The broadcast network evening newscast coverage Tuesday night, of the guilty verdicts for perjury and lying found against Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, painted the case through the prism of administration opponents who presumed a nefarious scheme led by Vice President Cheney against the heroic Joe Wilson. Though the legal status of Valerie Plame remains in dispute, ABC anchor Elizabeth Vargas and CBS's Gloria Borger described her as an “undercover” CIA agent. And while ABC's Pierre Thomas noted how Plame “had been outed as a CIA operative in a column by Robert Novak,” neither Thomas, nor reporters on CBS or NBC, ever pointed out how Novak learned of Plame's identity from then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a war opponent outside the Cheney/Karl Rove circle.
CBS and NBC managed to connect Libby to the Reagan years. “Guilty,” Katie Couric teased at the top of the CBS Evening News, “the highest ranking White House official found guilty of a felony since the Iran-Contra scandal." Over on the NBC Nightly News, Kelly O'Donnell echoed: "What happened here today makes Lewis 'Scooter' Libby the highest-ranking White House official convicted of a felony since the Reagan era and the Iran-Contra scandal.”
CBS's Gloria Borger ominously concluded: "The prosecutor said there was a cloud over the Vice President's office. And today he said it's still there. Only now, Katie, it may be darker." Bob Schieffer soon piled on: “I think it's going to hurt the administration because it's going to raise new questions about their credibility when they already have more problems on their plate than they can really handle right now." On ABC, Vargas picked up on how “Joe Wilson...said today he wants Karl Rove fired from the White House. Do you think that might happen?" George Stephanopoulos rationally retorted: "No. It ain't going to happen.”
With Brian Williams in Iraq, the NBC Nightly News led with Libby but spent less time on the verdict than did ABC and CBS, though NBC provided time to Tim Russert, a witness for the prosecution, to express how “I take no joy in this, Brian. It was not our doing. We didn't ask to be involved. But when you are asked to testify under oath, you tell the truth.”
NBC's Kelly O'Donnell began her report:
“Brian, to give this some perspective, what happened here today makes Lewis 'Scooter' Libby the highest-ranking White House official convicted of a felony since the Reagan era and the Iran-Contra scandal. Today aides say President Bush stopped to watch TV as the guilty verdicts were read. Once the ultimate White House insider, today Scooter Libby walked out of court a convicted felon.”
The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the video against the closed-captioning to provide transcripts of the March 6 ABC and CBS evening newscast coverage:
ABC's World News with Charles Gibson. Tease from substitute anchor Elizabeth Vargas:
"Welcome to World News. Tonight, a high-ranking White House official found guilty of lying in the investigation of who leaked a CIA agent's name, a case that leads to the highest levels of government."
Vargas led the newscast:
"Good evening. A man who was once in the Bush administration's circle of most-trusted advisors is tonight a convicted felon. A jury found Vice President Cheney's former Chief-of-Staff, Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, guilty of four counts of obstruction of justice, making false statements, and perjury. It happened during the investigation into who leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer, whose husband was an outspoken critic of the President's case for war in Iraq. The trial has shed new light on how the administration dealt with tough questions about the war when it became apparent Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. ABC's Pierre Thomas was in the courtroom today."Pierre Thomas: "Scooter Libby was stone-faced as the verdict was read. But his wife was visibly shaken, fighting back tears as each guilty count was announced."
Ted Wells, attorney of Lewis Libby: "We are very disappointed in the verdict of the jurors. He is totally innocent, totally innocent."
Thomas: "Vice President Cheney released a statement saying he was 'very disappointed with the verdict' and that he was 'saddened for Scooter and his family.' But the jury believed the prosecution's argument that Libby lied to cover up a campaign by the Vice President's office to discredit a critic of the administration's Iraq war policy."
Patrick Fitzgerald, special prosecutor: "It's sad that we had a situation where a high-level official, a person who worked in the office of Vice President, obstructed justice and lied under oath."
Thomas: "At its heart, the prosecution said, the Libby trial was about a Vice President and his staff obsessed with pushing back against critics. Back in 2003, Vice President Cheney was apparently furious about an opinion article written by Ambassador Joe Wilson that challenged the case for war. The Vice President was concerned enough to cut the Wilson article out of the newspaper and make notes on it. Within eight days of the article's publication, Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, had been outed as a CIA operative in a column by Robert Novak. The prosecution said Libby lied to impede their investigation into who leaked Plame's identity. Today at least one of the jurors said Libby was not the only one involved."
