PDA

View Full Version : Why isn't Scooter Libby still in Prison?



Duncan Gibbs
12-08-2010, 06:26 AM
In commuting Libby's prison term, Bush stated: "I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison. ... My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged."

If everyone is crapping on about how damaging Assange has been after only 350 or so of the stockpiled 250K cables have been released, what can people say about all status of all the Middle East sources, contacts and colleagues of Valerie Plame? How many are dead, or in fear for their lives?

Why isn't the US right wing treating Libby the way they would like to treat Assange?

Here's an open letter to our PM


Dear Prime Minister,

We note with concern the increasingly violent rhetoric directed towards Julian Assange of WikiLeaks.
“We should treat Mr Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him,” writes conservative columnist Jeffrey T Kuhner in the Washington Times.

William Kristol, former chief of staff to vice president Dan Quayle, asks, “Why can’t we use our various assets to harass, snatch or neutralize Julian Assange and his collaborators, wherever they are?”

“Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?” writes the prominent US pundit Jonah Goldberg.

“The CIA should have already killed Julian Assange,” says John Hawkins on the Right Wing News site.

Sarah Palin, a likely presidential candidate, compares Assange to an Al Qaeda leader; Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator and potential presidential contender, accuses Assange of “terrorism”.

And so on and so forth.

Such calls cannot be dismissed as bluster. Over the last decade, we have seen the normalisation of extrajudicial measures once unthinkable, from ‘extraordinary rendition’ (kidnapping) to ‘enhanced interrogation’ (torture).

In that context, we now have grave concerns for Mr Assange’s wellbeing.

Irrespective of the political controversies surrounding WikiLeaks, Mr Assange remains entitled to conduct his affairs in safety, and to receive procedural fairness in any legal proceedings against him.

As is well known, Mr Assange is an Australian citizen.

We therefore call upon you to condemn, on behalf of the Australian Government, calls for physical harm to be inflicted upon Mr Assange, and to state publicly that you will ensure Mr Assange receives the rights and protections to which he is entitled, irrespective of whether the unlawful threats against him come from individuals or states.

We urge you to confirm publicly Australia’s commitment to freedom of political communication; to refrain from cancelling Mr Assange's passport, in the absence of clear proof that such a step is warranted; to provide assistance and advocacy to Mr Assange; and do everything in your power to ensure that any legal proceedings taken against him comply fully with the principles of law and procedural fairness.

A statement by you to this effect should not be controversial – it is a simple commitment to democratic principles and the rule of law.

We believe this case represents something of a watershed, with implications that extend beyond Mr Assange and WikiLeaks. In many parts of the globe, death threats routinely silence those who would publish or disseminate controversial material. If these incitements to violence against Mr Assange, a recipient of Amnesty International’s Media Award, are allowed to stand, a disturbing new precedent will have been established in the English-speaking world.

In this crucial time, a strong statement by you and your Government can make an important difference.

We look forward to your response.

