Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I'm sorry but I REALLY do not understand why Libby and/or Cheney were not indicted for treason.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:26 PM
Original message
I'm sorry but I REALLY do not understand why Libby and/or Cheney were not indicted for treason.
Edited on Tue Mar-06-07 08:28 PM by MyPetRock
In the official testimony it was obvious that Libby took orders from the Vice Pres., and heard from him that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. Cooper and Russert say they were told about Plame from Libby. Follow the dots. At the very least Libby should have been indicted for outing a CIA agent, which, I assume, equals treason.

Why was this trial just about perjury and obstruction of justice?????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TomInTib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. They were sure they could convict on obstruction and lying/perjury.
Treason is a really tough prosecution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Sounds to me like they had a ton of evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. Because, dear, the repugs do not have to follow the law.
Laws, morality, and ethics are only for the Dems.
And if a Dem sneezes they are swift boated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. We're talking about prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
I think he's an Independent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Oh I am not blaming him at all. The American people are to blame.
They have allowed sociopaths to take over their country
who are above the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. True, sadly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. Wasn't she declassified?
I thought that Cheney declassified the whole thing before they leaked it. Maybe, technically, that makes it difficult to bring charges.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. To declassify a covert agent, the president or agent must
first notify the CIA and the agent.

Never happened. Treason all around.

Looking for the link, may be one of H2O Man's recent threads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. THANK YOU!
I've heard just a few too many apologists for this criminal adm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #15
28. Apologists???
Good fucking god. Telling the truth about facts doesn't mean one likes the consequences of the facts. In addition, law can be, and usually is, interpreted differently by different scholars. Who would a jury believe regarding declassification? Did the President and Vice-President really conspire to put our country at risk??? We've got idiots on this jury who feel sorry for fucking LIBBY for chrissake. What do you think that same jury is going to do if you ask them to convict a Vice President with conflicting expert testimony and charges that indicate treason. That isn't apologizing for anybody. Those are just the cold hard facts. Convicting a President and/or Vice President isn't an easy thing to do, I don't know that it's ever been done in a court of law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-07-07 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
32. Napi says in another post that it is only customary, not required.
There goes our sense of relief. Sorry. :blush::hi:

I'm going to do some more searching anyway, just in case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
24. He has asserted he has that right, but he does not.
He can classify things thanks to a new exec order he got the puppet to sign. De classifying requires documentation and people signing off on it other than Cheney somewhere down the line. That was a tall tale Cheney put over on FoxNews.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. I believe you're forgetting that the Prez gave declassification
privileges to Cheney. As I see it, if directly accused, Cheney would simply say he declassified the info on Plame, and when he told Scooter, there was no crime.

I have to givecredit to this admin! Not for being good at anything, but for being extremely good at covering all the bases! IF they get caught doing anything criminally provable, it sure isn't going to be because they weren't great at CYA!

You can NEVER FORGET... You MUST be able to PROVE your case!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. There was a thread recently that stated
to declassify a covert agent, the president or agent for him, must notify the CIA and the agent first. Never happened.

Trying to find the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. I'm not a lawyer, but I have been following all of this very closely.
As I understand it, the comment was "It is CUSTOMARY, and considered common courtesy to notify the Dept. that originally classified the info, but it is NOT illegal to eliminate that step.

In other words, Shrub/Cheney don't GAS about protocol, or what is right or in the best interests of any Department or the Country. They just care about THEM!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-07-07 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #19
31.  Customery, not required? Crap. We know *co has no
courtesy.

Thanks for correcting my mis-info napi! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
8. Smoke. This admin blurs the legality of everything. They are extra-legal
Edited on Tue Mar-06-07 08:35 PM by Hissyspit
on the face of it, illegal in the subtext and substance.

It is highly immoral, but you knew that about them already.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MazeRat7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
10. Errr... Because the didn't have a case...
I mean after all, the whole point of charging conspiracy is because your witness lying to keep prosecutors from getting to the facts of a more severe charge.

MZr7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
11. Because they're winning.
They have successfully obstructed justice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
12. Cheney says he was given the authority by dim son to declassify
willy nill and at will, so there is no crime. Silly us. D'oh.:silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Not declassified...
There was a thread recently that stated that to declassify a covert agent, the president or agent for him, must notify the CIA and the agent first. Never happened.

Trying to find the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
17. It;s too difficult to prove intent--especially with these lying weasels
intent is at the heart of all those other crimes you mention.Even though 70% of the country "knows" Cheney is the guilty party here, we need a confession or the like to prove it. None of the witnesses will spill on each other ( "the aspens are connected at the roots.") So we wait for a break.

The more that comes out about these thugs,the more hated they become, and the more likely it is we will get that break. A BushCo Joe Valachi might come forward, you never know .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Intent is all over the place!
Cheney was mad that Wilson was reducing his chances to go to war in Iraq. He was either looking for revenge, or somehow trying to minimize Wilson's influence by causing a brouhaha (possibly killing CIA agents as a consequence) that distracted from the negative Niger report.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. You cannot prove intent without corroboration. WE may see INTENT
behind every door and under every rock, but that's not the way it works in court. There is NO WAY to know or prove what someone was thinking. If emails, notes,tapes,letters, or SOMETHING were found to corroborate that, THEN you have a case. Until then, we're all guessing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. Isn't that where Sibel Edmonds comes in?
Edited on Tue Mar-06-07 09:25 PM by Cerridwen
It sounds as though she has the information that goes toward showing intent to maintain global arms sales and money laundering, among other things.

If I'm reading the things about her correctly.

Then yesterday, two whistleblowers reported on some of the information she's been "gagged" from saying.

I think, if I remember correctly, that her information is what ties this all together. cheney was covering his backside and Sibel Edmonds' information has the reason behind it which could probably show his intent.

I hope that made some sense.

edit typo and clarification

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Maybe. I don't know what Dibel has, but she's been gaged, and
until someone or something breaks that gag order, you still have NOTHING!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. The two whistleblowers coming out on Monday -
she's been gagged, they've not - and they're reporting information she's been required to keep quiet. They substantiate what's already known from her testimony. That is my understanding.

She's been gagged. The information hasn't. Perhaps Walton may remove the gag with this "new" information. Yep, I believe, same Walton as libby trial is the judge who gagged Sibel Edmonds.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. yup, indeed, and you would have 70% of the jury convinced
I would do it myself, but Fitzgerald has a reputation for never losing a case, and so he won't do that one without better evidence. Hope he puts the squeeze on Scooter, but I don't think Lewis will turn. Maybe. Maybe not. The new Mrs. Libby is a factor Cheney didn't count on. But Cheney has Scooter's nuts in his pocket. These people are hard core.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
20. The Sopranos is back on next month
Though truly often too violent and many of the characters are repugnant to me, I watch it for clues to understand my country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NotGivingUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
23. My sentiments exactly!!! Treason...nothing less!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
27. We're in a dictatorship.
The ones that pull the strings are untouchable and there are always fall guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-06-07 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
30. Joe Wilson explained it on Olbermann's show tonight
If Fitzgerald went for charges of treason, Libby & Cheney could have turned it into a three-ringed circus by asking for all sorts of classified information pertaining to Plame's work to be brought into evidence. It would have taken years if ever for that information to become declassified. Perjury and obstruction of justice were of course the lesser crimes, but it obviously was a successful move on Fitzgerald's part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-07-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
33. Fitz may not have all the evidence he needs....but that should not stop congress
from investigating, and if warranted, resolution of impeachment brought. Must be done.

Remember, CIA can't be happy about this. They must be furious (those clear-thinkers that are left after the purge).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 06:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC