Town Square

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby gets heckled as he departs sentencing (short video)

Original post made by Jewish Crook on Jun 6, 2007

"You should go right to jail, Libby... a bunch of criminals in the whole damn administration, got us into this war... Big Liar, Go to jail, go to jail, that's where you belong... "

Here's the video:

Web Link

Where Libby got all the money to pay for his defense team and to pay for those beefy, well-coiffed bodyguards?


Posted by Gerald, a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 6, 2007 at 1:21 pm

Libby is one of the fanatical ideologues that have staffed this administration. His lies and bottomless dishonesty contributed to the death of hundred of thousands. I have no doubt that Bush will pardon him, [portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Draw the Line, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 6, 2007 at 1:37 pm

From donating people like me who understood that nobody committed any crime ( including Armitage who was the REAL "leaker") because ol' Val wasn't covert ( can't be covert AND talk about your job at parties), and wasn't out of the country for her job in the last 5 years ( another requirement to have "leaked" illegally).

From people like me saw that memory experts were barred from the trial, that Libby was asked to remember the timing of conversations from 2 1/2 years earlier, got ONE wrong by 2 weeks, openly and willingly handed over his diary which showed he goofed, then was hung on "perjury" ( while the judge and attorneys conveniently shrugged off everyone else's errors in memory on timing of conversation).

This is the kind of "trial" I expect to happen in Cuba or China, not here. It is a "trial" of the President and Cheney through a scapegoat, as evidenced by the comments of the jurors after the last trial and by the comments on the video. The comments of both are and were completely irrelevant to the case. If I were President, I would pardon him right now.

It is a complete sham.

I will send money for the appeal.

Posted by Anon, a resident of another community
on Jun 6, 2007 at 1:41 pm

Libby's efforts to lie and coveup worked.

Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald confesses that Libby's deliberate obstruction of justice led to the re-election of GWB:

Web Link

"NO ONE really noticed, but Patrick Fitzgerald made an unassailable point last week about the timing of the indictment that his CIA leak investigation has produced so far.

"I would have wanted nothing better," he said, "that when the subpoenas were issued in August of 2004, witnesses testified then, and we would have been here in October of 2004 instead of October of 2005."

Give or take a nuance and some garbled syntax, the prosecutor was in effect showing that the quixotic pursuit of a nonexistent right or privilege by some news organizations is one reason President Bush was reelected last year.

... "

Posted by Anon, a resident of another community
on Jun 6, 2007 at 1:49 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jun 6, 2007 at 1:49 pm

The C.I.A issued an official statement last week clarifying that Mrs. Wilson had been indeed a covert C.I.A agent when her identity was leaked. This takes care of the extreme right wing slime machine absurd propaganda that she wasn't. The criminal Cheney along with Carl Rove was the shadowy figure behind this sordid move to out her in order to discredit her husband. Convicted felon Libby protected Cheney during the investigation and trial because he was certain that Cheney would make sure he gets pardoned if convicted.

Posted by Jon, a resident of Barron Park
on Jun 6, 2007 at 3:13 pm

We shouldn't worry too much about the fairness of Scooter's verdict and sentence. Just consider it collateral damage in the war on truth. I'm sure Bush and Cheney do.

Posted by Sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jun 6, 2007 at 5:46 pm

The right wing authoritarian conservative movement's ability to spout endless streams of BS knows no end. How many times does the CIA have to officially confirm that Plame was covert before they get it? (That was a rhetorical question, because the answer is: it doesn't matter because all they care about is propping up their leader).
Anyhow, Covert is not the main issue:
Lying and obstruction of justice is. Plame was covert, there's no doubt about it. The CIA determines what covert means, regardless of what congress decides.

If she wasn't outed, why did Libby obstruct the investigation? Opinions from water-carrying right-wingers mean nothing. The conservatives have an axiom - never admit you were wrong...never!

Posted by Gerald, a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 6, 2007 at 5:58 pm

When Novak wrote his article, to the world Valerie Plame worked not at Langley, but at a D.C.-based private company supplying energy services and consulting services, traveling the world.

