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

Skip to comments.

Bush faces crisis ... But only in the left's fantasies
Toronto Sun ^ | 2005-11-14 | Salim Mansur

Posted on 11/14/2005 6:03:43 AM PST by Clive

Democrats in the United States and their lib-left allies in the mainstream media have been in an uproar since special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald delivered a grand jury indictment against Lewis "Scooter" Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

Democrats and their media allies feel vindicated in their allegations against President George Bush that he lied in taking the U.S. into war against Saddam Hussein's Iraq. These allegations were liberally thrown around during the 2004 election with no effect on the democratic outcome of Bush and Cheney winning a second term in the White House.

The uproar is an indication of how far to the fringes of American politics the once-great Democratic party has drifted. Neither facts nor history seem to matter to its current leadership, which has focused on ideology wrapped in layers of resentment and hate directed at Bush.

The indictment of Libby was a result of a 22-month investigation into charges of a deliberate leak from within the White House "to out a covert CIA agent" -- Valerie Plame Wilson, wife of Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador.

But the investigation only led to an indictment of Libby for obstruction of the grand jury, two counts of perjury and two counts of false statements. Libby has pleaded not guilty and will fight the charges in court.

Here it is worthwhile to recall there was no indictment of any sort against Sandy Berger, former president Bill Clinton's national security advisor, who stuffed some secret papers into his socks and walked out of a building holding national security documents. Berger was fined $50,000, probably paid by friends of Clinton.

There was not, as Fitzgerald answered the media, "any allegation that Mr. Libby knowingly, intentionally outed a covert agent." Moreover, there was no indictment against Karl Rove, Bush's right-hand man.

When asked if the grand jury indictment of Libby could be viewed by critics of the Iraq war as a vindication of their charges against the Bush administration, Fitzgerald replied: "This indictment is not about the war ... people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution ... or any vindication of how they feel."

So the matter should rest. But it won't, because Democrats and their lib-left allies, having failed to win any of their arguments in the political arena, have resorted to the courts to fight their political battles.

LIB-LEFT TACTICS

The fact that neither Libby nor Rove was indicted for the reason the investigation was demanded -- the violation of the 1982 Identities Act to protect covert agents -- indicates the political tactic of the American lib-left is to continue throwing piles of rubbish at their opponents in the hope some will stick through the legal system.

Indeed, the Joseph/Valerie Wilson saga has been exposed for what it is, a highly egotistical man tilting against an administration over a policy endorsed by a majority of the American people.

The story of the CIA, on the other hand, is a history of an organization with a long list of failures, from Vietnam through Iran to Iraq. This is well-known inside Washington, and confirmed by the recent Senate Intelligence Committee findings in the Silbermann-Robb report which cleared the president of charges that the administration pressured the CIA to doctor intelligence reports before going to war.

But none of this matter to the angry left, who seem ever-ready to betray America's interests to the hordes who remain sworn enemies of freedom.


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 11/14/2005 6:03:44 AM PST by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Great Dane; Alberta's Child; headsonpikes; coteblanche; Ryle; albertabound; mitchbert; ...
This article appeared at the same time as an article by Eric Margolis entitled "Bush faces crisis ..."

It is my policy to never post a Margolis column.

2 posted on 11/14/2005 6:05:41 AM PST by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

Thank you for that policy.

Good articles coming out of Canada this morning!


3 posted on 11/14/2005 6:11:23 AM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Clive
But none of this matter to the angry left, who seem ever-ready to betray America's interests to the hordes who remain sworn enemies of freedom.

The minds of the Democratic party leadership are filled with rocks.

They will destroy themselves to a chorus of heavenly hallelujahs.

They are lovers of power and the lust for such rather than lovers of truth.

4 posted on 11/14/2005 6:11:40 AM PST by A message
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

Great article.


5 posted on 11/14/2005 6:17:04 AM PST by jveritas (The Axis of Defeatism: Left wing liberals, Buchananites, and third party voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive
No matter what the Left will forever insist the President Bush lied about WMD.

That is because they chose to defend the disgraced Clinton who took the oath with his hand on the Holy Bible in an American court of law and lied through his teeth.

Their only defense was that he lied about sex but the truth is when you take the oath in a court of law you don't get to decide what you are allowed to lie about. The Judge makes a ruling and when you are instructed to answer to MUST tell the truth.

Add to that Clinton was President and took an oath to uphold our laws and then he goes and lies under oath, that is extremely disgraceful. On the scale of national disgrace nobody come close in the history of the US to Clinton. Even Benedict Arnold false a bit short of what Clinton did because Arnold was not the President. Nixon? He resigned in disgrace but never lied under oath in a court of law.

So all this crapheaded hysterics about President Bush having lied about WMD is just how the Left is desperately cover their own historical disgrace.

Their friends in the media have done a very good job of coving up the historical disgrace otherwise both Clinton's would (as the should) be toast by now. But in the long run the Left will lose and history will judge President Bush to have been 100% correct about Iraq, while Clinton will eventually wear the full burden of his disgrace, especially when Hillary loses badly in her bid to be President again (she was the one who was really running Bill's Administration, she made all the appointments and promotions).
6 posted on 11/14/2005 6:25:00 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive
I had to laugh at Steve Roberts this morning. He's bloviating on WABC radio.

Said the President should take his advice and become a moderate because that's what the people want. Said the President should not be trying to please the conservatives.

Oh, I am sure Dubya is dying to hear more from Roberts and his ilk.

7 posted on 11/14/2005 6:28:43 AM PST by OldFriend (The Dems enABLEd DANGER and 3,000 Americans died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

The left thinks that if they use the media enough with the same old, same old they can make everyone forget about their own previous positions on issues such as Clinton's Iraqi Regime Change Resolution. The WMD charge should not be about whether Saddam had them but when did they manage to hide them or destroy them? Everyone knew he had them because he used much of them on his own people and they remained unaccounted for when the UN tried to collect and destroy the rest. The Rats better be careful because the media will turn on them also when the stories runs out of steam.


8 posted on 11/14/2005 6:35:27 AM PST by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive
Neither facts nor history seem to matter to its current leadership, which has focused on ideology wrapped in layers of resentment and hate directed at Bush.

Actually it is precisely facts and history which are pounding liberalism into oblivion. The media initially distorts, then the truth creeps out from the fog.

The left's ideological underpinning cannot support the weight of evidence against it. Their most sacrosanct tenets are refuted daily by events. They must believe their own lies to survive, but soon the house of cards will fall.

Fact: the Main-stream Media, both broadcast and print, are bleeding customers profusely. Meanwhile talk radio, the internet, and Fox News flourish.

9 posted on 11/14/2005 6:49:51 AM PST by wayoverontheright (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive
The left's fantasies? But I thought they were the reality-based community!
10 posted on 11/14/2005 7:52:58 AM PST by RightWingAtheist (Free the Crevo Three!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

This guy can see things more clearly from outside of the country. You're right pal, it is only in the small rat brain.


11 posted on 11/14/2005 10:08:05 AM PST by jmaroneps37 (Everything points to it so why not call them the Whigs?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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