Bush commutes Libby's prison sentence in CIA leak case

[Slobrain]

This should show the entire country where George W.s loyalty lies, not for the American public, only for the rich and powerful.

Money talks, bullshit walks!

George Bush needs to be impeached immediately for his actions.

This current PIP is the most corrupt in history!

That's all I have to say.


SLO

[strangedogs]

Not just Bush - I say throw em' all out and get some real folks in there. The whole bunch of em' are corrupt.

[hasserl]

This is excellent news. I know you'll think I'm a Bush fan, the truth is I didn't vote for him in either election and I'm not a Republican, and I disagree with a lot of things with the Bush administration. But this whole Libby prosecution was a rediculous politicized witch hunt that exemplifies the problems with using special prosecutors.

It's crystal clear that Fitzgerald already knew who the source was that leaked Valerie Plames identity, and it wasn't Libby. At that point his job was done, he should have wrapped up his investigation. But instead he drug it out for many months and spent many thousands (hundreds of thousamds, millions?) of dollars and came up with nothing, so he turned his attention to LIbby. That's an abuse of the special prosecutor, the whole issue was dead, there was no offense, Plame was not even a covert agent. It was overly political and partisan and a shameful abuse of power.

Good for Bush, he should have done this right away.

As far as impeachment, get a grip. As we learned when Clinton was President, impeachment is for "high crimes and misdemeanors". Not because you dislike the person or the politics.

[bob p]

Agreed. Special prosecutors aren't accomplishing the task that they were assigned to accomplish -- unbiased, non-politically motivated investigation and prosecution. Instead, they end up being politically appointed witch burners, and the only means of addressing their deficiencies (from a constitutional perspective) is for the President to commute sentences and/or issue pardons when they go too far.

[casey73]

Well shut my mouth wide open!! Another illuminating observation by the always eloquent and politically astute Slobrain.

[Slobrain]

Well shut my mouth wide open!! Another illuminating observation by the always eloquent and politically astute Slobrain.

Thanks you, just my opinion and also my freedom of speech.

Really, I feel sorry for you Casey, It must be tough being a fan of Dubya when so many Americans are against him due to all the corrupt things he does
:eek:


SLO...

[casey73]

No need to feel sorry for me. I'm a very content, and most likely a little better read than you. I've never been a follower of what's popular, but in retrospect (you can look "retrospect" up in the dictionary Slobrain) I've been right more than I've been wrong in my observations of historical figures who have risen to prominance in my lifetime.

If you've ever read any history, and I'm certain you have a long reading list, you know that many of history's great leaders were very unpopular in their time, such as Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill, just to name two. This is particularly true during a time of war. It wasn't until many years later that their positive contributions to the welfare of civilization was recognized by historians.

Peace, love, dove :)

[Satamax]

you know that many of history's great leaders were very unpopular in their time, such as Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill, just to name two. This is particularly true during a time of war. It wasn't until many years later that their positive contributions to the welfare of civilization was recognized by historians.

Peace, love, dove :)

Well, agreed, but that's other times, remember in thoses times medias weren't as good with digging bad things politicians were doing. The litle people didn't even have a clue of who Lincoln was at the time. Only the ones who could read. For Churchill, it was a bit different, but not much. I'm not Us citizen, and have nothing to say realy, but imho, you've got a big fool for president. Going to war in Iraq, daftest one ever. Iran, corea, afghanistan, no problem, but he just tried to finish what his daddy had started. Anyway, who do you think he is? You haven't had a single president who wasn't CIA's puppet for a long time. I agree i don't know about Clinton, but Bush JR, puppet of his father, ex CIA's director, Reagan, how do you think he got there?Carter? Father of al Quaida with his 79 decree. Gerald Ford, most certainly lying at the warren comission. Nixon, with hunt working for him etc. Before i don't know. But who benefits from all this? Or which governement agency shall i say. And below the agency, Gun and amo manufacturers, and all the army providers.

