|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 25, 2005 18:39:39 GMT -5
The rumors have started to swirl, and included an early evening report from Drudge, who claimed to have double sourced through ABC that Scooter Libby was indicted. ABC subsequently denied the rumor, and Drudge has retracted his earlier report.
Other rumors include one that says Fitzgerald will seek two or more indictments, possibly only for your typical obstruction, conspiracy, etc. charges, rather than the CIA leak itself.
There is also a boogeyman theory that says a third person (in addition to Rove and Libby) will be indicted.
Hopefully we'll see Bush stand by his word and remove those who are indicted so they no longer "serve" in the executive branch.
|
|
|
|
Post by showcase on Oct 25, 2005 20:38:08 GMT -5
I'm not all that confident that anyone will be indicted when the grand jury concludes, or that the indictments will last long. The one thing I'm supremely confident of, however, is that if anyone 'loyal' to Dubya is indicted, there will be some serious contorting to ensure that nothing happens. Probably something along the lines of "well, the indictment wasn't for leaking, per se, so there's no problem here..."
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Oct 25, 2005 20:43:35 GMT -5
T Hopefully we'll see Bush stand by his word and remove those who are indicted so they no longer "serve" in the executive branch. Since he already backed off his word that anyone involved would be dismissed, there is every chance he'll try to weasel through this one too. I hope he does, it will just be another nail in the coffin. The worst president in the history of the USA. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2005 21:00:03 GMT -5
The thing that's going to bother me is that - like with Whitewater - everyone is going to avoid the consequences of the actual crime at issue. The crime here is that someone "outed" a covert agent of the government. My money is on nobody taking the fall for that.
My guess, "expendable" folks take the fall for lesser "offenses."
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 25, 2005 21:01:24 GMT -5
T Hopefully we'll see Bush stand by his word and remove those who are indicted so they no longer "serve" in the executive branch. Since he already backed off his word that anyone involved would be dismissed, there is every chance he'll try to weasel through this one too. I hope he does, it will just be another nail in the coffin. The worst president in the history of the USA. I don't hold out much hope either, which is a sad commentary more than anything. That said, it does not do anyone a service by calling him the worst President in the history of the United States. There have been worse in wartime (LBJ) and worse in peace (Carter), although I must admit that it is increasingly difficult to name any in the latter category. I've always had more of a problem with Cheney and am hard pressed to name any worse, although Agnew quickly comes to mind for obvious reasons. Cheney is bad for other reasons, mainly the systematic deception of the public on WMD issues, which is related to the Plame matter. I thought he just might use his experience for the right purposes in this administration, but he used it in a conniving way IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 25, 2005 21:02:58 GMT -5
The thing that's going to bother me is that - like with Whitewater - everyone is going to avoid the consequences of the actual crime at issue. The crime here is that someone "outed" a covert agent of the government. My money is on nobody taking the fall for that. My guess, "expendable" folks take the fall for lesser "offenses." That's a great point Buffalo and should not be shortchanged, although the Republican "intelligentsia" wants us to believe that Plame's outing did not harm our national security or endanger any current or former CIA agents beyond herself. You've hit the nail on the head in terms of the tragedy of this entire scandal. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 26, 2005 11:39:39 GMT -5
"Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has asked the grand jury investigating the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson to indict Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby and Bush’s Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, lawyers close to the investigation tell RAW STORY. Fitzgerald has also asked the jury to indict Libby on a second charge: knowingly outing a covert operative, the lawyers said. They said the prosecutor believes that Libby violated a 1982 law that made it illegal to unmask an undercover CIA agent." rawstory.com/news/2005/Prosecutor_in_leak_case_seeks_indictments_1026.htmlWe should have better confirmation as the week progresses. |
|
|
|
Post by WilsonBlvdHoya on Oct 26, 2005 11:46:42 GMT -5
"Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has asked the grand jury investigating the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson to indict Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby and Bush’s Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, lawyers close to the investigation tell RAW STORY. Fitzgerald has also asked the jury to indict Libby on a second charge: knowingly outing a covert operative, the lawyers said. They said the prosecutor believes that Libby violated a 1982 law that made it illegal to unmask an undercover CIA agent." rawstory.com/news/2005/Prosecutor_in_leak_case_seeks_indictments_1026.htmlWe should have better confirmation as the week progresses. Can the Hoya Hooligans get a chant of "Orange Jumpsuit, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap" going for the Hammer, Scooter and Turd Blossom?!? ;D |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Oct 26, 2005 12:22:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 26, 2005 13:51:02 GMT -5
"Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has asked the grand jury investigating the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson to indict Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby and Bush’s Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, lawyers close to the investigation tell RAW STORY. Fitzgerald has also asked the jury to indict Libby on a second charge: knowingly outing a covert operative, the lawyers said. They said the prosecutor believes that Libby violated a 1982 law that made it illegal to unmask an undercover CIA agent." rawstory.com/news/2005/Prosecutor_in_leak_case_seeks_indictments_1026.htmlWe should have better confirmation as the week progresses. Can the Hoya Hooligans get a chant of "Orange Jumpsuit, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap" going for the Hammer, Scooter and Turd Blossom?!? ;D The only gesture appropriate for some of these guys is the thumbs down gesture depicted in movies about pre-modern periods. You may know what I'm talking about from the final scenes of Braveheart and other such pictures. If this plays out as I think it will, they've done a serious disservice to our country and should be condemned unambiguously. As with the Clinton period of obstruction, the real issue is not the obstructing. For the Republicans who carried forth articles of impeachment, I believe the real issue was marital infidelity, which is not a trivial issue in its own right. One has to wonder why there has not been an outcry from the likes of Barr, Hyde, and others in the Republican Party. At the end of September, Sensenbrenner called on folks to put politics aside in the DeLay matter. The sad reality is that the Plame matter is more of a crime against the country. Outing a CIA officer is not a laughing matter and is a possible offense. I'm hoping that there is some closure on this aspect of the Plame matter because it is the one that irks me the most. The rest of it reads as a typical Washingtonian cover-up. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 26, 2005 14:02:34 GMT -5
