The Immorality of George Walker Bush
There is a birdbath tucked in between a Japanese maple and a spruce tree at our house and this time of year it is a rare evening that there isn’t a procession of fat robins who take turns splashing in the water and then flying up to the branches of a nearby plum tree to preen and shake themselves dry.
I was standing at the door last night taking in this sweet little sideshow, a moment of sublime normalcy in what has increasingly seemed like a world gone crazy, when the news broke that President Bush had commuted Scooter Libby’s prison sentence with a grant of executive clemency.
The news was not only expected, but I had blogged a few hours earlier that the time had come for Bush to pull the trigger, which of course was fully within his rights as the chief executive. Yet I found myself nevertheless stunned and felt like I should call friends and breathlessly shout, “Did you hear the news?â€
Perhaps someone as expert as a Dr. E can explain in psychological terms why something that I knew was going to happen still put me so back on my heels. But I think that it comes down to the simple matter that even after all of these years I am still shocked by the immorality of the Bush presidency.
It would have been one thing if the Libby commutation had been an aberration. But here is a man who as governor of Texas openly mocked a woman whom he had just put to death by pursing his lips and squeaking “please don’t kill me†after she had appealed to him for clemency. Who did not intervene in a single one of the over 150 death sentences carried out on his watch although there were reasons to do so in at least several of them. Who as president did intervene against the wishes of Terri Schiavo’s husband. Who did not intervene when it became widely known that Tom Foley was preying on congressional pages or condemn his aberrance when he slunk off to a drunk tank. Who twice intervened to block expansion of federal funding of promising stem cell research.
Who has repeatedly scoffed at the Rule of Law. Who has railed against the sick deeds of Islamic jihadists but enshrined the use of torture and established a gulag of secret prisons. Who has been grossly insensitive to the needs of Hurricane Katrina survivors and the poor and disadvantaged in general. Who has used the Justice Department as a fief of the Republican Party. Who has been tough on crimes high and low unless they are committed by his pals, who in his crass calculus are like himself above the law.
Immorality is a maleable term and should not be used lightly, but it is in the shameful context of the last six years that the Libby commutation is less a presidential perquisite than yet another immoral act.
As it was, this calculatingly cynical man who claims to channel the wisdom of Mr. Jesus Christ had nothing to lose by playing to his shrunken political base. And I disagree with pundits who say the president was vulnerable if Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff blabbed. While the commutation does further the original cover-up, everyone knows that the vice president masterminded the affair that led to Libby’s slam-dunk conviction — a crude effort to inflict harm after one of the lies justifying an immoral war was bared.
There’s that word again. Immoral.
It was entirely coincidental, but I had reread the text of the Declaration of Independence earlier yesterday in preparation for posting it on Independence Day. I urge you to read it, as well. And reflect on the words of the Founding Fathers and the immorality of George Walker Bush.
50 Responses to “The Immorality of George Walker Bush”
Its interesting to note that the man heading up the Scooter Libby Defence Fund, Mel Sembler ( also campaign finance chair for the Republican party 2000), is the founder of a nationwide network of treatment centres for troubled teenagers, called Straight Inc.
In all their centres state investigators have documented scores of abuse including teens being beaten, denied food, shelter and sleep as well as being bound and sexually abused. All Straight Inc facilities have since been closed down.
Sembler, along with Robert Lichfield, is a top fund raiser for Mitt Romeny. Lichfield also founded a network of treatment centres for teens known as The World Wide Association Of Specialty Programmes and Schools (WWASPS) which has also been investigated and 3 of their centres were closed down in Mexico after police discovered, and videotaped, teenagers chained up in dog cages.
Sembler has branded the kids who came forward to document their treatment as ‘liars’ and ‘well known manipulators’.
The apples rot from the bottom of the barrel up. Guess the stench has finally reached the top.
Congress has subpoenaed the White House for more information, but on Thursday the President invoked executive privilege, saying he would not turn over any documents that related to advice he received or his deliberations about the clemency, which is a Presidential prerogative.
Opps sorry this took place in 1999.
As usual an excellent article Shaun.
You can always tell when a Bushaholics agrees with you… they either try to change the subject to Bill Clinton LOL; are unable to address any of the points make;
or, they edit your remark.Somebody- Bill Clinton did not bill himself as the law and order candidate from the party that respects the “rule of law”. Also lying about oral sex with an intern is hardly the same as someone from our own government jettisoning its own CIA operative for crass political purposes (and one who was looking for those elusive WMD’s no less!)