There's also another thing i want to shed light on, thoses politicians you've taken as examples, became popular after, when people had forgoten the (verry litle) bad things they had done. Do you sincerely think Bush will be regarded as a great leader one day? :D

I return a litle on Clinton's case. Screwing his secretary is nothing, if she realy didn't want to, he wouldn't even have fired her, there was too many other ones willing to do this imho. In France we've had presidents dying in between the legs of hookers, at least one with a dual life, a wife and a mistress both with kids. The latest one has a wife who had kids with another guy before marying him. And so on. What's all the fuss about? You know, i'm under the impression that the ultra religiosity in your country produces only whimps. Over here we would have said, Cmon Clinton, give her some more. Few years back, i saw a report about one state (or county) in the us where, if a girl got pregnant before 18 or 21 (can't remember) she was sent to prison. What a bunch of tards! Sorry i will never understand people who let things like this happen and let off the smaller heads of enron free. (big ones got killed or sentenced, heart atack almighty, may be something to do with possible political revelations Lay might have made?) And that's only one case discovered, how many more?

I'll shut it up now, in case they're on my door.

[hasserl]

There's also another thing i want to shed light on, thoses politicians you've taken as examples, became popular after, when people had forgoten the (verry litle) bad things they had done. Do you sincerely think Bush will be regarded as a great leader one day?

That depends, if the rest of the world wakes up and joins the US in fighting back the tide of Islam, then one day the world will look back on Bush with respect and honor and feel foolish for the way they've behaved for the past few years. But if they don't, eventually Europe will be under Islamic rule, Sharia law and all, and most will curse Bush outloud. But those in private that hide their lust for freedom will curse themselves for not standing up and fighting along side the Americans when they had a chance to save themselves.

I realize that sounds apochryphal, but the truth is that Europe is already well underway towards Islamic rule, it's just a matter of time. You can deny it if you wish, but that is just intellectual dishonesty. The trend is already established and there's not a lot that can be done. All that remains to be seen is if totalitarian Islam wins out over less radical forms. At this time the radicals look to be taking the lead. In France you're in a lot more dire situation than we are in the States. Had any car-b-ques lately?

I return a litle on Clinton's case. Screwing his secretary is nothing, if she realy didn't want to, he wouldn't even have fired her, there was too many other ones willing to do this imho. In France we've had presidents dying in between the legs of hookers, at least one with a dual life, a wife and a mistress both with kids. The latest one has a wife who had kids with another guy before marying him. And so on. What's all the fuss about? You know, i'm under the impression that the ultra religiosity in your country produces only whimps. Over here we would have said, Cmon Clinton, give her some more. Few years back, i saw a report about one state (or county) in the us where, if a girl got pregnant before 18 or 21 (can't remember) she was sent to prison. What a bunch of tards! Sorry i will never understand people who let things like this happen and let off the smaller heads of enron free. (big ones got killed or sentenced, heart atack almighty, may be something to do with possible political revelations Lay might have made?) And that's only one case discovered, how many more?

In the private sector for a company President to be screwing around with an intern would be at best incredibly stupid and risky. At worst it could cost the business many thousands of dollars in legal fees and penatlies and fines, and cost the president his job and career.

In one sense I tend to agree with you, that what two adults do in private is their own business, not mine. But when a public offical (read employee) is screwing around on the public dole, with interns, that then becomes the public's business, and the public has a right to be outraged by it. We expect powerful people in high positions of honor and responsibility to not take advantage of younger non-powerful people in low positions with little responsibility. It's just the way it is. It's not like Monica was a Senator or Congresswoman, or even a lobbyist, she was a young lady working as an intern for cryin out loud. A supervisor that took advantage of an intern would get into trouble, let alone the President of the United States! So people got outraged about it, fine. That's not what got him in the realtrouble, commiting perjurey to the grand jury is what did it. If not for that the whole episode would have largely blown over (maybe a bad term to use here) and gone away after a short time. Heck, Ted Kennedy killed a woman and he's still around wreaking havoc in the Senate. Even the perjury and impeachment wasn't the end of Clinton, he's still around and causing trouble.

[bob p]

I realize that sounds apochryphal, but the truth is that Europe is already well underway towards Islamic rule...
I don't mean to be inflammatory when I say this, but I thought it was already well known that France is essentially an Islamic nation. To be fair, the US is becoming a hispanic nation through immigration. In saying this about France, I don't mean to act as if I'm someone who lives in a glass house and starts throwing stones.