Dr Jeff Sparrow, author and editor
Lizzie O’Shea, Social Justice Lawyer, Maurice Blackburn
Professor Noam Chomsky, writer and academic
Antony Loewenstein, journalist and author
Mungo MacCallum, journalist and writer
Professor Peter Singer, author and academic
Adam Bandt, MP
Senator Bob Brown
Senator Scott Ludlam
Julian Burnside QC, barrister
Jeff Lawrence, Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions
Professor Raimond Gaita, author and academic
Rob Stary, lawyer
Lieutenant Colonel (ret) Lance Collins, Australian Intelligence Corps, writer
The Hon Alastair Nicholson AO RFD QC
Brian Walters SC, barrister
Professor Larissa Behrendt, academic
Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees, academic, Sydney Peace Foundation
Mary Kostakidis, Chair, Sydney Peace Foundation
Professor Wendy Bacon, journalist
Christos Tsiolkas, author
James Bradley, author and journalist
Julian Morrow, comedian and television producer
Louise Swinn, publisher
Helen Garner, novelist
Professor Dennis Altman, writer and academic
Dr Leslie Cannold, author, ethicist, commentator
John Birmingham, writer
Guy Rundle, writer
Alex Miller, writer
Sophie Cunningham, editor and author
Castan Centre for Human Rights Law
Professor Judith Brett, author and academic
Stephen Keim SC, President of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights
Phil Lynch, Executive Director, Human Rights Law Resource Centre
Sylvia Hale, MLC
Sophie Black, editor
David Ritter, lawyer and historian
Dr Scott Burchill, writer and academic
Dr Mark Davis, author and academic
Henry Rosenbloom, publisher
Ben Naparstek, editor
Chris Feik, editor
Louise Swinn, publisher
Stephen Warne, barrister
Dr John Dwyer QC
Hilary McPhee, writer, publisher
Joan Dwyer OAM
Greg Barns, barrister
James Button, journalist
Owen Richardson, critic
Michelle Griffin, editor
John Timlin, literary Agent & producer
Ann Cunningham, lawyer and publisher
Alison Croggon, author, critic
Daniel Keene, playwright
Dr Nick Shimmin, editor/writer
Bill O'Shea, lawyer, former President, Law Institute of Victoria
Dianne Otto, Professor of Law, Melbourne Law School
Professor Frank Hutchinson,Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS), University of Sydney
Anthony Georgeff, editor
Max Gillies, actor
Shane Maloney, writer
Louis Armand, author and publisher
Jenna Price, academic and journalist
Tanja Kovac, National Cooordinator EMILY's List Australia
Dr Russell Grigg, academic
Dr Justin Clemens, writer and academic
Susan Morairty, Lawyer
David Hirsch, Barrister
Cr Anne O’Shea
Kathryn Crosby, Candidates Online
Dr Robert Sparrow, academic
Jennifer Mills, author
Foong Ling Kong, editor
Tim Norton, Online Campaigns Co-ordinator, Oxfam Australia
Elisabeth Wynhausen, writer
Ben Slade, Lawyer
Nikki Anderson, publisher
Dan Cass
Professor Diane Bell, author and academic
Dr Philipa Rothfield, academic
Gary Cazalet, academic
Dr David Coady, academic
Dr Matthew Sharpe, writer and academic
Dr Tamas Pataki, writer and academic
Miska Mandic
Associate Professor Jake Lynch, academic
Professor Simon During, academic
Michael Brull, writer
Dr Geoff Boucher, academic
Jacinda Woodhead, writer and editor
Dr Rjurik Davidson, writer and editor
Mic Looby, writer
Jane Gleeson-White, writer and editor
Alex Skutenko, editor
Associate Professor John Collins, academic
Professor Philip Pettit, academic
Dr Christopher Scanlon, writer and academic
Dr Lawrie Zion, journalist
Johannes Jakob, editor
Sunili Govinnage, lawyer
Michael Bates, lawyer
Bridget Maidment, editor
Bryce Ives, theatre director
Sarah Darmody, writer
Jill Sparrow, writer
Lyn Bender, psychologist
Meredith Rose, editor
Dr Ellie Rennie, President, Engage Media
Ryan Paine, editor
Simon Cooper, editor
Chris Haan, lawyer
Carmela Baranowska, journalist.
Clinton Ellicott, publisher
Dr Charles Richardson, writer and academic
Phillip Frazer, publisher
Geoff Lemon, journalist
Jaya Savige, poet and editor
Johannes Jakob, editor
Kate Bree Geyer; journalist
Chay-Ya Clancy, performer
Lisa Greenaway, editor, writer
Chris Kennett - screenwriter, journalist
Kasey Edwards, author
Dr. Janine Little, academic
Dr Andrew Milner, writer and academic
Patricia Cornelius, writer
Elisa Berg, publisher
Lily Keil, editor
Jenny Sinclair
Roselina Rose
Stephen Luntz
PM Newton
Bryan Cooke
Kristen Obaid
Ryan Haldane-Underwood
Patrick Gardner
Robert Sinnerbrink
Kathryn Millist
Anne Coombs
Karen Pickering
Sarah Mizrahi
Suzanne Ingleton
Jessica Crouch
Michael Ingleton
Matt Griffin
Jane Allen
Tom Curtis
John Connell
David Garland
Stuart Hall
Meredith Tucker-Evans
Phil Perkins
Alexandra Adsett
Tom Doig, editor
Beth Jackson
Peter Mattessi
Robert Sinnerbrink
Greg Black
Paul Ashton
Sigi Jottkandt
Kym Connell, lawyer
Silma Ihram
Nicole Papaleo, lawyer
Melissa Forbes
Matthew Ryan
Ben Gook
Daniel East
Bridget Ikin
Lisa O'Connell
Melissa Cranenburgh
John Bryson
Michael Farrell
Melissa Reeves
Dr Emma Cox
Michael Green
Margherita Tracanelli
David Carlin, writer
Bridget McDonnell
Geoff Page, writer
Rebecca Interdonato
Roxane Ludbrook-Ingleton
Stefan Caramia
Ash Plummer

Allison
12-08-2010, 06:31 AM
I saw an article about how many of her contacts had been killed especially in Iraq. A bunch of other people have had to be pulled out of the field. Apparently there were a lot of problems but it was all kept quiet. I'll see if I can find the link.

JBreeze
12-08-2010, 06:38 AM
And in a related piece of news....

"The United States is pleased to announce that it will host UNESCO’s World Press Freedom Day event in 2011, from May 1 - May 3 in Washington, D.C. UNESCO is the only UN agency with the mandate to promote freedom of expression and its corollary, freedom of the press."

It goes on:

"The theme for next year’s commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The United States places technology and innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals’ right to freedom of expression."

And then:

"At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information."

No, it's not from the Onion, but from the US State Department:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/12/152465.htm

(hat tip to IKN)

Allison
12-08-2010, 06:42 AM
"At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information."