Bush refused clemency appeal after clemency appeal for death row inmates while Governor of Texas even after the criminals showed remorse and found God. He swore up and down he would not pardon (ok here comes the part where we talk about commutation as a separate entity) convicted criminals. Yet to protect the WH coverup in the leak case that is exactly what he did. Scooter did not even show remorse , admit his crime, or serve any part of his sentence, the usual precursors for commutation.
Was it legal? Yes. Was it moral? No way. And as you commented yesterday, all of these candidates who are now praising Bush will be held accountable by the American people in ’08.
You know Stevek I started to address his post each point at a time and then I thought….whats the point. Immorality as he defined it is all subjective.
He claims rejection of stem cell research is Immoral… A liberal Cause…Kill those babies.
He claims the interdiction in the Schiavo case is immoral…A liberal Cause…Euthanize those veggies.
He claims that not commenting on Foley was immoral…
Jail those GAY sicko Republicans….what happened to innocent till proven guilty….commenting on Foley would have been obstructing Foleys right to a fair trial if it came to that.
Death row failure to refute sentences….A liberal cause.
I mean I could go on and on. The point about Clinton is valid. He did the same things Bush did. Period. He was embroiled in Ethics and morality issues. However the difference can be defined in how we define the word.
Immorality. Shaun chooses to define it one way which makes Bush look like Stalins Henchman. Republicans choose to define it another way which make Clinton look like Stalins Henchmen.
Shaun has it right….the word immorality should not be tossed around lightly. So what is the point of refuting his once again continuing Hatred of all Things Bush??
Kritter again your absolute hatred for all things Bush clouds your judgement.
The perpetrator of the exposure was revealed. He even admitted it and can be proven that he was the one who exposed Valerie Plame who was about as covert as was the Director of the CIA.
Her name and face was plastered all over the DC social pages.
However all that aside. The fact that Armitage still runs free tells me this had nothing to do with JUSTICE. There was this euphoric hope they could nab Cheney and impeach him. When it didnt happen they took the next best thing…..Libby….Armitage meanwhile runs free, skipping around America and no one cares that he was the one that blew Plames cover.
Your hypocrisy knows no bounds Kritter. If you wanted Revenge for the Plame affair you would have Armitidge in jail, not Libby.
At least be honest about it. Libby was revenge…..Not Justice.
[...] House Link to Article iraq The Immorality of George Walker Bush » Posted at The Moderate Voice » [...]
Oh darn the whole effect of my post went down the tubes when I said this:
If you wanted Revenge for the Plame affair you would have Armitidge in jail, not Libby.
I meant to say this:
If you wanted JUSTICE for the Plame affair you would have Armitidge in jail, not Libby.
Innocent until proven guilty, eh… kind of a risky analogy in a thread about the guilty being set free I’d think! lol
What happened to guilty when proven guilty?
Bill Clinton did not bill himself as the law and order candidate from the party that respects the “rule of lawâ€.
“You live in a country that makes it harder to raise children than any country in the world. You vote for me and I’ll give you family values.” – “Portland Oregonian”, July 26, 1992
“I will streamline the federal government and change the way it works, cut 100,000 bureaucrats and put 100,000 new police officers on your streets of American cities.” – New York City, July 16, 1992
“To the fathers who have chosen to abandon their children by neglecting their child support: Take responsibility for your children, or we will force you to do so.” – New York City, July 16, 1992
Whats Clintons Excuse? The point is not to bash Clinton which everyone assumes if you even Breathe Clintons name in a conversation about politics. The point is that again your missing the grand picture here if you hold Bush to his promises but Not Clinton to his.
Every president runs on law and order. What are they going to stand up and say:
“If Elected I promise to have a rowdy return to the old west where law is a fleeting thing and this administration will do its damndest to have corruption as its focal point???”
Shaun – you know how little we have agreed, but even I am starting to come around on this issue.
It is not that he commuted Libby’s sentence per se; something like that was expected, and not out of character of other political acts in the pat by other Presidents.
What really, really bothers me, as kritter alluded to, and I posted to in an earlier thread on this subject, is summed up well by Orin Kerr of the Volokh Conspiracy:
I find Bush’s action very troubling because of the obvious special treatment Libby received. President Bush has set a remarkable record in the last 6+ years for essentially never exercising his powers to commute sentences or pardon those in jail. His handful of pardons have been almost all symbolic gestures involving cases decades old, sometimes for people who are long dead. Come to think of it, I don’t know if Bush has ever actually used his powers to get one single person out of jail even one day early. If there are such cases, they are certainly few and far between. So Libby’s treatment was very special indeed.