Denis Collins, Libby trial juror: "He was the fall guy. He was tasked by the Vice President to go and talk to reporters."
Thomas: "Throughout the trial, prosecutor Fitzgerald used Libby's recorded grand jury testimony to detail the Vice President's fixation with Wilson's charge. Mr. Cheney even micro-managed the media response to Wilson."
Lewis Libby, former Cheney Chief-of-Staff, in audio of testimony: "Vice President dictated to me what he wanted me to say to the press."
Thomas: "Mr. Cheney also asked President Bush to release the details of a highly classified national intelligence estimate, or NIE, to select reporters without informing the Defense Secretary, CIA Director, or the National Security Advisor. Ultimately, no one was ever charged with leaking Miss Plame's identity, something not lost on at least one of the jurors today."
Collins: "There was a tremendous amount of sympathy for Mr. Libby on the jury. It was said a number of times, 'What are we doing with this guy here?' Where's Rove? Where's, you know, where are these other guys?"
Thomas: "Libby's defense attorneys say any false statements were due to a bad memory. They plan to appeal. But if this conviction stands, Libby faces up to 25 years in prison. Elizabeth?"
Vargas: "All right. Pierre Thomas, thank you. And our chief Washington correspondent George Stephanopoulos joins us. The Vice President, as Pierre reported, said he was disappointed in the verdict today. We had a different statement from the President."
Stephanopoulos: "Oh, definitely. The President's staff came out and said he respected the jury's verdict even though he was saddened by it. And it is really unusual, Elizabeth, for someone like the Vice President to actually criticize a jury's verdict. But a senior White House official told me they recognize the Vice President was very close to Scooter Libby, and he felt strongly about it."
Vargas: "There's already debate, meantime, about whether there will be a presidential pardon of Scooter Libby. What are the chances of that? Democrats are today calling on the President to promise not to pardon him."
Stephanopoulos: "They're calling on him to pledge not to pardon him. But Scooter Libby's allies are already saying the President should pardon him and should do it fast. The White House is just not going to talk about this, Elizabeth. They're not going to touch it. But they're not going to rule out a pardon down the road."
Vargas: "In the meantime, Democrats are also calling on the President to, quote, 'do something' in light of today's guilty verdict. Ambassador Joe Wilson, who wrote the editorial that started this whole thing, said today he wants Karl Rove fired from the White House. Do you think that might happen?"
Stephanopoulos: "No. It ain't going to happen. The White House is going to try to hold the line. They're going to try to hold the line on not commenting about this at all, but the Democrats will keep up the pressure. Meantime, though, they know they can't do much about it. So they're going to also continue to use their oversight power on the scandal at Walter Reed and the problems with wounded vets throughout the veteran system."
Vargas: "But is the verdict and the reactions today another sign of the schism between the President and the Vice President?"
Stephanopoulos: "It sure is. It does show a little daylight between them. But a White House official told me there are absolutely no plans, no plans at all for the Vice President to leave."
CBS Evening News. Katie Couric, in opening teaser:
"I'm Katie Couric. Guilty: Scooter Libby is convicted in the CIA leak case, the highest ranking White House official found guilty of a felony since the Iran-Contra scandal."
Couric led:
"Hello, everyone. After ten days of deliberations, a federal jury in Washington convicted Vice President Cheney's former Chief-of-Staff, Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, of four criminal charges in the CIA leak case. Libby is the highest ranking White House official convicted of a felony in two decades ..."Gloria Borger: "It was a verdict that shook the White House, and ground zero was Dick Cheney's office."
Patrick Fitzgerald: "The results are actually sad. It's sad that we had a situation where a high-level official, a person who worked in the office of Vice President, obstructed justice and lied under oath. We wish that had not happened, but it did."
Borger: "The jury found that Lewis 'Scooter' Libby lied about his conversations with reporters regarding the identity of an undercover CIA agent. The Vice President's former chief of staff, who sat motionless when the verdict was read, said he simply forgot the conversations because he was so busy with national security matters. The jury didn't buy it."
