guy, but nail the right guy.
Are you kidding me? Outing a CIA agent isn't criminal? You must be listening to the Faux Noise channel a bit too often. Who cares if the 'conviction' still stands! like this guy will have any problem getting any job/lobbyist position he wants. He just became the most wanted employee in big business, willing to go to court and spend jail time to obstruct an investigation of his employer. He'll have no problem finding a job Lobbying for Sudan in Washington DC.
In Republican America, laws obey you!
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
Deibold??? What the fsck? What are you talking about?
Deibold was never involved in 2001 election.
It was the stupid, dumb floridans who could not even vote properly and PUSH the vote through the ballot box since they were too busy worrying about hurricanes...
You dumb floridans, you deserve all the hurricanes you get. It is the price you pay for not voting properly and allowing bush to be appointed president first time.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
Yes... that's what Mr. Libby did - a conspiracy to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA agent is treason...
Had he done that I would agree with you. I would also argue that Nancy Pelosy also comited treason by criticizing the US Government while within the borders of a state sponsor of terrorism. In fact, many Democrats have done things that have historically been considered treasonous in recent years. But this is not the point.
The point is that Mr. Armitage revealed Ms. Plame's identity. There was no conspiracy, and Armitage has admitted his role in revealing what has been called the worst kept secret in Washington DC. Also, had there been a conspiracy, it would not have been criminal or treasonous because Ms. Plame was no longer undercover. According to The CIA she had not been deployed outside the US in any capacity for more than five years. The statute of limitations on her "undercover" status has run out for a while now.
By the way, the reason you're not hearing much about this aspect of the issue anymore is that Ms. Plame is herself guilty of perjury. She lied to congress when she claimed that she had no role in sending her husband "yellow cake" hunting.
I thought the Nixon's pardoning of all the war protesters/draft dodgers (your choice)that went to Canada to avoid Vietnam service was pretty much a blank check. I doubt that he compiled a list of names when he gave this pardon.
Peace, or Not?
Those documents were forged by Nigerian diplomats because the (IIRC) French intelligence agency (DGSA?) had put out a substantial bounty on obtaining absolute proof that Iraq tried to buy yellowcake in Niger. So, some low-paid government bureaucrats decided to get some of that bounty...
And how does the presence of forged documents DISPROVE what Iraq tried to do in Niger anyway? I notice you never addressed any of my points, you just dragged in a Wookie. Being able to quote Latin does not appear to indicate an ability to think logically.
The CIA documents show she was still NOC at that time. Furthermore, Fitzgerald did not conclude that no crime occurred. He concluded that Libby's obstruction of justice made it impractical to determine to what degree additional crimes occurred. (For the record, obstruction of justice is a crime.) Not guilty != innocent.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Many people who defended Clinton during his impeachment didn't do so because they believed perjury to be a non-crime. They defended him on the basis that perjury committed in the context of a civil trial regarding sexual harassment isn't an impeachable offense. Which means impeachment opponents didn't think it was a "high crime and misdemeanor" against the state.
The context of Libby's perjury (and obstruction of justice and making false statements) is different. It was done during a federal criminal trial (not civil in the case of Clinton) with regards to the outing of a CIA agent. A crime that can pretty easily be construed as against the state. Had Clinton done the same thing, it would've been easier to argue that the crime qualified for the constitutional requirements for impeachment.
Regardless, both of them should have been punished (if that meant jail for Clinton, so be it) but Clinton didn't deserve impeachment for his crime.
On a side note, I don't get your epithet of cargo cult. The major parties have an uncountable number of flaws (the world would be better off without them) but I can't imagine how they're anything like cargo cults.
Let's impeach them both and let Nancy Pelosi be president until Jan 2009. She can stop the bleeding while we work on getting a new president in to clean up the mess.
I'm glad someone around here understands the difference between pardoning and commuting.... I for one telecommute.
And your proof of this is?
If the special prosecutor could only change one man with a process crime, how is this treason? In addition, since the prosecutor knew from the earliest part of the investigation who leaked the name and did not even try to indite them, obviously Libby was a saving face prosecution. Why was no one indited with leaking a covert operative's name when the prosecutor know who leaked Plame's name from the earliest part of his investigation? Obviously, Plame was not a covert agent at the time. Source
In God we trust, all others require data.
I'm amazed that this is not the straw that breaks the camel's back. We've seen all kinds of illegal shenanigans from this administration, and now they just outright endorsed criminal activity to further their own agenda.
At what point will people actually take action against this criminal? Are we so complacent now that we won't do anything until he nukes Boston?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I only wish that was true. I see that if you have powerful friends your are above the justice system. A sad sad day for America.
I remember when this was a tech news source and not a site that focused on politics and religion.
I miss those days.
Good point. However, the parallel I am making is that both comitted the same crime, perjury. In Clinton's case he avoided a conviction by the bar by making a deal to give up his law license and pay $25,000. That carries with it an implicit admission of guilt.
As for the lack of a Senate conviction; it was a matter of the nature of the punishment and not a question of guilt or innosence, that led to his acquittal. Most in the Senate wanted him censured, but not removed. In both cases politics intervened to deflect most of the punishment from two perjurers. It doesn't make it OK, rather it's a case of I told you so.
Pay attention to the Robert Novak and Richard Armitage sections.
The CIA has a lot of employees working that are not spies. Even what you would call a spy working for the CIA is usually a case officer that recruits people to get restricted information for them. There is a big difference between saying that Valerie Plame works for the CIA and Valerie Plame is a covert operative for the CIA. The CIA's estimation of fallout from publishing was "He asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause "difficulties" if she travels abroad" according to Rober Novak.
Valerie Plame/Wilson carries the most blame for blowing her cover. (Although she really hadn't been covert for a long time.) Valerie got Joe a CIA junket to Niger. He then wrote about that classified trip in the NY Times, using it to attack the White House. The White House had to refute the lies that Joe wrote in the op-ed. Robert Novak started asking why would the Bush Administration send Joe Wilson, a staunch Democrat, to Niger in the first place. The answer was confirmed by Richard Armitage and Patrick Fitzgerald knew this from day one: Joe's wife at the CIA got him the gig. Valerie was engaging in politics instead of doing her job. If she wanted to set public policy she should have run for office instead of subverting the policies of those who did get elected.
Emperor Palpatine does this for Darth Vader all the time.
There. I just made it "news for nerds". You're welcome.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
As I understand it Libby was found guilty of lying to Federal Employees and thereby impeding a still ongoing investigation. i.e. By whom and what purpose was the identity of an active CIA agent leaked to the public via the media. (A severe crime even, a "treasonable" offence). Thus the commuting of the most severe pentalty phase of Libby's punishment removes to a great extent, at a sensitive time, the willingness of said person to be further co-operative with Federal Employees/Prosecutors investigating the much larger offence. Given that such investigation centers largely upon the current administration, specifically the office of the VP, could it be construed that the President's recent action "hinders" the ability of the Proscutor on that case to offer the person with the most insight and knowledge a "deal" to co-operate and tell the whole truth? If construed this way, is the recent action by the President an act of hindering the ongoing investigation? And if so what implications roll out from this?
Why did Georgie commute the prison portion? Because he told libby to lie?