Nothing like a steady diet of hypocrisy to keep the fools believing in the good intentions of their masters!

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 07:00 AM
now may very well be the time to "put up or shut up". we may not get a better chance

Allison
12-08-2010, 07:03 AM
Don, he's the traitor and liar that should have been prosecuted for revealing Valerie Plame's identity but because prosecuting him for that would've meant going after his bosses they dropped those charges and convicted him of lying to the grand jury!
Then of course he was pardoned.
I'm sure that they are of course planning to be just as lenient with Manning, we all know how unbiased the system is!

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 07:10 AM
Don, he's the traitor and liar that should have been prosecuted for revealing Valerie Plame's identity but because prosecuting him for that would've meant going after his bosses they dropped those charges and convicted him of lying to the grand jury!
Then of course he was pardoned.
I'm sure that they are of course planning to be just as lenient with Manning, we all know how unbiased the system is!

I do wish my memory worked better...

I know the details somewhere in my head but can't bring them out without something to jog the file drawer. In the mean time I remember like a deer does...I note the odor and react because my gut sends messages to fight or flee. that "gut" message is almost never wrong but it's damn hard to make an argument with "gut" feelings...

Duncan Gibbs
12-08-2010, 07:13 AM
What does Libby have to do with Assange?

Nothing! It's a comparison and contrast that I'm drawing in relation to US Government confidentiality/secrecy being breached.

Are you really that dim-witted that you don't get it? It would appear that you are.

Allison
12-08-2010, 07:13 AM
He was on Cheney's staff if I recall correctly! If not then he was part of that inner circle.
Wonder who he was covering for?:D

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 07:15 AM
Nothing! It's a comparison and contrast that I'm drawing in relation to US Government confidentiality/secrecy being breached.

Are you really that dim-witted that you don't get it? It would appear that you are.

no, he's not...he's tryiing to pull an lj...dilute, distract and disrupt

Allison
12-08-2010, 07:17 AM
Dunc, my dear friend Don is not dimwitted he just pretends to be obtuse about some subjects. He couldn't be as bad as he acts, that just wouldn't be possible.
But he's trying to learn how to debate better, he's taking correspondence classes.
He's going to surprise us all one day soon and we'll all be proud of him!

PeterSibley
12-08-2010, 07:18 AM
Donn is just a little to the right of Ollie North ,I think he rather likes Scooter Libby .

McMike
12-08-2010, 07:23 AM
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 07:24 AM
Dunc, my dear friend Don is not dimwitted he just pretends to be obtuse about some subjects. He couldn't be as bad as he acts, that just wouldn't be possible.
But he's trying to learn how to debate better, he's taking correspondence classes.
He's going to surprise us all one day soon and we'll all be proud of him!

What's going on...are you and Donn an "item"?

Allison
12-08-2010, 07:25 AM
Did he get prosecuted, because to reveal the identity of a CIA agent is treason if I remember?

PeterSibley
12-08-2010, 07:26 AM
They could become debate but that would require involvement ,not sniping

Allison
12-08-2010, 07:29 AM
Phillip , we've been trying to keep it quiet but Don has struggled with some aspects of debating and the formation of a logical argt. so I've been giving him some quick classes so he can join in the debates without fear of just repeating unsubstantiated rumours and the like! He's getting better!

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 07:30 AM
Phillip , we've been trying to keep it quiet but Don has struggled with some aspects of debating and the formation of a logical argt. so I've been giving him some quick classes so he can join in the debates without fear of just repeating unsubstantiated rumours and the like! He's getting better!

I rather think my take is more interesting... :)

Allison
12-08-2010, 07:35 AM
Oh NO I think that would be too much of a shock to the soul, if I had one!:D
I think Don probably has a similar view
I've known a lot of ex-Marines as friends when I lived in the States, I understand Don is one. Mostly nice people when you get to know them.
There are exceptions of course. I don't think any one could describe Ollie North that way given what he did!

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 07:37 AM
oh well...

Duncan Gibbs
12-08-2010, 07:46 AM
Considering the proposed actions Assange should be subjected to and the hypothetical damage he's done, why was Libby released early when the damage he and his cohorts inflicted was very real. There appears to be a double standard at work.

Allison
12-08-2010, 07:50 AM
Very much so Dunc.
They never prosecuted the 2 journalists involved in publishing the leaked info., they never prosecuted anyone for the act of leaking the name at all. They just did Libby for lying and dropped the whole thing. yet that want to execute Assange for doing exactly the samr thing as those journalists did and the same as any paper that publishes the leaked material is doing but none of them will be targeted.
What pollie is going to dare go after the NY Times for treason!

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 07:52 AM
Considering the proposed actions Assange should be subjected to and the hypothetical damage he's done, why was Libby released early when the damage he and his cohorts inflicted was very real. There appears to be a double standard at work.

isn't there always? I believe we all are guilty of double standards sometimes and it takes vigilence to avoid it.

