Bush should just pardon him now, its not like he has a political advantage to loose.

6/5/2007 5:21:21 PM

ok goddammit.

LOSE is the opposite of FIND
LOOSE is the opposite of TIGHT.

how hard is this? I am NOT a grammar nazi, but i see this mistake EVERYWHERE. even on professional corporate websites. even in academic papers. and its not just a typo, because i see it done multiple times in both versions, in the same paper.

i mean WTF, people?


(*breathe*)



oh, and yeah... ^ i agree. and i really hope he does.





[Edited on June 6, 2007 at 2:46 AM. Reason : ]

6/6/2007 2:43:06 AM

Dammit, where is Webster when you need him? He thinks correcting people's spelling allows him to ignore points.

6/6/2007 3:03:56 AM

^ You harangued? It's a clever play on words, you see? Oh, forget it.

If mathman really wanted to push the bounds of grammar, he could argue that he meant the word at issue as a verb. An example might be "He loosed the dogs of war."

At any rate, mathman is entitled to an occasional solecism. After all, he is mathman.

[Edited on June 6, 2007 at 6:48 AM. Reason : .]

6/6/2007 6:47:58 AM

Don't enjoy talking to yourself too much now.

6/6/2007 7:20:48 AM

^ It was only a rhetorical question?

6/6/2007 7:44:50 AM

ha ha "loose"

although, joe_schmoe you are only fueling the fire that
you and hooksaw are one and the same.

(no offense hooksaw, but you do pick on the grammar, obviously if
I ever did such a thing then it would be easy to pwn me soundly with past grammatical
attrocities)

6/16/2007 12:43:00 AM

now wait a cottonpickin minute.

wtf is this bullshit? how could anyone in their right mind think that I am hooksaw.

you're trying to troll me, arent you?

dont troll a troll, motherfucker. I will cut you.

6/16/2007 4:17:33 AM

^ ya, well I'm Iron Man so good luck with that.

6/16/2007 10:14:37 AM

^^^ Hey, I defended you, mathman. I thought we were all right.

PS: joe_shithead is not me--but he does want to be me. He is not ready, though.

[Edited on June 16, 2007 at 6:09 PM. Reason : .]

6/16/2007 6:07:05 PM

dont worry. he wasnt attacking you.

making a "joe_schmoe --> hooksaw" comparison can only be interpreted as an insult to me.





[Edited on June 16, 2007 at 7:49 PM. Reason : ]

6/16/2007 7:48:49 PM

^ joe_schmoe again finds the way to get the thread back to what every thread must eventually become... a hooksaw trolling-fest.

Ok, so I admit you two are not the same person, but if you were it would be the funniest thing I've seen on TWW for a while. Personally, I've done that kind of thing on the CB back in the day, talking to one's self can be very funny if you can get another person in the conversation to boot...

Alright, lets get back to the issue at some point here.

W gimme my pardon already!!!

6/17/2007 1:43:57 AM

I want to see a pardon come from the White House ASAP. lets just get it done with. every administration pardons their favorite criminals. pardons are nothing new.

the only thing i think is different about this one, is all the harsh words GWB had to say at that time, about the then-unknown person(s) who outed the CIA agent. i cant remember the specific language (maybe someone can find the quote), but it was something along the lines of:

Quote :

"If anyone from this Administration is found to have had anything to do with compromising a CIA agent's cover, they'll be fired immediately. -- GWB, circa 2004 "

in his defense, i guess he didnt specify whether or not they would be able to receive a pardon from doing any jail time.

6/17/2007 2:09:55 AM

^sure, but technically it wasn't Libby who did that anyway, it was Armitage, correct ?

leaving aside the question of her "covert status" for the sake of discussion.

6/17/2007 10:04:10 PM

^ Yes.