Regarding Clinton, I don't buy the allegory of the French President between the harlot's being a suitable comparison. We have laws in the USA that specifically forbid the exploitation and sexual subjugation of people in the workplace. Clinton performed several crimes and misdemeanors, including sexual harassment and perjury. When perverted male Americans say things like "Way to go, Bill, give it to her," it only serves to turn my stomach. The fact that schoolchildren had to ask their parents and teachers to be educated about oral sex and whether or not oral sex contsitutes a sexual act is something that is inappropriate, and its certainly the wrong moral message to be proffered by the leader of the free world.

On the subject of Iraq, I won't dispute that the cost of fighting the war has been horriffic, and the price that the American taxpayer has to pay for this exercise may indeed be crippling for many years to come. To put things into perspective, one has to consider the total cost of the war, and compare it to the total cost of not fighting the war. Some people seem to forget that part of the analysis. Back in the 1930s there were lots of Americans who didn't want America to beocme involved in what many viewed to be Europe's problems.

[Satamax]

Hasserl, well, lying, for a politician is a second nature. And monica never realy complained, did she? My opinion is, in the us you care too much about religion, and that makes you guys become intolerant.

Bob, france is an islamic country? Cmon, give me a break, there's been aproximately 2 milions immigrants from north africa, not all muslims, but mainly. But now it's the second generation which is born in france, and most of them aren't muslim, they drink alchool and eat pork! Well, the oficial figures are around 3.7 milions nowadays. There's one milion portuguese of first generation and are catholics, and there lots of asians too. There's something like 7 milion muslims in the US; for about four times the population of france. So half of the muslims population of France. So USa are a Muslim country?

Bye guys.

Max.

[Don Symes]

Impeach Cheney first.

[bob p]

being fair to statisticians, a ratio that compares the number of muslims in the USA to the population of France isn't really a meaningful number, is it? for the statistic to have any validity numbers like these need to be normalized per capita.

[hasserl]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4385768.stm

From the bbc:
"Islam is widely considered Europe's fastest growing religion, with immigration and above average birth rates leading to a rapid increase in the Muslim population."

and

"FRANCE

Total population: 62.3 million

Muslim population: Five to six million (8-9.6%)

Background: The French Muslim population is the largest in western Europe. About 70% have their heritage in former north African colonies of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. France favours integration and many Muslims are citizens. Nevertheless, the growth of the community has challenged the French ideal of strict separation of religion and public life. There has been criticism that Muslims face high unemployment and often live in poor suburbs. A ban on religious symbols in public schools provoked a major national row as it was widely regarded as being a ban on the Islamic headscarf. Late 2005 saw widespread and prolonged rioting among mainly immigrant communities across France.

Sources: Total population - National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies, 2004 figures; Muslim population - French government estimate. "

More interesting info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_civil_unrest_in_France

[Slobrain]

Impeach Cheney first.

Heh, You all should have seen the new show (Little Bush) on comedy network. It was hilarious to say the least. It really pokes fun at the whole current admin and how bad they really are.

I guess some one here thinks trying to make me look stupid is his answer to me being wrong, but how can my feelings be so wrong when a BIG majority of America dislike Bush for all the crap he has done.

BTW, Lincoln freed slaves and that was a good thing as slavery is totally wrong. I really do not think Bush can compare to Lincoln in any way or form.



SLO

[bob p]

BTW, Lincoln freed slaves and that was a good thing as slavery is totally wrong. I really do not think Bush can compare to Lincoln in any way or form.
The war between the states -- are you saying that war was about slavery???

[Mark Black]

I Think Randy Newman said it best...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xm8_6h19Co

[spiffpeters]

Unlike Bush, Lincoln was a UNITER. Slavery was a sub plot. Until then, America was a loose collection of states. United we were not.

And unlike Lincoln, Bush is dividing us. Over half the country can't be wrong on this. Can they?

[spiffpeters]

"It's crystal clear that Fitzgerald already knew who the source was that leaked Valerie Plames identity, and it wasn't Libby."

We know Armitage was one of the leakers, as he admitted as much. But are we to assume that there was only one leaker? Should Fitzpatrick have stopped his investigation as soon one leaker was found and assumed that this was the only source? Fitzgerald gets a call from Armitage where he admits to 'accidentally' giving her name to Novak. Meanwhile, he has already caught Libby in at least one lie. Is he suppose to assume that Libby wasn't covering something up?


"But instead he drug it out for many years and spent $70 million and came up with nothing, so he turned his attention to Lewinski. That's an abuse of the special prosecutor, the whole issue was dead, there was no offense, Whitewater was not illegal. It was overly political and partisan and a shameful abuse of power."

Had to fix it for you.

"As far as impeachment, get a grip. As we learned when Clinton was President, impeachment is for "high crimes and misdemeanors". Not because you dislike the person or the politics."

As for Plame not being covert, that lie has been put to rest. In court filings on 5/25/2007 by Fitzgerald:

"At the time of the initial unauthorized disclosure in the media of Ms. Plames employment relationship with the CIA on 14 July 2003, Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for whom the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."

Brewster Jennings was the cover company that she worked under. At a time of war, our government leaked a covert agents identity, destroying an important intelligence operation at a time where that intelligence data would be invaluable (dealt with Iran). No way to determine how many lives were lost or endangered, but anyone associated with Brewster Jennings would not be above suspicion in certain circles. The whole operation was comprised.

This fits the description of high crimes and treason. We'll likely never know if more than one person leaked the identity. According to Fitzgerald, Libby lied at every moment of significance.

As for the commutation, because Bush didn't vet the commutation through the justice department, he has now created a legal paradox that needs to be resolved. A sentence can not be commuted unless they have actually been imprisoned. The implications are significant. Libby is in no-man's land right now. Bush will have to pardon him, at which point Fitzpatrick can call him into court and Libby would not be able to take the 5th. Bush doesn't want to pardon Libby for this reason, yet by commuting the sentence without time served, Bush has effectively created a status for a convicted felon for which there is no legal basis.

[Slobrain]

The war between the states -- are you saying that war was about slavery???

No....I was just saying that Lincoln was instrumental in freeing the slaves through Emancipation Proclamation.

I don't want to get into past war issues as we all know the past and if not, thats what the history channel is for ;)

Slavery is wrong and only used by rich people who didn't want to pay some one to do a job so they used slaves.

Believe me we are all slaves to the grind but with choices, these folks who were slaves had no choices.

SLO

[Slobrain]

I Think Randy Newman said it best...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xm8_6h19Co

Yeah, man thats excellent :p

[Earl Norton]

It's ironic that the Emancipation Proclamation only freed those slaves in the Confederacy. Lincoln had no office in the Confederacy, therefore the proclamation was impotent.

[bob p]

It's ironic that the Emancipation Proclamation only freed those slaves in the Confederacy. Lincoln had no office in the Confederacy, therefore the proclamation was impotent.
It was about as impotent as the Federalist's assertion that the collective rights of the Federal Government trump the individual rights of the States. ;)

The War Between the States uttered the last word in the battle between Federalism and anti-Federalism that had been taking place since the time of the Founding Fathers. It successfully established the replacement of a diversified government that had formerly been known collectively as "These United States of America" and replaced it with a centrally empowered government known as "The United States of America." Conceptually, the replacement of "These" with "The" was a watershed event in American history, yet it remains something of whose intricacies most Americans remain totally unaware.

[hasserl]

The War Between the States

You mean the War of Northern Aggression? ;)

[bob p]

You mean the War of Northern Aggression? ;)
I was waiting for that! Thanks for not disappointing me! :D

[JC@]

That depends, if the rest of the world wakes up and joins the US in fighting back the tide of Islam, then one day the world will look back on Bush with respect and honor and feel foolish for the way they've behaved for the past few years. But if they don't, eventually Europe will be under Islamic rule, Sharia law and all, and most will curse Bush outloud. But those in private that hide their lust for freedom will curse themselves for not standing up and fighting along side the Americans when they had a chance to save themselves.

