So, will Bush pardon Rove and Libby?

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Rex, Oct 12, 2005.

  1. LsuCraig

    LsuCraig Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    55
    Keep hoping. If laws were broken and the prosecutor has known the names for 3 years, why hasn't indicted anyone for breaking the leak laws?

    Maybe because no one was covert to start with......hehehehehe.

    I'd like to place a bet with you on your assumptions if possible......say $1000?
     
  2. LsuCraig

    LsuCraig Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    55
  3. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Come on, an opinion article in Slate? This closes nothing but one conservative writer's mind.

    Libby's trial doesn't even start until January. When people start testifying under oath in open court, the whole story will come out.
     
  4. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    slate is a mostly a liberal magazine, except for christopher hitchens. i listen to their daily podcast, it is pretty good.

    i really like hitchens, i read his book about the war in iraq and agreed with everything he said.
     
  5. LsuCraig

    LsuCraig Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    55
    Point is, the prosecutor knew who leaked it from day 1. Why wasn't he indicted?
     
  6. DRC

    DRC TigerNator

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    4,745
    Likes Received:
    374
  7. Sourdoughman

    Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    12,326
    Likes Received:
    575
    Interesting...
    So much for Libby, Rove and Chaney being guilty.
    The Wilsons and those on the other side of the spectrum, well in their dreams.
    They can't let the past 2 elections go because they claim Bush is so stupid but has out smarted them time and time again by stealing the elections or maybe the voting machines were just rigged unless Democrats win.
     
  8. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Damn good question. Perhaps because the Justice Department prosecutor works for the Bush administration. This was not an independent special prosecutor like those that investigated Nixon or Clinton. This was the executive branch investigating itself.

    Bush stood up and assured America that he would find out who illegally outed the covert agent and he would punish them. So, if the leaker has been determined why hasn't he been punished? Did Bush lie? Did the Justice Department prosecutor steer the Grand Jury away from an indictment of a Bush appointee? We'll never know because Grand Jury proceedings are secret. And because he is not a Special Independent Prosecutor he does not have to issue a report on his findings. How convenient.

    A crime was committed. The President pledged to find the criminal and punish him. If that does not happen then the President was lying. If the democrats win back Congress in 2006 or 2008, there will be a Congressional investigation for sure.
     
  9. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    not fulfilling a pledge is not the same as lying.
     
  10. LsuCraig

    LsuCraig Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    55
    What happened to the Bush White House going after the Wilson's......this was an attack squad I thought? Hmmm.....hard to prosecute something when no law was broken in the first place. Libby will walk too.
     

Share This Page