Hmmmm... Naw, that can't possibly be true!
Are you kidding me? Outing a CIA agent isn't criminal?
That depends on what your definition of "is" is. Since neither Libby nor Cheney was the one who revealed her identy you will have to look to Mr. Armitage for that answer, as he's the one who did it. However, according to the Communist News Network (CNN) Armitage will not be prosocuted since he didn't violate any of the provisions of the relivant law.
Is the definition of perjury taken from the Oath of Office? No.
The best mixed martial arts training in Boston - www.redlinefightsports.com
Besides, he sure as Hell doesn't want to piss off his designated fall guy TOO much, lest said fall guy get pissed and write a book telling the TRUTH about what really went on behind those closed doors.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
But it sure would be obstruction of justice, which is what he was going to prison for.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
If you try to send Libby Libby Libby to jail jail jail
Politics will ensure that your attempt at justice fails fails fails
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
The comment count for this article was a hair over 3 times greater than the front page runner up.
From this, we can deduce:
1) Nerds care about politics to some degree.
2) This must be news that matters.
Many people who defended Clinton during his impeachment didn't do so because they believed perjury to be a non-crime...
You seem to be arguing that some perjury is acceptable. I would argue that perjury to deprive someone of civil justice is worse than perjury to cover up something that wasn't, as it turns out, a crime. However, since our system of justice depends on truthful testemony in all cases, both are equal in undermining our legal system.
Of course, my point is not that Libby doesn't deserve punishment, but that we've traveled down this road before, and the question is how are we going to get off of it before we go too far. If we keep playing turnabout is fair play we'll eventually turn our system of government into an excuse to do anything without consequense. I'm not saying stop the war (left vs. right) I'm saying let's remember that we all have to live in this house when it's over.
Regardless, both of them should have been punished (if that meant jail for Clinton, so be it) but Clinton didn't deserve impeachment for his crime.
Agreed.
I can't imagine how they're anything like cargo cults.
Only in the sense that the leader of each is treated to fanatical loyalty, even to the point of ignoring any foibles, flaws, or criminal tendancies, so long as things are going well. Going well defined as plenty of "cargo" and your cult in power. When things are not so good it's time to chuck the old leadership and find someone new to dieify.
Sort of a "he's the messia and he always was... No! wait! He's not the messia and never was. Here's the messia over here.
In point of fact, Clinton was acquitted. "Impeached" is analogous to indicted. The Senate acquitted him. His law license was suspended for a term of 5 years. He was not disbarred.
I find being offended by me offensive.
You're all loosing sight of this whole situation. I've noticed a lot of arguing and bickering about technicalities and loopholes, rather than the fact that Libby is an asshole, and so is the president. Who cares what the DEFINITION of his crime is, he's a douche.
Internet: Serious Business
What everyone is conveniently forgetting is that the prosecutor already knew who outed Plame before Libby was found guilty of perjury. He wasn't even found guilty for outing Plame, something the media really doesn't seem interested in. This who thing was a huge waste of taxpayer money and an attempt to get to Cheney and Bush. If you have something go for it any corruption must be rooted out but this was nothing more than propaganda from the start.
Maybe I'm just crazy, but I think the main point, and travesty, revolving around this incident isn't being discussed. Let's go back to the very beginning of this whole thing. Valerie Plame's CIA status is "outed" to the press. How does this administration respond? By investigating it's own offices for the source? Not exactly, no. In fact, why would they even have to? Evidence has shown that quite a few top Whitehouse officials KNEW ALREADY about the source of the leak. They only really began an internal investigation at the insistence of the CIA, and as a response to holier-than-thou Democrats which began to puff out and thump their chests. So what DID the administration do when this first became an issue? They immediately attacked the press! The attacked the concept of anonymous sources! Reporters spent time in JAIL for not giving up those sources. Reporters spent time in jail over this, and someone who actually lied in court over it didn't, for that matter. I think this WHOLE damn event is a big fucking calculated farce, originally set into motion in order to crack down on the free press, and crack down on the anonymous free speech. Judith Miller told the court, before being ordered to jail, "If journalists cannot be trusted to keep confidences, then journalists cannot function and there cannot be a free press." Exactly Judy. I think that was the whole point...
"To lead the people, you must walk behind them"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yup. It's called "Impeachment".
And amazingly, Impeachment can also cure the constitutional question of whether Dick Cheney is in the executive branch or not. No VP Cheney, no question.
Isn't Impeachment great? It's kind of a shame, however, that the Republican Culture of Corruption uses it frivolously, and the Democrats are always too afraid to even use it.
Our country would be so much better if we had Democrats with guts, and no Republicans. Well, no corruption, but that realistically means no Republicans.
A pardon would have prevented Libby from using the 5th amendment to avoid testifying. This is just a get out of jail free card. Now the "government" (the part not controlled by the bushies) has no bargaining chips to get Libby to testify against the people who were actually behind the crime that started all of this. I wonder who that might be? Maybe Bush? Maybe Cheney? An otherwise perfectly legal act, that is done to prevent the proper functioning of the legal system, is obstruction of justice.
Just one more crime to add to a very long list.
let's see...
Several million counts of violating the 4th amendment (by wiretapping americans w/out warrant)
Assassination (bragged about in the 2003 state of the union address)
Violating the Geneva Convention re: classification of prisoners of war
Violating the Geneva Convention re: torture, inhumane, or degrading treatment
Violating the Geneva Convention re: collective punishment (both "battles" of Fallujah)
Violating the UN Charter (aggressive invasion of a sovereign state)
Denying American citizens their right to Habeas Corpus
-- QED
Who gets to decide how to "just fix it"?
Unfortunately, the back and forth bickering and shoving is part and parcel of the democratic system. You can't spend 'just a little more energy' and get a real solution. (If you think you can, I suggest you offer up an example.) Where we have gone off-track is entirely in the arena of oversight and transparency.
[Ego]out
Yeah, it was sent to georgewbush.com by mistake. And the georgewbush.com IT staff were trying so hard to make sure that no email was saved that it was deleted before it could get forwarded to the jury.
CMA: It's a joke. If you can't take jokes about your clandestine (or illegal) activity, don't participate in clandestine (or illegal) activity... or don't get caught, but I'd prefer the former.
Resistance is futile. Your technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. You will become one with the morgue
It is interesting that you say that Armitage did not commit a crime. I think I might agree if he was just repeating what the administration was cooking up as a smear. Did he hear from Grossman about Libby's interest in Wilson's wife? Did he read the actual document marked secret before speaking to Woodward? He may not have known that Plame was covert at that time though he should have. By the time he speaks with Novak though he should be pretty much aware that the information is secret. On the other hand, Wilson warned Novak that it was indiscrete to go around blabbing on July 10 http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Plame_Leak_timeline #July_10. Novak then speaks to Libby on July 11, presumably tidying up. Does he ask Libby if Libby knows that Plame is covert? That would be pretty standard practice. Novak certainly sends a copy of the article to Rove for approval. With that kind of editorial control, Novak is just an organ and it is a Libby-Rove show orchestrating the outing. They are also releasing other classified information at the time to assist with the smear which Libby insists is authorized, so he is being careful about that at least.
