Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obstruction for What? Libby is charged with lying about a crime that wasn't committed.
Wall Street Journal.com ^ | 29 October, 2005 | unattributed

Posted on 10/29/2005 3:10:01 AM PDT by YaYa123

Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation took nearly two years, sent a reporter to jail, cost millions of dollars, and preoccupied some of the White House's senior officials. The fruit it has now borne is the five-count indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the Vice President's Chief of Staff--not for leaking the name of Valerie Plame to Robert Novak, which started this entire "scandal," but for contradictions between his testimony and the testimony of two or three reporters about what he told them, when he told them, and what words he used.

Mr. Fitzgerald would not comment yesterday on whether he had evidence for the perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement counts beyond the testimonies of Mr. Libby and three journalists. Instead, he noted that a criminal investigation into a "national security matter" of this sort hinged on "very fine distinctions," and that any attempt to obscure exactly who told what to whom and when was a serious matter.

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 5countindictment; cialeak; fitzpatrick; gutless; libby; politicalhack; rove; wsj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-210 next last

1 posted on 10/29/2005 3:10:03 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

The more we learn, the more it appears Libby was indicted for lying to the media.


2 posted on 10/29/2005 3:12:37 AM PDT by counterpunch (JRB in '05 = GOP in '06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch

As if ELECTED politicians do not lie, 24-7


3 posted on 10/29/2005 3:18:14 AM PDT by gulfcoast6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: YaYa123

PARDON SCOOTER!

Old news, nobody cares, time to move on.


5 posted on 10/29/2005 3:22:23 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (There's nothing sarcastic in this post. Sure there isn't. Not one bit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: consinmd

I still believe that Fitz should be made to account for how well he has spent hyis time and money. I'd suggest that most of what he has done is basically perpetrate fraud on the taxpayer. His "investigation" was only pointed in one direction. I sure hope he doesn't plan to become a member of the SCOTUS.


6 posted on 10/29/2005 3:23:35 AM PDT by Paladin2 (MSM rioted over Katrina and looted the truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

On the one hand I'd like to see Libby fight these charges like hell, because I think a good lawyer could at least hang a jury on this using moral suasion.

But having a knock-down, drag-out trial will hurt the country and the president, and he doesn't need that trouble just now.

Sigh.


7 posted on 10/29/2005 3:24:02 AM PDT by Prince Charles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
The more we learn, the more it appears Libby was indicted for lying to the media.

And to Mr. Fitzgerald. And to the FBI. And to the grand jurors. If Libby intentionally lied under oath, he deserves to be in hot water. I hope Bush continues to take the high road on this case because Mr. Fitzgerald appears to be an outstanding and fair-minded prosecutor.

Bush can always pardon Libby at the end of his term if he believes the facts don't support a conviction or if he wants to give Libby a break. God knows a pardon of Libby would be more warranted than Clinton's pardons for FALN terrorists, Marc Rich, Vignali and that drug-infested brother of his, Roger.

8 posted on 10/29/2005 3:24:41 AM PDT by billclintonwillrotinhell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Hell... even Chris Wallace knew that! He said so yesterday on the Howie Carr Show.

Lets see if Chris has the balz to say it on FOXNews Sunday.

9 posted on 10/29/2005 3:26:18 AM PDT by johnny7 (“What now? Let me tell you what now.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gulfcoast6

Maybe so, however in point of fact, nothing that Mr. Libby is charged with, as I can see, forwards a criminal or civil violation. In other words, talking to reporters about events which were not under your control, and in a sense reacting to those events by speaking out about them and then trying to recall those statements versus what others will recollect doesn't seem worthy of criminal prosecution. Just my opinion.


10 posted on 10/29/2005 3:26:22 AM PDT by TheBlueMax ("Men of intemperate mind never can be free; their passions forge their fetters")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
No matter if Fitzgerald wins or loses with a Libby trial, three or four reporters (and maybe even R-U-S-S-E-R-T) will be looking for jobs at the Bodunk Gazette & Fishwrap when the defense counsel is done questioning them.

