I keep seeing this talking point phrase in multiple MSM stories about the Libby conviction; "Libby was convicted in March, the highest-ranking White House official ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair roiled the Reagan administration in the 1980s."(emphasis, mine) This is a misleading statement that makes the reader imagine that no high-ranking Presidential appointee, adviser, or member of the White House has been convicted of anything or sentenced to anything since Reagan's era. But, at least one past official's name should be placed above that of Libby's. Henry Cisneros was the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, appointed to that position by President Bill Clinton. Cisneros, it should be remembered, was indicted in 1995 on 18 counts of conspiracy, false statements and obstruction of justice. Cisneros pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of lying to the FBI. Now, I'd dare say that Libby, who only worked in the office of the Vice President, was a minnow in the pond in which Cisneros swam. Cisneros was the Secretary of HUD, a presidential cabinet member, after all!
Naturally, on his way out of the White House in 2001, Clinton pardoned Cisneros.
Yet, here we have the MSM constantly calling Libby the "highest White House official" convicted, completely ignoring the fate of a much, much higher official with Cisneros. Of course, that this man was a member of Clinton's cabinet pretty much explains why the MSM is conveniently forgetting the fact that Libby is a small fish in this conviction game compared to Cisneros. And, Cisneros was certainly a member of the White House having been a Clinton appointee.
Still, this claim of Libby being "highest official" is everywhere. An MSM talking point, for sure. And a misleading one, at that.
Here are just a few quick examples:
"Libby was convicted in March, the highest-ranking White House official ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair roiled the Reagan administration in the 1980s."
"Libby, who had faced as many as 10 years in prison, was the highest-ranking former White House official sentenced to prison since 1990, when ex-National Security Adviser John Poindexter was ordered to serve six months for lying to Congress about the Iran- Contra affair. "
"He was the highest-ranking US official to be sentenced since the Iran Contra affair 20 years ago."
Even MTV got in the talking points game with their report today:
"Libby is the only person charged in the Plame investigation and is the highest ranking government official to be convicted in a government scandal in 20 years."
These several stories are just today's, but the use of this talking point goes back months. Whether new or old, though, this "highest official" talking point that is besmirching both Reagan and Bush is pervasive and it all conveniently forgets the guilt of Clinton's much higher placed White House Official, Cisneros.
And, let us not forget to mention that Clinton himself was a pretty high level White House Official to get in a tad of trouble. There WAS all that impeachment stuff a little while ago, you know?
But, who really could be surprised that Clinton gets a pass by the MSM... AGAIN?
Update to pinpoint exactly what happened with Cisneros -- Henry Cisneros indictment information from Wikipedia:
In March 1995, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno secured the appointment of an Independent Counsel, David Barrett to investigate allegations that Cisneros had lied to FBI investigators during background checks prior to being named Secretary of HUD. He had been asked about payments that he had made to former mistress Linda Medlar, also known as Linda Jones. The affair had been 'public knowledge' for a number of years - during the 1992 presidential campaign, U.S. Treasurer Catalina Vasquez Villalpando publicly referred to Cisneros and candidate Clinton as "two skirt-chasers" - but Cisneros lied about the amount of money he had paid to Medlar. The investigation continued for three and a half years. In December, 1997, Cisneros was indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, giving false statements and obstruction of Justice. Medlar used some of the Cisneros hush money to purchase a house and entered into a bank fraud scheme with her sister and brother-in-law to conceal the source of the money. In January, 1998, Medlar pleaded guilty to 28 charges of bank fraud, conspiracy to commit bank fraud and obstruction of justice. In September, 1999, Cisneros negotiated a plea agreement, under which he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of lying to the FBI, and was fined $10,000. He did not receive jail-time or probation. He was pardoned by President Bill Clinton in January 2001 ( See: List of people pardoned by Bill Clinton). The independent counsel investigation continued after the pardon focusing on alleged obstruction of justice. In May 2005, Senator Dorgan (D-ND) proposed ending funding for the investigation; negotiators refused to include the provision in a bill funding military operations in Afghanistan. The funding at that point for the investigation totaled $21 million.
According to a New York Daily News report on October 3, 2005, "lawyers are fighting to suppress a potentially embarrassing final report from the probe that found Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros lied to the FBI about paying $250,000 in hush money to his ex-mistress. ... Lawyers at the Washington firm Williams and Connolly who work for Cisneros and both Clintons have argued to judges overseeing the case that allegations of illegal activity, for which no charges were filed, should be snipped before the report is made public."