I find the phrase “Euthanize those veggies” to be wonderfully poetic, even though I’m not planning to put my baby carrots on life support.
PS Armitage did not lie to the grand jury.
What happened to guilty when proven guilty?
Steve I hope you are only joking. Because if the facts bear out in this case then he should go to jail. If that is the case then for a sitting president to be making pronouncements good or bad is not a good thing. Now if a President wants to say Foley is a good man and an honorable man then so be it. That is a political calculation that would be very risky given a MORAL crime.
However Libby was not a moral crime. It was a crime of obstructing justice in a political witch hunt. For him to interceede is relevant although as I proclaimed yesterday very, very risky and shows a willingness of this president to abandon the party to the Base.
Bush is doing the same thing that the democrats are doing right this very minute. Abandoning the party to the base.
PS Armitage did not lie to the grand jury.
No he didnt because this witch hunt proved they did not want justice for Plame. They wanted revenge for all the evil Bush has done to the democrats psyche.
So they worked hard at trying to nab a PRIZE. When they finally realized they could not get to Cheney or Rove they settled for Libby with Armitidge on the sidelines waving his arms and jumping up and down screaming “ME ME ME.” to no avail.
It was never about justice. It was about revenge. When the Liberal/democratic base admits that then we will all be happy. They just continue to cloak themselves in the veil of righteous indignation. That is why Bush commuted his sentence and will pardon him on his last day in office.
It is a political nose thumbing to his opponents who have dragged him thru the mud for 6 years. It is why Clinton expressing frustration at the slowness of the DOJ giving him pardonable recomendations pardoned 146 on his last day in office.
We now have a department whose sole purpose it is to select pardons for the president to insure that a president does not suffer from investigations that were attempted after Clinton pardoned Rich.
Steve: please. You can complain all you want, but we adhere to certain standards here. Read the comment policy. Your comments are edited when you cross the line, not because you disagree with the poster.
Michael, If that were the case I wouldn’t have complained. Perhaps you should ask David Schraub what I’m referring to.
Somebody- Libby obstructed the investigation and lied to 5 grand juries. That doesn’t make him innocent in my book. Libby put a cloud of suspicion over the VP, because Fitzgerald believed he was covering up for Cheney. Armitage was not the sole leaker- others helped to spread the word- Libby, Rove and Ari Fleischer. Novak couldn’t have printed his column outing Plame if it wasn’t for Rove, and Libby was Judith Miller’s source for information about the leak, which is why she spent those months in jail, remember? It was obviously a failed campaign to discredit Wilson for blowing their little secret about the Niger uranium.
It is you whose uberpartisanship is clouding your judgement about this crime/cover-up/commutation.
LOL I must defend the ChimpinChief, the Texas governor can only delay an execution, they cannot change the sentence. Even Ann Richards caught criticism because of this.
http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/vlibrary/outlines/deathpenprint.html
By Texas law W couldn’t stop an execution, but he sure did relish his role as “Executor in Chief” while in Texas. He wouldn’t be like the Illinois governor.
One of the US attorneys was removed ostensibly because she didn’t pursue capital punishment aggressively enough in the cases that she prosecuted. Bush has made meting out death sentences a top priority of his administration- along with prosecuting Democrats for voter fraud. Why would anyone expect a president who governs for the base and by the base, to resist pressure from that base to commute LIbby’s sentence? It was totally predictable.
BTW, which of his campaign promises hasn’t he violated???
because Fitzgerald believed he was covering up for Cheney. Armitage was not the sole leaker- others helped to spread the word
I AGAIN HAVE TO ASK. If they are guilty why are they not in jail, charged or awaiting trial for a criminal activity of exposing Plame???
The fact is he believed but could not PROVE.
From Newsweek.
Armitage’s admission led to a flurry of anxious phone calls and meetings that day at the State Department. (Days earlier, the Justice Department had launched a criminal investigation into the Plame leak after the CIA informed officials there that she was an undercover officer.) Within hours, William Howard Taft IV, the State Department’s legal adviser, notified a senior Justice official that Armitage had information relevant to the case. The next day, a team of FBI agents and Justice prosecutors investigating the leak questioned the deputy secretary. Armitage acknowledged that he had passed along to Novak information contained in a classified State Department memo: that Wilson’s wife worked on weapons-of-mass-destruction issues at the CIA. (The memo made no reference to her undercover status.) Armitage had met with Novak in his State Department office on July 8, 2003—just days before Novak published his first piece identifying Plame. Powell, Armitage and Taft, the only three officials at the State Department who knew the story, never breathed a word of it publicly and Armitage’s role remained secret.
