With Libby convicted, what does that mean for Cheney?

The NYT runs with a breathless piece this morning speculating on what the political toll may be for VP Cheney in light of yesterday’s verdict in the Libby trial.

Captain Ed points out that indeed the VP will be on the hot seat with the media and, of course, Democrats in Congress for months to come over this and thinks that the VP should not resign, while Jules Crittenden has a more cynical take on the whole controversy.

Let’s also not forget that Joe “Cocktail Party” Wilson and his wife still intend to go forward with a civil suit against the WH.

By my count, Mr. Wilson is into his 17th minute of fame.

16 Responses to "With Libby convicted, what does that mean for Cheney?"

JammieWearingFool says:

March 7, 2007 at 10:04 am

Wilson is on about his 17th hour. A special corner of hell awaits him and his media enablers
Baklava says:

March 7, 2007 at 11:31 am

This event has made me re-think my position on this matter. I’ve tried to “understand” the left’s position by taking in their view points. One of the biggest challenges for humans is hearing another’s perspective that you disagree with.

AFTER careful reconsideration, and reading/listening to leftists yesterday I am as vehemently bewildered as before as to how this verdict came to be, equally as bewildered as to how the trial came to be, find myself agreeing with Victoria Toensing’s peice on NRO yesterday and find myself agreeing with someone else on NRO that said the press will regret what they’ve done here in the future. … well… that’s a hope as you can’t predict the future.

If a leftist can tell us all here today (focusing like a laserbeam on Wilson’s research about Niger and yellowcake) and the subsequent CIA report that was inconclusive about whether or not Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger, how Bush’s 16 words’s not being debunked caused people to DISCUSS Wilson and his perpetual lies (last I knew political discourse was allowed), and how when it was ARMITAGE who outed Plame, caused an investigation that Armitage subsequently admitted guilt to doing (leaving alone whether or not Plame was covert or not – even though she wasn’t), how when there was FAULTY memories all around how one person (not Tim Russert, nor Woodward, nor anyone else) is being held accountable for having differing memories.

It’s a sad thing to destroy somebody’s life like this just because you leftists disagreed with going to war. This was (focus like a laser beam now) about Joe Wilson’s lies that the Washington Post even called LIES. Wilson – Please take the stand… Rat Bastard!
Baklava says:

March 7, 2007 at 11:56 am

This peice is a good read.
Baklava says:

March 7, 2007 at 12:04 pm

Betsy Newmark cools my anger on the subject.
sanity says:

March 7, 2007 at 12:08 pm

1st one was a very good read Bak, thanks.
Baklava says:

March 7, 2007 at 12:13 pm

Sorry so many posts – Wall Street Journal’s take.
Sister Toldjah says:

March 7, 2007 at 12:33 pm

Bak, I think I’m gonna let you and sanity take over on posting about the Libby fallout as ya’ll seem to be more on top of it than I am today
Baklava says:

March 7, 2007 at 12:44 pm

I’d be honored… but I can’t hold a candle to the light your pinky can shed on the topic I’m sure…

Tammy Bruce’s post about Valarie Plame will lighten the mood.
sanity says:

March 7, 2007 at 12:45 pm

Baklava’s Sanity guest posting?
Baklava says:

March 7, 2007 at 12:57 pm

Dennis Prager who is very influential to me will devote the next hour to the Libby verdict. I’ll keep you posted…
sanity says:

March 7, 2007 at 1:16 pm

At least ABC mentions the question:

It also was never explained why former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who originally leaked Plame’s identity, was never charged.

Then there is this off the jury:

Collins said he was intrigued when Wells raised the idea that Libby was being made a scapegoat for Rove.

“There was a tremendous amount of sympathy for Mr. Libby on the jury. It was said a number of times, ‘What are we doing with this guy here? Where’s Rove? Where are these other guys?”‘ Collins said. “I’m not saying we didn’t think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells put it, he was the fall guy.”

Which makes me think they were thinking and considering beyond the scope of what Libby was actually being charged with.
Baklava says:

March 7, 2007 at 1:51 pm

I can only say that leftists must have their head in the sand on this one on future repercussions. This is an AMAZING Washington Post article today:

Mr. Wilson was embraced by many because he was early in publicly charging that the Bush administration had “twisted,” if not invented, facts in making the case for war against Iraq. In conversations with journalists or in a July 6, 2003, op-ed, he claimed to have debunked evidence that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger; suggested that he had been dispatched by Mr. Cheney to look into the matter; and alleged that his report had circulated at the highest levels of the administration.

A bipartisan investigation by the Senate intelligence committee subsequently established that all of these claims were false — and that Mr. Wilson was recommended for the Niger trip by Ms. Plame, his wife. When this fact, along with Ms. Plame’s name, was disclosed in a column by Robert D. Novak, Mr. Wilson advanced yet another sensational charge: that his wife was a covert CIA operative and that senior White House officials had orchestrated the leak of her name to destroy her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson.

The partisan furor over this allegation led to the appointment of special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald. Yet after two years of investigation, Mr. Fitzgerald charged no one with a crime for leaking Ms. Plame’s name. In fact, he learned early on that Mr. Novak’s primary source was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage, an unlikely tool of the White House. The trial has provided convincing evidence that there was no conspiracy to punish Mr. Wilson by leaking Ms. Plame’s identity — and no evidence that she was, in fact, covert.

OMG, Sweetness and Light shows who is posting at HuffPo. Denis the juror himself!!!
G-Monster says:

March 7, 2007 at 1:51 pm

Wilson reminds me of the the kid in the back of the classroom that nobody likes, that likes to report to the teacher on stupid things that didn’t happen.

You know, the kid that gets no attention at home, no attention at school, so he has to create attention for himself.

The kid that couldn’t be class president because he was too unpopular, so he had to start rumors about the class president.

I try to keep my mean streak in check, but what Joe Wilson and his enablers have done here is just plain wrong.

The only reason Valerie Plame’s identity came up is because Joe Wilson was telling people that Dick Cheney sent him to Niger.

Everything else is just a vendetta by the democratic party, because George W. Bush, and Dick Cheney beat them twice in the presidential election.

Oh, and the civil suit…give me a break. This whole incident has made Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame alot of money.
Sister Toldjah says:

March 7, 2007 at 1:52 pm

Argh! I’m in the middle of writing about that WaPo piece right now.
Flopping Aces says:

March 7, 2007 at 2:21 pm

Justice Denied

Clarice Feldman, someone who has followed every tiny detail about the Plame case, has written an excellent article today about the travesty we know as the Libby verdict. She details all of the wrongs committed on Scooter and ends with…
Great White Rat says:

March 7, 2007 at 5:45 pm

Another good commentary from Clarice Feldman at American Thinker.

We’re just overflowing with links today, aren’t we?

Comments are closed.