What happens when the Libby Case is No Longer An “On Going Legal Matter?”
June 20th, 2008 | by Windspike |Scotty McMessage McClellan is no longer delivering messages that the W, Rove and Co like. And, he has a number of good points.
Those of you who followed the Libby case, and the Plame leak know that the W, Rove and Co repeatedly said they would come clean when it is no longer an on going legal matter. Moreover, the president initially said that those responsible would be held accountable (which never really happened either, has it?
Well, the case is over. Libby was convicted and subsequently pardoned by his pal the President. Do we yet have a full testimony from the President about what happened in his Whitehosue revolving around this?”
This White House promised or assured the American people that at some point when this was behind us they would talk publicly about it,” he said. “And they have refused to.
No surprises. These folk who are about to leave us in the worst fiscal and geopolitical crisis this country has seen, well, in just about ever, won’t be forthcoming about any of their antics, favoring “history” to be the judge. Those of us who have lived through nearly 8 years of the GOP brand of chicanery hunger for some one to be brought to justice for it.
Don’t hold your breath, but it’s never too late for articles of impeachment.
13 Responses to “What happens when the Libby Case is No Longer An “On Going Legal Matter?””
By Lisa on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
Everything’s a crisis with you guys!
For crisis’ sake you Gore losers!
By Windspike on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
Lisa,
To what Crisis do you refer? Don’t you think that some one should be held accountable for telling us what really happened here? Do you feel that the establishment of Iraq as a welfare state that we are propping up is something less than a crisis?
P.S. your attempt at humor is a flop.
By Lisa on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
What do you to know WS? Accountable for something that is a non crime no matter how you try to paint it?
Even the woman who wrote the law said it wasn’t a crime.
It had to be done maliciously to put her in danger. And what kind of danger did it put her in,A book deal,a movie deal,the cover of Vanity Fair?
This story didn’t even break until months after it was printed and some democrat saw it and said “Ah ha” let’s see how we Can use this to get Bush.
If you are rally honest how would you be defending Obama had this happened under him?
For Crisis sake
By Windspike on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
I thought GOP stalwarts such as yourself Lisa, didn’t like dealing in hypothetical situations? Why would you ask me to contemplate such a thing?
Accountability is a good thing, no? Whether a person’s actions are illegal or simply just unethical. How do you explain to your children that lying is okay if you are the President, for just one example?
The fact that the Congress abdicated their oversight role to the President back when it was controlled by the GOP is no excuse to let this President and his cronies get away with the ethically slippery stuff they have, and the murder of Iraqi civilians as well - which, depending on how you slice it- could be considered both illegal, and grounds for being condemned to hell.
By Lisa on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
See the problem have is how it was okay for Clinton to lie and Sandy Berger to make a mistake. This is the example I am following.
If McClellan said Bush lied you would be all up in arms that Bush lied but if it was found out that McClellan lied would you be calling for his head as well? It seems you only want a republican to be caught doing something.
If McClellan was defending Bush they would be investigating everything he says but when he goes against him they take him to his word.
I want to see if Obama says that the Generals in Iraq says we are winning and not to pull the troops yet are will you and the rest of the left be saying the same thing you did when they said the same things under Bush. I can’t wait to see how this is going to turn out when the shoe is on the other foot and it will be all of your own making.
By Lisa on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
The problem is they are running out of time so they are grasping at straws. They will probably still go after Bush when he’s out instead of dealing with and I quote “The issues”
By Windspike on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
So, Lisa, your predicting Obama wins in November? I do hope you are right.
By Jet Netwal on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
So it’s OK to lie since you feel somebody else already lied?
Bush should be pursued if there is evidence he broke the law, Lisa. We are a nation of laws. Presidents swear to uphold the constitution, our basis of law. They don’t get a free pass, or we don’t have a democracy.
By steve on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
Does anyone care about Valerie Plame anyway? I mean… does it effect the price of oil, health care or change the decisions on gay marriage and abortion or the environment? C’mon people…
By Ken Grandlund on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
Lisa says, “I can’t wait to see how this is going to turn out when the shoe is on the other foot and it will be all of your own making.”
Sorry Lisa, but cleaning up someone else’s mess does not make it “all your own making.” Instead, it becomes about how best to end a horrible situation. Nothing about Iraq was, is, or will be of Obama’s making, except for the mess he would have to clean up. Get real…
Steve- About Valerie Plame personally? Only so much as I care about people in general. But I do care a great deal about violating the laws for petty, personal vindication. I do care a great deal about the number of people said violation put directly in harms way once their cover was blown. And yes, frankly, since the Plame outing was an effort to continue to sell the War in Iraq, which is at least partly responsible for an increase in oil prices (and the subsequent wasted dollars that could have been put to better use here helping redefine health care), so we should all care.
By Lisa on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
Jet you said it “IF” there is evidence. You can’t fabricate evidence or spend or spend every waking moment searching for it. You need probability first not wishfulness.
Steve I don’t care about Plame just like I didn’t care about Clinton’s BJ.
Frankly I don’t think the dems care about it either they are just a bunch of Gore losers.
By Windspike on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
Lisa,
Your humor is no good. Puns that are not funny don’t really suit you.
Really, the current situation is that Bush had promised to hold people accountable for the leak and tell us the full story. As of right now, the only person held accountable for the leak was Scooter and he was pardoned. Does that constitute holding his cronies accountable? I think not.
The fine line of hypocrisy has been transgressed so often and the Constitution excoriated by the W, Rove and Co such that their integrity is entirely suspect. Certainly, you can’t find them trustworthy, can you? If so, why?
I remain with bated breath to be convinced by your intellect and sharp reasoning skills. Dazzle us with your rhetorical wit. But please, stop with the Gore commentary until you win the Nobel Prize.
By Jet Netwal on Jun 20, 2008 | Reply
Congress has already brought 23 articles of impeachment up and sent it to the judiciary committee, Lisa. The evidence is presented. The leaking of Plame is one of thei articles. I’m not following where you are going with your witchhunt or fabrication theories. There was evidence, it’s been presented, and our system is functioning.