McMike
12-08-2010, 07:57 AM
Considering the proposed actions Assange should be subjected to and the hypothetical damage he's done, why was Libby released early when the damage he and his cohorts inflicted was very real. There appears to be a double standard at work.


I don't know why this is so hard to understand Duncan but I get it and agree. I think a more appropriate question, one that you're more likely to get an answer too is; Mr. Turtle, how many licks does it take to get to the Tutsi roll center of a tootsie pop?

http://www.apollopony.net/images/tootsie_pop.jpg

The world may never know . . .

LeeG
12-08-2010, 08:32 AM
Don, he's the traitor and liar that should have been prosecuted for revealing Valerie Plame's identity but because prosecuting him for that would've meant going after his bosses they dropped those charges and convicted him of lying to the grand jury!
Then of course he was pardoned.
I'm sure that they are of course planning to be just as lenient with Manning, we all know how unbiased the system is!

Allison, Scooter Libby didn't reveal Valerie Plames identity, that was Richard Armitage talking to the reporter Bob Novak. Neither Armitage or Novak were charged. LIbby was busted for obstructing the investigation into who/how her identity was revealed. The investigation was requested by the CIA. Of the various things revealed by the investigation, besides LIbbys obstruction, was the channel of disinformation from Cheney through Libby to Judith Miller of the NYT. This channel was used to spread disinformation into the NYT and media parts of a cherry picked intelligence paper about Iraqs WMD in Aug-Sept of 2002. This disinformation was in Congress' and the countries hands a MONTH before Congress would get it. Then after the Congress had the first paper on Iraqs "WMD" for 48hrs they would vote on the authorization to war. Think about that, Cheney is leaking parts of a cherry picked intel. to Congress and the country for a month through the NYT/media but Congress gets 48hrs. Actually Congress told Tenet of the CIA to present a paper for review because there wasn't one. We were moving to war and there was no actual comprehensive study on Iraqs "WMD" except for CHeney/Rumsfelds adhoc intel group that was used to circumvent established channels.

Novak would be a better parallel to Assange than Libby. And Novak wasn't busted.

Another parallel would be Steve Rosen who worked for the Israeli lobby AIPAC leaking classified intel to AIPAC which then made it back to Israel. If you're an advocate of pre-emptive war against Iran this is yourguy, along with the other neocons working under Cheneys presidency.

A common theme amongst these three individuals is the right wings support of them when they are obviously operating unethically or close enough to the legal line that their intention was clear. In Rosens case it was over it.

The real significance of Scooter Libby which you should dig into is his relationship to Wolfowitz and his role in toning down the more hegemonic aspects of Wolfowitz 1992 Defense Planning Guidance paper. This is a document that spells out US military strategy into the future. LIbby is en effing lawyer, WOlfowitz is a brilliant academic. Libbys recrafted Wolfowitz paper so that it was less offensive to allies and diplomats. While right wing chicken hawks like Kristol cry out for Assanges assasination it's these smart warriors of American politics who have leveraged US economy into imperial overshoot. The supreme irony of all this is that garden variety hawks and conservatives champion these assholes waste of our country while sending their kids to wars we can't win.

But Assange and Wikileaks is the great threat? Yeah, he's a threat to a veil of self-deception. In reality he isn't revealing much anymore than the IPCCs revealed peer to peer dialogs between scientists but for those stuck to stroking the emperors clothes non-approved channels of communication MUST NOT BE ALLOWED!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/themes/1992.html

Now you have to remember, these are exactly the same people [in 1992] who are most influential right now in the U.S. government, and in the formation of U.S. strategic policy. It's Dick Cheney as defense secretary. It's Paul Wolfowitz as undersecretary [of defense] for policy. And it's a guy named Scooter Libby who is, right now, Dick Cheney's chief of staff and chief strategist, who was deputy to Paul Wolfowitz. And they were the three drafting authorities for this Guidance.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_J._Rosen#Rosen.E2.80.99s_career_before_AIPAC

Rosen’s career took a dramatic turn on August 27, 2004, when CBS News broadcast a report alleging that “A spy is working for Israel at the Pentagon… The suspected mole supplied Israel with classified materials…passing classified information…to two men at AIPAC, and on to the Israelis...[including] a presidential directive on U.S. policy toward Iran.” On screen, CBS showed an image of a document titled “Presidential Directive: U.S. Policy Toward Iran,” and a file folder marked “classified” being passed from a man labeled “suspected spy” to a box marked with the AIPAC logo, and from there to Israel symbolized by its flag. The same day, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents, accompanied by media camera crews, raided the AIPAC offices with a warrant to inspect the paper and electronic files of Steven Rosen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Franklin_espionage_scandal
On August 27, 2004, CBS News broke a story about an FBI investigation into a possible spy in the U.S. Department of Defense working for Israel. The story reported that the FBI had uncovered a spy working as a policy analyst under Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He was later identified as Lawrence Franklin, who had previously served as an attaché at the U.S. embassy in Israel and was one of two mid-level Pentagon officials in the Office of the Secretary of Defense responsible for Iran policy in the office's Northern Gulf directorate. He has since been demoted within the Defense Department and no longer has his previous security privileges.[2][3][4]

Franklin has pled guilty to passing on a classified presidential directive, and other sensitive documents pertaining to U.S. deliberations on foreign policy regarding Iran to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, who in turn provided the information to Israel. FBI sources have indicated that the year-long investigation was actively underway when the CBS News story broke.

