Scooter Libby and Plamegate: My thoughts

Posted by: ST on October 28, 2005 at 9:50 pm

First, sorry I’ve not posted sooner this evening. My intent was to do so, but not long after I sat down at my desk I got caught up in some phone calls and a couple of other things and then ‘made a run for the border’ (to Taco Bell) for a quick dinner.

Ok, now that I’ve had time to assess the indictments against Scooter Libby, my thoughts fall in line pretty much with Stephen Spruiell’s at NRO’s Media Blog. He wrote:

I just can’t understand it. I just finished reading the indictment, and I watched the entire press conference, and I gotta say it looks bad. I’m not one of those who thinks Libby did anything wrong in discussing Wilson’s wife with reporters. Her relationship with the CIA was well-known around Washington according to numerous accounts, and the public deserved to know that Wilson’s wife arranged the trip. Apparently leaking Plame’s name was not a crime. No one has been charged with any violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act. So why would Libby concoct such an easily disprovable story?

Of course, he’s innocent until proven guilty. An of course, it remains important to tell the truth about Joseph Wilson and not let the press turn this into a vindication of Wilson’s lies. But I’m angry at what appears to be an incredibly stupid move, and left wondering why.

That’s the question I’m asking. The indictments against Libby are pretty damning – I don’t think that it is really deniable. He’s going to have his day in court, but my layman’s assessment of the indictments is that he’s going to be convicted of all of them (perjury, making false statements, and obstruction of justice). It was the right thing to do for him to step down today, but the lingering question obviously on the minds of the Rove-haters today was/is “What about Rove?” No doubt disappointment filled the air in leftieland over the fact that no indictments were handed down against El Roviator himself (though they are quick to point out that “this investigation isn’t over!!!!” – emphasis theirs). I mean, to them, getting Libby was ok – but the real prize was and continues to remain Karl Rove. As I noted at Blogs For Bush yesterday, Joe ‘I’m a private person except when I’m doing book tours and Vanity Fair interviews’ Wilson, in a rare moment of honesty, confirmed this Wednesday (emphasis added):

Wilson said he doesn’t regret telling a Shoreline audience in August 2003 that Rove ought to be “frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs” — though, he said in his interview with the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, “I didn’t realize it would be picked up by every right-wing blog.”

He said the more important thing is that Rove leave the White House, whether or not he’s wearing handcuffs.

Exactly. From day one this has not been about any worry on behalf of most of the pushers of the investigation (aka Dems) as it related to national security, or worry that someone’s family was in danger: this was again from day one about getting Karl Rove whether it be on criminal charges or to have him resign just on the perception that he violated the law. Fitzgerald is (obviously) on a fact finding mission to determine what laws were broken and he also stresses the national security angle, the latter of which the partisans in DC (there are always excpetions to the rule, of course) pushing for Rove’s indictment for the most part do not care about one way or the other. No Republican rejoiced Libby’s indictments today, but a measure of satisfaction was gained due to the fact that Rove 1) it would be a double whammy for two admin officials that high in the chain of command to be indicted, and 2) because they knew how disappointed liberals would be once they heard about it.

Regarding Plame’s classified status, it doesn’t appear that Scooter Libby is going to be charged with any deliberate outing of a covert agent – it’s still not clear if that’s what she was, and even if it were crystal clear Fitzgerald clearly did not see the proof that would be enough for an indictment on the charge of deliberately endangering an undercover agent. When asked about that today, Fitzgerald stated:

” I will confirm that her association with the CIA was classified at that time through July 2003. And all I’ll say is that, look, we have not made any allegation that Mr. Libby knowingly, intentionally outed a covert agent.”

So the crimes that are alleged to have happened here were over an issue that doesn’t appear was a crime to begin with. Fitzgerald has also said that the investigation is almost over so I don’t think this is going to go on much longer – my prediction is the investigation will be done before Thanksgiving and hopefully we’ll know more about what will happen with Rove by then.