On January 19, 2006, the New York Times reported that the independent counsel is finally closing his investigation with a report accusing the Clinton administration of thwarting the inquiry into Cisneros.
The office of the independent counsel issued a press release along with the final report stating:
An accurate title for the Report could be, “WHAT WE WERE PREVENTED FROM INVESTIGATING.” After a thorough reading of the Report it would not be unreasonable to conclude as I have that there was a coverup at high levels of our government and, it appears to have been substantial and coordinated. The question is why? And that question regrettably will go unanswered. Unlike some other coverups, this one succeeded.
The Independent Counsel's report has been a source of partisan bickering because it was heavily redacted with an estimated 120 pages removed by court order.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Selective Amnesia
July 2, 2007 - 23:04 ET by PawpawNThe MSM can't get a story straight today, how can they remember back to Clinton's days! Hell, history didn't start until Jan 20, 2001.
Libby
July 2, 2007 - 23:12 ET by Captain RepusChris Matthews of MSDNC must be beside himself after so many months and years trying to 'scoop' Libby, Rove and Cheney into prison for imaginary crimes and conspiracies, then getting this 'red meat' event while he is off somewhere sipping sweet drinks in cups with little umbrellas. Surely he is on drool overdrive trying to figure some way to get back into the action while the story is still hot. Not to worry though, his little cabal of NBC 'investigative democrats' like Russert, Lauer, Mitchel and Olbernut, all of who I can guarantee you were in the loop of knowing about Plame well before Libby's infamous phone call to Russert, will keep the venom stirred until he can claw his way back.
Commutation allows the appe
July 2, 2007 - 23:18 ET by Right2thePointCommutation allows the appeal process to go forward and if all appleals fail then the President can still do a full pardon.
All this does is eliminate the jail time portion of the sentence.
I'm sick of Newsbusters alw
July 2, 2007 - 23:51 ET by FairlightI'm sick of Newsbusters always trying to sneak facts into stories. That's not the way it's done in the real news world....jerks.
Suddenly, I feel shame. Why o
July 2, 2007 - 23:59 ET by Warner Todd HustonSuddenly, I feel shame. Why oh WHY do we have to be such sticklers for truth!?
It would be better to be unburdened by the need for truth... and be a Democrat!
You big truth bully!
July 3, 2007 - 00:06 ET by FairlightYou big truth bully!
Warner
July 3, 2007 - 00:15 ET by Dave RIt would be better to be unburdened by the need for truth... and be a Democrat!
You know, sometimes I wonder if the democrats do not, at least in some ways, have the better idea.
I mean, dems can literally rape, pillage and plunder their way through life, yet be held responsible for absolutely nothing (at least in this life, anyway). Better still, when they happen to run out of money, they just employ the police powers of the Imperial Federal Government and get more.
Maybe they aren't quite as dumb as we think. :-^)
Help Fred Thompson defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary/Obama axis, & win the White House in '08.
Warner Todd Huston says: Cisn
July 3, 2007 - 00:44 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Huston says: Cisneros, it should be remembered, was convicted in 1995 on 18 counts of conspiracy, false statements and obstruction of justice-
The truth is Cisneros was not convicted. Cisneros pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor.
I'll check that out. I had th
July 3, 2007 - 00:58 ET by Warner Todd HustonI'll check that out. I had thought I remembered a conviction. Still, "pled guilty" seems like a higher case of wrong doing than Libby's. After all, Libby's "conviction" had NOTHING to do with the case brought before the special prosecutor. No one was convicted or even brought up on charges for the "crime" that the special prosecutor was charged with investigating! Cisneros, on the other hand, did "plead guilty" on the charges he was being investigated for and not a side issue that had nothing to do with anything.
If I find that you are right, I will certainly alter my piece to better reflect Cisneros' case.
Thanks for the heads up.
Warner Todd Huston - And what
July 3, 2007 - 01:20 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Huston - And what was Cisneros crime? He told the truth about having an ex-mistress. He even told the thruth about paying his ex-mistress money. But he did lie to the FBI in how much money he was paying his ex-mistress. And this had exactly what to do with Clinon's Whitewater real estate transaction from years before?
Well, you may disagree but a Cisneros single misdemeanor plea is not a "higher case of wrong doing" than 4 felony convictions.