According to FBI surveillance tapes, Franklin relayed top-secret information to Rosen and Keith Weissman, a senior Iran analyst with AIPAC, while at the Tivoli Restaurant in Arlington, Virginia. On 27 August, the FBI raided Rosen's office, copying his personal computer's hard drive.[5]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb245/index.htm

The documents recently declassified by the Defense Department in response to the Archive's appeal provide an inside view of the making of the Defense Planning Guidance from September 1991 to May 1992, when Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Colin Powell and Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz approved it. Writing in the wake of the Soviet Union's collapse, the group of Republican-oriented officials that produced the Guidance wanted to preserve the unique position of American predominance that was emerging. With the leak of a draft in March 1992 and the resulting public controversy over the language about preventing a "new rival," "Scooter" Libby and his colleagues recast the document so that it would pass public scrutiny while meeting Richard Cheney's requirements for a strategy of military supremacy.

LeeG
12-08-2010, 08:34 AM
I do wish my memory worked better...

I know the details somewhere in my head but can't bring them out without something to jog the file drawer. In the mean time I remember like a deer does...I note the odor and react because my gut sends messages to fight or flee. that "gut" message is almost never wrong but it's damn hard to make an argument with "gut" feelings...

that's why you should use search tools available through your computer. It's not just a typewriter.

LeeG
12-08-2010, 08:39 AM
Considering the proposed actions Assange should be subjected to and the hypothetical damage he's done, why was Libby released early when the damage he and his cohorts inflicted was very real. There appears to be a double standard at work.

Libbys damage was not to Valerie Plame, it was as to the country as a tool for unrestrained use of military power. Think of him as Wolfowitzs' John Yoo, instead of providing a means to undermine Geneva Conventions he provided Wolfowitz/Bush and the military industrial complex with one less safety on the the use of military power. Instead of the resort of last choice against real threats war becomes a first choice based on hypothetical threats.

Allison
12-08-2010, 08:39 AM
Lee, Lots of interesting stuff, I was saying that he was the only one charged in the whole affair and then only with a minor charge despite the fact that he was obviously privy to what actually went on at the minimum and as you say played a big part in the attempt to cover it up. No-one else got busted at all.
In all those cases you site they did so much more than Assange has done and he's the one they want to execute! What does that say?

LeeG
12-08-2010, 08:47 AM
Considering the proposed actions Assange should be subjected to and the hypothetical damage he's done, why was Libby released early when the damage he and his cohorts inflicted was very real. There appears to be a double standard at work.

because Libby was doing the work of the executive, or when Cheney decides he's the executive. Assange is thumbing his nose at the perogative of any structure with private communications. He's saying the US govt is as insignificant as someones private e-mails. I'm not sure how to describe Assange, a vandal, a pawnbroker, but he's not a spy or enemy of the state. He sure isn't as dangerous as the last administration of chickenhawks implementing hegemonic war.

LeeG
12-08-2010, 08:54 AM
Lee, Lots of interesting stuff, I was saying that he was the only one charged in the whole affair and then only with a minor charge despite the fact that he was obviously privy to what actually went on at the minimum and as you say played a big part in the attempt to cover it up. No-one else got busted at all.
In all those cases you site they did so much more than Assange has done and he's the one they want to execute! What does that say?

it's pretty simple, if you're working for a state power you have a lot more influence and friends in power to cover your ass. Obama would protect Libby over Assange. Libby was charged because he obstructed the investigation, that's not a minor issue. No one got busted because there wan't a strong enough case to prosecute. Besides the entire country was in on the gig. Also Cheney and Rumsfeld were very good at not leaving fingerprints on their handiwork. Support the troops, get Al Qaeda in Iraq, keep Saddam from giving WMD to Terrists. Assange is fooked. Some Russian or African spy is going to kill him. And right wing Americans will think that's good.

peb
12-08-2010, 08:58 AM
The special prosecutor, Richard Armitage, and Robert Novak all agreed that it was Armitage who leaked Plame's name. Only people on the left continue to think it was Rove/Libby. No charges were brough against Armitage because the special prosecutor felt that the leak was not intentional, Armitage told the prosecutor in the very early days of the investigation the story. Armitage boss, Colin Powell, also was informed. Novak backed up Armitage's story.

Libby was convicted of lying to a grand jury, when he believed he was the prime suspect (although at that point, he was not). Not excusing Libby's perjury, but one cannot lay the blame of the leak at his feet just because he committed a different crime.