I note that the media was true to form today, with one headline (now changed) from the AP that read “Rove Not Indicted Yet“. It was almost like the person who wrote the story (and/or headline) sat down at his computer and typed out what he was feeling in frustration. The media coverage of this today also provided those of us media-watcher types with more fuel for the (correct) assertion that the media is liberally biased. I noted a few days ago the differences in how Fitzgerald has been portrayed in the media versus how Ken Starr was portrayed during the investigations into Clinton’s – uh – misdeeds. In part (to recap), I wrote:

Fitzgerald sounds like an above-the-board guy – I’ve seen good things written about him at conservative sites like National Review. My beef isn’t with Fitzgerald, but with the MSM, who are making sure that – before the indictments (if any) are handed down in the Plamegate case – we know what a fair and honest guy Fitzgerald is so once (if) any indictments are handed down, we’ll know that they were done by a guy who’s credentials are impeccable. They are doing similar things with regard to Ronnie Earle, especially considering the articles that were written about Earle that included the fact that he had prosecuted more Dems than Republicans – as if that’s supposed to mean he doesn’t have a partisan ax to grind with Tom DeLay.

But remember how the press portrayed Ken Starr during his investigations into Clinton’s, uh, misdeeds? The prevailing sentiment in the press was that Starr was just yet another member of the VRWC out to get Clinton – thereby his credibility could be questioned in the event that he ever got the goods on Clinton (which he eventually did). Yet years earlier, when he was handpicked by Democrats to investigate disgraced Republican Senator Bob Packwood’s sexual misconduct, Ken Starr was the cat’s meow (Jonah Goldberg noted this reversal in opinion on Ken Starr in a March 2002 piece at NRO).

Well not only is the press continuing to fawn all over Patrick Fitzgerald in stark contrast to how they treated Ken Starr, but the coverage today of the issuing of indictments and the press conference was starkly different back in le era de la Clinton admin indictments. Newsbusters noted this today:

In September 1997, we reported in Media Watch that when former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy was indicted on 39 counts, the networks aired a single evening news story. Three of the four networks — ABC, CNN, and NBC — underlined that the Smaltz inquiry had so far cost $9 million. None of them noted civil penalties originating from targets of Smaltz’s inquiry amounted to more than $3.5 million. The next morning, CBS’s morning show, called CBS This Morning, didn’t even mention Espy’s indictment. Months later, I noted in a Media Reality Check that on December 11, former HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros was indicted on 18 counts for misleading the FBI about payoffs to a mistress, Linda Medlar. NBC Nightly News filed one story; ABC’s World News Tonight gave it 18 seconds. CBS Evening News didn’t arrive on the story until the next night, and gave it nine seconds, a fraction of the two minutes Dan Rather gave the nightly El Nino update, about the weather “giving a gentle lift to the monarch butterfly.” The morning shows were worse: NBC’s Today passed on two anchor briefs, and ABC’s Good Morning America and CBS This Morning ignored it.

How about that? So Scooter Libby has been indicted in what appears to be at an attempt by him to cover up a non-crime, and our media doesn’t even pretend to be fair about how it chooses to cover 5 indictments with interruptions of afternoon programs to report this ‘breaking news’, special report coverage all afternoon and evening, etc – versus 2 separate sets of indictments totalling a count of 57 in the course of the year (1997) that barely registered on the ‘worthy news’ radar.

I’m disappointed in Scooter Libby and based on what I’ve seen so far, he may be in deep trouble over all of this. We won’t know for sure of course until later – and I’m pis-ed as heck at the media too for their ridiculously and overtly biased news coverage of the indictments. I’m not surprised because this is what the media does best, but that doesn’t mean that I don’t get incredibly frustrated by things like this when I see them.

(Cross-posted at Blogs For Bush)

MORE: Jeff Goldstein has lots of thoughts on this as well as a link roundup.

Linked up with Wizbang’s Carnival of the Trackbacks

RSS feed for comments on this post.