Denis Collins, Libby trial juror: "How he could remember it on a Tuesday, and then forget it on a Thursday, and then remember it two days later-"
Borger: "His lawyer will ask for a new trial, and if that fails, Libby will appeal."
Ted Wells, attorney of Lewis Libby: "We have every confidence that ultimately Mr. Libby will be vindicated."
Borger: "Like most things in Washington, the heart of this case involves a political dispute. Libby was at the center of the White House's case for war in Iraq. His boss, the Vice President, was rattled by this, an article in July 2003 attacking the administration's rationale for war, that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It was written by Ambassador Joe Wilson, who was sent to Africa by the CIA to look into whether Saddam was buying ingredients there to make a nuclear weapon. Wilson said he was not. Cheney wanted Wilson discredited. He knew that his wife, Valerie Plame, worked at the CIA. On a clipping of Wilson's column, he wrote, 'Did his wife send him on a junket?' To undermine the importance of the mission, Cheney wanted to spread the word that Wilson's wife sent him, and he asked Libby to do it. Today Wilson said he still wants answers."
Joseph Wilson, former U.S. Ambassador: "Well, I think the President and the Vice President both owe the American people a full explanation of what they know about this matter."
Borger: "Libby, who is 63, now faces a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison. He's not likely to get the full sentence."
Andrew Cohen, CBS News legal analyst: "I think the judge will want to make an example of him, so it wouldn't surprise me if he gets a sentence of a year and a half or two or even three years."
Borger: "During the trial, the jury never heard from Cheney, but the prosecutor said there was a cloud over the Vice President's office. And today he said it's still there. Only now, Katie, it may be darker."
Couric: "And, Gloria, why didn't the Vice President end up testifying?"
Borger: "Because it could have backfired, Katie. He was a witness for the defense. There was a always the chance that if he took the stand, he could have been ripped apart by the prosecution. And that could have made Libby really look even worse."
After asking Jim Axelrod about the possibility of a pardon, Couric turned to Bob Schieffer:
"And, Bob, Scooter Libby was the Vice President's right-hand man. How badly does this reflect on Mr. Cheney, in your view?"
Bob Schieffer: "Well, I think very badly, and it's hard to conclude otherwise. I mean, the prosecutor did not prove any underlying crime here, but he convinced this jury that Scooter Libby lied. Well, you have to ask, 'Why would he lie?' Clearly, because he did not want what was going on in his office and in the Vice President's office, where he worked, to come out. He was talking to the Vice President. He was getting memos from the Vice President. He was saying this and that and trying to work with the Vice President, so there are a lot of fingers pointing tonight at Dick Cheney, and I think this is not only going to hurt the Vice President, Katie, I think it's going to hurt the administration because it's going to raise new questions about their credibility when they already have more problems on their plate than they can really handle right now."
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center





“Brian, to give this some perspective, what happened here today makes Lewis 'Scooter' Libby the highest-ranking White House official convicted of a felony since the Reagan era and the Iran-Contra scandal. Today aides say President Bush stopped to watch TV as the guilty verdicts were read. Once the ultimate White House insider, today Scooter Libby walked out of court a convicted felon.”
Thomas: "At its heart, the prosecution said, the Libby trial was about a Vice President and his staff obsessed with pushing back against critics. Back in 2003, Vice President Cheney was apparently furious about an opinion article written by Ambassador Joe Wilson that challenged the case for war. The Vice President was concerned enough to cut the Wilson article out of the newspaper and make notes on it. Within eight days of the article's publication, Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, had been outed as a CIA operative in a column by Robert Novak. The prosecution said Libby lied to impede their investigation into who leaked Plame's identity. Today at least one of the jurors said Libby was not the only one involved."
Vargas: "In the meantime, Democrats are also calling on the President to, quote, 'do something' in light of today's guilty verdict. Ambassador Joe Wilson, who wrote the editorial that started this whole thing, said today he wants Karl Rove fired from the White House. Do you think that might happen?"
