Posted on 10/25/2005 6:18:38 AM PDT by Cindy_Cin
Well, it would be a stenuous task to keep track of who is not included in that description.
Whoops - strenuous.
I'm saying that if they willfully and knowingly lied they should be punished. We are on the same page.
Dear Ms. Susan Jones: Never presume that you can tell me what to do.
100% agreement...
WONDERFUL analogy! ;)
And they will have a trial to prove their innocence or not
Clinton had a trial and his side presented their case .. he was found guilty and impeached
In fact a Judge took Clinton's law license away for his perjury
What the Dems are doing is saying that Rove is guilty before the benefit of a trial and to present his case
Kind of like what they are doing to Delay
And, both with respect to Clinton and Bush, clearly reveal their extreme bias by arguing against their own professional interest. Reporters heavily benefit from leaks, but they're willing to criminalize and thereby discourage leaks if it means "getting" a Republican.
The NYT is reporting that Libby heard about Plame from Cheney. If Cheney did not know that Plame was covert, then there is no crime. There may be no evidence that he knew of her status. That's why they are going after the perjury charge I think we just have to see how high up this damn thing's going to go. Wait it out.
Target: Republican, LEAKS GOOOOD..........
When the Dammocraps reintroduce articles of impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton to the House of Representatives, and take the lead in convicting Mr. Clinton in the Senate, then this argument will have cogency.
Until that time, the Dammocraps should STFU.
Bingo
This new talking point from the libs is laughable
Another difference between Linda Tripp and Joseph Wilson--
Linda was proven to have told the truth about the affair and about the dress.
An investigation concluded that Joe Wilson lied about a number of things, such as who sent him to Africa.
I agree, and they should be toast if that is proved to be the case.
What a mess. With all the selective leaking and speculating taking palce- it's pretty hard to have an informed opinion at this point. IF Rove and/or Libby deliberately lied to the grand jury- they must be held accountable. But we don't know that yet. The only thing I know for sure is Joe Wilson is a slimy SOB.
Always include the New York Times in your villainy list. They published Wilson's BS article. When Judith Miller proposed investigating the Plame/Wilson connection, her NYT editor nixed the idea. Now the paper is going after Miller.
Not that crime anyway. Perjury and obstruction are possible crimes regardless of the underlying investigation. Miller even went to jail for refusing to testify, contempt of court. Granted, the charge was civil contempt, but rumor has it Fitzgerald was willing to hit her with criminal contempt, if that's what it would take to pry her testimony loose.
You are right. However, what makes a lie? Clinton lied with the intent to deceive. It may be that Rove and/or Libby said something that was untrue, but it appears from everything I've read that when they were offered evidence that showed them the actual dates/times/etc., they "refreshed their recollection" and filled in the details of the story. Getting a date or a minor detail wrong is not a lie if the inconsistency is not deliberate. Proving an intent to deceive is hard to do. It appears, at least on the surface, that Rove and Libby have cooperated fully with the investigation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.