scooter is guilty
-
AYHJA
- 392
- Posts: 37990
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:25 pm
- Location: Washington, D.C.
- Contact:
30 years in Federal Pen..? Damn, they call that punishment..? Send his ass the Leavenworth, lol...
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
radioforme
- Posts: 122
- Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:49 am
too bad the fitzy couldn't nail all those guys.....scooter takes the fall for the vp and rove.
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
bobpike
- Posts: 292
- Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:50 pm
The article reads:-
"In the end, jurors said they did not believe Libby's main defense: that he hadn't lied but merely had a bad memory."
This has to be a bit rich coming from a man also described as "once the closest adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney", suggesting that he he was happy to hold this incredibly important and responsible job yet is happy to excuse himself as having a bad memory.
Perhaps he thought that the "I'm don't exactly recollect" training offered by the Oliver North School of Crap Get-out Clauses would be sufficient to deflect the law.
Perjory and obstructing legal investigations is surely serious stuff. But the article seems to indicate that this is considered by the law to be more important than what the incident was about in the first place - a high-level leak, and mucky one at that, which ruined someone's job. People have still brazenly got away with doing bad things, in the full glare of publicity.
"No one will be charged with the leak itself, which the trial confirmed came first from then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage."
It's filthy at the top.
"In the end, jurors said they did not believe Libby's main defense: that he hadn't lied but merely had a bad memory."
This has to be a bit rich coming from a man also described as "once the closest adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney", suggesting that he he was happy to hold this incredibly important and responsible job yet is happy to excuse himself as having a bad memory.
Perhaps he thought that the "I'm don't exactly recollect" training offered by the Oliver North School of Crap Get-out Clauses would be sufficient to deflect the law.
Perjory and obstructing legal investigations is surely serious stuff. But the article seems to indicate that this is considered by the law to be more important than what the incident was about in the first place - a high-level leak, and mucky one at that, which ruined someone's job. People have still brazenly got away with doing bad things, in the full glare of publicity.
"No one will be charged with the leak itself, which the trial confirmed came first from then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage."
It's filthy at the top.
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |