I’m flattered that digby used some of the material I sent her way.
Libby does not equal Mark Rich. Libby equals Caspar Weinberger. And the media reaction? Much the same.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
I like it when Republicans fight among themselves..appears Romney likes porno. Profit before morals..The republican way.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070705/ap_on_el_pr/romney_pornography;_ylt=ArXFsCWopFp9lZw4b1dkB4myFz4D
at the time for some of those last minute pardons. And that’s even though none of them were, at least apparently, intended to obstruct justice.
.
In 1983, Rich was indicted in federal court of evading more than $48 million in taxes. He was also charged with 51 counts of tax fraud and with running illegal oil deals with Iran during the hostage crisis.
Rich’s money has now bought him a pardon in the United States. Direct bribery was unnecessary. After hiring prominent Republican lawyers during the Reagan and Bush administrations–Leonard Garment, former Nixon White House counsel, William Bradford Reynolds, once an official of the Reagan Justice Department, and Lewis Libby, now chief of staff to Vice President Richard Cheney–Rich hired a top Democratic lawyer, Jack Quinn, to give him direct access to Clinton.
Clinton has cited high-level Israeli support of the Rich pardon as one of the reasons he pardoned the billionaire. Outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Barak and former Mossad chief Shabtai Shavit were among top Israeli officials who pushed Clinton to pardon Rich.
During the past 20 years, Rich has contributed up to $80 million to Israeli hospitals, museums, symphonies and to the absorption of immigrants. He also had a role in helping Israel get Jews out of Ethiopia and Yemen.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Question: Why did Armitage tell Woodward that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA? Obviously I’m not looking in the right places but maybe someone can give me a clue or a link. Thanks.
.
Transctiption of exchange between Woodward and Armitage, claim “Joe Wilson Told Everyone About Plame” is false.
According to Woodward, this exchange took place “nearly a month” before Bob Novak wrote his column referencing Ms. Plame.
I didn’t transcribe the beginning of the exchange. But in it Richard Armitage brags that “we” (at the State Department) are “clean as a whistle” regarding the yellowcake claims.
When Woodward asks him why the reference had been included in the State Of The Union address, Armitage notes it had been removed from an earlier speech. He then blames the White House ((Steve Hadley). He adds that “Condi” “doesn’t like to be on the hot seat.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."I’m a little late with all of this. Why would Armitage then say something like that if it wasn’t true? How odd. Obviously the whole discussion about what to do about Wilson’s findings in Niger had begun in the administration earlier. So why wasn’t Armitage considered the source of the leak. Because he didn’t know Plame was undercover? Hard to believe he didn’t know that.
Conyers is going to hold hearings on Libby’s commutation. What happens if he asks Libby to testify using a subpoena, if necessary:
Conyers: “Did you receive any promises of a quo for the quid of lying under oath? This includes vague references to your family being looked after or other hints?”
Libby:
a) Pleads the Fifth
b) Says no he did not
c) Says yes he did
Choice (a) is the same as admitting he did. This and (c) then open up the door to further investigation including possible grounds for impeachment for Bush or Cheney depending on who made the offer.
Choice (b) leaves him open to further perjury charges if it later comes out that there was some compensatory offer made.
Can he still plead the Fifth? Didn’t Bush remove any jeopardy?
If he is asked about the conditions of his commutation that has nothing to do with the conviction. This is a new avenue of investigation and would open him up to new prosecutions if he lied to the committee.
Pleading the fifth would also be a big political loss for the admin.
You may want to read these:
July 7, 2007 http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=11250
Armitage: Cheney Cabal Scapegoat
by Gordon Prather
Members of the Cheney Cabal – in and outside government – and their media sycophants are charging that then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage played the initial and key role in the exposure of CIA covert agent Valerie Plame and of her “cover,” Brewster-Jennings & Associates. And even though that charge is evidently false, they illogically claim that if it were true it would somehow “exonerate” Scooter Libby, found guilty of committing the crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice….” excerpt
AND….
…”But whatever Armitage did, or says he did, in no way alters what Rove and Libby did in the days that followed, nor does it change their intentions. It’s a simple concept–two people or more can commit a similar act for entirely different reasons–but evidently it has flummoxed the great minds of contemporary journalism….”
Joe Conason: White House Guilt in CIA Leak Case Remains
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060906_joe_conason_cia_leak/
good catch, Sandy. This whole thing is such a red herring for bushie. he and his minions are such fools.
The concerts are in full force, viewable in the states at the MSN site and on Bravo. Lots of good info between the music, so I’m hearing. I just turned it on….