:eek:
And Cuba, and the cold war, and the comunism, and the out space invaders...
It's ok if as a country now is your turn to be the big boy, but history doesn't begin in 1850. Just try to be as honest as possible and don't screw it too much.
I would reccomend a short reading: The Prince, by Machiavelo.

[bob p]

another spelling: Machiavelli

link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prince)

[JC@]

another spelling: Machiavelli

link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prince)

Yes, that's correct, it would be a lot easiar if we all spoke in english:D

[hasserl]

:eek:
And Cuba, and the cold war, and the comunism, and the out space invaders...
It's ok if as a country now is your turn to be the big boy, but history doesn't begin in 1850. Just try to be as honest as possible and don't screw it too much.
I would reccomend a short reading: The Prince, by Machiavelo.

And World War I, and World War II; (how soon they forget!)

This is not about a country being the big boy; it's about good people doing the right thing, even in the face of determined political forces lined up against them. Doing the right thing for those same people, who are too ungrateful to remember how you bailed them out before, and who are going to need you again very soon, but are too blind with their own jealousy and hatred to see it.

If you think George Bush and/or the United States is your enemy, or are a bigger threat to you than radical Islam, you aren't being intellectually honest. Like you said, let's be honest.

I remember Machiavelli from school days, several decades ago. Let me recommend something for you to read: http://www.amazon.com/While-Europe-Slept-Radical-Destroying/dp/0385514727

Having recently published an indictment of Christian fundamentalist intolerance in the U.S. (Stealing Jesus), New York native Bawer relocated to Europe with his Norwegian partner in 1998 and found an even more dangerous strain of religious and cultural bigotry ensnaring Western Europe. A swarming menace called radical Islam, he writes, rings Europe's cities in smoldering Muslim ghettos, provoking everything from so-called honor killings and political assassinations to the Madrid subway bombings and the massacre of school children in Beslan. Worse, the Taliban-like theocracy Bawer sees looming inside backward immigrant populations resistant to integration flourishes under the protective wing of Western Europe's America-bashing, multicultural, liberal establishment. The latter correspond to the appeasers of Nazi Germany, in Bawer's view, since he believes that radical Islamism is every bit the threat to Western civilization that Nazism was.

Here's an interesting read: http://www.worldthreats.com/Europe/Grim%20Warning.htm

Excerpts:

THE CIA has predicted that the European Union will break-up within 15 years unless it radically reforms its ailing welfare systems.

n a devastating indictment of EU economic prospects, the report warns: "The current EU welfare state is unsustainable and the lack of any economic revitalisation could lead to the splintering or, at worst, disintegration of the EU, undermining its ambitions to play a heavyweight international role."

It adds that the EU’s economic growth rate is dragged down by Germany and its restrictive labour laws. Reforms there - and in France and Italy to lesser extents - remain key to whether the EU as a whole can break out of its "slow-growth pattern".

The EU is also set for a looming demographic crisis because of a drop in birth rates and increased longevity, with devastating economic consequences.

The report says: "Either European countries adapt their workforces, reform their social welfare, education and tax systems, and accommodate growing immigrant populations [chiefly from Muslim countries] or they face a period of protracted economic stasis."

As a result of the increased immigration needed, the report predicts that Europe’s Muslim population is set to increase from around 13% today to between 22% and 37% of the population by 2025, potentially triggering tensions.

Do a google search on declining European birthrates and increased Muslim immigration and you'll find enough hits to spend several hours reading.

[JC@]

hasserl, with all my respect, what I try to expose is that your country started all these conflicts and a few others, and couldn't finish them properly (meaning, your way). They just ended.

The BAD is the conflict, the war, not the war threat.

World War II was quite a different story, here I have to say thank you.
But some people think what could have happend if "we" didn't "win" that war.

A very few times someone has to hit first, but only when you are pretty sure that the other part thinks the same way.

The prevention role of the United States of North America is more or less ok, just take it easy.

Yes, quite a few inmigrants from other cultures are circulating in Europe (too many for my personal taste, but that's just that, a personal appreciation).
We'll have to absorb them someway, or dictate new laws. Just like you do.

The chance of getting killed by an outlaw inmigrant in europe is a lot smaller than it is in your country.