Cisneros plea bargained out o
July 3, 2007 - 01:24 ET by Warner Todd HustonCisneros plea bargained out of further convictions as Clinton ran interference for him. No one ran interference for Libby and he wasn't even charged with anything that this so-called prosecutor was charged with investigating. Libby's was a trumped up charge. Cisneros, on the other hand, seems to have gotten a huge break and an out from the inside of worse trouble, then a full pardon afterward.
Warner Todd Huston - Saying t
July 3, 2007 - 01:49 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Huston - Saying that Clinton ran interference for Cisneros with independent counsel David Barret is ridiculous, since Barret was still trying to find "something" in 2003.
Libby and trumped up charges..
July 3, 2007 - 12:05 ET by Gary HallLibby and trumped up charges..
I think that adding David Boies' (Gore's counsel in Gore v Bush) view of the issue of the charges Fitzgerald pursued against Libby is of value in the discussion here:
David Boies on H_C on Fox – March 5th, 2007
Still, you are side stepping
July 3, 2007 - 01:28 ET by Warner Todd HustonStill, you are side stepping the discussion. After all, the central point is that the MSM is ignoring a higher placed White House official and his on the job malfeasance as they go after Libby. If Cisneros' troubles were so harmless, why did he even NEED a pardon? And why won't the MSM even broach Cisnero's name?
Warner Todd Houston - Cis
July 3, 2007 - 01:41 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Houston - Cisneros payments to his ex-mistress had nothing to with "on the job malfeasance", while Libby's leaks of classified information to various reporters was "on the job malfeasance".
Warner,Sorry to butt in here,
July 3, 2007 - 01:46 ET by Dave RWarner,
Sorry to butt in here, but;
...while Libby's leaks of classified information to various reporters was "on the job malfeasance".
dingbat,
What, pray tell, was this "classified information" that Mr. Libby "leaked" to "various reporters?"
That is a new one on me.
Help Fred Thompson defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary/Obama axis, & win the White House in '08.
We don't know what else Cisne
July 3, 2007 - 01:51 ET by Warner Todd HustonWe don't know what else Cisneros did because the Clinton administration shut down and stonewalled the investigation! Further, this "Libby lied" business clearly had little to do with his duties. Additionally, it had nothing to do with the Plame case in any concrete way. Worse, the so-called prosecutor KNEW that Libby had nothing to do with the case he was actually investigating. So,there really is no comparison of which is worse. Cisneros' was by far worse and the reaction of his administration to the investigation was ALSO far worse. Bush, by comparison, did NOTHING to help Libby OR stifle the investigation, which is very unlike Clinton's actions with Cisneros.
Additionally, there was NO "classified information" passed on to ANYONE by Libby!
Even with that said, you have STILL sidestepped the real issue here. That the MSM refuses to even MENTION Cisneros smacks of MSM bias.
So, I'm not really even debating which is "worse." I'm pointing out that the MSM is biased by not even remembering Cisneros at all.
Whether Libby is worse than Cisneros is immaterial to the fact that Cisneros was a Clinton White House man and was HIGHER in status than Libby.
Warner Todd Huston - Clinton
July 3, 2007 - 02:14 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Huston - Clinton did not shut down SP Dave Barrett's investigation. On the contrary Barrett expanded his investigation twice and was still in business in 2003. Clinton did not run interference for Cisneros or stonewall Cisneros' investigation.
Libby passed portions of the NIE to reporters (and Bush ran interference by claiming after the fact that he conviently "declassified" a sentence here and a sentence there)
Libby's own testimony states that he (Libby) was not sure if he was authorized to give the NIE information to Sanger.
The MSM says that Libby was the highest ranking official convicted .... and he was.
What did Libby leak ding(ChiC
July 3, 2007 - 02:02 ET by liberal_bug_zapperWhat did Libby leak ding(ChiChiChiChi)? Please tell us as we are all too stupid to know all the things that you know.
____________________________________________________
"We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities." ~ Thomas Paine
lbz,Hell will freeze over lon
July 3, 2007 - 02:22 ET by Dave Rlbz,
Hell will freeze over long before we get an intelligent answer out of dingleberry. I'm guessing he is too busy looking for his crack pipe (or hiding his cell phone with the direct link to Osama's cave (see above)).
Scooter Libby didn't leak diddly, and dingleberry here knows it.
Help Fred Thompson defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary/Obama axis, & win the White House in '08.