Most of the editorial is a post hoc rationalization of a decision that Kagan made in January 1998, if not earlier (reference: www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm). His rationalization at that time related to the limited efficacy of containment and the decreasing ability to monitor WMD programs. That, of course, reads differently from the arguments offered by members of the administration about launch times for missiles to hit the United States, how Iraq will use its mighty air force to poison our food supply, how they're acquiring nuclear weapons, etc. Additionally, the arguments about "everyone else agreeing" do not sit well with me. For an administration that expresses its policy of not caring about polls, why would they care what the French, British, or others ostensibly think? I don't want to hear about what Richard Butler said. His UNSCOM group used its access to Iraqi sites to advance American intelligence, rather than the UN mission exclusively. He is far from the paragon of virtue that Kagan makes him out to be. Instead of offering excuses and post hoc rationalizations, it is high time that they admitted their mistakes to put the issue aside. The reality is that they could have sold the war through other ways and did not have to let their post-9/11 doctine get in the way of sound judgments based on careful examination of the options available. Instead, they chose the low route of making the American public fearful based on shoddy, cherry-picked evidence. |
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Oct 26, 2005 16:17:59 GMT -5
Yawn about Carter and LBJ. They did some good and some bad. Like Nixon, they get castigated far too much as bad presidents. The real stinkers were: Harding, Andrew Johnson, Buchanon and worst of all -- Pierce. In fact, now that I think of it Franklin Pierce = George W. The similarities are uncanny.
Northern yankee with strong souther sympathies. Good looking yet inane. Did nothing to prevent or soothe growing divide in social fabric of country -- often blamed for the Civil War.
Kunhardt wrote in The American President that he was "a good man who didn't understand his own shortcomings. To his credit, he loved his wife and reshaped himself so that he could put up with her aristocratic, nervous ways and show her true affection. He was one of the most popular men in New Hampshire, polite and thoughtful, easy and good at the political game, charming and fine and handsome. And he was genuinely religious. And yet he was a timid man with a shallow, rigid, old-fashioned mind which could not cope with a changing America. In addition, Pierce was hounded by guilt, temptation, and just plain bad luck."
Who does that sound like?
|
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Oct 26, 2005 16:23:41 GMT -5
That's not Kagan's column from yesterday. Something is messed up on the Post website. The article yesterday was about Miller and the NYT coverage of the war. And it was a much better column. Notice the date on the link is currently September 12. My guess is that easyed linked yesterday's column and the website snafu occurred sometime before Jersey clicked on it. EDIT: This is Kagan's column from yesterday. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 26, 2005 19:33:03 GMT -5
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Oct 28, 2005 17:18:58 GMT -5
I don't hold out much hope either, which is a sad commentary more than anything. That said, it does not do anyone a service by calling him the worst President in the history of the United States. There have been worse in wartime (LBJ) and worse in peace (Carter), although I must admit that it is increasingly difficult to name any in the latter category. I've always had more of a problem with Cheney and am hard pressed to name any worse, although Agnew quickly comes to mind for obvious reasons. Cheney is bad for other reasons, mainly the systematic deception of the public on WMD issues, which is related to the Plame matter. I thought he just might use his experience for the right purposes in this administration, but he used it in a conniving way IMO. taking your second point first, Agnew was an insiginificant boob. No impact on domestic affairs, let alone international issues. Cheney's impact on the US and the world has been disastrous. From energy "policy" to lying about Saddam's 9/11 and al qaeda involvement to WMD. As for LBJ and Carter, if one wished to cite failed presidencies of the 20th century, most would be more likely to mention Hoover or Nixon. But the real issue is Bush -- none of the four mentioned above come close. I will state again, he is and will be proven by history to be the worst president in the history of our country. This is not idle talk or emotional reaction. And I am not the only person in this country who thinks so. What has he done to deserve this evaluation? Starting a war of choice over false pretenses tops the list. Total incompetency in tracking down Bin Laden and al qaeda Worsening our national security with the Iraq situation by creating a training ground for terrorists and giving al qaeda all the political fodder they need to drum up muslime support and emotion against us. Taking the enormous world-wide support for the US after 9/11 and squandering it with Iraq and other international policies to the point that the US probably has its lowest international standing ever. Taking a $1.6 trillion budget surplus and turning it into a $3.6 trillion deficit. Failing to enhance our security AND combat global warming by refusing to even consider conservation and alternative energy development Katrina, FEMA and the culture of incompetent cronyism Failing to take any steps to deal with our ever expanding trade deficit reckless and unncessary tax cuts with long term negative implications for the US Economy No environmental policy No global warming policy Harriet Miers Impinging on American civil rights Abu Ghraib -- and the white washing of those responsible Doing his best to divide the country at every opportunity Kow-towing to the religious right Trying his best to blur the lines between church and state Pursuing possibly the most unethical and slimiest campaign practices ever undertaken is that enough for now? Bush isn't the worst because he is Republican. He is just the worst. Bush The Father was a good and effective president. So was Eisenhower. Even Reagan accomplished good things, among a lot of bad things. But Dubya is in so far over his head it is almost incomprehensible. His tenure will go down as one of the darkest eras in American History. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Oct 28, 2005 19:04:41 GMT -5
SirSaxa - why don't you tell us how you really feel about Bush?