Borger: "Like most things in Washington, the heart of this case involves a political dispute. Libby was at the center of the White House's case for war in Iraq. His boss, the Vice President, was rattled by this, an article in July 2003 attacking the administration's rationale for war, that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It was written by Ambassador Joe Wilson, who was sent to Africa by the CIA to look into whether Saddam was buying ingredients there to make a nuclear weapon. Wilson said he was not. Cheney wanted Wilson discredited. He knew that his wife, Valerie Plame, worked at the CIA. On a clipping of Wilson's column, he wrote, 'Did his wife send him on a junket?' To undermine the importance of the mission, Cheney wanted to spread the word that Wilson's wife sent him, and he asked Libby to do it. Today Wilson said he still wants answers."
Bob Schieffer: "Well, I think very badly, and it's hard to conclude otherwise. I mean, the prosecutor did not prove any underlying crime here, but he convinced this jury that Scooter Libby lied. Well, you have to ask, 'Why would he lie?' Clearly, because he did not want what was going on in his office and in the Vice President's office, where he worked, to come out. He was talking to the Vice President. He was getting memos from the Vice President. He was saying this and that and trying to work with the Vice President, so there are a lot of fingers pointing tonight at Dick Cheney, and I think this is not only going to hurt the Vice President, Katie, I think it's going to hurt the administration because it's going to raise new questions about their credibility when they already have more problems on their plate than they can really handle right now." 














Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I nearly drove off the road t
March 6, 2007 - 21:42 ET by Clear thinkerI nearly drove off the road today when I heard the guilty verdict. Something is drastically wrong with our system, or the jury pool was full of non-clear thinking people.
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
CT,Chalk it up under 'Payback
March 6, 2007 - 21:49 ET by NeoConfirmedCT,
Chalk it up under 'Payback for Clinton'.
That file is getting awfully large.
I sure hope Bush has the guts
March 6, 2007 - 21:52 ET by Clear thinkerI sure hope Bush has the guts to pardon Libby!
The liberal MSM has become an enemy of the USA.
wouldn't that just throw the
March 6, 2007 - 22:04 ET by Conservative in the Artswouldn't that just throw the left wonkettes into a tizzy!
Bush will pardon Libby. And t
March 6, 2007 - 22:06 ET by NeoConfirmedBush will pardon Libby. And then the MSM will be appauled. They only approve of pardons by outgoing Democratic Presidents. That is, if the animal being pardon is a convicted murderer.
Of course, you're right. Pard
March 6, 2007 - 22:24 ET by joe conservativeOf course, you're right. Pardons all around...coming soon! Can Prez AWOL pardon himself?
A pardon? This stinks to hig
March 6, 2007 - 22:19 ET by joe conservativeA pardon? This stinks to high heaven, and given Bush's track record with the truth, I'd hedge my bets that he is as guilty as Libby and all the others...
My my my, Is it a full moon o
March 6, 2007 - 22:25 ET by Conservative in the ArtsMy my my, Is it a full moon out tonight? There sure are a lot of looney libs howling.
OK Joe,I tried to be your fri
March 6, 2007 - 22:27 ET by NeoConfirmedOK Joe,
I tried to be your friend. To have your back when these damn Newsbusters posters were on the attack.
Now you're on your own...Good luck.
And I am sure you were just
March 7, 2007 - 11:01 ET by MightyMouthAnd I am sure you were just as outraged at the previous administrations actions. Or does it only "stink to high heaven" when Republican presidents use the pardon?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Clinton didn't partdon anyone
March 7, 2007 - 13:14 ET by clickerClinton didn't partdon anyone who was involved in his own (lack of) criminal actions and/or scandals. That would be the issue, pardoning someone just so he can't be used to further implicate the White House.
LOL!!! What an uninformed goo
March 7, 2007 - 13:17 ET by bassndudeLOL!!! What an uninformed goof. You forgetting the brother of the Hill?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
You are factually incorrect.
March 7, 2007 - 13:21 ET by NL207You are factually incorrect. -- this is code for: "You are a lying, liberal bastard"
Bill Clinton pardoned (a) His half brother, Roger Clinton. and (b) Susan McDougal, his former business partner in the Whitewater Development Corporation bank fraud scheme. Can you google this for yourself or do you need links?
