did I write that ? I don't think I did or even implied .....

when it comes to "national security"...which is what you responded to...what hillary did is far worse than what scooter did....

Is this why you are butthurt?
And you have not provided a pass for your own party in the past when they have been accused of wrong doings? Hypocrite much Jeff?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think it is quite comical that the man with great concerns about various people leaking and lying, pardoned someone who was convicted for leaking and lying about it.

Enjoy your laugh Pete,good for the soul.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

was he convicted for leaking?

Are we talking about that Manning Dude(ette)?

What do you expect from somone who invites 2 Russian envoys into the oval office w/no other Americans present and betrayed the intelligence community by leaking the content of a classified and Israeli intelligence operation.

did they get to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom too?

With the embedded agent?

He was convicted of one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury, and one count of making false statements.
Why don't you just ask Valerie Plame what she thinks?

Of course maybe Trump likes Scooter because he wrote a book.
The title was The Apprentice, maybe he thought it was about him.

Sometimes overzealous prosecutors, who haven't been able to convict their real target, and need SOME conviction to justify the time and money spent, cook the books a little bit to frame somebody, anybody, else they can get (sort of what seems to be going on in the Mueller inestigation):

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ter_libby.html

you said he was convicted for leaking....

"pardoned someone who was convicted for leaking"

good thing you aren't under oath :)

So why did it become something that needed to be done now?
Do you think Trump finally got down that far in his reading pile, discovered this book and then decided to pardon Scooter.
Or maybe Stephen Miller suggested............
Someday books will be written and we will find out something, probably contradictory depending on which ones you read.

Thanks for citing a very neutral source. I'd note his conviction was considered an open and shut case.

You mean a "neutral" source such as The Washington Post? Like this one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.aded0574b100

Would you care to dispute the article rather than throw a demeaning label at it?

It seems, per the article, that his conviction was prematurely or fraudulently opened and shut. Like a lot of fraudulent convictions are.

I don't know of any major sources that are "neutral." So, unlike you, I evaluate what a source actually says, rather than bitching about the source's lack of neutrality.

However, I can see how it would be far more convenient to kill the messenger than to read the message. The only thing that might suffer from that is something that is as minor as the truth.

QUOTE=Pete F.;1141443]So why did it become something that needed to be done now?

Because Obama or Bush didn't. Do you think it should have been done sooner . . . later . . . or never? What is the point of your question?

Do you think Trump finally got down that far in his reading pile, discovered this book and then decided to pardon Scooter.
Or maybe Stephen Miller suggested............

Right . . . right . . . President's should not ever listen to advice. Wait . . . haven't all of them often depended on advice about what would be right, good, important, or good optics, to do?

Right . . . right . . . Trump is different. He is odd.

Someday books will be written and we will find out something, probably contradictory depending on which ones you read.[/QUOTE]

And some books are right and some are wrong--that is, in a world in which right and wrong, objective reality, exist.

In the vague Post Modern world, only opinion and power matter. You often seem, to me, to be anchored in the indefinite, the innuendo, the suggestion, the isolated incident colored by opinions meant to give power to narratives and parties that suits some world view that makes you comfortable.

That's why it is so fruitless to ask you what your point is. Some actual, substantial "point" would destroy the creative beauty of your narrative.

My rear is fine but thanks for thinking about it. I don't really adhere to a party so I'm not sure who I'm giving a pass to but I do think a lot of issues need to be put into perspective.

Thanks for the laugh
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I did, she said to tell you that she and her husband subsequently filed a civil lawsuit against Libby, #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney, Karl Rove, and other unnamed senior White House officials, they later added Richard Armitage for their role in the public disclosure of Valerie Wilson's classified CIA status. Judge John D. Bates dismissed the Wilsons' lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds. The Wilsons appealed Bates's district-court decision the next day. Agreeing with the Bush administration, the Obama Justice Department argued that the Wilsons had no legitimate grounds to sue.

some interesting tidbits...

Christopher Hitchens asserted that Richard Armitage was the primary source of the Valerie Plame leak and that Fitzgerald knew this at the beginning of his investigation. This was supported a month later by Armitage himself, who stated that Fitzgerald had instructed him not to go public with this information.

Alan Dershowitz cited the "questionable investigation(s)" of Scooter Libby as evidence of the problems brought to the criminal justice process by "politically appointed and partisan attorney(s) general".

Investor's Business Daily questioned Fitzgerald's truthfulness in an editorial, stating "From top to bottom, this has been one of the most disgraceful abuses of prosecutorial power in this country's history...The Plame case proves [Fitzgerald] can bend the truth with the proficiency of the slickest of pols.

Peter Berkowitz argued that statements by Judith Miller, in her recently published memoir, raised anew contentions that her testimony was inaccurate and that Fitzgerald's conduct as prosecutor was inappropriate.


maybe someday books will be written.....please tell me how, with regard to national security, what "Scooter, be careful" did or didn't do, is
that worse than what Hillary did in her handling of classified material?

hall of fame stuff

"I don't really adhere to a party"

I have no words.

" I do think a lot of issues need to be put into perspective"

And context, don't forget context.

Classic “BH”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ummm...you injected "Scooter careful" in the context of national security regarding BH.....:kewl:....classic "BS"

Funny thing is while Scott makes fun of Plame for being a woman he doesn't realize she was actually a covert field operative in Greece for years recruiting spies for the CIA and when she was outed was leading a secret team recruiting Iraqi nationals in the US to go back to Iraq and spy on Saddam.

I'm also not sure Scott even read his copy and paste. The Wilson lawsuit wasn't dismissed because it lacked merit, it was dismissed because Wilson didn't demonstrate that it belonged in a Federal court.

still keeping busy too...


" She has been keeping busy in the years since she retired from the C.I.A. and moved, with her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, from Washington to Sante Fe, writing spy thrillers and raising teenage twins. She turned one of her books, a memoir about the 2003 scandal that bears her name, into a movie starring Sean Penn and Naomi Watts. But it is her obsession with nuclear weapons that has inspired her most recent, and most quixotic, bout of activism.

This week, Plame, who works closely with counter-proliferation group Global Zero, announced a new crowd-funding campaign to buy a controlling stake in Twitter and force the company to ban Trump from the platform. “Time and again his use of this huge global platform has major consequences in the real world,” Plame writes on her GoFundMe page. “Trump has already brought us closer to nuclear war than any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis. We can’t take Trump’s nukes away (yet!), but we can take away his biggest megaphone and stop him from tweeting armageddon.”

The plan is ambitious, to say the least. Plame is seeking to raise $1 billion, in what would be the largest crowd-funding campaign of all time. Similar plans went nowhere when a group of shareholders petitioned Twitter to sell itself to its users earlier this year, nor when Mexican currency traders floated a bid to buy the company and immediately shut it down. Still, Plame is deadly serious about the idea—"

Wow, talented, courageous, patriotic and ambitious. She is impressive to say the least.

So is Trump. And it doesn't absolve Fitzgerald for railroading Scooter.

I don't think I'd ascribe much of that to Trump aside for the ambitious part, but it would be hard to feed that ego without some drive.

Libby may have been a fall guy but that doesn't absolve him from what the grand jury found.

It shouldn't have gotten to a grand jury. Fitzgerald knew that Scooter didn't out Plame.