Allison
12-08-2010, 08:59 AM
Some Russian or African spy is going to kill him

I think a few pollies would like the circus of trying him and executing or imprisoning him for life. If he gets killed by anyone, they are likely to get the blame, it probably wouldn't be far off the mark anyway!

goodnight gentlemen.

LeeG
12-08-2010, 09:01 AM
Only people on the left continue to think it was Rove/Libby. .

I'm relieved to be recognized as not being on the left.

LeeG
12-08-2010, 09:04 AM
Libby was convicted of lying to a grand jury, when he believed he was the prime suspect (although at that point, he was not). Not excusing Libby's perjury, but one cannot lay the blame of the leak at his feet just because he committed a different crime.

wasn't Libbys obstruction also to protect the vice president because a case of conspiracy to obstruct was possible? He brought the investigations focus to himself.

Hot Air
12-08-2010, 09:06 AM
And the Super Duper Extra Secret Secret Agent, Plame, was pretty damn stupid for having her dopey husband go and write an Op-Ed about his "mission."

peb
12-08-2010, 09:14 AM
wasn't Libbys obstruction also to protect the vice president because a case of conspiracy to obstruct was possible? He brought the investigations focus to himself.

Well, we do not know what Libby's motivation was. We do know that there was a very aggressive special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald on the case. It is likely that his investigation, after the early days, was left with only the option of searching for any such conspriacy. There were no charges along these lines ever seriously considered. We also know that Libby/Rove/Cheney were left in the dark as to the knowledge of who leaked the name. Much of anything else is purely speculation.

LeeG
12-08-2010, 09:27 AM
And the Super Duper Extra Secret Secret Agent, Plame, was pretty damn stupid for having her dopey husband go and write an Op-Ed about his "mission."


Plame was obviously a sacrificial character in the conflict between the Cheney/Bush presidency and the intel agencies they were subverting. HotAir, why do you think the CIA asked the Department of Justice to investigate ?

Don't you love the irony of a presidency willing to sacrifice a CIA agent working to stop the spread of "wmd" in the middle east while waging a war based on stopping the spread of WMD and terrorism? What did the Cheney/Bush presidency do? They increased the battlefield for terrorism while using the argument that deposing Saddam would eliminate an ally of Al Qaeda, when he never was. They said they would stop the spread of WMD, when they were impotent against North Korea and Irans projects.
Then of course there's some pretty damn stupid Americans who believed all that bs. and re-elected GW because we really couldn't leave the delusions unsupported, why we wouldn't be supporting the troops!

LeeG
12-08-2010, 09:35 AM
We also know that Libby/Rove/Cheney were left in the dark as to the knowledge of who leaked the name. Much of anything else is purely speculation.

much of anything else? like what?

LeeG
12-08-2010, 09:53 AM
And the Super Duper Extra Secret Secret Agent, Plame, was pretty damn stupid for having her dopey husband go and write an Op-Ed about his "mission."

speaking of dopey,

The Cheney/Bush presidency pushed the argument Iraq was trying to acquire yellow cake as proof of their intentions when Iraq already had enough yellow cake and low enriched uranium under IAEA controls to build a bomb, besides domestic sources of uranium ore. The only problem of course is that yellow cake is USELESS without the means to refine it. Which Iraq didn't have.
But Americans are too stupid to know the difference between a nuke and nuclear material, between a weapon of mass destruction and mass destruction by weapons. The brain cells required to program a microwave oven is all that's needed to parse the differences, but we was afraid. Parts of radioactive scrap metals would show up in trash piles in Jordan or Sweden and the US media would repeat talking points about "suspected WMD materials found!!"

Ian McColgin
12-08-2010, 09:54 AM
Donn is right that Armitage admitted to the leak, eventually. He was not charged with anything. Libby was convicted of obstruction for his role in hiding the sourse of the leak.

One difference between Wikileaks and the conspiracy to leak and then hide the leaking of Plame's identity is that the former was done - whether rightly or wrongly - for the motives of greater governmental (and business) responsibility and honesty. The conspiracy to leak Plame's identity was an act of pure political revenge on her husband for writing an absolutely honest and in no way classified op ed piece. The selfishness of treasonously causing the deaths of American assets for such a petty reason is astounding.

pefjr
12-08-2010, 10:08 AM
Reading through this Aussie/American bilge history lesson reveals further study of details needed. Lots of study of details needed. I suggest also a refresher on the US Constitution especially by these jack leg Aussie lawyers and historian wannabes. Definition of Treason might be a good starting point. A lot of bilge rats need to refresh their definition of irony if they are gonna throw it around and around.

S.V. Airlie
12-08-2010, 10:13 AM
Probably because he is now 80 and can't play tennis.