Within 48hrs of his article, that firm was gone! Vanished! Plame was not the only one affected by being outed. The entire company she had worked at, now exposed as a CIA-front, was put out of business, along with dozens of other COVERT CIA operatives!

Indeed, several articles back then documented how representatives of several foreign governments were trying to identify all the people who had worked at the firm, and then everyone they ever dealt with in foreign governments!

Now if this doesn't fit the classic NOC, covert agent, then NOTHING does! And right-wing liars are deliberately playing the fool to pretend otherwise! Notice how often conservatives talk about Plame working a desk at Langley, despite no evidence she ever was at Langley?

Plame was covert, and the Bush Administration outed her!

All of which has absolutely NOTHING to do with Libby's crime, which was obstruction of justice and perjury, both of which he was found guilty of. He's getting a tiny fraction of what he deserved, which is to spend the rest of his life in prison.

Posted by Excuse Me, a resident of Southgate
on Jun 6, 2007 at 6:08 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Draw, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 6, 2007 at 6:28 pm

Please look up the definition of "covert".

Also, read the is a crime if the person is covert and OUT OF THE COUNTRY in the last 5 years.

After 3 years the CIA finally admits it never changed the paperwork on Val from "covert"? Interesting. Even after the defendants begged for the information throughout the sham trial of Libby? Very interesting. I will research it.Something is fishy.

But, even if true, the other aspect "out of the country" was not in place, and ARMITAGE is the one who "leaked" it.

Uh...the crime is what by whom?

I stick to it...complete sham

Posted by Draw, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 6, 2007 at 6:35 pm

Web Link

Much more informative than the stuff already written.

I repeat...very interesting that it took so long to "come out" and declare the covert nature of Val' job ( which she talked about with friends at parties, a completely open "secret", as she drove openly to Langley..give me a break. Politics worthy of Cuba)

This is the best you can do?

Posted by Big Mama, a resident of Evergreen Park
on Jun 6, 2007 at 6:59 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jun 6, 2007 at 7:16 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by sugerloaf, a resident of Palo Verde
on Jun 6, 2007 at 7:51 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Gerald, a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 7, 2007 at 6:37 am

By implying that Valerie Plame sent her husband on a "junket" in early 2002 to Niger, Libby, at Cheney's direction, was smearing her. But why attack someone as obscure as this Plame woman?
Niger has never been mistaken as the vacation capital of Africa. Plus the husband, Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador in Africa, paid his own expenses. So what is this "junket" business?

Now Joseph Wilson wrote an OP-ED in the New York Times on July 6, 2003. Its title "What I Didn't Find in Africa". In the article Wilson stated that Cheney had asked the CIA in early 2002 to find out if "yellow cake" uranium from Niger, where it is mined, was being shipped to Saddam. Wilson had filed his negative report with the CIA on March 8, 2002.

We now know from British Intelligence disclosures that Sir Richard Dearlove, head of MI6 (CIA equivalent), learned that war with Iraq was inevitable after Dearlove's meeting with the Americans on July 20, 2002 at Langley, VA. On July 23, 2002 Dearlove, back in London, told Blair that the war would be justified in the United States through a "conjunction of terrorism and WMD... The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy," according to the so-called Downing Street Memos published in 2005. See page 169 of "The Italian Letter", Eisner and Royce's 2007 masterpiece.

Can everyone recall the "mushroom cloud" speeches of Bush, Cheney, Rice and Powell in the fall of 2002 ?

So Joe Wilson was blowing the lid off with his "What I didn't Find ..." article. And since the Administration could not get to Wilson directly, they decided to KNIFE THE WIFE.

Posted by Ron Radhovsky, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 6:47 am

The only leniency Libby's apologists should be campaigning for
is a long drop and a large knot to the left, so he won't suffer much on the gallows.

Treason is treason, and providing aid and comfort to a traitor is treason as well. We were a better country when we knew that.