30 Responses to “Scooter Libby and Plamegate: My thoughts”


  1. D.R. Gilbert says:

    I think Scooter Libby will be exonerated. If not he will spend a lot unnecessary time in jail. In my opinion, the only reason he was indicted was because the special prosecutor needed to justify the last two years of “investigating” a crime which seems to have never happened. I would like to think that if he were convicted there would be a full presidential pardon. This investigation of nothing has cost millions of taxpayers dollars and probably distracted our federal government from conducting a very important war!! I would like to see Joe Wilson indicted for being a traitor to his country in a time of war.

  2. camojack says:

    I’ve said this before: indicted ain’t convicted…

  3. Bachbone says:

    It’s too early yet to make book on anything, because we still don’t have all the facts, but I agree that Libby’s actions, if accurately portrayed at the news conference, were not the brightest. But my impression is that Rove was/is not the left’s ultimate aim. Bush is. Rove is a means to that end. The left believes Bush to be either a dunce, who is incapable of making a decision without Rove pulling his strings, or a Merlin who can steer hurricanes where he wants them to devastate black people. So, it wants to start chipping away at Bush’s tenure on the “dunce” end of that continuum. If that fails and Libby is acquitted, another line of attack will be mounted. Things like this will not end till Bush leaves office at the end of his term, in my opinion.

  4. – If you step back and look at this from a standpoint of the Liberals its patently clear they’ve long since decided to put all their energies into an ongoing campaign to sully the image of the conservatives in the voting publics mind leading up to the 2006 and 2008 elections. Its no longer limited to Bush and the administration, but a more broad attack. Bush is in his final years, and so even if I would like to think the Liberals are that anal reentive and stupid it makes no sense. Thsy can’t possibly win on their anti-ameican everything, baby murdering platform so they are going with the “throw the rascals out” approach, hoping they can convince enough people they’re angels and the ChimpyMcBush camp is a bunch of Nixon like birdbrain, conspiratorial baddies. Good luck. In the means time the Dems still bring nothing to the table as long as the left calls the shots, and have not a prayer in hell of convincing a majority of the electorate that demonizing Condi is going to carry the day in place of a glaringly MIA, mainstream America acceptable party platform. Isn’t going to happen. Notice the lose cannons are largely silent these days, wanting not too diminish the milage they can get in the leftist MSM from Plamegate. If the left insists on following this dead end game I’m loving it.

    Big Bang happy 🙂

  5. Seth says:

    Rove’s head would be a prize, indeed, for the Democrats — getting the “enemy’s” chief strategist in the political arena’s about the same thing as taking your opponent’s queen on a chessboard.

  6. Baklava says:

    I couldn’t believe the insanity. I went everywhere today looking for a good write-up.

    I read the 22 pages (it was like reading fantasy land stuff for Democrats) of the 5 indictments.

    I went more places on the net. Powerline, Little Green Footballs, Malkin, Peter Mulhern, Instapundit, National Review, Polipundit, etc. I was very dissappointed because I wasn’t seeing the shredding of the indictments that I thought were warranted.

    I read the transcript of Fitzgerald’s news conference. I couldn’t believe the talking out of both sides of his mouth that was going on. Strong language concerning breaking the law and outing a CIA agent yet no indictment for the 1982 law that Victoria Toensing helped craft and said herself doesn’t apply. Then Fitzgerald couldn’t classify (during the news conference ) whether Plame was covert or not !@#$%^&^ Well what the heck you been doing for the last 2 years?

    I finally turned Michael Medved on and then Hugh Hewitt came on and I heard Sean Hannity.

    THEY provided some sanity. Michael Medved as always pieced everything together so that any liberal can figure out how foolish they are looking. Hugh had a prosecutor on his show. Hugh, Sean and Michael all thought Libby was in trouble but outlined the ridiculousness that it was and the big picture perspective.

    Sean pointed out that Clinton when testifying said I don’t know and can’t recall over 200+ times. HOW IS THAT for perjury, obstruction of justice, etc. Libby cooperates fully and turns over everything including his personal notes and doesn’t say I can’t recall and don’t know.

    The prosecutor that Hugh had on EVEN said that if Libby just pleaded the 5th that he wouldn’t have been indicted today.