S.V. Airlie
12-08-2010, 10:20 AM
Sorry was thinking of Gordon Liddy..not Scooter Libby. Scooter is only 60. See how much two "d's" can make a difference

Phillip Allen
12-08-2010, 10:42 AM
it's pretty simple, if you're working for a state power you have a lot more influence and friends in power to cover your ass. Obama would protect Libby over Assange. Libby was charged because he obstructed the investigation, that's not a minor issue. No one got busted because there wan't a strong enough case to prosecute. Besides the entire country was in on the gig. Also Cheney and Rumsfeld were very good at not leaving fingerprints on their handiwork. Support the troops, get Al Qaeda in Iraq, keep Saddam from giving WMD to Terrists. Assange is fooked. Some Russian or African spy is going to kill him. And right wing Americans will think that's good.

don't you mean that YOUR sterotype of to-the-right-of-you-people will approave?

McMike
12-08-2010, 10:57 AM
isn't there always? I believe we all are guilty of double standards sometimes and it takes vigilence to avoid it.

I think that goes without saying but we're talking about the talkingheads wanting to put a hit out on this guy!!!!!!

Canoeyawl
12-08-2010, 11:00 AM
Scooter Libby's sentence was commuted by w.
His crime was not pardoned. He's a felon... convicted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scooter_Libby) of (one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury, and one of the counts of making false statements)
He is also the red herring

Canoeyawl
12-08-2010, 11:09 AM
The imprisonment part of his sentence was commuted. .
That's the only part that matters. Some other fool can pay the fine.

stevebaby
12-08-2010, 11:10 AM
Is there no law in the US which would cover "incitement to commit murder"? The RWW calling for Assange's murder should certainly be charged if there is.
Assange himself does not appear to have committed any criminal offence beyond not wearing a condom when having sex and not calling his date the next day It seems to be forgotten in the frenzy to kill him,but neither of the women wanted him charged.They only reported him to the Swedish police (they say) to have him compelled to take a medical test for STDs.
Any notion of trying him (a non-Americam citizen) for treason is absurd. He's a publisher just like the Grauniad and the NYT.

pefjr
12-08-2010, 11:19 AM
Any notion of trying him (a non-Americam citizen) for treason is absurd. He's a publisher just like the Grauniad and the NYT.More like the Globe.

stevebaby
12-08-2010, 11:26 AM
Right...and you're a publisher because you post opinions in the Bilge.Yes,I am.

stevebaby
12-08-2010, 11:31 AM
"Anonymous" has attacked Mastercard...their website isn't responding.

LeeG
12-08-2010, 11:37 AM
don't you mean that YOUR sterotype of to-the-right-of-you-people will approave?

I would be glad to respond if I understood what you said.

stevebaby
12-08-2010, 11:42 AM
That tickles you, doesn't it? Swiss Post cuts Assange off, and the hackers attack them. The Australians love it. Mastercard does the same, gets the same response, and the Australians love it. What a lot you are. Gonna hack the British Cricket Team next?"British" cricket team? :D
It may be a bit difficult to hack something which doesn't exist.
Try "English" cricket team.

Ian McColgin
12-08-2010, 11:45 AM
It is interesting that one can help pay another's fine (#50) but cannot serve his or her sentence. I guess there's enhanced justice for those with a cause. Wish I'd thought of having a fundraiser after a civil disobediance conviction.

The legal issues around what the US can do about Assange are interesting, starting with: Just what jurisdiction can we claim? I don't think we'd actually murder someone of such high profile and a white guy to boot, but I can understand his fear of being taken to god knows where if the British or the Swedes don't maintain custody and he mysteriously whatever.

stevebaby
12-08-2010, 12:09 PM
After watching you try them, I think I'll pass.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v54/donnwest/smilies/nana.gifHow is the "American" side doing lately? Not too well from what I read.

pefjr
12-08-2010, 12:16 PM
It is interesting that one can help pay another's fine (#50) but cannot serve his or her sentence. I guess there's enhanced justice for those with a cause. Wish I'd thought of having a fundraiser after a civil disobediance conviction.

The legal issues around what the US can do about Assange are interesting, starting with: Just what jurisdiction can we claim? I don't think we'd actually murder someone of such high profile and a white guy to boot, but I can understand his fear of being taken to god knows where if the British or the Swedes don't maintain custody and he mysteriously whatever.Mohammed chooses to die and we will not accommodate. What risk does this Gossip Columnist have? Much ado..........

Allison
12-08-2010, 04:45 PM
That tickles you, doesn't it? Swiss Post cuts Assange off, and the hackers attack them. The Australians love it. Mastercard does the same, gets the same response, and the Australians love it. What a lot you are

"Wikileaks posts cables, US attacks Wikileaks site!"
That tickles you Don doesn't it?

I thought you were doing better but obviously you are not!

The cricket??? Come on lift your game Don, that's embarassing!!
Am I really wasting my time trying to teach you?!:mad:

stevebaby
12-08-2010, 04:58 PM
That tickles you, doesn't it? Swiss Post cuts Assange off, and the hackers attack them. The Australians love it. Mastercard does the same, gets the same response, and the Australians love it. What a lot you are. Gonna hack the British Cricket Team next?I don't speak for all Australians,but a recent newspaper poll,for what they're worth, showed that 90% of the respondents agreed that Wikileaks was a positive force for democracy.
The truth will set you free...

leikec
12-08-2010, 08:19 PM
I would be glad to respond if I understood what you said.