Posted by Baker, a resident of Los Altos
on Jun 7, 2007 at 6:51 am

Can anyone point me to a single Republican Representative who voted to impeach President Clinton, or a single Republican Senator who voted to convict him, who wrote a letter to the judge saying "I said in 1998 (or 99) that it was all about the lying, not the sex, and to be consistent with my views then, I urge you to sentence Mr. Libby to the most severe sentence within your power"?

Well, of course you can't. Because it was never about the lying. It was all about the sex, and the power. And when the lying is not about whether you had sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky, but about someone who in good faith worked in a responsible job for the CIA and whose husband was one of the few honest voices in this country about the mess this Administration has put this country in, then not only is it considered fair game to try to smear her, but it's also fair game to lie about it.

Anyone who thinks this man is a patriot is unfit for office under our Constitution and unfit to hold US citizenship. This is a man who puts real Americans in danger. Of course, the same can be said for Cheney, Wolfowitz, Abrams and Feith, can't it?

Posted by Draw, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 6:55 am

I love your selective definition of treason.

I repeat: IF there was a crime committed, ( which there wasn't), then it would be ( did you read the former posts? If so, you may remember it was ARMITAGE who admits to "outing" Valerie) who would be "hung" for treason, not Libby.

TREASON: Is what Tokyo Rose was convicted of. Nowadays, her style of speech, accusing our soldiers of atrocities, telling them they are losing and to give up, is mimicked by Reid, Pelosi, Shumer, Kennedy, etc. And it is called "Democrat Talking Points".

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Draw, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 7:00 am

I repeat about the lying aspect: Can you remember within two weeks when you spoke to anyone 2 years ago? Do you really think you would be stupid enough to lie about a date, then give the journal up to "prove" yourself a liar? How would you think if you were on trial, and the witnesses made the same errors in timing AGAINST you court, but were simply excused with "understandable error in memory", but YOU had to go to jail for 2 1/2 years?

Give me a break.

Posted by Albert, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jun 7, 2007 at 7:10 am

The ease with which the NeoCon clique and coterie claim victimhood on behalf of Scooter Libby speaks volumes about their detachment from reality. It also shows their complete disconnect from the spirit and rule of law. In their eyes, poor Scooter is the victim of an over-zealous prosecutor, probably inspired by his liberal/left-wing handlers. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Truth be told, Dick Cheney should be standing in the prisoner's dock where Scooter finds himself now. However, since Mr. Cheney has neither the class nor character to admit his hand in the Plame imbroglio, Scooter will now face his new cell-mate, "Bubba", in his stead.

You'd think that Mr. Cheney would at least offer Scooter a reach-around since he is, metaphorically, screwing him.

Posted by David G, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 7:23 am

As an Australian I'm not altogether happy with our complicity in the myriad lies and deceptions that our Howard government participated in regarding the Iraq war.

Also, we've had our own travesties around gamed-intelligence, compromised officials/analysts and rule-of-law aberrations, but all of it is several orders of magnitude less than what's going on over your way.

And, although I'm extremely concerned with our governance problems, I'm also confident that our democracy will survive as such.

I'm not so confident about yours.

Whether it's warrantless, FISA-less, wiretapping; suspension of habeas corpus; ridiculous legislative-branch-denying signing statements; or orgiastic corporatism: your entire system of government is perilously close to being broken when measured against the standards set by your system's founders (e.g your legislative branch is now, even with a Democratic majority, largely defunct both in terms of this new 'Unitary Executive' hoopla holding sway beyond theory as well as the fact that

there appears to be an unwillingness to traverse particular political thresholds that demand accountability from the Executive - the recent back down on troop withdrawal is a case in point).

After the damage this current administration and its GOP sympathizers in the media have wrought, you'll be needing a major democratic-infrastructure/superstructure upgrade pronto!

Remember you can take apart a bicycle and put it together again but you can't take apart a person and put it back together again.

Democracy is a bit the same.

Once it's broke, it's broke!

Posted by Spider, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Jun 7, 2007 at 7:31 am

I hope you are being sarcastic Draw.
The crime is obstruction of justice in an investigation of treason - not just a capital offense, but the capital offense. Aiding and abetting treason (which is what this amounts to) should warrant more time than a third DUI or failure to pay income tax.