This action of the president is unfortunate since after a few months in jail, Libby might have been willing to talk. Miller finally did. But, perhaps the president's motive is not alleviating too harsh a sentence but rather disuading Libby from talking. In that case, the president's action would be an attempt to obstruct justice.
Rape is a serious crime, whether it's against a man or a woman, but you're mistaking where the joke is. It's not that it's funny he's at risk of this, it's funny (in a schadenfraude sort of way) because his expectation is that he, being white and high class, is above such risks - that they can't or shouldn't happen to him. But oops! Look, there he's gone and done a crime, and now, foolishly, he finds himself in with the other 'riff raff'.
The funny/not-funny thing about this is that there is an expectation that 'white collar' criminals should get it easy, but that that expectation is being changed up. Libby should do hard time - harder than 30 months, in my opinion. And not in a resort prison, but with every single other human we lock up for seriously screwing over other citizens. He should be getting no consideration and no special treatment.
And the really unfunny thing about it is that the truth of the matter is really painful (and according to Strangers in a Strange Land, therefore the only reason to laugh): that rape does occur in prison, to both men and women. They're nasty places no one would want to land in.
[Ego]out
Had he done that I would agree with you. I would also argue that Nancy Pelosy also comited treason by criticizing the US Government while within the borders of a state sponsor of terrorism.
So you consider criticizing the US government treason? Ah, no. You object to her being outside of one of the designated free-speech zones when doing so?
I'm trying to figure out why this should be "News for Nerds", and am unable to come up with a single reason except for the "I Hate Bush" SlashDot agenda.
Libby doesn't remember what he said to a random reporter three years ago. BFD. Clinton knowingly lies about having sex to avoid jail time in his trial while under oath, and gets praised for his wonderful ability to make a bald face lie. Remember his words, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" in front of cameras. Another lie. And he got more praises for it. "Everybody lies about sex," remember that?
SlashDot shows it's Democrat fanboy basis, already greasing their asses for and moaning for more of their wonderful Democrat creamy smoothness. You can hear them crying, "Do it to me again."
This is so fallacious as to nearly not bear commenting on. Women are raped in prison all the time; generally by the guards. Realize that a rape victim has nowhere to go in prison; complaining about a rape can be more dangerous to your health than submitting to it. You think there would be an almighty outcry? One that would stop the crime? On what do you base this? Because it's not that to date there is a great deal of outcry over women being raped in prison. It's not because of the outcry of men being raped. It's certainly not the outcry over women being raped in general, or violence against women in general. It's hard enough to get accurate reporting on those issues, much less any sort of response.
[Ego]out
...does that make it all better?
Rape would be the least of Scooter Libbys problems if he ended up in the general population of a federal prison.
Hedghog
But we don't always get what we want.
On the Other Hand: Well Played, Dubya, Well Freeking played. That dodge has been the first sign of intelligence to come from the White House in far too long a time.
On the Gripping Hand: Slick Willy's 'lie of omission':
If you watch the footage of the deposition where Clinton was asked the key question:
"Are you having a sexual relationship with that woman?" (meaning Monica)
Clinton glanced down under the table and made sure, before answering, truthfully (and in the present tense): "NO".
And the prosecutor, being an IDIOT, didn't ask "Have you ever..."
http://visualizecommonsense.com/
Wow. That CNN can be described as `communist' with a straight face is just amazing.
Many out outraged over this because the people campaigning for and cheering Libby's pardon were the same people who were claiming perjury and obstruction of justice were serious enough to impeach Clinton, when he hadn't been charged with either crime.
The same people claiming that Libby should do the time are the same one claiming Clinton didn't do the crime.
Nope - that is an Oxycontin inspired delusion there.
Time to start joining the "reality based" folks.
Plame was, in fact, under cover
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
The "she was an office worker" meme was a neocon BS line
"Bush won in 2004 because the majority of the people who voted thought he would be a better president than Kerry." Interesting that you presume to know the intentions of 122 million people in choosing to vote for one person or another. "Better" in what respect? As I said, it's the American public's fault for embracing unimportant issues and ignoring the important ones, and it's the parties' faults for purposely feeding the unimportant issues to the public. They did it in 2004 and they're still doing it. As for your "majority", 62 million isn't exactly representative when it only amounts to 1 in 5 people.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
***Obviously, Plame was not a covert agent at the time.***
Plame was a covert agent, according to the CIA.
The "she was just an office worker" meme is a lie, as revealing an office worker would not have had the desired effect of silencing a critic of the administration's war.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
May 29, 2007
WASHINGTON - An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.
What kind of grown man lets himself be called something like "Scooter"?
"I have as much authority as the pope, I just
don't have as many people who believe it" - George Carlin
That's lawyer logic for you.
You can't take the sky from me...
"it is not relevant what the CIA thinks"?? And what brand of crack are *you* smoking? Jesus.
Doesn't the oath say "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?". I'd say the second bit covers omissions.
I just recently talked about this with my brother-in-law (a retired lawyer, no longer practicing; misunderstandings are probably my fault, IAmNotALawyer). If you check the law, the crime of perjury requires someone "willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true". The statement has to be deliberate, and the person has to know it was false. Thus, "it all depends on the meaning of what is is" — Clinton believed his statement to be literally true; the prosecutor didn't feel he could prove a willful falsehood.
BUT although not clearly a crime, it was clearly a violation of the oath he took to tell the "whole truth", ergo a violation of his duty as a lawyer and thus an officer of the court. So, Clinton lost his law license..
Myself, I feel both Clinton's impeachment by the House and his acquittal by the Senate were nevertheless appropriate. A question of Perjury is a serious matter, and a trial is appropriate... for a trial can clear as well as convict.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
The interesting thing is, it's not considered perjury if the question **itself** is not relevant to the main thrust of the case.
The question of Clinton having sex with Monica, occurred in the Paula Jones case. This question was itself ruled not relevant to the case by the judge. Therefore Clinton's lie in answering that questions was not perjury.
The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
I notice in this discussion hundreds of comments (perhaps thousands) in which someone posts a "fact" and the opinion that they have generated from that "fact" without any reference to the source of that "fact," not even a link.
Be careful with such discussion as it is a very good sign of brainwashing. (And here I go doing the same thing.)
My point is, if you can't back up your "facts" then you shouldn't be formulating opinions based on those facts. And some talk show or news host's rantings are not backup for facts. That's the kind of thinking that got us into the quagmire that is the US two party system in the first place. (And I did it again.)
Resistance is futile. Your technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. You will become one with the morgue
The President is much more concerned with the penalties for possession of cocaine.
Re-read my original post. As I pointed out in plain English, the Democratic Congress that laid out the rules did not WANT the CIA to be able to decide who would get prosecuted for (courageous whistleblowing on covert shenanigans / traitorous betrayal of critical top secret information). That's why we're talking about the US Code and not internal CIA rules. Whether the CIA thinks Plame was covert is not relevant *for legal purposes*, which happen to be the purposes we're discussing at the moment.
I'm sorry I can't explain it any more clearly.
- Alaska Jack
You can't spell bullshit without bush!
burrocrisy
and that would be what? Ruling by jackasses? Never has a slashdot misspelling been more apropos
I notice that this article was tagged: usa, republicans, corruption, politics, conspiracy.
Is there any reason for using all those redundant tags?
