Robert Novak -- Libby case about politics, not justice

[ladiesbballcoach]

http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/288118,CST-EDT-NOVAK08.article

 

Democrats had been slow reacting to my column of July 14, 2003, that reported former diplomat Joseph Wilson's mission to Niger was suggested by his CIA employee wife, Valerie Plame. By September, when the Justice Department began investigating the CIA leak, Democrats smelled another Iran-contra or Watergate. They were wrong. The Libby trial uncovered no plot hatched in the White House. The worst news Tuesday for firebrand Democrats was that Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald was going back to his "day job" (as U.S. attorney in Chicago). With no underlying crime even claimed, the only question was whether Libby had consciously and purposefully lied to FBI agents and the grand jury about how he learned of Mrs. Wilson's identity.

 

While my column on Wilson's mission triggered Libby's misery, I played but a minor role in his trial. Subpoenaed by his defense team, I testified that I had phoned him in reporting the Wilson column and that he had said nothing about Wilson's wife.

 

On Fox's "Hannity & Colmes" Tuesday, super-lawyer David Boies said Fitzgerald never should have prosecuted Libby because there was no underlying criminal violation. Boies scoffed at Fitzgerald's contention that Libby had obstructed him from exposing criminal activity. Boies, who represented Al Gore in the 2000 election dispute, is hardly a Bush sympathizer. Neither is he a Democratic partisan trying to milk this obscure scandal.

 

 

 

Only recently have I began to read information on this situation. And the more I read, the more I realize that my first instinct is correct. This is politics as usual and nothing more. And mean that as not one side is favorite because the Reps started with the perjury charges with Clinton and now the Democrats are seeking vengenance.

 

Nothing here but normal DC activity that the voters are tired of.

[Guest Bluto]

because the Reps started with the perjury charges with Clinton and now the Democrats are seeking vengenance.

False.

 

In the modern era it began with Democrats seeking to oust Republican Richard Nixon.

 

I am speaking of attacking the president via criminal prosecution (the judicial branch), not just oppossing him politically.

 

(D) Johnson was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

(D) Kennedy was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

® Eisenhower was not prosecuted by Democrats.

(D) Truman was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

(D) Roosevelt was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

 

Even after Nixon, the Republicans did not prosecute Carter.

 

Democrats DID use the judicial branch to try to get to Reagan (remember Ollie North?)

 

Democrats DID use the judicial branch to try to get to Bush Sr. (remember the "October surprise?")

 

So finally, the tables were turned on Clinton, and the Democrats want "payback." Honey, Clinton WAS payback for Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr.

[ladiesbballcoach]

False.

 

In the modern era it began with Democrats seeking to oust Republican Richard Nixon.

 

I am speaking of attacking the president via criminal prosecution (the judicial branch), not just oppossing him politically.

 

(D) Johnson was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

(D) Kennedy was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

® Eisenhower was not prosecuted by Democrats.

(D) Truman was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

(D) Roosevelt was not prosecuted by Rebublicans.

 

Even after Nixon, the Republicans did not prosecute Carter.

 

Democrats DID use the judicial branch to try to get to Reagan (remember Ollie North?)

 

Democrats DID use the judicial branch to try to get to Bush Sr. (remember the "October surprise?")

 

So finally, the tables were turned on Clinton, and the Democrats want "payback." Honey, Clinton WAS payback for Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr.

But Nixon deserved it. While Clinton technically and legally did, the perjury charges were more for politically show than anything. And I say that as a person who didn't vote for Clinton, wouldn't vote for Clinton and think he was a horrible President for the long-term good of this country.

[HHSDad]

But Nixon deserved it. While Clinton technically and legally did, the perjury charges were more for politically show than anything. And I say that as a person who didn't vote for Clinton, wouldn't vote for Clinton and think he was a horrible President for the long-term good of this country.

I've yet to see a president in my lifetime who has deserved to be impeached. And that includes Nixon and Clinton.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I've yet to see a president in my lifetime who has deserved to be impeached. And that includes Nixon and Clinton.

WOW!!

 

Why not him?

[HHSDad]

WOW!!

 

Why not him?

He did what a number of presidents before him did. Tried to cover his butt. He wasn't involved in the Watergate break-ins, only their cover-up.

[ladiesbballcoach]

He did what a number of presidents before him did. Tried to cover his butt. He wasn't involved in the Watergate break-ins, only their cover-up.

I have always thought that he organized and ordered the code red....I mean Watergate break in.

[HHSDad]

I have always thought that he organized and ordered the code red....I mean Watergate break in.

There's no evidence of that, although there's plenty of evidence that he was involved in the cover-up. I guess its justice that he be forced to step down. He was after all, guilty of using the FBI and CIA for his own political purposes. Ironic that he would get burnt by a 3rd rate amatuer breakin.

[H]

I've yet to see a president in my lifetime who has deserved to be impeached. And that includes Nixon and Clinton.

 

Really? Not even Nixon? We can't have people thinking they can cover up an attempt to steal elections. Very dangerous precedent in a democracy.

[75center]

There's no evidence of that, although there's plenty of evidence that he was involved in the cover-up. I guess its justice that he be forced to step down. He was after all, guilty of using the FBI and CIA for his own political purposes. Ironic that he would get burnt by a 3rd rate amatuer breakin.

 

I've never understood why they even felt they needed to bug the Dems Headquarters. Was there ever any doubt that Nixon was going to win that election?

[Diamond Dandy]

Was it political motivation that caused Novak to run the story?

[Guest Bluto]

I've never understood why they even felt they needed to bug the Dems Headquarters. Was there ever any doubt that Nixon was going to win that election?

It's called PARANOIA....

[Covercorner]

In my book, releasing classified information, like the identity of an operative, should be a crime under any circumstance.

 

Didn't Gerald Ford accidentally on purpose, put some classified information in a book he wrote about his days on the Warren Commission?

[H]

I've never understood why they even felt they needed to bug the Dems Headquarters. Was there ever any doubt that Nixon was going to win that election?

 

 

Good point. I believe Nixon would have had the '72 election sewn up without the Watergate breakin. A shame, because apart from that, he had a very solid presidency.

[LSURock]

Really? Not even Nixon? We can't have people thinking they can cover up an attempt to steal elections. Very dangerous precedent in a democracy.

Define "stael elections". They had some operatives trying to gather embarrassing info on supporters of opponents. This same job is now handled by the media due to the internet and 24 hour cable news. In retrospect, it really wasn't some monumental thing. Then as now the real fun started when the people involved had to testify. I always thought that Nixon was brought down by his own hubris. The need to record everything and thinking that he was above the law. Clinton had a similar MO, although he was better at being sneaky. Clinton should have just stuck with its a personal issue and none of your business. I think we have now seen that "special prosecutor" law that Watergate gave birth to has become a problem. Lawyers don't like to come up empty handed. In the Libby case as well as Clinton they couldn't make any charges stick so they settled for lying. The prosecutors (both Star and Fitzgerald) should have had the sense to drop the case. But as we have all seen in the "Duke LaCrosse" case, prosecutors are politicians first and foremost. JMO.