Cisneros was sentenced in 1
July 3, 2007 - 06:33 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsCisneros was sentenced in 1999 (near the bottom of the page), so there must have been a conviction.
D
I don't support our liberals or their mission.
Of course there was... he ple
July 3, 2007 - 06:49 ET by Warner Todd HustonOf course there was... he pleaded guilty! That is a conviction isn't it? Or is pleading guilty now to be considered "OK" because you were showing contrition enough to admit your evil ways? Did Cisneros bite his lower lip and say that he felt the judge's pain making everything A'OK? Cisneros...not guilty by reason of false contrition!
White House vs. administration and all things semantic
July 2, 2007 - 23:58 ET by Ken ShepherdThe MTV account you cite is altogether factually incorrect. The other accounts are perhaps semantically correct, but, because White House and "administration" are used interchangeably in media accounts in other instances, there can be some confusion to be had by the general public.
I tend to think of the "Bush White House" as a narrower synedoche than "Bush administration" and "White House officials" as a smaller domain than "administration officials."
I tend to think of the former as those directly working for the POTUS who are not confirmed by the Senate are, essentially, the President's employees more so than executive department officials. So, for example, Condi Rice and Tony Snow are both "Bush administration officials," though of the two, only Snow is a "Bush White House official."
This might explain the labeling in the media and it's not dishonest on its face.
I would say, however, that it does ignore that larger abuses have occurred in the President's top appointments in the Clinton administration.
I agree with you, Ken. That i
July 3, 2007 - 00:06 ET by Warner Todd HustonI agree with you, Ken. That is why I said it is misleading and not just an outright lie. It makes it seem as if Bush's White House is the "worst" since Reagan's, but it plays loose with language, I think. Arguably, Clinton's was worse. Along with Cisneros, there is Webster Hubbell and Burger and a host of others.
Plus this language goes to
July 3, 2007 - 00:33 ET by Ken ShepherdPlus this language goes to a media storyline that leftist activists and bloggers are trying to forward. One needs look no further than Olbermann seeing in the commutation some massive criminal conspiracy on the part of Bush and Cheney and hinting the need to run impeachment proceedings.
Warner Todd Huston - Hubbell'
July 3, 2007 - 00:52 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Huston - Hubbell's conviction had nothing to do with anything Hubell did while Hubbell in the Clinton Administration. Ditto for Burger.
...um, which is why I did not
July 3, 2007 - 01:09 ET by Warner Todd Huston...um, which is why I did not mention them in the original story above!
Warner Todd Huston - but even
July 3, 2007 - 01:30 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Huston - but even in the comments you didn't mention the conviction of David Safavian for lying and obstruction re his dealings with Jack Abramoff or that Presidential adviser Claude Allen was caught stealing from Target
Are you saying shoplifting is
July 3, 2007 - 01:35 ET by Warner Todd HustonAre you saying shoplifting is the same as pleading guilty in an FBI/Justice Department probe?
Warner Todd Huston - No, Clau
July 3, 2007 - 02:00 ET by ding7777Warner Todd Huston - No, Claude Allen stealing from Target is similar to Hubell inflating his billing records at the Rose law firm (both are stealing) and neither one has anything to with the Administration for they worked in.
cisneros investigation & the clintons
July 3, 2007 - 00:11 ET by mastersofdeceitThis has been a long and difficult investigation. It is my hope that people will read the entire Report and draw their own conclusions. An accurate title for the Report could be, "WHAT WE WERE PREVENTED FROM INVESTIGATING."
After a thorough reading of the Report it would not be unreasonable to conclude as I have that there was a coverup at high levels of our government and, it appears to have been substantial and coordinated. The question is why? And that question regrettably will go unanswered. Unlike some other coverups, this one succeeded.
http://barrett.oic.gov/pressrelease/pressrelease011906.pdf
This may be slightly off-to
July 3, 2007 - 02:39 ET by sarcasmoThis may be slightly off-topic, but I've never really gotten one aspect of this case, and it has nothing to do with this "Scooter" guy's side-case, but the main case itself which everyone seems to be ignoring these days. See if you're following me on this timeline...
