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

Skip to comments.

Hillary: Libby's Leak Lie 'Reprehensible'
NewsMax.com ^ | Nov. 1, 2005 | Carl Limbacher

Posted on 11/01/2005 7:51:05 AM PST by Carl/NewsMax

2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is blasting former top White House aide Lewis Libby for allegedly lying to investigators, saying his decision to leak CIA employee Valerie Plame's name to the press was "simply reprehensible."

"Taking such action for political purposes is simply reprehensible and should never be tolerated," Clinton complains in a statement posted to her web site.

The former first lady, who had her own truth-telling problems in the Travelgate scandal, said Libby's attempts to "interfere with the investigation" by deceiving investigators "raises serious national security concerns."

"This administration owes our CIA agents around the world a promise that their identities will never be jeopardized," she railed. "And it owes the American people direct answers and responsible action."

In 2000, then-Independent Counsel Robert Ray issued his final report on the Travelgate probe, where he concluded: "The overwhelming evidence establishes that Mrs. Clinton played a role in the decision to fire the [travel office] employees and thus her statement to the contrary under oath to this office is factually false."


TOPICS: Front Page News
KEYWORDS: 109th; bigbutt; cialeak; false; technicality; thunderthighs; travelgate; underoath; valeriesgirlfriend
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-148 next last
To: Carl/NewsMax

I think we sent that message (that leaking is not tolerated) loud and clear.

When a question was raised about whether there was a leak, this administration immediately said it was a serious issue, and promised to cooperate fully. They waived reporter privilege, and to a man testified when asked to investigators and to the grand jury.

They never said a bad word about the prosecuter, or complained about the "direction" of his investigation. They didn't leak their side of the discussions to intimidate or lead other witnesses. They didn't sign mutual defence pacts.

And when the investigation turned up nothing about leaking, but accused libby of trying to obstruct the investigation, he was FIRED from his position at the white house.

I think the CIA people can be certain that, so long as a republican is in the white house, their jobs will be held with respect, deserved or not.

A marked contrast to anybody working in the government during the Clinton years, where it was clear if you crossed them you would be smeared, fired, and have your life ruined (for example, Linda Tripp).

Hillary Clinton was accused by a special prosecuter of lying, perjury, and obstruction in a criminal investigation -- but they didn't charge the crime. Rove wasn't charged now, but the democrats say he should be fired anyway simply for having been investigated.

But Clinton is a senator.


21 posted on 11/01/2005 8:08:18 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

shut up


22 posted on 11/01/2005 8:08:33 AM PST by yldstrk (My heros have always been cowboys-Reagan and Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

Ah, Hillary is doing her knee-capping via her web site.

Someone from the press should ask Madam where and in what profession her former hand picked staffer Craig Livingstone is working these days.


23 posted on 11/01/2005 8:09:08 AM PST by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

Reprehensible? Funny, isn't that the word Jod Lieberman used to describe Bill Clinton during the whole Monica thing?


24 posted on 11/01/2005 8:09:10 AM PST by Maceman (Fake but accurate -- and now double-sourced)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

Was it paid for by Hillary'08?


25 posted on 11/01/2005 8:10:13 AM PST by desherwood7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
"saying his decision to leak CIA employee Valerie Plame's name to the press was "simply reprehensible."
"Taking such action for political purposes is simply reprehensible and should never be tolerated,"
"This administration owes our CIA agents around the world a promise that their identities will never be jeopardized," she railed. "And it owes the American people direct answers and responsible action."
She....has obviously gone insane. #1, innocent until proven guilty, a supposed tenet of a free society; #2 she needs to call a commission for all the garbage and scandals her husband brought to the office (i.e. rape); #3, her and her husband's treatment of our military and intelligence agencies while in office was reprehensible;
...etc...etc...etc... Little Miss "I'm not just 'Standing by my Man' like Tammy Wynette"(even tho' disgustingly she did)" needs to take some of the proceeds from that trailer park Clinton mausoleum library, "The Library of Lies",and buy herself a clue about how stupid she sounds.
26 posted on 11/01/2005 8:10:24 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet (Let it begin now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

...Independent Counsel Robert Ray .... concluded: "The overwhelming evidence establishes that Mrs. Clinton played a role in the decision to fire the [travel office] employees and thus her statement to the contrary under oath to this office is factually false."

I thought then, and still think now, that this statement was improper, inappropriate and extrodinarily unethical.

If Ray beleived Hillary was guilty of a crime, he should have indicted her. If he couldn't, or didn't want to indict her, he should have kept his mouth shut. Fitz did the same thing in his press conference last week, when he made not too subtle implications that Libby commited a crime by 'outing' a covert CIA agent. It's disgraceful prosecutorial conduct.