The second question that I have is that why is Robert Novak not in jail. Maybe I don’t understand the power of the 1st amendment but does that give the newspapers the right to publish something like this with impunity?
The real question is that many of you have to dance a two step to reach the conclusion when those of us who understand the truth. Armitidge gossiped and the great Democratic Fred Astaire two step began.
Libby had a choice- lie to the grand jury or tell them the truth. He lied, and as we all know, in Bush’s world lies have no consequences.
Are you listening, kids?
So Kritter what you are saying then is that Bush removed US attorneys for not doing their job.
AKA meeting out harsh enough punishment or going after DEMOCRATS WHO COMMITTED CRIMES.
Hmmmm….Interesting concept. Darn US Attorneys and here I thought they were supposed to go after criminals and meet out punishment to the bad guys.
Darn that Bush fella.
Anyone care to take a bite out of this wormy apple?
Somebody- Its selective prosecution, and selective compassion for one of his own-
Bush is using the Justice Dept to catch those vicious felons guilty of voter fraud- in many instances (Iglesias’ for one)the cases were not pursued because of flimsy evidence. But Iglesias is being replaced by the very attorney who urged him on regardless of the strength of the evidence.
And Bush overturned precedent which lets USA’s determine which cases to pursue the death sentence to order that they request it at every opportunity. Sounds like equal justice under the law to me!
If he’s so concerned with going after the bad guys and punishing them, then he should let the sentence stand for the felon in his own administration.
If he’s so concerned with going after the bad guys and punishing them, then he should let the sentence stand for the felon in his own administration.
I agree!! Even G. Gordon Liddy served his sentence. Course he might have been pardoned had it not been for his boss resigning and not having the opportunity to pardon him.
I have never argued that Libby did not break the law. Ever. He did. That is clear.
The big question I have for you is this.
IF given the information above the FBI knew who the perpetrator was, then why did they continue on with a witch hunt of an investigation and in my opinion use entrapment against Libby?
This has really been my biggest question about the entire libby ordeal. The FBI knew who the leaker was long before Libby began his weak attempts at lieing to the grand juries.
The very fact that the investigation continued continues to prove the paranoia that runs rampant in DC.
The man continues to show no aptitude for cleverness. He should have merely granted a respite until the real appeal hearing and the pollsters would have been tied up for hours explaining the term to people first. It would have had one-quarter of the impact.
After all, didn’t Hillary just tell the Howard University audience that its stupid to fill up the jails with non-violent offenders?
The fact is he believed but could not PROVE.
one of the reasons he could not “PROVE” it was because someone Obstructed Justice. there’s a reason lying to a grand Jury is a crime, ya know.
Somebody,
Why do you continue with the lie that this is sort of Left-wing witch hunt?
The entire cast of characters from the prosecution to the judge and to the defense were Republicans and Bush appointees.
Because, Somebody- Fitzgerald didn’t think the sole perpetrator was Armitage. He believed that the idea to out Plame originated out of the VP’s office. Libby protected Cheney which is why Fitzgerald said that Libby had put a cloud of suspicion over the Vice President. I assume that Cheney did his part by urging Bush to commute the sentence so that Scooter wouldn’t serve any time. Breaking news is that the WH won’t rule out a pardon, which would complete the bargain.
Even Sandy Berger didn’t get a deal like that.
Glenn Greenwald says it better:
Clinton!! Clinton!!!
Err… Nevermind… More here.
And after 100 million spent on the Starr investigation, we have now come full circle, and negated the need of those in power to remain virtuous while holding the public trust.
The ‘witch hunt’ was led by a respected Republican prosecutor. Almost everyone involved in the prosecution was a Republican.
Are those of you resorting to this claim saying that it was a Republican witch hunt?
——————————————-
A conviction for the original crime-revealing the identity of a covert (as Plame was vouched to be, by the CIA) agent requires prood of INTENT to do so; Doing so unwittingly (Armitage) does not qualify. The threshhold of intent is deliberatrly high to discourage spurious accusations.