Technically did not perjure himself.
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."
Libby's lies probably saved some in the administration from prosecution under the IIPA. That is why Libby was prosecuted for perjury and why no one has been (or probably ever will be) charged for outing Plame under the IIPA.
So why not charge _him_ with it, since he's preventing charging anyone else?
We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
The reason you cannot explain it any more clearly is because your entire argument is a fact-free turd which you are trying to polish. What the "Democratic Congress that laid out the rules" (and which "Democratic Congress" would that be? The Republican Congress that wrote and passed the agent-identities protection act? Or the Republican Congress that reenacted the special prosecutor law?) wanted or did not want had absolutely nothing to do with this investigation. That investigation was undertaken *entirely* at the behest of the CIA, in response to their *criminal complaint*, which compelled a reluctant DOJ to find out who leaked Valerie Plame's name.
You are so wrong. What happened in 2004 (and 2006) wasn't lack of power, it was lack of will. 99% of the voters decided that corruption was ok. That's lack of wisdom and lack of desire to serve self-interest. But it's not lack of power; it's rejection of power. If people actually cared enough to show up and vote, and then when they did show up, they cared enough to vote against corruption, then things would be different today.
Why did they do this? Actually, you just explained it. They stopped caring. They gave up. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Dude: you are the problem. Stop trying to justify shirking your responsibility, and start voting. And for fuck's sake, vote against Democrats and Republicans.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The majority of votes cast in 2004 were for Kerry.
:-(
The majority of votes counted in 2004 were for Bush.
Similarly in 2000, if we went on what voters intended, Gore would have won by a fairly easy margin.
The discrepancy is about a million votes. What accounts for the million vote discrepancy is that the rate of voter spoilage is closely tied to race, and race is tied to political party. If you don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, the cause is that blacks (who vote strongly democratic) tend to live in poor areas with poor equipment that is more likely to malfunction. If you do subscribe to (mild) conspiracy theories, there is no shortage of reasons why politicians prefer voting systems that can be manipulated, and there are no shortage of examples where they have engaged that preference.
Don't look for this in the mainstream news though. At least not in this country.
That's blatantly misleading. Clinton lied about a matter that was completely tangential to a civil lawsuit. In this case, you are correct that the underlying matter was not criminal.
In the Libby case, he lied to cover up the release of the name of a covert CIA agent. That is a crime. In fact, if the release had been done by another CIA agent, and the person receiving the information had been a foreign national, the crime would have been treason and the perpetrator could be facing the death penalty. To try to spin Libby's role as somehow not related to a criminal act just because no one was convicted (at least I assume that's your reasoning) ignores the point of why 'obstruction of justice' is a crime.
Further, it's important to understand the reason behind why each crime was committed. Clinton felt he was being asked a question that was neither relavent or appropriate. He lied to protect himself and his family from embarrassment, and his lie didn't significantly effect the outcome of the case. It's important to remember that while he was disbarred, he was also found NOT GUILTY of obstruction of justice, and even several republicans voted not guilty on that charge.
Libby, on the other hand, lied to cover up people who were releasing national secrets in order to smear a political rival. His lies specifically prevented the prosecutor from being able to bring charges against those who were directly involved in the cover up. There is strong evidence that the vice president was involved and some evidence that the president himself was involved. Beyond being felonies, these crimes are -legitimate- grounds for impeachment, and Libby's lies prevented the prosecutor from being able to prove his case.
Finally, before you make the argument, Valerie Plame was a covert operative. The head of the CIA says she was, and I tend to assume that he has more knowledge of the situation then a bunch of rightwing blowhards with a political motivation to have her not be covert.
I guess we are lucky you are not being interviewed by the Special Prosecutor. The Pesident might have to Commute your comviction.
Try reading Artical 2 Section 3 of the US Constiution.
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the
Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge
necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both
Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with
Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he
shall think proper;
Seem the President call the time and location if he deems it.
''That's fantastic. It's a great relief,'' said former Ambassador Richard Carlson, who helped raise millions for Libby's defense fund. ''Scooter Libby did not deserve to go to prison and I'm glad the president had the courage to do this.''
If I was in need of defense, would anyone raise money for me to pay for legal counsel? How could I prove my self innocence irregardless of being falsely accused or not. This statement enrages me more than the pardon!
Bullshit there was no conspiracy. There absolutely was a conspiracy coming out of the VPs office to get Plame's name out there. Armitage is the one who leaked to Novak, but Libby was leaking it to everyone he could. Bullshit as well that Plame wasn't undercover. I don't know why it isn't enough for you pinheads when the CIA, AND the prosecutor both confirm that she WAS. BTW, its Pelosi, not Pelosy. Nitwit.
I'm not an American. I will probably never vist the USA again because I actively fear being harassed by officials for my big mouth. Your actions, you fucking stinking heap of shit, have caused tens of thousands of innocent people to die and it seems very likely that many tens of thouands more will die before this is all over. You have made the world a phenomenally unsafe place, actually giving the freaks who started all this insanity in 2001, far more support than they ever would have had otherwise. You have sullied your country's reputation so badly that all the things that your country supposedly, in some way, stood for, such as freedom (no, not the potatoes, you dumb cunt) of opportunity, speech and lifestyle, have become null and void, destroyed by a big, dark, terrifying cabal of huge multinational corporations and utterly corrupt and amoral politicians. Your bunnies, Tony the poodle (selling his own country out bit by bit), and Johnny the bonobo (fucking Australia till it hurts), are going or are gone. All your corrupt buddies in world bodies, like Wolfie and Bolt-on, have been thrown out, becuase no one respects or trusts you, you sick prick. Even your own party is trying desperately to distance itself from you.
Did you know, you stupid semi-literate fuck, that China, of all the possible places, is regarded as being more friendly than the USA today by the majority of the world's population?
And today, difficult as it may seem, you actually managed to make me, once again, feel physically ill. You actually managed to lower my opinion of you.
I seriously doubt, you bastard, that history will much in the way of kind, good, and especially intelligent words for you.
May you burn in hell.
That's right, the judge in this case was a Bush appointee.
So was Fiztgerald, the prosecuting States Attorney.
The President's pardon powers are absolute.
Quibble: except for cases of impeachment.
Abuses like the Libby case and the Mark Rich case may fuel efforts for a Constitutional amendment limiting pardons, or allowing them to be overturned. I'd imagine an amendment that lets a massive super-majority of Congress (like 75%) override a pardon might not be a bad idea.
I despute the merit of that suggestion, based on what I know of the constitutional convention debates on the issue. The thought was that the President being able to give a swift and certain pardon might facilitate the quieting of rebellions, and (political cronies aside), those who make it all the way through the official DOJ pardon vetting process are generally deserving. "The quality of mercy is not strained"; excessive additional limits seem seem both uncharitable and unwise.
I have a counterproposal (if you're going to amend the constitution): modify the pardon power, so that therafter the president may still use one to exempt anyone from "indictment, trial, judgment or punishment," but that whoever accepts such pardon or clemency shall still suffer "disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of Honor, Trust or Profit under the United States" (while allowing that anyone may refuse such pardon or clemency when proferred). This limits the usefulness of the pardoning of political cronies (since they're effectively banned from the political game ever after), without excessively limiting the potential role in society for rehabilitated criminals who now benefit from the rare exercise of "the benign power".