6/18/2007 12:17:40 AM

okay, point. but regardless, all of them had something to do with it, from at least Cheney on down. Armitage took the "fall" because, conveniently, he couldn't be held accountable for it since he was no longer at his position. Libby, as we all know, lied to the grand jury about his role and what he knew.

and furthermore, to complain that Plame was not currently covert, implying that somehow invalidates the more serious charges, either shows an ignorance of what CIA operatives do, or a willfully disingenuous effort to conceal this administration's Jacobinesque purges of the intelligence community, criminally destroying their political opponents livelihoods and careers in retaliation for daring to challenge their "facts".

whether or not Plame was currently covert is irrelevant. it is criminal because there is an entire network of american and friendly foriegn operatives who worked with Plame in one manner or another, and by exposing her, it risks exposing them as american agents and puts their and their families' lives in danger





[Edited on June 18, 2007 at 1:33 AM. Reason : ]

6/18/2007 1:22:33 AM

^ (Sigh.) Possibly the dumbest post ever.

WTF does Armitage no longer being in his position have to do with a damned thing?! Oh, since he left his job we can't charge him with revealing the name of a covert agent?! BULLSHIT! ARMITAGE WAS NOT CHARGED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO FUCKING CRIME! PLAME WAS NOT COVERT! GOD DAMN!!!

Libby was convicted on four counts in a five-count indictment alleging perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to FBI investigators--but is was lying about whether he had discussed the Wilson case with reporters. Libby wasn't the source of the so-called leak--he just got caught up in this political shitstorm.

David Broder--who is widely considered the dean of Washington correspondents and no conservative--wrote the column below about this stinking mess. It is illuminating.

Quote :

"Despite the absence of any underlying crime, Fitzgerald filed charges against Libby for denying to the FBI and the grand jury that he had discussed the Wilson case with reporters. Libby was convicted on the testimony of reporters from NBC, the New York Times and Time magazine -- a further provocation to conservatives. I think they have a point. This whole controversy is a sideshow -- engineered partly by the publicity-seeking former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife and heightened by the hunger in parts of Washington to 'get' Rove for something or other. Like other special prosecutors before him, Fitzgerald got caught up in the excitement of the case and pursued Libby relentlessly, well beyond the time that was reasonable."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802398.html



[Edited on June 18, 2007 at 1:54 AM. Reason : .]

6/18/2007 1:49:33 AM

snarky

boldy

Quote :

"selectivey"

snarky

http://linky

:rolly:

6/18/2007 2:17:29 AM

^ Worthless--he's got nothing.

6/18/2007 2:49:34 AM

^ OMG, you are just so damn typical blah blah blah blah

the fact is LIBBY LIED TO THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR AND GRAND JURY TASKED WITH INVESTIGATING A CRIME yet you go on and on about how Clinton lied about a GODDAMN BLOWJOB so should be removed as Chief Executive blah blah blah blah blah blah

then you pull a single quote by David Broder out of context, why dont you feel the need to post the FULL quote, and not JUST THE PART THAT YOU AGREE WITH BLAH BLAH BLah blah blah blahdy blahdy blah

Quote :

"Nonetheless, on the fundamental point, [Judge] Walton and [Special Prosecutor] Fitzgerald have it right. Libby let his loyalty to his boss and to the administration cloud his judgment -- and perhaps his memory -- in denying that he was part of the effort to discredit the Wilson pair. Lying to a grand jury is serious business, especially when it is done by a person occupying a high government position where the public trust is at stake."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802398.html

or is it just too much for you to ever quote something in context?






[Edited on June 18, 2007 at 3:08 AM. Reason : ]

6/18/2007 3:00:25 AM

^ Man, fuck you! I didn't mention shit about Clinton in the last post, you stupid motherfucker. And any quotation you don't like is "out of context," you stupid piece of shit--that was Broder trying to be balanced.

Quote :

"Despite the absence of any underlying crime. . . ."

Quote :

"I think they have a point. This whole controversy is a sideshow -- engineered partly by the publicity-seeking former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife and heightened by the hunger in parts of Washington to 'get' Rove for something or other."

Quote :

"Like other special prosecutors before him, Fitzgerald got caught up in the excitement of the case and pursued Libby relentlessly, well beyond the time that was reasonable."

I'll use the quotations that support a given point, okay, ass? And you STILL didn't address the point, you fucking idiot.

6/18/2007 10:22:25 AM

damn, you misspelled something.

6/18/2007 10:37:04 PM

and pardoned...