Proof of intent in this particular case(Fitzgerald’s ‘cloud’ over the VP’s office) was doomed, because of the diffficulty of getting documents from the WH.
It was right to stop here; a judicial fight with the executive would have been ugly and horrible for the country).
That explains why no one was convicted of the original crime.
We’re left with Libby, Cheney’s deputy.
He was convicted of a separate crime, obstructkng justice. Interpret it any way you want, but Libby was formally charged with a crime and was convicted for it.
—————————————
The comparison shopping mode of talking about current events is dangerous.
Even if Clinton was the worst president in history regarding pardons (Raegan and Nixon both outscore him, BTW). the ‘worst’ should not be the benchmark by whick we judge any action.
I don’t think we want to excuse the next president because Bush ‘did it too’. A succession of presidents could well get on an escalator built on ‘he did it, too’ that has no limits.
———————————-
I’m not sure where I stand on the commutation of Libby’s sentence.
I’ve heard some conservative purists condemn it on the grounds it besmirches their ideology.
I dont’ subsbribe to the supremacy of an ideology as the primary factor in all cases.
I’m concerned about Libby’s young children. Jailing Libby punishes them, too.
————–
But lets not forget that Libby allowed Judy Miller to sit in jail for 8 months protecting him as her source. If he was just caught in Fitzgerald’s perjury trap and not involved up to his neck, why would he have done so? Now that its his turn to go to jail, well that’s totally different?
Why do you continue with the lie that this is sort of Left-wing witch hunt?
From Wiki
On August 28, 2006, it was reported that Richard Armitage was the primary source of the Valerie Plame leak and that Fitzgerald knew this at the beginning of his investigation.[12] Investor’s Business Daily questioned Mr. Fitzgerald’s truthfulness in an op-ed piece one day later.
Very good question. One must look at Fitzgerald to see why the investigation continued despite a few days after it started he knew the leaker.
Fitzgerald began an investigation of political appointees of Republican Illinois Governor George Ryan, who were suspected of accepting bribes to give licenses to unqualified truck drivers. Fitzgerald soon expanded this investigation, uncovering a network of political bribery and gift-giving, and leading to more than 60 indictments
Notice the expansion here.
I suspect he had visions of grandeur dancing in his head. Stirred on and spurred on by the democrats and the Republicans were powerless to stop his witch hunt that followed.
In March 2007, it was revealed that Fitzgerald “was ranked among prosecutors who had ‘not distinguished themselves’ on a Justice Department chart sent to the White House in March 2005….”
The left wing blogsphere drove this witch hunt…along with the democratic party during an election year. So before we simply wave away the fact that a judge and a prosecutor were republican does not on the surface mean a darn thing.
I repeat the FBI and Fitzgerald knew the leaker days after the investigation began but that was not good enough.
And as Kritter puts it 100,000,000 dollars later we put Libby in jail and let the leakers go free.
No wonder he was on the list of those not distinguishing himself.
Every time I read a Somebody Said post I think of that Yeats line ‘The worst are full of pasionate intensity’.
11 comments out of 34!
Relax for God’s sake. Put your trousers on and get some fresh air. Your guy won. The liars win again. and all’s right in your world.
Why bother, the Somebody’s of the world will never call the administration on their BS. The mere fact Clinton is invoked like some sort of ward against allegations against Bush shows the disconnect with reality. Like somehow the previous presidents shortcomings justify the current ones. Its entirely possible they are BOTH scum.
If I had to rate them though I don’t see how Bush’s policies even merit a comparison. Clinton’s involved interns and marital infidelity. Bush’s involve violation after violation of the public trust and widespread abuse of authority as well as stepping all over the Constitution. Its like trying to get a rapist off the hook because the last guy in the courtroom was a convicted jaywalker.
And Somebody, we didn’t “Let” the leakers go free. The administration lied and covered up and invoked priviledge until there was no way to convict the leakers.
Why bother, the Somebody’s of the world will never call the administration on their BS.
I have never argued that Libby did not break the law. Ever. He did. That is clear.
And Somebody, we didn’t “Let†the leakers go free. The administration lied and covered up and invoked priviledge until there was no way to convict the leakers.
Richard Armitage confessed to the FBI he was the leaker. If Fitzgerald could not make a case out of that then I dont know what to say.
“I have never argued that Libby did not break the law. Ever. He did. That is clear.”