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,433
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Oct 29, 2005 13:01:59 GMT -5
SirSaxa, that about sums up my position on Bush too.
|
|
DallasHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,634
|
Post by DallasHoya on Nov 1, 2005 20:40:23 GMT -5
John Kerry has downplayed the indictment and the independent counsel investigation:
"Think about it," Kerry continued. "When [the independent counsel] was appointed, when we authorized an independent counsel, when the grand jury was convened, the crime on trial before us now had not even been committed, let alone contemplated."
Oh wait, that was in 1999 and he was talking about Clinton.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,212
|
Post by hoyarooter on Nov 1, 2005 21:41:49 GMT -5
I don't hold out much hope either, which is a sad commentary more than anything. That said, it does not do anyone a service by calling him the worst President in the history of the United States. There have been worse in wartime (LBJ) and worse in peace (Carter), although I must admit that it is increasingly difficult to name any in the latter category. I've always had more of a problem with Cheney and am hard pressed to name any worse, although Agnew quickly comes to mind for obvious reasons. Cheney is bad for other reasons, mainly the systematic deception of the public on WMD issues, which is related to the Plame matter. I thought he just might use his experience for the right purposes in this administration, but he used it in a conniving way IMO. taking your second point first, Agnew was an insiginificant boob. No impact on domestic affairs, let alone international issues. Cheney's impact on the US and the world has been disastrous. From energy "policy" to lying about Saddam's 9/11 and al qaeda involvement to WMD. As for LBJ and Carter, if one wished to cite failed presidencies of the 20th century, most would be more likely to mention Hoover or Nixon. But the real issue is Bush -- none of the four mentioned above come close. I will state again, he is and will be proven by history to be the worst president in the history of our country. This is not idle talk or emotional reaction. And I am not the only person in this country who thinks so. What has he done to deserve this evaluation? Starting a war of choice over false pretenses tops the list. Total incompetency in tracking down Bin Laden and al qaeda Worsening our national security with the Iraq situation by creating a training ground for terrorists and giving al qaeda all the political fodder they need to drum up muslime support and emotion against us. Taking the enormous world-wide support for the US after 9/11 and squandering it with Iraq and other international policies to the point that the US probably has its lowest international standing ever. Taking a $1.6 trillion budget surplus and turning it into a $3.6 trillion deficit. Failing to enhance our security AND combat global warming by refusing to even consider conservation and alternative energy development Katrina, FEMA and the culture of incompetent cronyism Failing to take any steps to deal with our ever expanding trade deficit reckless and unncessary tax cuts with long term negative implications for the US Economy No environmental policy No global warming policy Harriet Miers Impinging on American civil rights Abu Ghraib -- and the white washing of those responsible Doing his best to divide the country at every opportunity Kow-towing to the religious right Trying his best to blur the lines between church and state Pursuing possibly the most unethical and slimiest campaign practices ever undertaken is that enough for now? Bush isn't the worst because he is Republican. He is just the worst. Bush The Father was a good and effective president. So was Eisenhower. Even Reagan accomplished good things, among a lot of bad things. But Dubya is in so far over his head it is almost incomprehensible. His tenure will go down as one of the darkest eras in American History. Kudos, SirSaxa, for a brilliant summation. Jimmy Carter was a bad president, but Bush II is without doubt the worst of my lifetime. He's even a worse president than Jerry Brown was a governor, and that's no small feat. |
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Nov 1, 2005 21:48:14 GMT -5
John Kerry has downplayed the indictment and the independent counsel investigation: "Think about it," Kerry continued. "When [the independent counsel] was appointed, when we authorized an independent counsel, when the grand jury was convened, the crime on trial before us now had not even been committed, let alone contemplated." Oh wait, that was in 1999 and he was talking about Clinton. So you don't think that someone should be indicted when they lie in the course of an investigation. So if a terrorism suspect lied to the FBI while they were investigating him, you wouldn't want the DoJ to be able to nail him for obstruction of justic or false statements at the very least? |
|