This soil we are walking on is quite slipery.

[spiffpeters]

"Doing the right thing for those same people, who are too ungrateful to remember how you bailed them out before, and who are going to need you again very soon, but are too blind with their own jealousy and hatred to see it."

I thought we went into Iraq because of WMD? Didn't realize we went in there to do Europe any favors.

I guess we just have to spread our brand democracy every where.

[bob p]

I don't think its fair to dismiss America's history of "doing the right thing" in times of trouble just because there are political agruments taking place that make our motivation for doing the right thing a matter of controversey. WMD or not, America took action because horrible things were happening in the Middle East -- things that were destabilizing the region -- and something needed to be done about it. The WMD threat was real, and more than anything else it served as a trigger for when action was taken. It was not the trigger that caused action to be considered in the first place. Those who focus on WMD and their presence/absence after the invasion of Iraq are missing the big picture. Besides, we gave Hussein plenty advance warning about our invasion deadline, and that gave him plenty of time to clean house. I think that everyone who's paid attention already knows that the Ba'ath party sanitized all of its weapons centers and moved the WMD to its sister state of Syria.

Sure, its tempting to go off on politically fueled tangents, but its also important to remember that America has a long history of doing the right thing regardless of which political party has been in power. Look at American history. America has always stepped in to do the right thing, because that's the responsibility that comes with being an honorable man. Its also the responsibility that comes with being the world's only remaining superpower. For evil to prevail in the world, all that needs to happens is for good men to do nothing. Evil things were happening (and continue to happen) in the Middle East, and its our responsibility as a superpower to help people who can not help themselves.

[spiffpeters]

"I think that everyone who's paid attention already knows that the Ba'ath party sanitized all of its weapons centers and moved the WMD to its sister state of Syria."

Conjecture. A reasonable theory, but I don't hear much alarm in the international community about Syria harboring WMD.

"America has a long history of doing the right thing regardless of which political party has been in power. Look at American history. America has always stepped in to do the right thing, because that's the responsibility that comes with being an honorable man."

That's a rather Norman Rockwell remembrance of American history. Our involvement in WWI and WWII wasn't for as noble purpose as you state.

Vietnam doesn't strike me as a particularly noble cause.

The Sha of Iran and Sadam Hussien seemed like good, noble idea's at the time? Not really. We knew what we were doing and being kind and compassionate wasn't the primary motive.

Iran-Contra wasn't noble, and was a little bit on the illegal side.

Sure America is the greatest nation in the world. A super power if you must. But America yields the most power and influence when we lead by example. And our policy's, both foreign and domestic, seem to have enough inconsistency and hypocrisy to create a lot of confusion and distrust in those with whom we wish to influence.

We say we are a peaceful nation, yet invade a country that did no harm to anyone outside its borders. But even this could have been forgotten had the ensuing occupation not been handled so irresponsibly. The reason we went to Iraq has evolved over the past several years. And while the reason of the day may sound reasonable, everyone knows this war was conducted as a pre-emptive first strike. There is no point in denying the dominant rationale, mushroom cloud has entered the lexicon to the point that its former association with Japan has been replaced with the faces of the administration that engaged in a very organized and orchestrated campaign to whip up public support for this war.

If Bush and Co. had said he wanted to install a democracy in Iraq (one of the more recent reasons we are there) back in early 2003, there isn't a single person that would have agreed with him.

"...its our responsibility as a superpower to help people who can not help themselves."

I agree. And why not show the world how a great country treats its own? Why do we need to spend $12 billion/month occupying a foreign country? Wouldn't it be cheaper to provide universal health care and free college to high school graduates?

There's plenty of matters in our own country that we should tend to first before we try to tell another country what to do.

[bob p]

That's a rather Norman Rockwell remembrance of American history. Our involvement in WWI and WWII wasn't for as noble purpose as you state.

Vietnam doesn't strike me as a particularly noble cause.
Well, maybe I'm really missing something. Perhaps you can help me understand this by explaining why the USA became really involved in WWI, WW2, Korea and Viet Nam.

[JC@]

What about that umbrella we were going to get for free in Europe?
Is there any advance in the negotiaton between the USA and Rusia?