Well I’m confused then. You seem to be bringing up Clinton’s crimes as some sort of defense of Libby’s sentence being commuted. I really don’t see what the one has to do with the other. There are A LOT of us that feel Clinton’s perjury was a black mark of shame and also feel the same way about the ongoing secrecy of the Bush administration, the protectionism of cronies and the way there is all this smoke but everyone in the Whitehouse locks the doors and keeps telling us there is no fire.
somebody- The hundred mill was wasted on Kenneth Starr’s collaborative effort with Ann Coulter, who believes Libby’s perjury and obstruction deserves a pardon. I completely agree with Sam’s comment:
“If I had to rate
them though I don’t see how Bush’s policies even merit a comparison. Clinton’s involved interns and marital infidelity. Bush’s involve violation after violation of the public trust and widespread abuse of authority as well as stepping all over the Constitution. Its like trying to get a rapist off the hook because the last guy in the courtroom was a convicted jaywalker.”
Clinton’s saga was a tacky soap opera that entertained the nation with its sordid details. This is a betrayal of our trust by our officials- who would jeopardize a covert agent to hide their dirty work. Its more Watergate than Zippergate. Clinton is a great man with a major flaw, Bush is a weak, insecure one with many flaws. All the secrecy is needed to cover up how little he cares about the national interest.
Somebody- You really need to stop making Rush’s point that Fitzgerald knew Armitage was the leaker. The plot involved the administration, and Libby covered for them. Otherwise there would have been no point in lying and putting on that disjointed defense at his trial.
Whats Clintons Excuse? The point is not to bash Clinton which everyone assumes if you even Breathe Clintons name in a conversation about politics. The point is that again your missing the grand picture here if you hold Bush to his promises but Not Clinton to his.
This is about the only thing I wrote here in regard to Clinton other then posting a news clip where he invoked executive priveledge while the Bush bashers howl in outrage at Bush doing the same.
Im not Clinton Bashing. I think Clinton was a pretty decent moderate president. Im only saying that both sides of this equation are held to a double standard.
The post was about Immorality. I just pointed out how Morality is subjective and it depends on who is defining the word as to which President is getting toasted.
The posters continued to talk about Libby and the decision in an Immoral context. It was not immoral. Many on the left believe that victimless crime should not be punished. They believe that non violent offenders should not be in prison and yet many of those same people are wringing their hands in anguish over this decision.
I just try to get people to look at the Ethics of any decision. Im sorry if it stirs you up. Actually Im not. I like it when people start googling for information. Perhaps they just might learn something they didnt know. I know I do.
Shaun: I agree with much, except the claim of immorality.
Unethical, yes. Immoral, no.
Because morality can oft be stretched to include murder and other acts, while secular ethics cannot.
Bush may be unethical, as well his conies- as well as venal, disgusting, and reprobatory. But immoral. Nay.
Well the GOP will be feeling the pinch in ’08. Donations are already way down— compare Giuliani’s 17 million with Obama’s 33.4 million! The Democrats will ram the Republican comments about the pardon/commuted sentence of Scooter Libby down the public’s throats during the general election. Btwn the immigration issue, the war and the Bush/Cheney arrogance of power, and this the Dems will have no trouble increasing their margin of victory.
“Many on the left believe that victimless crime should not be punished. They believe that non violent offenders should not be in prison and yet many of those same people are wringing their hands in anguish over this decision.”
Perjury is not a victimless crime. When some lies in court its to cover up something someone did to the rest of us. The system itself is the victim if we can not reliably get witnesses to tell the truth. Perjury’s only purpose is to set the guilty free and imprison the innocent.
And didn’t this make him an accomplice to something worse?
Valerie Plame and the truth owed the American people about why she was really outted and by whom- were Libby’s victims.
Stop holding back, Shaun! Tell us how you REALLY feel!
“witch hunt”
What a convenient way to denigrate the work of investigators and prosecutors to enforce the law. Oh how the holier-than-thou Republicans have fallen. See them twist in mock outrage in defense of lying under oath. OF ALL THINGS!
I’m gonna save this post–such a useful insight about who is about truth here and who is NOT. Party loyalists, arguing on behalf of liar and convicted criminal Libby, show no respect for the oath sworn by witnesses, the cornerstone of justice. They show contempt for the truth. How could anyone trust them? All their future arguments are hereby tainted by a disregard for truth.
Another thing. That ‘so help me God’ oath that they so lightly dismiss shows just how empty is any claim they make of religious or moral authority. Goodbye, illusion of integrity.