    Liberals will learn to rue these days that they didn’t work with Republicans to solve this country’s and the world’s problems. Because many in the public can see this for what it is and every time some big event happens like this more and more people turn towards conservatism just like I was converted during a big event or two. And why? Because people generally have a conscience and see too many double standards if they are presented the other sides story.

  7. Kenwg says:

    The latest buzz on right-wing talk shows and blogs: “There was no crime!”

    Libby not being indicted for “knowingly” outing an undercover CIA agent does not mean there was “no crime”.

    Prosecutor Fitzgerald obviously didn’t think he could prove that Libby knew Plame’s status, but that isn’t the same as exonerating Libby, or proving that he did not know. In fact, Scooter may have very well have known, or whoever passed Plame’s name to Libby (apparently Mr. Cheney) may have known, and “encouraged” him to pass it on to the media. Either would still be a crime, either is certainly plausable, and this possiblity (given my contempt for the Bush administration, I am personally inclined to call it a “liklihood”) has NOT been DIS-proven.

    In other words, the blanket conclusion that there was no crime is hopeful speculation. Certainly she and her CIA front company (Brewster Jennings Asssociates) were undercover (and she apparently a very valuable asset – expert on WMD, clandestinly buying up “Russian Mafia” plutonium, identifying who is trading in such material, etc), and her outing without doubt harmed our national security.

    And if it can be proved that Libby (or someone else) knew her status and yet still, directly or indirectly, passed the information to the media, then Libby or that “someone else” is a base and contemptible traitor to our country, and should be treated as such.

    A very serious matter, still an open question, and not one that I would expect even Bush lovers to simply dismiss.

  8. “Either would still be a crime, either is certainly plausable, and this possiblity (given my contempt for the Bush administration, I am personally inclined to call it a “liklihood”) has NOT been DIS-proven.”

    – Guilty until proven innocent. Some more of the charming “turned on its head” thinking from the left.

    – Kenwg – you and those of your ilk are trying very hard to change the face of America to some sort of twisted version of the Marxist ideal. That you are doing it is bad enough, that you think anyone but a nitwit doesn’t see through it is just one more indication of the naviate’ of the so-call “elitist” left.

    – You think the average working voter cares about this sort of nit-pick politicking witch-hunt. If you and your cronies don’t stop the idiotic attacks and start building some sort of viable, socially acceptable platform for your rag-tag, off in 40 directions at once party, you face the happy prospect of another 8 years of rapacious protests and grumbling. At some point it seems even you should be able to see that…Bon appitite’

    Big Bang –

  9. J Rob says:

    Kenwg, it does not have to be “DISproved”. The way our criminal justice system works is that it is presumed that did not happen until such time as it is proven (AKA:presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty)
    You seem to want presumed guilty until it is disproved. It does not work that way.
    Now if you wish to believe it until it is disproved that is your right, but understand that the legal system does not work that way.

  10. Walter E. Wallis says:

    Hey, Fitz! Where’s the beef?

  11. Baklava says:

    Kenwg wrote, “Libby not being indicted for “knowingly” outing an undercover CIA agent does not mean there was “no crime”.”

    Read the 1982 law Kenwg. Read what the author of the law Victoria Toensing had to say about the law NOT being broken.

    You and other liberals insisting and attaking doesn’t make a crime (except libel on your part.

  12. Kenwg says:

    Response to Big Bang Hunter and J Rob…

    Your reactions to my post are, if I can say so without intending to be patronizing or to demean, just a bit knee-jerk. Perhaps you should re-read my post.

    Of course Scooter is legally innocent until proven guilty, and so is the administration, even given how mean, vindictive and mendacious they have proven to be (Richard Clark, Paul O’Neil, Lawrence Wilkerson, etc). My only point is that a serious breach of National Security occurred, and that it was done so deliberately is still a strong possibility, and should not be so self-rightously and happily dismissed, as many admininstration supporters are so quick to do – blindering themselves to the possible reality that the administration has indeed put politics above the serious national interest.