If we hung this creep (as we rightly should) or at least gave him life without parole in maximum security, the next guy wouldn't be so willing to cover up for his boss when he abused the power of his office to settle a petty vendetta by divulging state secrets and risking an agent's life.

I'd feel better if he had to do his time in one of those Iraqi towns his masters claim love Americans so much.

Posted by Gerald, a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 7, 2007 at 8:34 am

There's a very simple psycho/sociological reason this is all going on, aside from the political motive. Under Bush, the core of the GOP machine has development a powerful sense of entitlement as to not experiencing consequences of their actions. Vis a vis, there are none; the message is, do what you like, you won't be held accountable.

Now, with a Democratic Congress and an enraged public, there are consequences and that fact is something that just doesn't compute with most of the Neocon flacks out there.

If only the Dems had the sack to impeach the Resident when he pardons Scooter, he might think twice. But he knows they don't.

Either way, the Bush Reality Distortion Field is history. Maybe this psychopathic monster we have occupying the Oval Office will be next.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Jun 7, 2007 at 8:55 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jun 7, 2007 at 9:08 am

Not only did this administration cook up propaganda to lead America into war, it deliberately suppressed factual assessments of the dangers that our troops would encounter. The Military, the State Department and the CIA had each clearly warned of the "harm's way" our troops would encounter.

For political purposes these intelligence warnings were not only buried, they were actively shunned and ignored. This is criminal behavior which, with one hundred per cent certainty, led to troop' deaths and maimings.

A Libby pardon would condone this establishment of a propaganda apparatus in the Executive branch. It would condone a conspiracy to provide false information to Congress. It would set free the sole conspirator who, of necessity had to lie, protect his boss and other executive branch participants.

A Libby pardon would condone the criminal opposite of 'supporting the troops' that in fact Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith and others actively participated in making false pronouncements which resulted in American deaths.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Jun 7, 2007 at 12:39 pm

"A lie is an untruthful statement made to someone else with the intention to deceive. To lie is to say something one believes to be false with the intention that it be taken for the truth by someone else."
Here is your chance to shine, Sari, name just one. Not two, ten or a thousand, just one that fits that definition. Chose with care because your work will be graded.

Posted by Albert, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jun 7, 2007 at 12:53 pm

Libby was convicted, because his lies about not remembering weren't convincing. Every time a Republican gets into trouble they lose their memory. Either that or they all have Alsheimer's disease. Alberto can't remember his own eye color. Reagan and Ollie North couldn't remember selling weapons to the Contras. Ya, right.

Posted by Gerald, a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 7, 2007 at 12:57 pm

"It's the personal stupid" captures this awful dministration. like nothing else, too. Who would think, after all, that these scandals have layer after layer of a faux Byzanintine grasp for power. On their face they simply look like bad government. Yet, the insistent abuse of the public trust, and the incompetence shown while doing so, repeatedly make the deeper point. The false case for war, The Plame Affair, the Abramoff Scandal, Gonzales and his constant failures and total amnesia, Rumsfeld and Cheney and Bolton and Wolfowitz, the efforts to ignore science at every turn...I could go on and on obviously but the theme of a set of rouges with no skill, even less character, and delusions of grandeur comes through as the tie that binds here.

Posted by Sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jun 7, 2007 at 1:06 pm

Elliot Abrams and Adm. Poindexter, to name but two, are formerly-convicted-then-pardoned felons who lived under the radar awhile in token "disgrace," before being given policy positions and thus, "rehabilitated," by subsequent right wing regimes. The argument that Scooter has "suffered enough" without going to jail overlooks the calculation by the Republicans that the next Republican administration, be it in 2008 or subsequently, will lionize Scooter as a hero who "took one for the team," Then comes the government appointment to an important policy position. In the meantime, Scooter gets a job in the private sector (Halliburton, lobbyist, you name it) where he gets paid a lavish salary pending that future phone call from the next crook the Republicans manage to elect. So much for suffering enough. Where's the suffering, exactly, in this scenario?

