Libby: GUILTY!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
1) President Clinton was never found guilty of anything.
Judge Susan Weber Wright most certainly did find him guilty of lying under oath (i.e.; perjury) and he was disbarred and impeached for it. Now, he was never found guilty by a jury and sentenced for a crime, but that was because he was a sitting president, and you held a different standard for him.
2) Lying about a blowjob is a bit different than lying about exposing the name of an undercover CIA operative.
There is no law against lying about blowjobs. Clinton was guilty of lying under oath to a grand jury in a sexual harassment case, Libby was guilty of lying under oath in the CIA leak investigation. To this date, no one has established Plame was "undercover" or subject to the laws covering covert CIA operatives, so that point is moot. Rove and Cheney didn't get convicted because they didn't break any laws, it's really that simple. The fact that some juror has said they wish they had been deliberating on Rove and Cheney, is evidence the jury was biased, and could be used by Libby as grounds for appeal, in my opinion.
Judge Susan Weber Wright most certainly did find him guilty of lying under oath (i.e.; perjury) and he was disbarred and impeached for it. Now, he was never found guilty by a jury and sentenced for a crime, but that was because he was a sitting president, and you held a different standard for him.
2) Lying about a blowjob is a bit different than lying about exposing the name of an undercover CIA operative.
There is no law against lying about blowjobs. Clinton was guilty of lying under oath to a grand jury in a sexual harassment case, Libby was guilty of lying under oath in the CIA leak investigation. To this date, no one has established Plame was "undercover" or subject to the laws covering covert CIA operatives, so that point is moot. Rove and Cheney didn't get convicted because they didn't break any laws, it's really that simple. The fact that some juror has said they wish they had been deliberating on Rove and Cheney, is evidence the jury was biased, and could be used by Libby as grounds for appeal, in my opinion.
She did not find him guilty of lying under oath. You really dont understand the American Criminal Justice system do you? Before you are found guilty of a crime you must be Charged, Arrained, and then if you dont plead guilty be found guilty by a JURY. Go take a high school civics class you idiot. President Clinton was done being president before the Statute of Limitations ran for the crimes you are alleging he committed! Why did they not charge him once he was out of office?
I don’t feel sorry for Libby. Which is unusual for me, because I usually feel sorry for almost anybody. But he was a part of this war, and I personally have never seen one iota of evidence that any of these scum-sucking rat bastards have lost one moment sleep over the lives lost, the people hurt, the babies with their faces burned off.
I have not once ounce of sympathy for Libby or anyone involved in any way with pulling this war off.
But…he was the fall guy. And it came out during the trial that Libby himself was furious that Rove was being protected by Scott Mclenon (whatever his name was, Bush’s old press guy), but felt that he wasn’t. He already, then, felt he was being set-up. How must he feels every time he sees a picture of that fat, formless, smirking face of Rove’s? If I want to punch him in his head, how must Libby feel?
I have not once ounce of sympathy for Libby or anyone involved in any way with pulling this war off.
But…he was the fall guy. And it came out during the trial that Libby himself was furious that Rove was being protected by Scott Mclenon (whatever his name was, Bush’s old press guy), but felt that he wasn’t. He already, then, felt he was being set-up. How must he feels every time he sees a picture of that fat, formless, smirking face of Rove’s? If I want to punch him in his head, how must Libby feel?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
She did not find him guilty of lying under oath.
Yes, she did. Go read her findings, it's pretty clear.
President Clinton was done being president before the Statute of Limitations ran for the crimes you are alleging he committed! Why did they not charge him once he was out of office?
Because it would have taken a legal precedent to be set regarding conviction of a former President of the United States, and those who really wanted him to be convicted, did not have the political motivation to continue pushing for it. Congress essentially pardoned him anyway, so this would have also been a factor in any prosecutable case.
That doesn't change what he did, which was essentially the same thing as Scooter Libby... Hillary has done this as well, and she got away with her lies completely. "...I don't recall, I was baking cookies with my daughter...."
Yes, she did. Go read her findings, it's pretty clear.
President Clinton was done being president before the Statute of Limitations ran for the crimes you are alleging he committed! Why did they not charge him once he was out of office?
Because it would have taken a legal precedent to be set regarding conviction of a former President of the United States, and those who really wanted him to be convicted, did not have the political motivation to continue pushing for it. Congress essentially pardoned him anyway, so this would have also been a factor in any prosecutable case.
That doesn't change what he did, which was essentially the same thing as Scooter Libby... Hillary has done this as well, and she got away with her lies completely. "...I don't recall, I was baking cookies with my daughter...."
1) Congress does not have the power to pardon anyone.
2) President Clinton has never been convicted or ANYTHING.
3) Senator Clinton has never been convicted of ANYTHING.
4) IN fact none of the Clintons have ever even been charged by ANY prosecutor anywhere of ANYTHING!
SCOTTER LIBBY is a four time convicted FELON!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
1) Congress does not have the power to pardon anyone.
I never stated they did, dumbass.
2) President Clinton has never been convicted or ANYTHING.
OF anything, you mean, and again, I never stated otherwise.