7/2/2007 6:08:28 PM

^link http://www.charlotte.com/news/ap_news/story/182522.html

7/2/2007 6:11:30 PM

commuted, not pardoned.

7/2/2007 7:53:58 PM

Quote :

" President Bush commuted the sentence of former aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby Monday, sparing him from a 2 1/2-year prison term in the CIA leak case. Bush left intact a $250,000 fine and two years probation for Libby, according to a senior White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision had not been announced. "My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged," Bush said in a statement. "I respect the jury's verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive." --http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19570081/ "

Remember a month ago when the White House insisted that the president was "not going to intervene"?

--http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/06/20070605-13.html

ah, whatever. its not like anyone ever believes anything that comes out of this White House, anyhow.

7/2/2007 8:19:27 PM

omg, flip-flop.

7/2/2007 8:50:32 PM

omg, surprise.

7/2/2007 9:11:48 PM

“reputation … damaged”

Yeah, being less popular is really a fitting replacement for legal consequences after breaking the law.

7/2/2007 10:43:15 PM

Interesting note, Scooter Libby was Marc Rich's attorney for 15 years.

7/3/2007 9:36:31 AM

it bugs me that he just commuted it, but wouldn't go out on a limb and just pardon Libby... i guess he's just waiting to do that until the december before he leaves office...

7/3/2007 9:54:27 AM

it's almost clintonesque

7/3/2007 10:01:45 AM

He didn't pardon so that congress couldn't hall Libby's ass out and make him talk. By commuting, he can still keep appealing and pleading the fifth.


Still a bitch move, but when you have dirty shit to keep quiet, you do what you have to do.

7/3/2007 10:21:11 AM

^ i dont know if you understand what a presidential pardon means. no one can challenge a pardon (or a commutation) by a president. not attorneys, not Congress, not the Supreme Court.

Perhaps one might say there was danger that Libby would snitch on Bush and Pals had he been faced with prison time -- but I doubt it. he'd have done the time standing on his head if he had to, and returned to the Neocon family with a hero's welcome.

i found this article to summarize the whole sordid affair rather nicely:

Quote :

" Lewis Libby owes his freedom to our corrupt political elite -- Glen Greenwald That Lewis Libby has been protected by George Bush from the consequences of his crimes only highlights how corrupt and broken our political system is. It reveals nothing new. This is the natural, inevitable outgrowth of our rancid political culture, shaped and slavishly defended by our Beltway ruling class and our serious, sober opinion-making elite. The disasters and rampant lawlessness and fundamental erosion of our country's political values and institutions are exactly what Fred Hiatt and David Broder and Time Magazine and Tim Russert and Tom Friedman and the New Republic geniuses have spent the last six years protecting, enabling and defending. We have the country we have -- one in which our most powerful political leaders are literally beyond the reach of the law in every sense, where we casually invade and bomb and occupy countries that have not attacked us, where our moral standing in the world has collapsed with good reason, where we are viewed on every continent in the world as a rogue, dangerous and lawless nation -- because we are ruled by a Beltway elite and political press that is sickly and cowardly and slavish at its core. That Dick Cheney's top aide, one of the most well-connected neoconservatives on the planet, is protected from the consequences of his felonies ought to be anything but surprising. That is the country that we have. It is a result that is completely consistent with the "values" that define official Washington. No other outcome was possible. The Plame investigation was urged by the Bush CIA and commenced by the Bush DOJ, Libby's conviction pursued by a Bush-appointed federal prosecutor, his jail sentence imposed by a Bush-appointed "tough-on-crime" federal judge, all pursuant to harsh and merciless criminal laws urged on by the "tough-on-crime/no-mercy" GOP. Lewis Libby was sent to prison by the system constructed and desired by the very Republican movement protesting his plight. But our political discourse and media institutions are so broken and corrupt that Bush followers (and their media enablers) feel free to make the completely-backwards and fact-free claim that the Libby prosecution was driven by "partisan" and "political" motives -- as though it was a mirror image of the Clinton persecution driven by Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and a purely partisan Republican prosecutor -- because they know that there is no such thing as a claim too false to be passed on without real objection by our vapid, drooling press corps. For the right-wing political movement that has spawned the Bush disasters of the last six years, the exoneration of Lewis Libby was not merely something they supported. It was much more than that. It was a matter of the greatest importance. That is because Libby is a True Believer, a loyal member of their cult. Seeing him in prison would be humiliating, would make them feel weak and defeated at the hands of the Enemy (defined as "anyone who opposes them"), which is the worst outcome there is. The only "principle" they have is that their movement is Good, those who oppose it Evil, and loyal members of their movement -- and especially its Leaders -- must never have their power checked or limited in any way. One who serves at Dick Cheney's side cannot possibly be in prison. Literally, there is no crime their Leaders can commit which will render them unwilling to defend and justify it. The overriding priority is that they remain strong and powerful, immune from the constraints of the law. Hence, the country's right-wing movement made the defense of Lewis Libby one of its most impassioned causes, and one of the leading candidates seeking to lead it -- Fred Thompson -- made exoneration of this convicted felon one of his principal missions over the last two years. And he does so while running around spitting out tough and righteous sermons about the need to restore the "rule of law": "It is a sad irony that a nation that is so dedicated to the rule of law is doing so much to undermine the respect for it," he said in the very same speech where he urged Libby's pardon. One of the prime defenders of Lewis Libby has the audacity to say such things with a straight face because he knows how broken our political and media institutions are. "

7/4/2007 2:50:51 PM

This is interesting. Bush may have wiped out his probation in addition to his jail time. If this happens, I wonder what his response will be. I wonder if he’d honestly try to play dumb as if his legal team didn’t realize they could be getting rid of practically all of the punitive consequences.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/03/libby.sentence/index.html

Quote :

" WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from prison, and his clemency order may wipe out Libby's 2-year probation as well, the trial judge told lawyers Tuesday. Strictly interpreted, the statute authorizing probation indicates that supervised release "should occur only after the defendant has already served a term of imprisonment," U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton wrote. "

also from cnn:

Quote :

"The president said Libby's sentence was excessive. But the 2 1/2 years handed Libby was much like the sentences given others convicted in obstruction cases. Three of every four people convicted for obstruction of justice in federal court were sent to prison, for an average term of more than five years."

So I suppose half the normal term of an average man, is excessive punishment for a crony.

[Edited on July 4, 2007 at 3:28 PM. Reason : .]

7/4/2007 3:22:31 PM

In any event, thank God that Roger Clinton was pardoned for cocaine charges.

Pardons may tarnish Clinton legacy

Quote :

"(CNN) -- Many U.S. presidents have left a trail of controversial pardons in their wake. Former President Bill Clinton is no exception. The 176 people who were pardoned or had prison sentences commuted by Clinton on his last day in office include: An accused tax swindler who is the former husband of a major Clinton donor; two felons who paid Clinton's brother-in-law $400,000 to lobby on their behalf; and the former president's own half-brother. Adding fuel to the firestorm is the fact that some of the pardons bypassed the usual Justice Department procedures. The web of close Clinton associates linked with the pardon requests extends into the successful New York senate campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton, putting the former first lady directly in the line of fire."

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/pardons/overview.html

Bill Clinton's list of presidential pardons and commutations:

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/20/pardons.list/

7/6/2007 4:47:28 PM

Clinton did it!

7/6/2007 4:49:14 PM

^ Not the point and you know it.

PS (man-on-the-street interview): Who is this?



Blank stare.



[Edited on July 6, 2007 at 4:55 PM. Reason : .]

7/6/2007 4:50:20 PM

if we can get off of what Clinton did for a minute, right or wrong as it was, and just concentrate on this one case....
How can you not agree that what is going on up there reeks of corruption? It's quite obvious now that this was planned from the very beginning. The administration has no credibility if they "demand justice" ("whoever did this will be taken care of"), then when justice is served, the sentence is just overridden because they don't want their guy to go to jail.

You might argue that Libby is just a fallguy for someone else. Does that make this situation any better? If that's the case, and Cheney or Rove or someone else more important than Libby was actually behind all this from the start, then it's pretty obvious that they intended to give the impression that someone, anyone "was going to pay" for this, while behind the scenes they were just telling him "hey - don't worry about it. You'll take the fall to protect us, but we'll just commute/pardon you if you get convicted anyway, so it's not like you'll go to jail or anything". That's just fucked up. That kind of system basically gives the Administration free reign to do whatever they want, because even if they're caught and get in trouble for a crime, Bush will just let them off later on.