    Have the Democrats done the same? Of course. Lyndon Johnson and the Tonkin Gulf affair are the first and most obvious that come to mind, and Johnson’s reputation in history has suffered in the history books and rightly so. Clinton’s reluctance to go into Bosnia due to fears of political fall-out (the right was vehemently opposed) is another – when we did finally go in, the Serbs quickly ran for cover, and if Clinton hadn’t been such a political poltroon then thousands of innocent lives would have been saved. And sending rockets into that milk-factory may very will have been a case of “wag the dog” (in this case though there is at least strong support for the administration having good reason to do so).

    There are rabidly single-minded, self-promoting and partisan low-lifes on both sides of the isle, willing to use any means to achieve their ends, and blind to the real costs to our democracy for doing so. We should be contemptuous of them all, regarless of party.

    There also tend to be more spineless cowards on the left, and self-rightous would-be dictators on the right, IMHO.

    An honest evaluation of the current situation would be that Scooter, and possibly Rove or Cheney or someone else, has indeed committed a vicious and abhorrent crime. Time, hopefully, will tell, one way or the other, but in the meantime everyone should keep an open mind on this serious and important issue, and make it clear to our leaders that we will not just happily dismiss the issue – that just because they’re “our guys” we’re willing to accept that anything goes as long as you aren’t indicted for it. This, in my opinion, is what so many on the right are doing.

    And Big Bang, I agree with your comments about the Demowhimp’s lack of a coherent policy or response. It sickens me to see Senators Schumer and Clinton, when asked whether they would still have voted to support the war given what they now know, whimper that “yes,they would” and give some muddled tripe about how it’s neccessary to show the world we will be strong, etc. They should instead be standing up and leading the charge that this administraion lied us into a ruinous war. Even Repuclican leaders have admitted that the congress would never have approved the resolution knowing what it now knows.

    Ms. Clinton and Mr. Schumer have shown themselves to be, just like John Kerry, spineless, calculating politicians lacking any real commitment to principles. If the Democrats can’t come up with at least one leader with more substance, as a check on rampant neo-con extremism, then this country is really down the tubes. The only Democrats around these days with any real balls are Howard Dean and Al Sharpton, neither of whom have any chance of challanging the Republicans.

    As it stands, I’m confronted with the very real possibility that this country has gone horribly wrong, and that I may have to just give up in disgust and move to New Zealand – (or maybe south Mexico where I imagine I could retire and live pretty well), but I’m afraid of what you guys will do with the most powerful “toy” in the world if people like me just abandon ship.

    Hopefully my comments will help prod you to you open up your Bush-besotted, new-American Empire dreaming minds just a bit, and no offense intended.

    And yes, I like the French, who can be very courageous at times (Verdun), even though I admit they can also be real jerks at least as often.


  13. Kenwg says:


    Where I said “An honest evaluation of the current situation would be that Scooter, and possibly Rove or Cheney or someone else, has indeed committed a vicious and abhorrent crime”, I meant to say “may have indeed commited”, not “has indeed comitted”.


  14. Steve Skubinna says:

    Looks to me as if Libby’s home free. All his lawyer has to do is stack the jury with Democrats. They can’t possibly find him guilty of perjury then.

  15. Norah says:

    Kenwg, you make some excellent points.

    So Scooter Libby has been indicted in what appears to be at an attempt by him to cover up a non-crime

    Gee…what does that sound like? Bill Clinton lying about a perfectly legal relationship? Hmm. I’d like to think matters of national security are at least AS important as sex to you people, but perhaps not.

  16. Evon says:

    I had heard so many nice things about Fitzgerald, so, I listened to his press conference. If he had charged someone with the serious crime of “outing” Mrs. Wilson a.k.a. Valerie Plame, what he said could have made more sense–unless he deliberately wanted to convey the falsehood that, after spending millions of dollars, he had charged someone with that crime.

    If what the CIA does is so serious [and it’s refreshing to see so many Democrats wanting to “protect” the identity of CIA covert operatives], why isn’t it a serious matter to use an assignment with the CIA to spread misinformation about the President?

    I’m disappointed in Mr. Fitzgerald.

    That said, no one should lie to FBI investigators or a grand jury and if they do they should suffer the consequences.

