Actually, I don't care. Having to work under Cheney should be punishment enough for Libby. I do predict a jail sentence though. And I'll say it again..."SHOW ME THE MONEY".

 

OK, maybe you can explain the "SHOW ME THE MONEY" comment. What money? From who? Once again, what is your point?

I predict no jail because if (and he shouldn't be) he is sentenced to jail the president will grant him a pardon, and rightfully so.

OK, maybe you can explain the "SHOW ME THE MONEY" comment. What money? From who? Once again, what is your point?

I predict no jail because if (and he shouldn't be) he is sentenced to jail the president will grant him a pardon, and rightfully so.

 

 

So Bush should pardon someone who lied to the grand jury? That's some funny stuff....I don't care who ya are. But like I said, who cares about jail time as long as Libby buys Mr. and Mrs. Wilson a summer home in the Bahamas. LOL

YASAK, Joseph A. Chicago, Illinois Knowingly making under oath a false declaration regarding a material fact before a grand jury. Pardoned by Bill Clinton 2001. You're right, that is funny. Hopefully Bush can sell his pardons for the same amount slick got.

So Bush should pardon someone who lied to the grand jury? That's some funny stuff....I don't care who ya are. But like I said, who cares about jail time as long as Libby buys Mr. and Mrs. Wilson a summer home in the Bahamas. LOL

 

First, it won't need to happen. Second, I'll quit asking questions about this "fantasy civil suit" you keep crowing about. Its obvious you don't have a clue what you are posting about and too embarrassed to admit it.

 

FYI, check out some of the convicted felons that Bill Clinton pardoned on his way out. That list would make Scooter Libby look like a choir boy. Start with Marc Rich, you know the guy that got Geffen's panties in a wad.:lol:

Wasn't Marc Rich the guy that fled the US rather then face charges?

 

Nice guy Willie cut loose there. Wonder how much Clinton carged for that pardon?

First, it won't need to happen. Second, I'll quit asking questions about this "fantasy civil suit" you keep crowing about. Its obvious you don't have a clue what you are posting about and too embarrassed to admit it.

 

FYI, check out some of the convicted felons that Bill Clinton pardoned on his way out. That list would make Scooter Libby look like a choir boy. Start with Marc Rich, you know the guy that got Geffen's panties in a wad.:lol:

 

I get it, you don't think there will be a civil suit. I do. Vallarie didn't leave the CIA because she is at retirement age.

I get it, you don't think there will be a civil suit. I do. Vallarie didn't leave the CIA because she is at retirement age.

 

It is more obvious than ever that know very little about the facts of the case. First, Plame wasn't covert when she was alledged to have been "outed". Fitzgerald found no reason to charge Libby (or anyone else for that matter) for that crime. He is charged with lying (he claims a faulty memory, you Clinton fans should be familiar with this defense) to the Grand Jury. Its a pretty big leap for her to claim harm when she was never exposed in the first place. Her hubby's zest for the spotlight (ala photos in Vanity Fare) ruined her case from the get-go. I think you are a little out of your depth on this one.

It is more obvious than ever that know very little about the facts of the case. First, Plame wasn't covert when she was alledged to have been "outed". Fitzgerald found no reason to charge Libby (or anyone else for that matter) for that crime. He is charged with lying (he claims a faulty memory, you Clinton fans should be familiar with this defense) to the Grand Jury. Its a pretty big leap for her to claim harm when she was never exposed in the first place. Her hubby's zest for the spotlight (ala photos in Vanity Fare) ruined her case from the get-go. I think you are a little out of your depth on this one.

 

Again, that's your opinion. I however, do think there will be a civil suit. Time will tell.

Again, that's your opinion. I however, do think there will be a civil suit. Time will tell.

The civil suit was filed by the Wilson's last July. It named Cheney, Libby and other unnamed White House officials. Armitage was added as a defendant in November.

The civil suit was filed by the Wilson's last July. It named Cheney, Libby and other unnamed White House officials. Armitage was added as a defendant in November.

 

I thought that suit was dropped before the Libby trial, to be refiled after the facts of the Libby trial were on record. I thought they wanted to see what Cheney's testimoney would be before they continued with the civil suit.

I thought that suit was dropped before the Libby trial, to be refiled after the facts of the Libby trial were on record. I thought they wanted to see what Cheney's testimoney would be before they continued with the civil suit.

Nope. Still filed. You can find out more here.

Nope. Still filed. You can find out more here.

I guess the link declares where you stand. I still don't see any damages? What is the suit about?

I guess the link declares where you stand. I still don't see any damages? What is the suit about?

From the website:

A civil suit would uncover the truth surrounding the leak, ensure all relevant public officials are held accountable for actions depriving the Wilsons of their privacy and constitutional rights, and serve as a deterrent to similar crimes being committed in the future.

 

Should the civil action result in a payment to Joe and/or Valerie Wilson that is in excess of all costs associated with their legal activities, once the legal costs were paid, monies equal to what had been contributed would go back to the Wilson Trust that would, in turn, distribute them to other charitable organization(s) working to protect government whistleblower First Amendment rights and help to defend them from retaliatory action.

 

An if by "where you stand" means I side with the Wilsons, you couldn't be more wrong.

It is more obvious than ever that know very little about the facts of the case. First, Plame wasn't covert when she was alledged to have been "outed". Fitzgerald found no reason to charge Libby (or anyone else for that matter) for that crime. He is charged with lying (he claims a faulty memory, you Clinton fans should be familiar with this defense) to the Grand Jury. Its a pretty big leap for her to claim harm when she was never exposed in the first place. Her hubby's zest for the spotlight (ala photos in Vanity Fare) ruined her case from the get-go. I think you are a little out of your depth on this one.

 

Show.......Me.......The.......Money

Show.......Me.......The.......Money

 

I'll conclude with, there will be no money as no damages were done. Case closed.

 

BTW, let me know if you want a DVD of the 4A state game. There aren't any backs jumping over the line of scrimmage but its still fun to watch.:lol: