[OldDeckHand]

Why would Cheney be tried for Richard Armitage's crime?

Maybe that's just how people roll in H-Wood.

[Calvin Locke]

And Colon Bowell.

[paudio]

Why would Cheney be tried for Richard Armitage's crime? Maybe that's just how people roll in H-Wood.

Because...ehm... Cheney is like... ehm... you know... leaking the same... ehm, documents... And he is sooo evil.

[muawiyah]

Or why would Cheney be tried for Colin Powell's crimes? Armitage and Powell were both FIRED ~ "W" promised to fire the two people who talked to Novak didn't he?

Cheney had nothing to do with it. Besides, there was NO CRIME COMMITED.

"W"'s error was not not bring Powell and Armitage forward to accept blame in public.

Now, about this Baldwin guy ~ wasn't he a donor to the Viet Cong? Like to see him swinging from a lampost before anybody else actually.

[Servant of the Cross]

Yea, the truth is known that Armitage and Powell were the 'leaker' and cover-up and Baldwin sticks with the original lies of the Plames as if no one notices.

[Steve_Seattle]

There was no crime committed by Cheney or Armitage. Patrick Fitzgerald investigated that for two years and only came up with an investigation-related crime, Libby’s perjury. There was no underlying crime regarding the leak, or Fitz would have filed charges. He desperately wanted to, really wanted to be a big shot with the media kissing his ass, but there was no crime. Not even that smelly, media-hungry creep could find a crime. And he was thoroughly unprofessional in his statements to the press, hinting at at crime for which he had no evidence.

[griswold3]

According to the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act there was no crime committed. The crime being persued at that time was the crime of being a Republican.