Leak happens and Plame is outed as CIA agent of some sort in Novak's column (although, like many intelligence "secrets," it's apparently already well known around DC). CIA gets all-atwitter over the leak anyway, and calls for an investigation. DOJ, seeing the case is political, appoints a special prosecutor, who -- despite the fact that a couple of reporters go to jail pointlessly for months over it -- almost instantly learns that this shady longtime bureaucrat named Richard Armitrage(sp?) is the original source of the leak to Novak. So how come he's allowed to keep his job and see no legal consequences whatsoever? Was his leak of classified info to Novak somehow just an accepted US government policy, and he's immune because he's a State Department bureaucrat and therefore allowed to leak secrets to reporters of his choice with impunity? What am I missing? And I know I'm being off-topic, but for the purposes of just this comment let's please try to ignore Scooter Libby if possible and concentrate on explaining to me, in "For Dummies" terms, just why this guy saw no consequences. Thanks.
JMR
Armitage is immune because th
July 3, 2007 - 03:20 ET by Warner Todd HustonArmitage is immune because the goal was to "get" Dick Cheney and Armitage had nothing to do with Cheney. Libby was as close as they could get to Cheney, so they settled hoping that Libby would turn on Cheney somehow.
That's about it.
I don't get it, but I do wa
July 3, 2007 - 03:39 ET by sarcasmoI don't get it, but I do want that guy's job. I'd go to work with a decent and reliable government paycheck, find interesting secrets and feed 'em to Novak. He'd take me to the Capital Grille (yum!) for lunch on his newspaper's dime, and then I'd face no consequences if people ever found out about my crime. I think this is the government job for me, and I'm easily venal enough to be qualified if I just ignore this annoying conscience thing about leaking US national security secrets. Where do I apply, anyway? I need a job without consequences!!
JMR
The only OTHER job you could
July 3, 2007 - 04:18 ET by Warner Todd HustonThe only OTHER job you could get like that would be Mrs. Bill Clinton's Husband! That guy NEVER has to suffer consequences.
Hmmm. I'm just trying to im
July 3, 2007 - 04:33 ET by sarcasmoHmmm. I'm just trying to imagine the mental consequences of "doing it" with either of them. A couple of years in jail seems like nothing by comparison! ;)
JMR
Ya know... After your last co
July 3, 2007 - 04:46 ET by Warner Todd HustonYa know... After your last comment, I have to say Billy boy HAS had one sentence that a kinder man would sooner avoid imposing on anyone, but one that has, indeed, caused Billy no end of pain and agony. That would be the sentence of which a shiny band of gold forms the chains and is initiated by the words "I do." So, at one of the meanest levels, he HAS had to serve the consequences of just ONE of his actions. And OH what a rotten sentence it has been!
Sarcasmo, you've got the basi
July 3, 2007 - 09:12 ET by GalvanicSarcasmo, you've got the basic facts correct. Add to that the elements of proof to find someone guilty of 'outing a covert intelligence operative' under the law:
(1) The operative must be in a covert status, or have been serving in a covert status within the previous five years, and
(2) The 'leaker' must have been aware of the operative's covert status at the time he/she revealed the operative's identity.
The Special Prosecutor was apparently unable to satisfy to a grand jury that either or both of the elements may have met, otherwise he should have charged Richard Armitage with the crime. Instead, convinced that the 'conspiracy' ran deeper, he blew millions of taxpayer dollars to investigate an alleged crime he already had all the answers to. In the process, he snared Libby in a perjury trap. Libby was convicted of and senteneced for perjury and obstruction of justice (What he obstructed is still not clear since the SP got all the necessary informatiion before Libby ever took the stand). The investigation was closed without ANYONE ever being charged with outing Plame.
Ok, and I understand all of
July 3, 2007 - 09:18 ET by sarcasmoOk, and I understand all of that in my own, dim, way; but I'm still having problems with the nonjudicial aspects of why I'll have to admit, I still desperately-want this guy's job. So, the special prosecutor could not satisfy the legal hoop-jumps to get Armitage into court, but even as a longtime government bureaucrat who is therefore difficult to actually-fire absent rape or murder level crimes, isn't he somehow subject to nonjudicial sanctions by higher-ranking bureaucrats? And wouldn't "leaking classified stuff to Novak" be grounds for such sanctions? I mean, aside from his name being spread around like this, has he experienced ANY sanction whatsoever, judicial or not, for what I think we all agree is a violation of US law??
If he really deserves/gets no sanctions, I really need his job for the next decade or so...
JMR
Sandy Burglar vs. Scooter...?
July 3, 2007 - 06:19 ET by Sergeant ROCKSandy Burglar vs. Scooter...?