It was the jury pool. That sl
March 6, 2007 - 21:55 ET by Conservative in the ArtsIt was the jury pool. That slime ball of a lawyer stacked his jury with people that despised Bush. I mean, come on.....if the jury was of people from the Washington DC area, there is no way the jury would every be "partial"
The thing that makes my blood boil is that Libby's lawyer should have cried for a mis-trial. Or at least turn it around and blame Pat for knowing who "leaked" Plame's name and yet still kept looking for something. He wasn't charged with "look till you find something you like." he was charged with "look into who leaked" Period.
IT's evident that the jury was chocked full of BDS, as proof of the press conference afterward of one juror upset that he couldn't charge Rove.
Tim Russert: But when you are asked to testify under oath, you tell the truth.”
Yea, like all those "truths" you try to sell me every night on TV? I bet the cast was a fake!
You guys are amazing... The m
March 7, 2007 - 10:42 ET by clickerYou guys are amazing... The man is guilty, logically and legally. What will it take for you people to wake up. Lying to cover things up an investigation is criminal. You should be glad that the legal system in fact seems to have worked in this case. People, Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, hopefully will think twice or three times before trying to cover up a crime. How is that not good? Government officials do not have the right to lie to the people. It's against what our country stands for. Be sad for Libby, but happy for the system today.
Clicker...if this is the case
March 7, 2007 - 10:49 ET by bassndudeClicker...if this is the case, why did the jurors say what they did? You know, the part where they said they dident understand what he was guilty of? That he was a fall guy? They convicted him out of shear contempt of the current administration. Like it or not, that sets a president for the future, be it conservitive or liberal. Be warned, this is a two edged sword. Your passive stance now is proof you dont understand the implications. The MSM understands tho. And they are now worried about their futures.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
If what you wrote it true, Mr
March 7, 2007 - 12:30 ET by j. frank wilsonIf what you wrote it true, Mr. Libby would have been convicted on all 5 counts. The fact the jury came in with guilty on 4 out of 5 tells me they were quite thoughtful.
And I sincerely hope we all have a president for the future...
They never said they didn't u
March 7, 2007 - 13:11 ET by clickerThey never said they didn't understand what he was guilty of. In fact the opposite. They knew exactly what he did, they just didn't get why Rove or Cheney weren't part of the deal, and felt bad the Libby had to take the brunt.
Here are some of their quotes
"We're not saying we didn't think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of, but it seemed like ... he was the fall guy."
"There were some incredibly good managerial-type people who just took everything apart in to the smallest piece, put it in the right places, and it got to the point where opinion had very little to do with it," said Collins. "You just came to this conclusion that, 'wow here it is, right before us.' "
Hmmmm... then I am sure tha
March 7, 2007 - 11:22 ET by NL207Hmmmm... then I am sure that you must think that O.J. was innocent, the Cops in the Rodney King case should have been aquitted as their first trial did, and various KKK operatives were innocent of hanging black men from trees and burning churches in the old south, right? Of course you must also agree, those terrible, evil witches in Salem were obviously guilty and desperately required hanging or burning for the public good. After all, duly empaneled juries made ALL of the above determinations as well.
Are you so ignorant or partisan that you cannot recognize when justice has been abused for political purposes?
I'll even put money on it that you also think at least one of Sacco and Vanzetti, Alger Hiss or Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were innocent.
Right, that makes sense. Beca
March 7, 2007 - 13:17 ET by clickerRight, that makes sense. Because this case is so clear cut, (4 out of 5 counts guilty, and only one holdout on the third count stopped it from being all 5 counts) let's compare it to every other legal case in history and conclude that we feel the same way about all of them. Great argument.
All of those other cases were
March 7, 2007 - 13:32 ET by NL207All of those other cases were clear-cut as well. Unanimous jury verdicts. NO holdouts. Every single one of them. Yet I am sure you will disagree with nearly every one of those verdicts, just as I disagree with this Libby verdict.
Thank you for the compliment, I enjoy crushing the squalid arguments of nincompoop liberals. And YOU just got crushed by your own hypocrisy when you failed to reject my asserstions about your opinions of these other cases.
Armitage...
March 6, 2007 - 21:53 ET by FactFiendOnce again, NB claims that the networks are biased because they aren't mentioning that Bob Novak learned Plame's identity from Richard Armitage, and once again they fail to explain how this fact is relevant to the story, or would change it in any way.