27 posted on 11/01/2005 8:10:50 AM PST by tjg (Being a liberal means never having to grow up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

Do we really care what an amoral marxist says, anyway?


28 posted on 11/01/2005 8:11:23 AM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s......you weren't really there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
How ironic.

I guess it takes "reprehensible" to know "reprehensible."

29 posted on 11/01/2005 8:11:49 AM PST by My2Cents (Dead people voting is the closest the Democrats come to believing in eternal life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BibChr

Libby would have been well served to use "I don't Recall" himself. I have yet to figure out with Libby was up to with in all of this. Libby was a criminal attorney who defended Marc Rich but yet got caught up in this deal with Wilson. He not someone I would have thought would have been chosen to be in the WH. Is there a connection between Rich and Wilson?

My question is WHY did he lie to the FBI and Grand Jury (if he did)?


30 posted on 11/01/2005 8:12:31 AM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII MOM -- Istook for OK Governor in 2006! Allen in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

"Hillary: Libby's Leak Lie 'Reprehensible'"

This from Ms. "I don't recall"; "I can't remember"; "Files, what files?"; "Billing records? What billing records?" "Cattle futures? What cattle futures?" "My head is J-E-L-L-O!!" Un-freakin'-believable!


31 posted on 11/01/2005 8:13:50 AM PST by Polyxene (For where God built a church, there the Devil would also build a chapel - Martin Luther)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
Hey, Carl, here's a blast from the past:

With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
For the story behind the story...
Tuesday, March 30, 2004 12:36 p.m. EST
Hillary Predicts October Surprise

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton is predicting that this year's presidential election will be very tight and the victor will win because of "something unforeseen."

"It will be very close," the former first lady tells the New York Post's Cindy Adams.

On how the contest will ultimately be decided, Clinton said, "It will be outside forces - something unforeseen that suddenly happens - that tilts the election one way or the other."-------

In 1992, Clinton's husband won the White House after Reagan Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger was indicted on Iran-Contra charges four days before the vote. Though the indictment was later overturned, the charges were enough to reverse President Bush 41's last-minute surge in the polls to within one point of Clinton.

In 2000 - again four days before the vote - a Democrat operative in Maine uncovered court records from Bush 43's then-24-year-old DUI stop. Bush's 5-point lead in Florida dwindled to a mere 537 votes, with the DUI news making Gore the popular vote winner nationwide.

32 posted on 11/01/2005 8:15:12 AM PST by txhurl (Just trying to solve an old cold case here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

Do we really care what an amoral marxist says, anyway?

You have this exactly correct. Please let Hillary and NewShmuck go. Tripe is banal.


33 posted on 11/01/2005 8:20:09 AM PST by Oystir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax

Don't forget the Rose Law Firm files which disappeared and then mysteriously reappeared in the residential part of the White House, with her fingerprints on them, two days after the statute of limitations ran out.


34 posted on 11/01/2005 8:22:05 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
saying his decision to leak CIA employee Valerie Plame's name to the press was "simply reprehensible."

I didn't see that stated in the indictment. Did I miss something?

35 posted on 11/01/2005 8:22:21 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine's brother ( We need a few more Marines like Lt. Gen. James Mattis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine's brother

I really can't figure out which is worse...being lectured by Fat Teddy Kennedy or this hag!!


36 posted on 11/01/2005 8:23:38 AM PST by jackv (just shakin' my head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
..."saying his decision to leak CIA employee Valerie Plame's name to the press was "simply reprehensible."

Did I miss something? Is that what Libby was indicted for?

37 posted on 11/01/2005 8:24:02 AM PST by manwiththehands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
This Libby leak is far worse than handing the Chinese missile and MIRV technology via Loral. /sarc

I heard a MSM newsbabe complaining the other day that Ken Starr kept expanding his inquiry.

Excuse me, he was handed the extra duties.

IMHO it was an effort to overwhelm him. It worked.
The impeachment was for the wrong reasons.

The important reasons, treason, extortion, etc. were completely missed.

38 posted on 11/01/2005 8:24:41 AM PST by Vinnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jackv

I guess Hillary has a problem with perjury in the White House...who knew?


39 posted on 11/01/2005 8:27:06 AM PST by gogeo (Often wrong but seldom in doubt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jackv
"I really can't figure out which is worse...being lectured by Fat Teddy Kennedy or this hag!!"

Do you want your brain to explode out the left side of your head or the right?

40 posted on 11/01/2005 8:27:21 AM PST by manwiththehands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-148 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