Liberals are such partisan, &$%^# idiots! And all of this crying over his sentence being commuted??? Let's ask Marc Rich what he thinks about it?
I hope the weak-kneed, bed-wetting Republicans that avoided swift punishment of Sandy Burglar learned their lesson. Appeasement of those that seek your destruction is FUTILE!
Appeasement of those that see
July 3, 2007 - 07:25 ET by rimskyAppeasement of those that seek your destruction is SUICIDE!
And yet, there's a lot of idi
July 3, 2007 - 07:31 ET by Sergeant ROCKAnd yet, there's a lot of idiot Republicans that continue to do so!
Chew on this...
July 3, 2007 - 07:23 ET by Sua Sponte 75*Cough* Clintons pardons and other asshattery.....
Joseph A. Yasak N. D. Ill. 1988 Knowingly making under oath a false declaration regarding a material fact before a Grand Jury, 18 U.S.C. § 1623
Jack L. Williams D. Dist. Col. 1998 Making false statements to federal agents (two counts), 18 U.S.C. § 1001
Jack Kenneth Watson D. Oregon 1985 Making false statements of material facts to the United States Forest Service, 18 U.S.C. § 1001
John Fife Symington, III D. Ariz. 1996 indictment; 1997 superseding indictment False statements to federally insured financial institutions, wire fraud, attempted extortion, and false statements in bankruptcy proceeding, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1014, 1343, 1951, 152, 2(a) and 2(b)
Gerald Glen Rust E. D. Tex. 1991 False declarations before grand jury, 18 U.S.C. § 1623
Jerri Ann Rust E. D. Tex. 1991 False declarations before grand jury, 18 U.S.C. § 1623
Robert William Palmer E. D. Ark. 1995 Conspiracy to make false statements, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Verla Jean Allen W. D. Ark. 1990 False statements to agency of United States, 15 U.S.C. § 714m(a)
Sandy "Dox in the Sox" Berger. Also, Pat Leahy (D) was forced to resign his Senate Intelligence Committee post in 1988 after he was caught leaking top-secret information to a reporter.
The Marc Rich pardon. Also, the Clinton pardons of FALN terrorists, with the NYT praising the decisions.
Chuck Schumer (D), 1999, calling for the release of a convicted Israeli spy named John Pollard.
And a few other pardons…..
David Phillip Aronsohn D. Minn. 1961 Failure to pay special occupational tax on wagering, 26 U.S.C. § 7203
Wanda Kaye Bain-Prentice D. Ariz. 1982 Mail fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1341
Antonio Barucco U. S. Army general court-martial 1945 Desertion in violation of the 58th Article of War
Kristine Margo Beck D. Idaho 1981 Bank embezzlement, 18 U.S.C. § 656
David Christopher Billmaier D. New Mex. 1980 Possession with intent to distribute amphetamines, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)
Terry Lee Brown E. D. Ky. 1962 Interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle, 18 U.S.C. § 2312
Joe Carl Bruton N. D. Tex. 1979 Conspiracy to commit mail fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Nolan Lynn DeMarce W. D. Wis. 1983 Making false statements to obtain bank loans, 18 U.S.C. § 1014
Jimmy C. Dick N. D. Calif. 1976 Conspiracy to manufacture counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Edward Eugene Dishman W. D. Okla. 1983 Conspiracy to defraud the United States and Oklahoma counties, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Brenda Kay Engle S. D. Ind. 1983 Conspiracy to commit theft from interstate shipment, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Mary Theresa Fajer D. Oregon 1980 Conspiracy to commit bank embezzlement, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 371
Albert James Forte D. Dist. Col. 1973 Making and subscribing false and fraudulent income tax return, 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1)
Fendley Lee Frazier S. D. Ala. 1965 Interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle, 18 U.S.C. § 2312
Robert Linward Freeland, Jr. N. D. Ind. 1983 Forcible rescue of seized property, 26 U.S.C. § 7212(b)
Ralph Leon Furst S. D. Calif. 1966 Embezzlement of United States mail (U.S. Code section not cited)
Barbara Ann Gericke W. D. Wis. 1984 Conspiracy to introduce contraband into federal prison, 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1791
Billy Joe Gilmore N. D. Tex. 1982 Mail fraud and aiding and abetting, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 2