Unfortunatly in the delay until a trial, the MSM can say anything they want about the situation to degrade the Bush Administration, before the trial degrades them (MSM)

11 posted on 10/29/2005 3:26:31 AM PDT by leadhead (It’s a duty and a responsibility to defeat them. But it's also a pleasure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MD4Bush
"Unless he tries to implicate someone higher up the food chain in exchange for a plea deal now that he's seen the full extent of the charges. But he's a loyalist."

But to whom is Libby loyal, New One?

Libby received two awards from the Clinton Administration in 1993. Libby worked for/at NSC during Clinton's terms. Libby's massive law firm Dechert Price reeks of "CIA front company" and has only donated campaign money to Democrats.

When reporters wanted scoop from "inside" the Bush White House, they called Scooter Libby.

Frankly, the Bush Administration is better off for having one less leaker in D.C.

...and we still don't know where Libby's loyalties reside.

12 posted on 10/29/2005 3:28:11 AM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
I still believe that Fitz should be made to account for how well he has spent hyis time and money. I'd suggest that most of what he has done is basically perpetrate fraud on the taxpayer.

If Libby hadn't lied or had severe memory loss, much of that taxpayer money could've likely been saved. I was very impressed with Fitzgerald's press conference yesterday, and I think Bush is impressed with Fitzgerald, too, which is why he was appointed in the first place and why the White House hasn't attacked him.

13 posted on 10/29/2005 3:28:24 AM PDT by billclintonwillrotinhell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Prince Charles

We still don't know who 'outed' Valerie Plame or if she was 'outed' or who told who what? Isn't that why the Special Prosecutor was appointed?


14 posted on 10/29/2005 3:31:38 AM PDT by mombrown1 (PAFairTax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
Isn't a prosecutor's first responsibility that of determining if the initial complaint of a criminal act is legitimate?

A high school student could have discovered that Plame's "undercover" status with the CIA had changed so long ago that the law which was alleged to be violated didn't apply. It seems to me that someone with this man's credentials probably knew that fact at first glance. After that realization, he's done nothing but to enjoy a two-year fishing expedition in his attempt to be able to say "Got ya!".

Those that love their liberty should be outraged that a prosecutor can spend two years dragging a handful of men/women into a court room, without benefit of a lawyer, and repeat the same questions dozens of times...spaced months apart...just waiting for someone's memory to fail. This is especially so when the initial concern of criminal activity was obviously something the prosecutor knew he could never successfully prosecute from "day one."
15 posted on 10/29/2005 3:31:59 AM PDT by RavenATB (Patton was right...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mombrown1

Yep. Although I suspect he spelled that out in his classified addendum, or whatever he called it.


16 posted on 10/29/2005 3:33:44 AM PDT by Prince Charles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TheBlueMax

I agree, some of the folks look for ANYTHING when it comes to the President, his staff to use against them.


17 posted on 10/29/2005 3:33:52 AM PDT by gulfcoast6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

The WSJ poses the same question that I've been asking all day. What was Libby's motive to lie? In the absence of any crime, why would Libby lie about conversations with Russert and other reporters? It makes no sense. The most likely explanation is that there are differing recollections (which is what Libby's lawyer mentioned in his press release). Contrary to what others have said, I believe these charges with be very difficult to prove in court.


18 posted on 10/29/2005 3:34:23 AM PDT by calreaganfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

"Perpetrate Fraud on the taxpayer"

What a great line. Think about it for a second. Isn't that what the political class do all the time?


19 posted on 10/29/2005 3:34:32 AM PDT by rambo316 (America is a Republic and the U.S. Constitution guarantees a Republican form of Government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: billclintonwillrotinhell
" I hope Bush continues to take the high road on this case because Mr. Fitzgerald appears to be an outstanding and fair-minded prosecutor."

"Outstanding and fair-minded"?!?! Gimme a break. This Fitzgerald clown is a partisan hack in the same vein as Ronny Earle.

20 posted on 10/29/2005 3:37:52 AM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-210 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson