Letters to the Editor
WeikuBoy
Published Letters: 487 Editor's Choice: 62
-
Elephant's Hypocrisy is Breathtaking
[Read the article: The Libby lobby's pardon campaign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Here at last is the Elephant we all know: "The one and only thing that [Libby] is charged with is 'lying' about where he first heard the name of Valerie Plame, inasmuch as his recollection of conversations with Judy Miller and Tim Russert differed."
That's rich! You really should be a defense attorney. I can hear it now: "Members of the jury, the ONLY thing my client, Mr. Soprano, is charged with is 'murdering' three people But the other 99% of his life has been totally crime-free life (as far as you'll ever know)."
Outing Ms. Plame might or might not have been a crime -- and without Scooter's truthful testimony, we'll never know -- but Lil' Scooter obviously THOUGHT Ol' Cakewalk Cheney had done something wrong -- legally or politically -- and thus he lied to protect his boss.
The bottom line is that Elephant's Gop impeached a democratically-elected president for the very same crimes they now belittle; and the Elephantine hypocrisy is breathtaking.
-
Elephants, Calliopes, and Clowns
[Read the article: The Libby lobby's pardon campaign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Elephant says: "Libby, Rove, and Cheney all cooperated with the investigators, which [sic] concluded no prosecution of any violation of the Act. But more importantly, it was clear to Fitzgerald from the start that Armitage was the original source."
"Cooperated" in the sense of obstructed, lied to, stonewalled, and ultimately stopped; yes indeed, Elephant! Sort of like the way the Iraqis have "cooperated" with the Bush-Cheney Occupation. But only in Elephant's obviously overheated imagination did the Bush-Cheney people "cooperate" with their own Gop-appointed Republican proscutor, Patrick Fitzgerald.
Only in Elephant's fevered imagination was violating "the Act" the only possible crime at issue; and only in his vivid imagination did Armitage's "gossip" preclude the possibility of a parallel criminal conspiracy in Cheney's office to protect the lies used to sell the Iraq war.
But then, what else could we expect from a Gop partisan who compares "Salonistas" with communists and the Democrat [sic] party to al-Qaeda? Although Elephant's errors do sort of explain the Gop's all-out war against We the People, while they let bin-Laden go free.
-
Elephant's Bad Memory in re the Meaning of "Cooperation"
[Read the article: The Libby lobby's pardon campaign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Gop's 8-year war to destroy a democratically-elected President of the United States is what made me see the so-called republicans for what they really are; yes. Their trampling of democracy in 2000 and the neo-fascist sickness that is "Bush-Cheney" increased my disgust; true. But MY feelings are irrelevant, as the issue at hand is poor little Scooter's multiple felony convictions. Or rather it was, until Elephant ran out of arguments.
Elephant says, "But Libby did 'cooperate.' He did everything that the investigators asked of him." Everything except TELL THE TRUTH. Really, you crack me up, Elephant. Perjury and obstruction of justice are not cooperation in the real world most of us inhabit.
By the way, no one can refuse to testify before a grand jury; and officials whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers cannot refuse to talk to the FBI, or to Congress. Yet the Bush-Cheney Gop, including our Elephant, has utter contempt for the co-equal branches and constitutional checks and balances. When I call Bush-Cheney "neo-fascist", that is why. (Along with Operation Iraqi Liberation, warrantless wiretapping, secret renditions, etc.)
-
The Fall Guy
[Read the article: The Libby lobby's pardon campaign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You have to "appear" in order to assert your 5A privilege against self-incrimination; and it technically is asserted on a question-by-question basis. For example, it would be strange to invoke the 5th in answer to your name and occupation. Once you do invoke it, you can then be offered a form of immunity (or not); and if you still refuse to respond, you can be held in contempt. So don't pretend Scooter did anyone a favor by "agreeing" to testify.
The aspect of federal officials whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers "taking the 5th" as if they were mobsters or common criminals is really quite extraordinary. U.S. presidents, who take an oath to protect and defend the constitution, are generally assumed to obey the law, unlike mobsters; and if people like Monica Goodling had attended real law schools they might understand how shameful it is for senior Justice Dept. officials to take the 5th.
When after 6 years and many millions of dollars the Gop succeeded in getting Bill Clinton under oath and surprised him with questions about the intimate details of his sex life, he could have taken the 5th; and any other citizen would have done so. Politically, however, it would have been unthinkable for the President of the United States to "take the 5th." Yet it appears that such a sense of shame, like so much else, is just pre-9/11 thinking.
Bush & Cheney certainly think they are above the law; but alas, Scooter, at least, is not.
-
The Fall Guy II
[Read the article: The Libby lobby's pardon campaign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]President Clinton might not have been able to "take the 5th" because his private sex life involved nothing illegal. The 5A protects us from self-incrimination with regard to criminal culpability, and possibly civil liability; but I don't know that it protects us from disclosures that are only embarrassing or politically damaging. Maybe someone up on the 5A knows?
In any event this is WHY it is so shameful for Bush-Cheney officials pledged to defend the Constitution and employed as the nation's top law enforcement officers to "take the 5th." Taking the 5th is like saying, "I might be guilty, but even though I know best what I did you're going to have to spend more public funds looking elsewhere for proof of my guilt." Which is acceptable for mobsters, but shameful for public officials in re their offical duties.
The point is, we assume "our" government is law-abiding; but a "unitary Gop executive" dedicated to breaking the law, subverting democracy, and overthrowing the Constitution, is unprecedented. Elephant's phrase "perjury trap" really says it all; this Gop is so corrupt that the mere act of public officials being asked to give truthful testimony concerning their official duties is viewed suspiciously, as constituting some sort of trap. It's extraordinary.