Baker wrote that "neither Thomas, nor reporters on CBS or NBC, ever pointed out how Novak learned of Plame's identity from then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a war opponent outside the Cheney/Karl Rove circle."
So? Why is this relevant? Libby leaked Plame's identity to journalists before Novak's column. So did Rove. Just because Novak was the first to print the leak does not change the fact that Libby and other members of "the Cheney/Karl Rove circle" leaked Plame's identity to the press.
So, again, why is it important that the networks mention Armitage?
uh.....ok......yea.....hehehe
March 6, 2007 - 22:02 ET by Conservative in the Artsuh.....ok......yea.....hehehe
Um, so if journalists were getting the leaks all over the place, then why did everyone claim to find out by reading Novak's column. Why is it relevant? Because Pat was put to investigate who leaked, and it was Armitage. Pat knew this only a matter of weeks into the investigation and it should have ended the very moment Pat knew the Novak's source. But he didn't, he went on a witch hunt and the stupid thing is that Libby is not charged with anything related to Plame or the leak! Libby was charged with a "technicality"
"leaked"
March 6, 2007 - 22:10 ET by FactFiendYou seem to be under the impression that the first person to leak information can be the only leaker. This is not true. Libby leaked Plame's identity to journalists. So did Rove.
Again, just because Novak learned her identity from Armitage and was the first to publish the leak does not mean that Armitage was "the leaker." They were all leakers.
So, I ask once more, why is Armitage's role relevant?
Ok, so, if Libby and Rove lea
March 6, 2007 - 22:20 ET by Chicago RepublicanOk, so, if Libby and Rove leaked her identity, why didn't Fitzgerald charge them with that "crime"?
**************
Support the Spread of Open Society and Capitalism around the World. Do it for the Children.
I'm already bored of you. You
March 6, 2007 - 22:23 ET by Conservative in the ArtsI'm already bored of you. You can't even see that you answered your own question.
Here's a question back: if they were all leakers, how come Pat couldn't nail anyone for leaking? Not one charge or account of anyone breaking the law for leaking.
Are you a total numbskull?
March 6, 2007 - 22:38 ET by NL207Are you a total numbskull? Robert Novak's story was the reason for all the hoopla in the first place and constituted the first public disclosure of Plame's employment [ignoring the fact that enemy intelligence services knew who she was years earlier]. Armitage was the leak that enabled that story. How could Armitage's role NOT be relevant?
And if this was such a serious crime, why the H*** was Armitage not prosecuted?
How can anybody else "leak" this "secret" after Novak plasters it all over in public print?
NL,Did this guy just end his
March 6, 2007 - 22:49 ET by NeoConfirmedNL,
Did this guy just end his post with "Why is Armitage relevant"?
That has to be the lamest comment I've read on here in months.
And I've read nonsense from Hayes (Schmidt), Dave High, Balboa and this new Adkins guy.
Ridiculous....
Are you a total numbskull?BDS
March 6, 2007 - 22:52 ET by Conservative in the ArtsAre you a total numbskull?
BDS does that. Your brain is the first thing to go. Then you go color blind, there is no more black and white, everything becomes shades of grey. Then the next thing to go numb is the heart. This is the stage of denial, so even though you don't give a rip about anyone but yourself, you fight extra hard for "the little people." Next comes the hallucinations, where you actually believe that Bush is doing all kinds of bad things like going into nursing homes and pouring ice cold water down your grandma's back, and spitting on the constitution.
The final stage: you wake up one morning and find out you've become a journalist.
Convicted on one count of obs
March 6, 2007 - 22:13 ET by mostlymoderateConvicted on one count of obstruction of justice, one count of making false statements to the FBI, two counts of perjury. Yea, "technicality". hehehe
Ofcourse this is just the beginning. Wait until Cheney loses the Civil Trial that Plame has brought against him. That is going to be amazing. And to think that all Plame was doing was serving her country. That poor woman.
"That poor woman."
March 6, 2007 - 22:34 ET by winston smith"That poor woman."
Yeah, she's married to a bulbous liar named Joe Wilson. BTW, everytime I see Valerie she's got this big toothy grin (new veneers?), cocktail dresses and stilettos, book deals, movie in the works, oh and who forced "that poor woman" onto the cover of Vanity Fair?