Look, Bush and his people are a gang. As such, they will take care of their own and Libby will keep his mouth shut (to protect those above him, like a loyal gangster). We should expect that. Bush will try to wait out the pardon issue until the end of his term, unless he has to do it sooner to keep Scooter out of the pokey. Whenever Bush tries to pardon Libby, the suggestion that Scooter has suffered enough all ready, without going to jail, should not be allowed to pass unchallenged. Also, Scooter might surprise us (and his masters) and sing like a canary if he knew for a fact that he was headed to the Big House. Ridiculous as it seems, Scooter could try to cast himself as the John Dean of this Watergate and drop a dime on Big Tony, I mean Karl Rove and his gang. In that event, we're talking impeachment.

Either way, Scooter should not be allowed to skate on jail time. If he only has to do the perp walk and spend a fraction of his sentence behind bars, still it's important to make him do it for a lot of reasons in addition to the bogus ones argued against here.

Posted by Mr.Humble, a resident of Professorville
on Jun 7, 2007 at 3:20 pm

I have a deal for Scooter-I would let him off the hook
If he told the truth about the whole inside dealings of this sordid affair and exposed how they set up Valerie in retaliation for Joe's article and comments about the failure to find credible evidence that Saddam was trying to get uranium from niger.

I would even give him immunity from future prosecution. Of course the Resident and Dick Insaney will be going down heavy after that. I'm talking quick impeachment and then a criminal trial and many years in federal prison.

Posted by Draw the Line, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 4:05 pm

It is easy to see how quickly a country without a strong judicial system could slide into mob rule with these threads. And how right the NRA is to defend the private ownership of firearms for self-defense. We think we are all so civilized, then you read such postings as "Libby should be hung" and shudder.

Posted by Draw, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 4:11 pm

Australia: The difference is that your country is smaller, and therefore has fewer extremists on either side, so you don't have the constant and incessant amount of screaming that you see here.

Your Howard is awesome. I love the way he told immigrants ( like Blair did), that they had to conform to the Australian way, not expect Australia to conform to theirs. We haven't heard that from our President, and I wish we would.

I admire Australia immensely. It brought itself back from the verge of socialist destruction of your economy, to become a freer economy than our own with an extremely rapid recovery.

Frankly, if I could move there, I would. I read Australian posts and newspapers, and Australia, frankly, seems to have fewer nutcases. Maybe there are as many on the basis of percent of population as here, but because there are fewer, it seems much more sane.

Posted by David G, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 5:25 pm

Actually, as an Australian, I can tell you that the biggest nutcase we have is Howard. His days as a politician are numbered because of his cooperation with Bush on Iraq which has antagonized most of the Australian public and because he's so far to the right, he made the public scared. He is going to lose by a landslide and then we'll be rid of him for good. He is not 'awesome'- he's a lunatic and a crypto-fascist, a Cheney-like figure and that says it all.

Posted by Draw, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 8:29 pm

Howard, you sure it isn't because he will be running for his 5th...count it..5th term? The second longest running guy in Australian history? With his govt reelected in 2004?

Hmmm, I think there is more at work here than "Iraq". I know for some people this is a litmus test for whom to vote, sort of like for some people abortion is litmus test or socialized medecine etc. But, I think most people think of the whole picture. From what I have read of Australia, it is a big picture kind of country.

It will be interesting to watch.

I love the election system Australians have. Isn't it something like 6 weeks that your candidates are allowed to run, then the vote happens? I am already sick to death of the 'running" happening here, and we are still 1 1/2 years away!

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Jun 7, 2007 at 9:09 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Just Askin', a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 9:33 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Citizen, a resident of Midtown
on Jun 7, 2007 at 10:33 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Just Sayin', a resident of Stanford
on Jun 7, 2007 at 10:40 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Jun 8, 2007 at 6:33 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Draw, a resident of Stanford
on Jun 8, 2007 at 6:41 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Just Askin', a resident of Stanford
on Jun 8, 2007 at 6:45 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]