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
pardons and commutations since the Nixon pardon. And, perhaps, the Marc Rich pardon as well.
Yes, Marc Rich was a bad pardon given the conflicts of interest, but it's not on the same planet as Libby's. Rich had to pay $100 million fine for the pardon to take effect, and Rich wasn't covering for Clinton and other officials in leaking intelligence information for political gain.
No, Libby's pardon is the worst since Bush pardoned everyone in the Iran Contra scandal that could have testified against him.
1) Nifong ignored early signs that there was no case (lack of DNA, "victim"'s story not checking out, alibis from the "assailants", the list goes on)
2) Nifong race-baited to win an election with this case (Durham is roughly 50/50 black/white), despite the aforementioned warning signs
3) Nifong made ridiculous claims throughout the whole ordeal (e.g. "why do [lax guys] need lawyers if they're innocent?") to make it seem like the defendants were guilty - that's not the job of the prosecutor
The Lacrosse players were far from perfect - but that doesn't mean Nifong is getting railroaded. Also, for once these people (Nifong and some members of Durham PD) are going to get something they deserve - terminated dishonorably and possibly losing their pension. Nifong played god with other people's lives to benefit himself, and now he's getting "railroaded" for his own fuck-ups.
In the Libby case, there are several factors that militated in favor of commuting the sentence (and made out an arguable, though less compelling, case for a pardon). The two most important factors are Libby's public service and the fact that, at the time Libby made the false statements in question, the prosecutor already knew the answer to the question he had come to Washington to investigate. Indeed, it seems likely that but for the high profile and political context of the investigation, the prosecutor would not have asked Libby these questions. In addition, it may also be relevenat that Bill Clinton was never prosecuted for committing perjury with respect to matters where, unlike here, the facts were not yet known.
Your labeling of the Chinese people with such malicious intent is both racist and paranoid. I don't suppose you have any facts that the Chinese government is engaged in a premeditated campaign to kill us?
[Ego]out
An out-of-control executive branch, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
Support Dr. Ron Paul and reverse these trends.
Last link (unless Stark County District Library caves to the gov't and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)
"In point of fact, Bill Clinton was impeached and disbarred for the same crime."
No. Clinton was not ever accused of Perjury in any court. The Perjury charge was soundly defeated in Senate, even with a majority of Republicans seated. The Obstruction of Justice charge also failed to get a majority in the Republican Senate. The only thing Clinton was accused of in court was Contempt of Court for failing to testify truthfully. Clinton cut a deal for that charge, which would have been tough to prove, since the lawyers questioning Clinton under oath never asked him straight up questions about what they knew he had done.
For example "Mr Clinton, did you ejaculate on Monica Lewinsky's dress?" "Did Monica Lewinsky touch your penis with her mouth?" "Did you touch Monica Lewinsky's vagina with a cigar?"
They knew all these things had happened, because of Linda Tripp's blabbing (not completely sure Tripp knew about the cigar). They could have asked those questions directly and established the facts of Lewinsky's and Clinton's relationship for the civil court. They did not do these things. Instead, they asked highly circular and vague questions that barely, if at all, touched on the situation. "Were you ever alone with Monica Lewinsky? "No" (I was on the phone with Yasser Arafat while she sucked my dick).
The lawyers asked these questions in this odd fashion because they weren't interested in establishing the truth of the matter. As was later ruled by the judge in the case, Clinton's canoodling with Monica had no bearing on the Paula Jones case. Clinton didn't supervise Monica officially, and never did anything official that affected Lewinsky's White House responsibilities. The lawyers were already in substantial possession of the details of what Clinton and Lewinsky did, but did not seek to confirm those detail in a straightforward fashion.
The lawyers asked vague questions because they were hoping to trap the President into Lying Under Oath to avoid revealing politically and personally embarrassing details. If they had asked direct, yes or no questions about the specific behavior they already knew about, Clinton would have realized they had a source, and not tried to weasel his way out of admitting his infidelities. He would have 'fessed up and avoided a big chunk of trouble, although when the lawyers for Jones illegally leaked details of his testimony Clinton would have suffered serious political damage.
But, Clinton was a pretty good lawyer himself, and knew how to parse the truth. Using a dictionary definition, he did not have "sex" with Lewinsky. As far as the touching with intent to arouse, etc., I think a pretty strong defense could have been made that time and personal feelings of shame had clouded Clinton's memory regarding the specific 'blow-by-blow' activities with Lewinsky*. There is no guarantee a charge of Lying Under Oath would have succeeded. I myself doubt it. But there is no question that the process of beating the charge would have been a humiliating one for Bill, and I completely understand his decision to pay a fine and surrender his law license to put it behind him.
Not like he needs to try cases anymore to make a living.
Scooter Libby was tried and convicted of Perjury and Obstruction of Justice. He was accused by a Republican Prosecutor, convicted by a highly sympathetic jury and sentenced by a Republican Judge. No one attempted to entrap or deceive him to get the conviction. The crimes Libby committed had direct bearing and relation to his duties and responsibilities as a Cabinet Officer. Libby continues to cover up the criminality of his superiors, and has just had his sentence commuted to enable him to keep covering up that criminality.
Clinton screwed up. Libby is a convicted criminal. George Bush Jr and Dick Cheney are criminals.
*Scooter Libby tried a similar defense, with less time for forgetting and an amazing ability to remember false details that never happened.
Fundamentalism is a crime against humanity
hey guys whats going on in this troll
lose != loose
Can you imagine, for a second
Doing anything just 'cos you wanted to?
Well, that's just what I do
So hooray for me, and fuck you.
-- "Hooray for Me", Bad Religion.
"It doesn't cost enough, and it makes too much sense."
I am in full agreement with you Good Citizen Copid, but would like to clear up this one misunderstanding: while she was based in mainland USA, according to her testimony before congress recently (backed up by the Director of the CIA), Ms. Plame did indeed operate outside the US in her frequent trips overseas to Turkey and several other countries. This did indeed put her in some danger, while most definitely (from the testimony of several active CIA agents in Scooty Libby's trial) shut down the counter-proliferation operation, Brewster Jennings, in which CIA-affiliated agents were, in fact, terminated overseas - that's terminated as in murdered....).
It's a problem with the corrupt government and whatever part of the population that blindly supports them... and the American media and news outlets are HUGELY to blame as well.
America is on the decline. We're getting dumber as a nation, more in debt, more into irresponsible consumerism and displays of wealth (even if we can't really afford it), eating junk that kills us slowly, becoming a nation of philistines who listen to manufactured bands and watch formulaic movies with no artistic value... our industries are going overseas even though we overwork ourselves and the greedy companies give us crap for vacation time, we aren't self-sustaining in the slightest as a nation... the government is corrupt and probably won't get reformed, as most people don't care enough to do anything about it... moreover, they don't even want to care. America is ignorant and trashy, and damn it, we're proud of it!
We're not the world leader in any area anymore... not healthcare, not education, nothing. We've got nothing to be proud of as a nation. And we're jerks to the rest of the world. The divisions between rich and poor in our country are increasing rapidly.
