LINK

…..with feeling…..

LINK

The whole thing smacks of prosecutorial misconduct. Think Mike Nifong with a bigger budget.

Fitzgerald was supposed to find out who leaked Plame’s name to reporters. What we now know is that Fitzgerald had that name – Armitage – all along. So it’s reasonable to ask why he dragged one official after the other in front of the grand jury.

No one on the left has even tried to explain this – you’ll notice Jeff and pce didn’t even make a timid stab at it – so I’ll assume the most logical reason: for partisan purposes, he wanted a scalp. The more people he could question, the more chance someone would make a mistake, or contradict someone else, and then he could spring a prejury trap. And in the process, get a pat on the head from the likes of the NYT and give the Dems some talking points.

Seems to me like one of those ‘principles’ pce likes to bray about is for Democrat prosecutors to abuse the power of their office for political reasons…

While my column on Wilson’s mission triggered Libby’s misery, I played but a minor role in his trial. Subpoenaed by his defense team, I testified that I had phoned him in reporting the Wilson column and that he had said nothing about Wilson’s wife. Other journalists said the same thing under oath, but we apparently made no impression on the jury.

Another money paragraph:

Some questions asked me in television and radio interviews after the verdict implied that I revealed Armitage’s name to Fitzgerald. Actually, in my first interview with Fitzgerald after he had been named special prosecutor, he indicated he knew Armitage was my leaker. I assumed that was the product of detective work by the FBI. In fact, Armitage had turned himself in to the Justice Department three months before Fitzgerald entered the case, without notifying the White House or releasing me from my requirement of confidentiality.

A third money paragraph:

On Fox’s “Hannity & Colmes” Tuesday night, super-lawyer David Boies said Fitzgerald never should have prosecuted Libby because there was no underlying criminal violation. Boies scoffed at Fitzgerald’s contention that Libby had obstructed him from exposing criminal activity. Boies, who represented Al Gore in the 2000 election dispute, is hardly a Bush sympathizer.

There is absolutely NOTHING leftists can do but say – you guys did it to Clinton in the 90’s…

First of all Clinton was not thrown in jail, the violation of Paula Jone’s civil rights and his perjuring himself to avoid being held accountable (when evidence of his pattern of behavior was being brought up) WAS a crime in contradiction to no crime here (otherwise Armitage would be in jail or being brought up on charges).

Secondly, even if you “disagree” with the above paragraph you can never excuse your actions by pointing to other’s actions and saying they did it first or too. That tactic ADMITS guilt. It admits you are at fault but you are saying someone else did it too.

That is why I said checkmate above.

So, how do you feel lefties for being so untruthful on the 16 words, the Niger contention, the assertion that this has been smear and fear by the B admin, AND for ruining a good man’s life where no crime was committed?

You should feel repentant and for a long time – but I have yet to see that attitude anywhere except from David Boies but I never considered him a partisan…

what was Libby’s “motive” for lying??

Having a differing memory than others when each of the others had differing memories than each other is labeled as “lying” by you.

Shall I call jpe perfect? It’s the only way you can be writing such nonsense…. the “p” in jpe stands for “perfect”. Mighty big of you to be so perfect.

The answer to the first question is: He did NOT have a motive to lie as leftist’s keep asserting it is about smear and fear. It was Armitage who outed Plame and that was known by Fitpatrick months before the grand jury started.

What was Armitage’s motive? He was a war critic?

Additionally, what was the crime to be lied about or covered up? There wasn’t an underlying crime. Otherwise Armitage would be charged and convicted.

Smack.

That’s rich. A democrat talking about principles?

Someone from the party that defends Sandy Burglar stealing and destroying classified documents is lecturing us on principles?

Someone from the party that defended Bill Clinton’s perjury is lecturing us on principles?

Someone from the party of Ted Kennedy, the only senator in history to pilot an Oldsmobile-class submarine, is lecturing us on principles?

Someone from the party of John Murtha, who told FBI agents on tape to come back later with the bribe money, is lecturing us on principles?

There are crooked politicians on both sides of the aisle, so cut the sanctimony. What’s I’d like is for the Dems nationally, as a party, start having some principles.

Here’s one to start with: the principle of defending America from her enemies. I think the last Democrat to endorse that principle was JFK. Since then, you guys have a different principle: if it’s bad for the USA but helps us get power, we’re for it.

What “principle” was in play when your guys just voted to ban secret ballots in union organizing elections? Wait, I know – the principle that anything that helps you get more campaign cash is good, and to hell with whether it trashes the rights of the average worker.

So come back to us with your lecture when you have some principles other than (a) wanting more power over everyone’s life and (b) wanting more money for yourselves. Then maybe your comments will pass the laugh test.

Jeff excuses himself of ruining a man’s life because his perception that somehow people went over the line in the 90’s.

It’s not Libby’s fault for lying. It’s the system. It’ll be nice when republicans get their principles back. Well, if they get them back.

Nice.

Even if so does two wrong’s make a right Jeff?????

No.

Checkmate.

Pah-leaseeeeee!!!!!

If you guy’s res crying into your towels over this you should remember that A) Libby is guilty and B) you guy’s fired repeated salvos like over the line all through the 90s.

Pardon us if we on the left just happen to be right.

I don’t think leftists’ really know the line they have crossed on so many issues and now this one. They cannot easily return to decency….