3) Senator Clinton has never been convicted of ANYTHING.
Again, idiot, I never stated otherwise.
4) IN fact none of the Clintons have ever even been charged by ANY prosecutor anywhere of ANYTHING!
Including Roger?
SCOTTER LIBBY is a four time convicted FELON!
Now he is, this is true. And he was convicted on essentially the same crime committed by both Bill and Hillary, who were not convicted. Your point?
I never stated they did, dumbass.
2) President Clinton has never been convicted or ANYTHING.
OF anything, you mean, and again, I never stated otherwise.
3) Senator Clinton has never been convicted of ANYTHING.
Again, idiot, I never stated otherwise.
4) IN fact none of the Clintons have ever even been charged by ANY prosecutor anywhere of ANYTHING!
Including Roger?
SCOTTER LIBBY is a four time convicted FELON!
Now he is, this is true. And he was convicted on essentially the same crime committed by both Bill and Hillary, who were not convicted. Your point?
uscitizen
Villified User
what he was convicted of is not all that he was guilty of. They knew treason would not fly for his involvement in exposing a covert agent of the USA. ie treason.
Treason is all our business sex with a consenting adult is not our business.
Beefy
Worst gambler ever
Jared you're making a big mistake in even engaging this Clinton narrative. It is irrelevant. Bill Clinton was not convicted on four felony counts, and never will be.
Libby's conviction is the highest ranking administration member to be convicted since Iran-Contra, another Republican scandal.
The democrats, have absolutely nothing to do with this, just as they had nothing to do with the criminals in Iran Contra, and doing anything other than ignoring this desperate attempt to change the subject is playing in their hands. But that is just in my opinion.
Libby's conviction is the highest ranking administration member to be convicted since Iran-Contra, another Republican scandal.
The democrats, have absolutely nothing to do with this, just as they had nothing to do with the criminals in Iran Contra, and doing anything other than ignoring this desperate attempt to change the subject is playing in their hands. But that is just in my opinion.
uscitizen
Villified User
Dix ? wow.
So sex with a consenting adult is a crime ?
Partisanship showing ? Not really I did not like clowntoon much anyway. He was grossly stupid to lie about his BJ instead of telling everyone to shove it.
But then Clinton was never convicted was he ?
But only Republicans are innocent till proven guilty ?
So sex with a consenting adult is a crime ?
Partisanship showing ? Not really I did not like clowntoon much anyway. He was grossly stupid to lie about his BJ instead of telling everyone to shove it.
But then Clinton was never convicted was he ?
But only Republicans are innocent till proven guilty ?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Dix ? wow. So sex with a consenting adult is a crime ?
See Post #8 above, where I already answered:
2) Lying about a blowjob is a bit different than lying about exposing the name of an undercover CIA operative.
There is no law against lying about blowjobs. Clinton was guilty of lying under oath to a grand jury in a sexual harassment case, Libby was guilty of lying under oath in the CIA leak investigation. To this date, no one has established Plame was "undercover" or subject to the laws covering covert CIA operatives, so that point is moot. Rove and Cheney didn't get convicted because they didn't break any laws, it's really that simple. The fact that some juror has said they wish they had been deliberating on Rove and Cheney, is evidence the jury was biased, and could be used by Libby as grounds for appeal, in my opinion.
But then Clinton was never convicted was he ?
*sigh* See Post #13 above, where I clearly answered this as well:
2) President Clinton has never been convicted or ANYTHING.
OF anything, you mean, and again, I never stated otherwise.
But only Republicans are innocent till proven guilty ?
Republicans are the only ones put on trial! If you are a Clinton or Kennedy, for some reason, the law just doesn't apply to you.
See Post #8 above, where I already answered:
2) Lying about a blowjob is a bit different than lying about exposing the name of an undercover CIA operative.
There is no law against lying about blowjobs. Clinton was guilty of lying under oath to a grand jury in a sexual harassment case, Libby was guilty of lying under oath in the CIA leak investigation. To this date, no one has established Plame was "undercover" or subject to the laws covering covert CIA operatives, so that point is moot. Rove and Cheney didn't get convicted because they didn't break any laws, it's really that simple. The fact that some juror has said they wish they had been deliberating on Rove and Cheney, is evidence the jury was biased, and could be used by Libby as grounds for appeal, in my opinion.
But then Clinton was never convicted was he ?
*sigh* See Post #13 above, where I clearly answered this as well:
2) President Clinton has never been convicted or ANYTHING.
OF anything, you mean, and again, I never stated otherwise.
But only Republicans are innocent till proven guilty ?
Republicans are the only ones put on trial! If you are a Clinton or Kennedy, for some reason, the law just doesn't apply to you.
klaatu
Fusionist
Of course Sex with a consenting adult is not a crime. But I must ask you USC.. do you condone our Elected Officials getting blow jobs in their Tax Payer Paid Offices from Interns? Do you find this kind of behavior worthy of Job dismissal...
It appears as long is one is a Democrat... blow jobs, abuse of power and coercement are simply personal adult matters. My how times have changed.
Bottom line... Clinton was impeached and disbarred for a reason.