One day at a time. She is str
March 6, 2007 - 23:39 ET by mostlymoderateOne day at a time. She is struggling to cope with the unfortunate circumstances of her outing. I hope she keeps strong
mostly moderate
March 7, 2007 - 01:21 ET by JudithYou have the wrong moniker, it should be mostly stupid. What an idiot to not see thru such a transparent plot. Bet you think Sandy Burgler was framed. Estupido con cabeza de vaca!
Were we talking about support
March 7, 2007 - 01:34 ET by mostlymoderateWere we talking about supporting G.W. Bush? I didn't think so. Wrong bullitin Judith.
On the cover of Vanity Fair?
March 7, 2007 - 12:32 ET by j. frank wilsonOn the cover of Vanity Fair? And that issue was...? Date please -
So wait I'm confused. He's
March 7, 2007 - 09:33 ET by Challenger GrimSo wait I'm confused. He's convicted on lying to the grand jury about his cooper conversation but NOT his statements to the FBI about the EXACT SAME CONVERSATION? Does this not boggle any leftist minds or give them pause to think?
Yes, you are confused. You sh
March 7, 2007 - 13:22 ET by clickerYes, you are confused. You should read the details of the charges, the case, and the jurors' comments before you claim others' minds are boggled. It's all pretty clear to most of us.
I have been. From the jury
March 7, 2007 - 14:12 ET by Challenger GrimI have been. From the jury's own words:
"We would like clarification on the charge as stated under Count 3, specifically:
Page
74 of the jury instructions, “Count 3 of the indictment alleges that
Mr. Libby falsely told the FBI on October 14 or November 26, 2003, that
during a conversation with M. Cooper of Time magazine on July
12, 2003, Mr. Libby told Mr. Cooper that reporters were telling the
administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but that Mr.
Libby did not know if this was true.” (i.e., is the charge that the
statement was made over about the content of the statement itself)"
Before the judge could answer their question, they said:
"After further discussion, we are clear on what we need to do. No further clarification needed. Thank you. We apologize."
As it's been pointed out: "Two of the counts, one each of perjury and making false statements, are
based on a single conversation Libby had with Matthew Cooper, then of Time magazine, on July 12, 2003." Yet one of those he is acquitted under.
The rest: "Two other counts, one of perjury and one of making false statements,
are based on a single conversation Libby had with NBC’s Tim Russert on
July 10 or 11, 2003. The remaining count, obstruction of justice, is
based on Libby’s testimony about both conversations."
Here's the statements that libby was convicted of:
"I was very clear to say reporters are telling us that because in my
mind I still didn’t know it as a fact. I thought I was — all I had was
this information that was coming in from reporters…
I said,
reporters are telling us that, I don’t know if it’s true. I was careful
about that because among other things, I wanted to be clear I didn’t
know Mr. Wilson. I don’t know — I think I said, I don’t know if he has
a wife, but this is what we’re hearing…
I didn’t want the
reporters to think it was true because I said it. I — all I had was
that reporters are telling us that, and by that I wanted them to
understand it wasn’t coming from me and that it might not be true….
Basically,
we didn’t know anything about him [Joseph Wilson] until this stuff came
out in June. And among the other things, I didn’t know he had a wife.
That was one of the things I said to Mr. Cooper. I don’t know if he’s
married. And so I wanted to be very clear about all this stuff that I
didn’t, I didn’t know about him. And the only thing I had, I thought at
the time, was what reporters are telling us."
And here's what he was NOT convicted of:
"During a conversation with Matthew Cooper of Time magazine on July 12,
2003, Libby told Cooper that reporters were telling the administration
that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, but Libby did not know if this
was true.
As defendant Libby well knew when he made it, this
statement was false in that: Libby did not advise Cooper on or about
July 12, 2003 that reporters were telling the administration that
Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, nor did Libby advise him that Libby
did not know whether this was true; rather, Libby confirmed for Cooper,
without qualification, that Libby had heard that Wilson’s wife worked
for the CIA."
As Bryon York pointed out:"The counts overlap each other and rely heavily on the memories of three
people — Libby, Cooper, and Russert — about two conversations." But of course, somehow there's no conflict with overlapping counts being hair split.