  17. Yeah right Norah, as if this has ever been about ‘national security’ to the people pushing it the hardest. If the Dems cared about national security, they’d be pi–ed as hell that the last President we had in this country wimped out when it came to major decisions involving our national security and furthermore seemed predisposed to extracurricular .. um, activities instead.

    This is about nailing Karl Rove to the wall. Plain and simple. Joe Wilson was at least honest enough to admit that.

  18. Norah says:


    I don’t remember any mini-Vietnams while Clinton was in charge. You think he “wimped out”; I think Bush is entirely too preoccupied with proving what big cojones he has, to the tune of 2000 and counting dead American troops.

    But certainly, nailing Rove to the wall is a large part of it. Who plays a major role on shaping conservative policy today? The same policy that is tanking our credibility and our integrity as a nation? Three guesses, and the first two don’t count. Do you really want to be on the wrong side of history as bad as all that?

  19. kenwg says:

    “This is about nailing Karl Rove to the wall. Plain and simple.”


    You know I have to disagree with this.

    Certainly the Democrats would love to crush Karl Rove, and just about every other member of this administration along with him, if they could. But wasn’t it a group of ex-CIA agents that asked for this investigation? (it’s notable that “Presidential Medal of Freedom” recipient and CIA Director at the time Mr. Tenent couldn’t stir himself to do so) And wasn’t it the Republican Justice Department who agreed, and appointed the special prosecutor? And the highly respected Mr. Fitzgerald – even Mr. Bush acknowledges his professionalism – is certainly no liberal Democrat.

    The implication that the Democrats, or the left in general, could have contrived to initiate this investigation in order to “get Rove” can’t be taken seriously. It’s beyond plausibility to suggest that they have the reach (to say nothing of the collective brain cells) needed to successfully put together such an endeavor. The Dems just don’t have the horsepower. The Republicans control everything, and they would certainly never acquiesce to such a coup by the Democrats.

    And by the way, Baklava, the hubristic pronouncements of Victoria Toensing (certainly not the most unbiased commentator) notwithstanding, there is every possibility that the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act was indeed violated. Ms. Toensing may claim to know the intent of Congress, but I’ve read the law (as I imagine most of you have by now), and it’s very short, concise, and straightforward, and as written, its violation in the current instance is certainly a possibility.

    We won’t know until all the facts are known, if ever.

    And ST, I’m very happy to have provided you the refreshment of learning that some of us on the left actually do care about our country and those who defend it! Many of us, maybe even most of us, in fact feel that we are at least as patriotic as any self-flag-draping so-called patriot on the right :-)


  20. PCD says:


    Toensing wrote the law for Sen. Goldwater to push. If anyone should know the reasoning behind it and what violates it, it would be her, not YOU!

    Also, Mr. Bush didn’t clean out Democratic, partisan holdovers in the government. He should have. There is a knot of CIA insiders who are Clintonistas and really should have been fired long ago. These are the CIA people who started their little plot to get rid of Mr. Bush.

  21. PCD says:


    My what a short memory you have. Try Kosovo and Haiti. We are still there in both cases.

  22. Evon says:


    President Clinton and Quarter-bright were so intent on getting the Nobel Peace Prize [awarded to Yasser Arafat but not Pope John Paul II or President Reagan which tells you all you need to know about its worth] that they ignored whatever mayhem our enemies chose to inflict on our citizens and military. That is not commendable in my opinion.

  23. Pam says:

    The same policy that is tanking our credibility and our integrity as a nation? Norah, who is it tanking with? Syria, Iran and North Korea? Please explain that. I haven’t seen any articles telling us of countries returning their aid checks because they want nothing to do with us. Last week, the AP reported that the US and France are working together to deal with Syria. Germany voted in a new leader that ran on a multitude platforms, one of which was a promise to mend the relationship with the US. Katrina hit and we were flooded by all these nations that weren’t impressed with us! How come? Could it be that the MSM writes it that way and you just buy it hook line and sinker?

  24. kenwg says:


    You’re in denial. Try taking a step back and looking at what you’ve said.