In effect he said his gut feelings are usually right, but yours are stereotypes.

Jeff C

john welsford
12-08-2010, 09:58 PM
Lee, Lots of interesting stuff, I was saying that he was the only one charged in the whole affair and then only with a minor charge despite the fact that he was obviously privy to what actually went on at the minimum and as you say played a big part in the attempt to cover it up. No-one else got busted at all.
In all those cases you site they did so much more than Assange has done and he's the one they want to execute! What does that say?

Seems to me that Assange is only passing on material that he has been given. He's just the messenger, the real problem for the security people are those who are supplying him with the material.
I dont know anyone who believes that the arrest for rape in Sweden is anything other than a jackup by the CIA, and this sort of action does the USA absolutley no good at all in terms of its image with people outside its boundaries.

John Welsford

pefjr
12-08-2010, 10:04 PM
I dont know anyone who believes that the arrest for rape in Sweden is anything other than a jackup by the CIA, and this sort of action does the USA absolutley no good at all in terms of its image with people outside its boundaries.

John WelsfordSo, the CIA is gonna get blamed for this?:rolleyes::D

Ian McColgin
12-08-2010, 10:23 PM
Nah, State Department.

yesiam
12-08-2010, 10:31 PM
This thread just confirms my desires to enter the bilge only every once in awhile for a brief time....can only take listening to bleeding hearts in dribs and drabs. I would seriously hope that those that hate their country so much would just go and take their unhappiness elsewhere. The likes of Allison had to take a break some hours ago when faced with some facts from leeg and others. My allotted bilge time for this month is up and it is time to move up the ladder and really enjoy the topics above the bilge. One final note, there are no ex-Marines Allison.

Ian McColgin
12-08-2010, 10:43 PM
yeslam is totally off-base when he charges with not loving America people who patrioticly opposes certain governmental activities that favor right wingers who for their political gain expose the people who defend our freedom while at the same time attempting to persecute (no prosecution thus far) people who expose corporate and governmental (several different governments) misdeeds. If people like yeslam have reasoned and legal arguments, this is one of many places to state them. But attacks on people acting on our basic democratic promice both show the paucity of the attackers' reasoning and show their willingness to surrender the basic freedoms that they falsely claim to defend.

Thus far, all yaslam has done is show the value to democracy of things like wikileaks.

leikec
12-08-2010, 10:52 PM
This thread just confirms my desires to enter the bilge only every once in awhile for a brief time....can only take listening to bleeding hearts in dribs and drabs. I would seriously hope that those that hate their country so much would just go and take their unhappiness elsewhere. The likes of Allison had to take a break some hours ago when faced with some facts from leeg and others. My allotted bilge time for this month is up and it is time to move up the ladder and really enjoy the topics above the bilge. One final note, there are no ex-Marines Allison.


It would be much easier to reply to this post if it made sense--but I will ask this question: if I hated America (I don't, but try to stay with me), why would you assume that I should leave? Why don't I have the right as a citizen to try to change America to more accurately reflect my personal values?

I don't think I would enjoy living in your idea of a perfect America, but I certainly don't presume to tell you to move away just because I abhor your ideas and values.

Jeff C

Curtism
12-09-2010, 02:59 AM
What pollie is going to dare go after the NY Times for treason!

While he doesn't use those exact terms, it sure seems like that's what he's suggesting here.


Joe Lieberman, the chair of the Senate homeland security committee, told Fox News: "To me the New York Times has committed at least an act of, at best, bad citizenship, but whether they have committed a crime is a matter of discussion for the justice department."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/07/wikileaks-joe-lieberman-new-york-times-investigated

Allison
12-09-2010, 03:30 AM
Yesiam,
you seem to be more than a little confused in your post, I'll leave it to others to sort you out.
I'm a bit bored with some of you right wing loud mouths who know nothing about me and yet feel free to make comments. You are not worth the effort to put back in your place.
Though I'm sure that it wouldn't take much effort at all!

The likes of Allison had to take a break some hours ago when faced with some facts from leeg and others

It's called sleep, something I do for about 5 hours a night and then work.
If you'd bothered to even make a tiny effort you would've worked out that I live on the other side of the world, that takes a bit of intelligence and about the same amount of effort, neither of which you seem to have to spare!!
So maybe I should excuse you.

Were you in the Corps yesiam?

My friends used the expression because they knew that they would never go back into the Corps, that they had done their time. They loved the Marines and were proud to have served in the Corps but almost to a man they were angry about some of the things that they had been told to do that turned out to be garbage. To be betrayed by the politicians that let them and their friends die and be wounded for crap causes and political expediency.
Their outlook may be rare among Marines, I don't know but the fact that they were friends with me showed that they were clearly very intelligent and discerning guys, way above average if you are anything to go by:d:D