With this trend continuing, America is going into a (higher-tech) middle ages. There's the aristocracy (or maybe 'investment class') which is just plain greedy and sociopathic... and then there's the MUCH more populous lower working class which becomes depraved and miserable.
Anyone in their right mind would high-tail it out of here and go someplace more sane like Canada or Western Europe where quality of life is just plain better.
Let us not forget all the pardon's Clinton passed out during his tenure.
Oh, Jesus Christ. Yeah, he doled out pardons; all presidents do that, you numbnut. What is different is that Bush is commuting Libby's sentence (and threatening to pardon as well) specifically to protect his own ass--and more likely that of Cheney's--from the Iraq lies that started this shitstorm in the first place.
Personally I do not believe any President should have the power to pardon anyone convicted in the courts and by jury. This goes against the will of the people that stood in judgement. This pardoning can lead to abuse and false protection. This is one power the executive branch should not have. Well, this, you and I can agree upon.
Captain America must be turning in his grave.
Actually, no. Bill Clinton was impeached and disbarred for using the legal definition of the term sex, while being questioned in a court of law, by a lawyer. You can argue that he lied to *us* (the public), and frankly I agree, but what happened in the court was not perjury (The judge ruled it wasn't applicable to the case at hand, which defines perjury - it's untrue *and* it's relevant. The judge ruled it wasn't relevant to the case at hand, which meant the question of whether it was untrue was moot), and in my opinion wasn't even a lie - he was playing according to the rules of the situation.
Scooter Libby was found guilty of presenting multiple verifiably untrue statements that *were* germane to the investigation at hand while under oath to federal investigators.
See, one lied about things that were relevant, the other told the truth (admittedly in a deceptive way) to a question that wasn't relevant to the case. The second is an impeachable offense according to the republican party - I can only assume it's the telling the truth part that bothered them at the time, since they've very much backed a pardon for actually perjuring yourself.
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
He claims that not every sentence in a classified document is really classified. He's right, but it's not for him to decide what can safely be declassified, which is effectively what he did. Had the circumstances been different and Plame been abroad, he could have signed her death warrant.
The liberals ignored Sandy Burglar's light sentence, yet they rejoiced over Libby's harsh sentence. What did Libby do? He lied and I seem to remember a past president who thought lying under oath was no big deal. What did Burglar do? He stole classified documents. Burglar's is a much more serious crime than Libby's. 30 months in jail for Libby, 100 hours community service for Burglar. $250,000 for Libby, $50,00 for Burglar. How are those two sentences fair?
Bush has used legitimate checks and balances in the face of an over-reaching special persecutor and sentencing judge.
"Politicians always tell the truth, when they're calling each other liars."
Well, there is plenty so see here actually. Clinton went through the impeachment process, no matter if you like how it turned out, whatever punishment he got he took fair and square.
It is also true that most Presidents pardon people, but frankly the same people asking for Libbey to get one (or a commuted sentence) pretty much were beside themselves with rage when Clinton handed out some controversial pardons. By comparison, I don't really remember many, if any, Clinton supporters defending his questionable pardons, much less urging him on.
So, yeah, it is very fair to be unhappy that a President sure looks like he is just rewarding loyalty of someone who took the fall for higher ups.
Sorry - I'm sick of this argument, and I'm going to keep saying it every time I see someone try to say it's okay because Bill Clinton perjured himself.
He didn't. Perjury involves two things -
A - the statement must be untrue - In point of fact, a lawyer used a legal definition, in a court of law, when asked a question by another lawyer. Deceptive? Yes. Not untrue.
B - the statement must be germane to the case at hand. The judge on the case ruled that it was not. END OF STORY
He didn't perjure himself. He was stupid, he lied to the public, and it was an unholy mess that could have bee avoided, but it was never perjury, and no matter how many time Rush Limbaugh screams that he did, it still isn't so.
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
You mean like the interests of these ?
- Moral majority
- AIPAC
- NRA
- Philip Morris ($2,387,480)
- Microsoft ($1,942,751)
Different countries found several workable solutions to that problem of balance the different parties (and special interests).Sex was defined as vaginal intercourse, so blowjobs didn't count.
Clinton did not say "I did not have sex with that woman". He said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman". Since when is a blowjob not something sexual?
Note the part that says she has to serve outside the US within the last 5 years? Well - guess what - the release occurred after that 5 year window.
When an agent's cover is blown, it's stupid to fully disclose the nature of the agent's work. Yeah, if I were a top CIA official and one of my operative's cover was blown, I'd say she hadn't worked outside the US within the last 5 years, too. I'd minimize her involvement in the agency to decrease the damage. The last thing I'd do is give a complete account of her responsibilities and activities.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Maybe I have misunderstood your comment and if so, I apologize in advance. Are you saying the 60's accomplished nothing?
I was born too late to experience the 60's, but it seems to me its generation accomplished quite a bit.
* Civil rights for black people
* More women's rights
* General liberalization of society
* Greater sexual freedom
* Greater freedom to be different
* End of Vietnam war (Much like Iraq)
* Greater acceptance of gays (Stonewall)
That's just the stuff I can think of right off the top of my head. They also screwed up some stuff, such is the nature of revolution. Overall, I think we are better off than we would be had they played ostrich.
http://www.marxist.com/
Google it.
. . . .
Read it.
Learn from it. Pay particular attention to paragraph 503. Learn how WRONG you are.
I'll quote the ENTIRE section about Iraq's efforts to buy uranium in Niger.
6.4 URANIUM FROM AFRICA
490. There has been significant controversy surrounding the reliability of Government
statements about Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa. We have therefore studied
this issue in detail.
491. Natural uranium is the necessary starting point for all nuclear developments (whether for
weapons or civil power). In the late 1970s, Iraq obtained large quantities of uranium ore
from Niger, Portugal and Brazil. By the mid-1980s, however, Iraq had become self sufficient
in uranium ore, which was a by-product of indigenous phosphate mines at Akashat and purifying plants at Al Qaim and Al Jazira which extracted and purified the
uranium ore for subsequent use in nuclear enrichment processes.
492. In the course of the first Gulf war, the facilities involved in this indigenous route were
severely damaged. Subsequently, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
supervised the dismantlement of all the facilities that Iraq had built to process, enrich and
fabricate uranium, and removed all potentially fissile material. Some unprocessed
uranium ore was left in country, but under IAEA safeguards and subject to regular
inspections. Iraq would therefore have had to seek imports of uranium or uranium ore if it
wished to restart its nuclear programme covertly.
493. In early 1999, Iraqi officials visited a number of African countries, including Niger. The
visit was detected by intelligence, and some details were subsequently confirmed by
Iraq. The purpose of the visit was not immediately known. But uranium ore accounts for
almost three-quarters of Niger's exports. Putting this together with past Iraqi purchases
of uranium ore from Niger, the limitations faced by the Iraq regime on access to indigenous
uranium ore and other evidence of Iraq seeking to restart its nuclear programme, the JIC
judged that Iraqi purchase of uranium ore could have been the subject of discussions and
noted in an assessment in December 2000 that:
. . . unconfirmed intelligence indicates Iraqi interest in acquiring uranium.
[JIC, 1 December 2000]
494. There was further and separate intelligence that in 1999 the Iraqi regime had also made
inquiries about the purchase of uranium ore in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In this
case, there was some evidence that by 2002 an agreement for a sale had been reached.
495. During 2002, the UK received further intelligence from additional sources which identified
the purpose of the visit to Niger as having been to negotiate the purchase of uranium ore,
though there was disagreement as to whether a sale had been agreed and uranium
shipped.
496. This evidence underlay the statement in the Executive Summary of the Government's
dossier of September 2002 that:
As a result of the intelligence we judge that Iraq has:
. .
- tried covertly to acquire technology and materials which could be used in the
production of nuclear weapons;
- sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,despite having no active
civil nuclear power programme that could require it . .
and in Chapter 3 of Part 1 of the Government's dossier that:
The main conclusions are that:
. .
- Saddam continues to attach great importance to the possession of weapons of
mass destruction and ballistic missiles which he regards as being the basis for
Iraq's regional power. He is determined to retain these capabilities;
. .
- Iraq continues to work on developing nuclear weapons,in breach of its
obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and in breach of UNSCR 687.
Uranium has been sought from Africa that has no civil nuclear application in
Iraq.
and:
Iraq's known holdings of processed uranium are under IAEA supervision. But there
is intelligence that Iraq
Fuck Bush.
He's a traitor against the constitution. He should be tried in a court of law for crimes against the United States and crimes against humanity. And then he should be lawfully executed, and his entire family to the 10th generation forbidden to hold any public office of any kind.
Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
You can spin it, you can nuance it, you can split the hairs until you match my baldness.
There is a principle behind organizational behavior, such that the further up the government/military organization chart you are, the more accountable you are for personal behavior.
If you're the flag officer, you simply do not even imply that you'd like to have your car washed in front of a subordinate, because if they go ahead and wash the car to curry favor, you've just abused your authority.
The fact that Clinton's behavior was a disgrace to Christianity, marriage, and manhood is of little interest.
The fact that Clinton's subordinates in the military were held to a higher standard than him, and paid higher consequences for lesser infractions, is inexcusable. To a man able to say "It depends upon what your definition of 'is' is", this line of argumentation probably sounds like something out of C.S. Forester. Keep in mind that the US is not entirely populated by moral relativists, though.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Here's hoping that the Republican party bites it and the Libertarians become the new balance against the Dems. I respect Mr. Bush but am deeply, deeply disappointed, though not surprised.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sophistry
Well, with Congress's current approval rating, I seriously doubt that they are going to be making big gains in 2008. Quite the opposite, they could end up handing the presidency and congress over to the Republicans again in 2008 just like they did in 2004.
I say get the ball rolling on the impeachment hearings. Getting the country talking about the corruption in the Whitehouse is a good thing. Showing the world that the US is serious about undoing some of the damage inflicted in the past few years would be a good thing. Forcing Republicans in Congress to either stand by the man they are currently trying to distance themselves from or vote against him would be a good thing. Showing America that the Democrats actually have testicles would be a good thing. Actually convicting Bush (or Cheney) would not nessecerly be needed for the move to be a political success. However, so long as they don't attempt to do what America voted them in for in 2006 (stop the madness), they can continue to enjoy their low approval ratings. Seriously, the Whitehouse must be laughing their asses off from all this talk of non-binding resolutions that seem to going around nowadays.
I agree. At minimum you can make statement about your distrust of the other options.
On a related note, the Independence Party of Minnesota did quite well last go-round. Perhaps a similar party in other states would be beneficial.
Just because you can, does not mean you should.
What is the real reason GW is only commuting the sentence? What kind of precedence or future implication does it have?
I know what the Republican spin is, and I have also heard the Democrat spin. What is the truth? Will we ever know the truth of what is going on in the administration?
Just because you can, does not mean you should.
This reminds me that a number of slashdotters who voted for Bush have expressed regret in the last year or so. So, I'll ask: does this bring any more to that position?
Clinton did not say "I did not have sex with that woman".
He said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman".
Since when is a blowjob not something sexual? Since it's defined in trial as vaginal intercourse. Are you dense?
You can't take the sky from me...
Since it's defined in trial as vaginal intercourse. Are you dense?
Please read and respond to what I actually said rather than resorting to ad-hominem attacks.
If he had said "I did not have sex with that woman", with the word sex being specifically defined in the context of the trial as vaginal intercourse, he would have been technically correct. However, because he used the words sexual relations, he was being technically incorrect, since a blowjob is something sexual, while not actualy being sex (in the same way that strawberry jam is fruity without actually being a fruit).
With that, Clinton may have been given the room to offer a technically "true" denial to the question of whether he had sex with Lewinsky--even if she happened to perform fellatio on him. The truncated definition characterizes sex in terms of a checklist of body parts, including the genitals, breast and thigh. Oral sex would not necessarily require the President to touch anything on Lewinsky that appears on that list. Strange as it may sound, under one reading of the definition, Lewinsky could have been having sex with him (because she was "touching" the President's genitals) while at the same moment, he was not having sex with her. (At the deposition, Clinton wasn't asked if she had sexual relations with him, just if he had them with her.) Isn't the law a wonderfully intricate device?
You're not just dense, you're a fucking idiot.
You can't take the sky from me...
I stand corrected.
You're not just dense, you're a fucking idiot
Once again, your resorting to ad-hominem attacks weakens the strength of your argument, no matter how correct it ma be.
Just try saying "nya nya-nya nya nya" in a court of law and see how well that impresses a judge or jury.
I very recently discovered a quote by Simone de Beauvoir that undoubtably will echo through the ages: "One is not born a Woman but becomes one." This may be true, but I was utterly stunned to find it is trumpeted more than it's male analog. How many kids are in Iraq to liberate and protect the Shia and how many joined the military to "become a man" or die trying. I defy any reader of this post to claim they've never heard of such a motivation. The notion of "Manhood" is so valued and supra-natural that I've even heard it invoked by homosexuals who have nothing to lose by forsaking that status because they aren't given it anyway.
Women who berate the cover of Cosmopolitan magazine as a male conspiracy are full of shit. Those images are created by women for women. Similarly, men should drop the authoritarian hierarchy once it could involve damaging another guy to preserve the status quo. Obediance is the only result besides death, martyrdom, failure, or prison bitchdom.
Are you claiming that I am NOT the same race as they? If not, then why would you regard anything I say as true?
Alright, step back for a moment and look at this statement. In your first question you ask if I am claiming a thing - what, for now is irrelevant. This thing that you ask if I am claiming I am very clearly not claiming - anywhere. (If you dispute this, quote the relevant passage.) But then you proceed to make a causal link between that claim (that you are not the same race as the Chinese) and the fact that I should therefore regard nothing you say as true. This is a standard logical fallacy; "if a exists then b is possible, therefore if a ever exists b always exists." Your logic here is bad.
If that's the case, then you have no reason to discuss anything with me unless you simply like fighting.
You stated an opinion, which I have every right to challenge. Further, even if the evidence you introduce is wrong, that is an independent thing from the logic you are using to reach your conclusions. I have the right to challenge both your evidence and your arguments. It is not simply a matter of 'lik[ing] [to] fight.' It is a matter of challenging someone who is putting forward a belief I find to be erroneous.