7/6/2007 5:20:41 PM

Since Libby's punishment was so "severe", as W. put it, then why doesn't he just commute the sentence of the 1000+ other people convicted of the same exact thing? Oh that's right. They weren't one of his cronies.

Another free pass for W. given by Hooknuts.

7/6/2007 6:56:40 PM

only republican presidents pardon their friends

7/6/2007 8:00:06 PM

^ that's not the point.
Address the point ^^ concerning Bush giving anyone in his administration a free pass to do whatever they want, because if they get caught and convicted, he'll just pardon them anyways

7/6/2007 9:21:43 PM

Point of order.

What relevance do Clinton's pardons have on Bush's commuting of Libby's sentence? This President's inauguration was marked by promises to restore honor and dignity to this White House, unquestionably holding itself to a higher ethical standard than the previous administration. Further, no former President's pardons are relevant to this matter.

What this President has done is reject the sentence of a judge he appointed, on a case prosecuted by a man he selected, that was unanimously upheld by a 3-judge panel two-thirds of which probably voted for him.

There are few secrets left, folks. Without that Justice Department to shield this administration by providing the legal basis for their flagrant abuses of authority such as this, the whole stack of cards would fall down.

[Edited on July 6, 2007 at 9:39 PM. Reason : ...]

7/6/2007 9:38:37 PM

Quote :

"no former President's pardons are relevant to this matter."

its actually one of the only relevant things because its the only thing that makes people even have an opinion about this

7/6/2007 9:52:35 PM

au contraire

I think Iraq has a lot to do with this.

7/6/2007 10:05:39 PM

this administration is without a doubt, the absolutely most corrupt government we've had in modern history.

bush/cheney makes nixon/agnew look like boy scouts.

now, if you can find something in that to be proud of, okay. but you cant deny it

7/6/2007 10:33:28 PM

without a doubt? cant deny it? more like you cant quantify "amount of corruption"

7/6/2007 10:35:40 PM

Its so horrible Libby failed to recall a few things in a 6 hour politically charged witchunt. He could have just said "I don't recall" but instead he followed the goodwill instruction of the Whitehouse and was forthcoming. His reward, a trumped up charge that has not been applied to similar incidents that actually involved willful perjury, for example Clinton. The Clinton's had the good sense to be anything but forthcoming in their hearings, " I do not recall" was their mantra. Even that withstanding it is public record that Clinton lied before congress, and it was for damn sure on purpose. You can argue well that was about Clinton's personal sex life wheras Libby's testimony was about innerworkings of the Whitehouse, but Libby was not tried for the Whitehouse misdeeds, at least not according to the charges leveled against him. Yet that's what this was, it was not really a trial about what Libby did wrong. It was a trial against Bush, and the unquestioned perception that Bush and Co. are evil incarnate in motion.

Not to mention we still do not have a clear answer to if there was a crime commited in the first place, if so you guys should be screaming for Armitage to be hanged. But, I know, Bush evil must put this first in mind and proceed from this premise.

So lets look at this from a different angle for a moment,

1.) Plame was NOT covert in any meaningful sense of the word.
2.) Everybody knew that she was outed by Armitage early on, so why continue the investigation?
3.) the only answer is politics coupled with prosecutorial overambition.
4.) Since Libby actually committed no crime then it stands to reason he should not go to jail.

This is really not that hard to understand.

Has the Bush Whitehouse done bad stuff, probably. Is this an example? No.

7/6/2007 11:37:35 PM

Quote :

"Even that withstanding it is public record that Clinton lied before congress, and it was for damn sure on purpose."

umm, yeah, and as i recall, he was fucking impeached for it

7/7/2007 12:44:25 AM

Quote :

"4.) Since Libby actually committed no crime then it stands to reason he should not go to jail."

so perjury and obstruction of justice are no longer crimes?

7/7/2007 4:14:48 AM