I said it before and I'll say it again: the only thing that is apparently clear to "most of you" is that Libby was guilty until proven innocent. I wonder if the founders are crying.
Read the juror Collins' comme
March 6, 2007 - 22:29 ET by kubob21Read the juror Collins' comments. The Jury felt the Bush admin was guilty before the case even started, they wanted Rove, Cheney, even Bush and the got Libby, the lack of evidence not withstanding. A DC Jury indeed, Collins was a WAPO reporter and used to work with Russert.
Russert
March 7, 2007 - 01:24 ET by JudithBoy, I'd like to see someone get Russert. What a phony calling himself a journalist, but wait! journalist is a dirty word anymore so he fits the mold.
The MSM is now back in their
March 6, 2007 - 22:40 ET by MidAmericaThe MSM is now back in their role of carrying the load for the ineffectual democrats. The democrats sold their soul to the lunatic left down at the crossroads. If the press doesn't make lots of distracting noise the 'demons' will come and demand their due.
Bob Shieffer
March 7, 2007 - 01:28 ET by JudithBob Shieffer is so old and febile that he should be in a nursing home. Did anyone hear his reporting? "They were doing this and that" was one of his quotes describing the so called jurors. What an old a**wipe.
Ah yes. Bite the head off th
March 7, 2007 - 01:37 ET by mostlymoderateAh yes. Bite the head off the messenger; how expected.
From the Legal Timeshttp://
March 7, 2007 - 08:19 ET by Right2thePointFrom the Legal Times
http://tinyurl.com/2...
Seat 9, Juror 1869: A white male and a former Washington Post
reporter who once had Bob Woodward as an editor. He used to share space
with Tim Russert of “Meet the Press.” While he had questions about the
Bush administration’s rationale for going to war, he said that, “I’m
very skeptical about everything I hear until I see it backed up.”
Described in the Washington Post
http://tinyurl.com/2...
Another candidate, the former Post journalist, seemed to have a link
to nearly every key player in the case. He had worked in the
newspaper's Metro section, he said, where his editor was Woodward, a
key defense witness. Until recently, he lived across an alley from
Russert, a star witness for the prosecution. And he had gone to parties
with The Post's Walter Pincus, another defense witness.
He said
he would understand if the lawyers believed he couldn't be impartial,
but he promised he would use his reporter training to sort through the
facts fairly.
"If I were in your seats, I'd be skeptical," he said.
Who the hell cares what Joe W
March 7, 2007 - 08:28 ET by I am conservativeWho the hell cares what Joe Wilson wants....This Joe Wilson is a disgrace and his Bleach Blonde Bimbo of a wife was not an operative in the first place. A political witch hunt....
Witch hunt
March 7, 2007 - 09:45 ET by iveseenitallHistory will reveal these times as dark days for the Republic. When a good citizen, who committed no crime, can be hauled into a Kangaroo court ( a.k.a. Grand Jury) and entraped by a vicious political operative who is supported by an equally vicious "free press", democracy is doomed. As the left cheers in the newsrooms, they better hope it never happens to them or their families. Unfortunately, as America continues its march toward a socialistic, propagandized, government -dictated state, its citizens remain more naive and apathetic than ever in their history. It's the 1930's all over again. Fitzgerald sees a cloud hanging over the presidency. I see a different cloud hanging over America. And it portends the end of our freedom.
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
I think you let these guys ru
March 7, 2007 - 11:47 ET by JayTeeI think you let these guys run with this story, all the way to the Bank, and when the Appeal leaves the DC Courts and arrives in the fresh Air of American Justice, the check will bounce at the Bank.
They will have to cover the story again.....and the innocent verdict.
It's obvious one cannot get a fair Trial in DC....unless your last name is Berger, and you Steal. When picking DC jurors, there are just too many Liberal Idiots to chose from in that town (5 to 1 liberals). And trying to say Cheney is done, impeached, is just dumb and dumber.
It's an important lesson for History, when Selma Alabama is still fresh in the news from Osama and Shrillary visits....there is a NEW KIND OF DESCRIMINATION running around DC, and it needs to be fixed.
But the next Trial/appeal needs a change of Venue, and a 50-50 mix of citizens.
At Times like these, it becomes more than just a Moral Obligation to express ones opinion, it becomes a Pleasure.