If you can't define racism correctly, then you have no business making such accusations. Racism is the belief in the genetic superiority of one race over another.
Let us consult the American Heritage Dictionary at dictionary.com:
"1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race."
There is nothing in those definitions that suggest someone of a given race might be prejudiced against that same race. So, point in fact, I don't care if you're Chinese, Japanese, Caucasian, Hispanic or whatever. You made a racist remark.
And what "gross generalizations" about a race did I make?
I refer you to:
"... which they relay to us with pristine accuracy when they're not busy trying to poison our citizens, children, and household pets."
"They" is always a good indicator of a generalization. If you think that you're not generalizing about the Chinese people and/or the Republic of China's government, then please tell me if the U.S. Government is for or against the war in Iraq - without making a generalization.
It becomes 'gross' when you start confusing the topic of 'government' versus 'private interest'. The poisoned food, for instance, was not the result of government involvement - if anything, it was the lack of government oversight that allowed it to happen. It was the actions of a private company that caused the problem. But you lump the private company in with the government - the citizens in with the lawmakers; your result is a gross generalization.
Additionally, are you claiming that "Chinese" is a "race"?
I would not be in error to identify 'Chinese' with an ethnicity. You can certainly be racist against Chinese people and not, say, Japanese people. Or racist against Japanese people and not Chinese people. This happens a great deal in those countries, but also in the U.S. where during WWII we saw a great deal of hatred against Japanese people, but not Chinese people. For the purposes of this conversation I think you're going to have a hard time making the case that I'm misusing the term there.
I thought that the poisoned pet food and poisoned children's toys spoke for themselves, so perhaps the case is that no amount of evidence will convince you.
You cited no evidence that this was done by the Chinese government, much less in any premeditated sense - yet you claimed both. You cite no evidence for any of the assumptions you claim. I am not disputing the events you reference, only disputing your linking of them to p
[Ego]out
Interesting, Mr. Value. Tell me more about the planet you live on, where the Republicans held a majority in Congress in 1981. And where an "argument" is a simple pointing out of facts.
- AJ
Welcome to the new fantastic world where America, is now just america. Like argentina or belarus! Just another shithole country with no reason to exist, except to be bought and sold. Hey, wanna kill children, just buy enough politicians, wanna make those kids work in a mineshaft? Buy some politicians, they're cheap and ever so pliable! Wanna sell food contaiminated with polonium? Just buy some politcians. Truth doesn't matter, transparent government is a thing of the past. Wanna invade a country? Steal their oil, just buy some politicians. They'll lie and throw away soldiers lives for cheap! You can even buy media, media who'll not question the lies, they infact will tell them. Invent more. They'll call anyone interested in the truth, a communist or a taliban-lover! It really made me feel good over july 4th to celebrate the end of our democracy. So how long do we have until they start shooting people? I'd guess 10 years at the most.
Well then, indeed, welcome to my planet, Mr. Asshat Jack, where history is actually a matter of record, instead of a prop for whatever idiot arguments you find convenient to make this year.
i es_Protection_Act. It received that opposition from Democrats because it was written solely to go after guys like Richard Agee, who opposed the misuse of the CIA since 1950 as an agency of right-wing empire-promoting assassination and dirty tricks -- the kind that included the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Iran, for which the USA has been paying a price for over 50 years -- and who made the mistake of going too far in furtherance of that aim by outing actual CIA employees and getting them killed.
:-)
The Identities Protection Act was passed in 1982, not 1981. It was authored by Republicans, and passed *against* majority Democratic opposition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_Identit
It's remarkably humorous today to watch Victoria Toensing and other Republican operatives (such as yourself) come forward to object that going after Republican shills, tools and traitors like Scooter Libby wasn't what they intended. They *still* don't get what "blowback" is all about.
This made me laugh. Wow -- you are one angry young man!
... 100 members of the Senate ... Democratic majority, so at least 51 Democrats ... and (according to you) a majority of Democrats opposed it ... so that means at least 26 Democrats voted against it ...
... Dems = at least 218 ... Majority of Dems = at least 109 ...
WRT the 1981 vs 1982 thing -- hey, you got me. I was a year off. Guilty as charged.
Of course, my point was that the IIPA was passed in a year when not only the Senate but also the House were Democrat-dominated.
It passed "*against* majority Democratic opposition"? Really? Impressive! Normally, under those conditions, supporters would find it almost impossible to even bring the bill to the floor, much less pass it.
Hmm, let's see [pulls out napkin and pencil]
Except obviously I've made some grievous mathematical error, since the Senate vote was 81-4.
OK, well you must have meant combined House and Senate. Let's see: House = 435 members
well, I trust you can see where this is going.
Respectfully,
- Mr. Asshat Jack
Whoops! Let me take this opportunity to point out that, though I knew the Republicans did not control both houses, I forgot the Republicans did hold a slim majority in the Senate during the first six years of the Reagan era. It therefore is not accurate to refer to it as a "Democratic" Congress, as I did in my first post.
It doesn't change the substance of my post, of course, but I thought I should set the record straight.
- AJ
Wow, a wingnut who can do arithmetic. Fascinating.
Notice you don't mention what's stated clearly in the link:
"The law passed the House by a vote of 315-32, with all opposing votes coming from Democrats. The law passed the Senate 81-4, with the opponents being Democratic Senators Joseph Biden, Gary Hart, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Republican Senator Charles Mathias." So, essentially, the majority of opposition to the bill, in both houses, came from Democrats.
"Doesn't change the substance of my post"???!! Hell, man, your entire case about what *DEMOCRATS* intended in this bill just falls flat if congress wasn't Democratic when the bill was passed.
This is really so typical of little wingnuts everywhere. It's the O'Reilly Technique: Just make shit up, pretend you're completely unbiased about it, and never admit you lied.
Really, you've earned my contempt, don't you think?
And the fact STILL remains that what the CIA thinks about Plame's covert status is entirely relevant, both under the act and as a matter of triable fact. Your argument (and it is precisely that, because your facts are incomplete and your interpretation of their significance biased) is at least stupid, and if also disingenous, then very likely just more of the "right-wing spin" you so casually dismiss.
The prosecutor had abundant reason to believe Plame was covert within the meaning of the act, and listed every one of those reasons in his "Summary". As the following points out, that was never even an issue at trial, and the probability that the judge would have agreed had the judge not ruled it prejudicial to the central case approaches 1.0 by any reasonable interpretation -- assuming, of course, that Fitzgerald didn't lie like a rug in his "Summary" the way Libby did in practically every statement he made to investigators: http://anewerworld.org/?p=1011.
Finally: Why are *you* apparently *not* angry about this? It doesn't bother you that a White House functionary is free to endanger the lives of our secret agents in order to protect what more and more appears to be the outright lies of his superiors? Why, if you don't actually care about Plame's covert status, are you trying to pretend that the right wing spin on this is anything but exactly that?
> You're not just dense, you're a fucking idiot
Not according to the court's definition of "fucking".
> You're not just dense, you're a fucking idiot
;)
Not according to the court's definition of "fucking".
Yes, the same thought occurred to me too at the time, but I didn't want to go there.
Besides, if I went to Washington, and said:
I did not have sexual relations with that idiot
that would open up a HUGE can of worms I would really prefer to avoid!