Loreto Joseph Iafrate N. D. W. Va. 1976 Failure to record receipt of firearms, 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(m) and 924(a)
Carl Bruce Jones W. D. Mo. 1983 Distribution of marijuana and use of telephone to facilitate marijuana distribution, 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 843(b)
Candace Deon Leverenz N. D. Calif. 1972 Unlawful distribution of LSD, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)
George William Lindgren S. D. N. Y. 1975 Bank embezzlement, 18 U.S.C. § 656
Brian George Meierkord C. D. Ill. 1983 Making false statement to bank, 18 U.S.C. § 1014
Jackie Lee Miller N. D. Okla. 1983 Conspiracy to defraud the United States, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Joseph Patrick Naulty E. D. Pa. 1980 Carrying away goods moving as part of foreign shipment, 18 U.S.C. § 659
Theodore Roosevelt Noel N. D. Ala. 1972 Selling whiskey in unstamped containers and making false statement in the acquisition of firearms from licensed dealer, 26 U.S.C. § 5604(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(6) and 924(a)
Mary Louise
Oaks M. D. La.1979 Conspiracy to defraud the government with respect to claims, 18 U.S.C. § 286
Robert Paul Padelsky D. Utah 1980 Misapplication of bank funds, 18 U.S.C. § 656
Elizabeth Amy Peterson D. Nev. 1985 Conspiracy to make false statements to bank, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Susan Lauranne Prather W. D. Ark. 1975 Causing marijuana to be transported through the mail, 21 U.S.C. § 843(b)
Gary Lynn Quammen W. D. Wis. 1976 Misapplication of bank funds, 18 U.S.C. § 656
Robert Ronal Raymond D. Conn. 1972 Conspiracy to manufacture, receive, possess, and sell firearms silencers, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Elizabeth Hogg Rushing N. D. Ga. 1978 Misapplication of bank funds, 18 U.S.C. § 656
Marc Alan Schaffer S. D. N. Y. 1968 Submission of false statements to Selective Service System Local Board, 50 U.S.C. Appendix § 462(a)
Roy Aaron Smith E. D. Tex. 1982 Misprision of a felony, 18 U.S.C. § 4
Diane Dorothea Smunk D. So. Dak. 1984 Embezzlement by government employee, 18 U.S.C. § 641
Thomas Peter Stathakis D. So. Car. 1976 Selling and delivering firearms to out-of-state resident and falsifying firearms records, 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(3), 922(m), and 924(a)
Kathleen Vacanti C. D. Calif. 1979 Conspiracy to defraud the United States by obtaining payment of false claims, presenting false claims to the United States, forging a writing, and aiding and abetting, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 286, 287, and 495
Pupi White W. D. Mo. 1985 Making false statement on United States passport application, 18 U.S.C. § 911
Charles Coleman Wicker E. D. Mo. 1975 Conspiracy to conduct illegal gambling business, 18 U.S.C. § 371
Roderick Douglas Woods S. D. Miss. 1982 Misappropriation of bank funds and aiding and abetting, 18 U.S.C. §§ 656 and 2
"You're either part of the solution or part of the problem"
Yeah, Scooter got away with m
July 3, 2007 - 07:27 ET by Sergeant ROCKYeah, Scooter got away with murder, didn't he?
I can usually tolerate whiny
July 3, 2007 - 07:31 ET by HelenSI can usually tolerate whiny liberals as no more than disturbingly creepy curiosities, kind of like this thing:
Ugly Pregnant Naked Mole Rat
With the howling and screaching and lust for blood going on now, way out of proportion to the alleged wrong, I can add that they are clearly disgusting and nauseating hypocrites.
(and I apologize for being so inept at adding links that I end up wreaking havoc with the esthetics of this thread. Mea culpa)
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
(NB Staff note- We fixed your link!)
My heroes! Thank you :o)&qu
July 3, 2007 - 09:10 ET by HelenSMy heroes! Thank you :o)
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
No problem. Any time.
July 3, 2007 - 09:26 ET by Warner Todd HustonNo problem. Any time.
What about Sandy Burglar?
July 3, 2007 - 15:27 ET by jasontrommThe MSM is also ignoring the conviction of Sandy Burglar and the light sentence he got. Sure, it happened after Clinton left office, stealing classified documents is a much more serious cribe than Libby's. 30 months in jail for Libby, 100 hours community service for Burglar. $250,000 for Libby, $50,00 for Burglar. How are those two sentences fair?