    I don’t doubt that Toensing knows what SHE had in mind when she helped write the bill. But she was only one negotiator among several, and wasn’t at all one of the several hundred who debated it on the floor and voted for it. Does she know what was in the minds of all?

    The published law speaks for itself. Have you read it? Why don’t you take a moment to address THAT point in my memo, instead of coninuing to cling to the self-serving fulminations of a notorious right-wing partisan. You have to be smart enough to see that anyone without blinders on doesn’t take her seriously. You’ll have to do better.

    And you still cling to the idea that democratic partisans in the various Bureaucracies are behind this? You’re sounding like a conspiracy nut. You mean Mr. Fitzgerald? Don’t make me laugh. Or perhaps Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, who appointed Fitzgerald? Or Judge Reggie Walton? Or Dick Gergen, Bush Senior, Brent Scowcroft, and Senator John McCain, all of whom support the investigation? Do your research, PCD, before engaging your mouth. You won’t look quite so blindly partisan.

    The Democrats aren’t the ones behind this. It’s Bush I’s team, stepping in and taking over for the failed ideologs and incompetents that they fear are bringing the republican party down. THEY are the ones pulling the strings, not the Dems.

    And as for Haiti and Kosovo, yeah, we’re really suffering heavy casualties there, and seeing stories of the violence and warfare there every day, aren’t we.
    Again, PCD, do some fact-checking for clicking that “Say it” button. You’ll probably avoid saying some things that tend to undermine your credibility.

    I probably sound patronizing but I don’t mean to be. I just want you and others to look at things a little more deeply and not just blurt out you’re long-held but erroneous stereotypes.

    Have a good one!


    No offense intended – keep up the commentary, it’s a good foil to keep those of us who

  25. Baklava says:

    Kenwg attacks by saying, “instead of coninuing to cling to the self-serving fulminations of a notorious right-wing partisan”

    yes. this is the level of debate we get wtih leftists…..

    Kenwg continues this level of debate with “You have to be smart enough to see that anyone without blinders on doesn’t take her seriously. You’ll have to do better.”

    Attacking a poster’s intelligence and ability to see with perspective. Not such good behavior. I find Victoria’s point of view very pursuasive and I too have read the law. Which, BTW, Fitzgerald didn’t charge Libby with breaking that law.

    Kenwg comments about his behavior with these follow up words, “but I don’t mean to be”

    Only you can control your ownself. Every marriage counselor worth their salt learns one important thing and tries to convey to every couple one important thing. You can only control yourself. You can express words in a kind manner and in a suggestive manner but if your spouse (or person you are dialoging with) doesn’t change the only thing you can focus on is what you do, what your behavior is like and what words you say and with what tone.

    I am in favor of a much better debate of ideas and facts. It is VERY difficult to do, especially since leftists and liberals seem to believe that Republicans/conservatives are evil. With that mindset Kenwg you will not get anywhere debating us. You won’t be pursuasive.


  26. PCD says:

    Ken, you are no more than a partisan liar. Look yourself. A CIA Operative had to have been covert and overseas within 5 years before disclosure. Plame was not. Get off your left wing talking points and do some research yourself, and not at the Democrat Underground, DNC, or

  27. Lorica says:

    Actually let’s not forget Somalia that certainly would of been a “quagmire” if Clinton wouldn’t of tuck tailed and run.

    Seems to me that Clinton did a great deal to hurt our image in the world too. During Kosovo the inteligence said to bomb a certain building that turned out to be the Chinese Embassy which had moved there 2 years earlier. Our Intel people went “Opps”, and thousands of Chinese attacked and destroyed our Embassy in China. Stuff like that makes you feel so loved around the world. Talk about a guy that should of been charged with war crimes. – Lorica

  28. PCD says:

    Ken, on second thought, your post is nothing more than an elite snob’s attempt to shame a person into silence with condescension. It won’t work on me. Good thing you didn’t try that in person. You’d be having to prove every word you said, Edited –ST.

  29. OK – I think this convo has run it’s course. Thread closed.