Letters to the Editor

This letter is associated with the following article:
Even if the vice president himself is not indicted, imagine the questions he might be asked, under oath, in Libby's case.
  • Interesting

    I'm not so sure that some of those questions would be asked that way (such as the use of the word "false Nigerian claims" - but the substance is there.

    Cheney will be in a hard spot either way. If he buries Libbey, then he risks having Libbey turn on him and possibly Rove - and if that happens, especially in either 2006 or 2008 during an election year, it could hurt the Republicans hard.

    On the either side, if he tries to protect Libbey, it will look like he's trying to manipulate the game. I'm not sure that the calls to Bush to not pardon Libbey will work - this administration has never stopped at doing whatever they think they can get away with, but I'm not sure the other Republicans who will be running for office want to see their party look even worse.

    Either way, it should be interesting, and scores the major point that all politicians - from Reagen to Clinton to Bush and Cheney always seem to forget:

    Telling the truth about something you did wrong gets you in far less trouble then lying about it - even if it wasn't that bad.

    Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.