From the outset, Pres. Bush and Vice Pres. Cheney have brushed aside questions about their involvement in the the CIA leak case first by claiming they could not talk about it while the investigation and subsequently the trial were underway — and more recently because Scooter Libby was appealing his conviction on perjury and obstruction of justice charges.
Well, it’s all over now. Bush commuted Libby’s sentence. While his appeals will continue, the Libby case is done, and either Bush and Cheney will be forced to answer questions about their involvement, or — and this is much more likely — they’ll have to come up with another, more creative excuse.
There are serious questions that require answers about the involvement of the president and the vice president in the conspiracy to out the agent, Valerie Wilson. Early on, Bush played ignorant, making statements to the effect that when he found the person who leaked Wilson’s identity, that person would be fired and “no longer part of my administration. Many people thought at the time that these statements were false — that within hours of the release of the Bob Novak column that outed Wilson they president was fully briefed on how her name came to be released to the press.
The special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, was said to suspect that outing Wilson was Cheney’s idea, and that leaking of her name to various journalists was done under his direction.
Perhaps you recall responses from the White House on this matter. Here’s the classic, from the White House press briefing on Oct. 25, 2005:
Q Scott, a couple of years ago, you told us that Scooter Libby and Karl Rove had nothing to do with the CIA leak. It appears that you may have gotten bad information before you made that statement. Now, today, we learn through extrapolation that when the Vice President said in September of 2003 that he didn’t know who said Joe Wilson to Niger to investigate the claims that Iraq was trying to buy yellow cake, that he was not speaking the truth. My question is: Can we be confident that when we hear statements from the White House in public that they are truthful?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think you can because you know that our relationship is built on trust, and I have earned that trust with you all. As you pointed out, you pointed back to some past comments that I gave and I’ve talked to you about the assurances that I received on that.
In terms of the investigation, it is an ongoing investigation. The policy of this White House has been to carry out the direction of the President, which is to cooperate fully with the special prosecutor. That means not commenting on it publicly from here at the White House. There is a lot of speculation that is going on right now. There are many facts that are not known. The work of the special prosecutor continues, and we look forward to him successfully concluding his investigation.
Q But in terms of public trust, if it is true that Scooter Libby learned of Valerie Plame’s identity from Vice President Cheney in June of 2003, would that not mean then that the Vice President made a false statement three months later when he said he didn’t know who sent Wilson to Niger?
MR. McCLELLAN: I appreciate that. A couple of things. One, the question you bring up is relating to a matter that is under investigation. And secondly, as I pointed out, there is a great deal of speculation that is going on right now, and I would urge you not to engage in that speculation. But certainly, you are pursuing this story as you should. We will wait to see what the special prosecutor does and learn more about the facts at that point.
Q Are you not commenting on whether this report is accurate or not? Will you comment?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I’m not going to comment because it’s relating to an ongoing investigation; the story that you’re referencing relates to an ongoing investigation.
Q Given the fact that the Vice President did say publicly in September of 2003 that he never knew about Joe Wilson or who sent him, as John points out, and now there appears to be information to contradict that, how do you explain that contradiction?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, there’s an ongoing investigation. There are many facts that are not known. I would encourage you not to engage in speculation. And on top of that, if there’s any additional information that the Vice President’s Office wants to provide you, you can direct questions there. But the policy of this White House has been not to comment on this investigation while it’s ongoing. And it has been that way for some time.
Q Does that mean that if you had information that could help clear this up and perhaps make it look like something other than what it is, which is a contradiction, would you provide that, or would you hold that just because you don’t want to —
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I said — I mean, if you want to ask any more from the Vice President’s Office, you’re welcome to do that, but —
Q Have you done that?
MR. McCLELLAN: — our policy has been that this is an ongoing investigation, we’re not going to comment on it. The special prosecutor is the one that has been gathering the facts related to it. But just because I’m not commenting on it doesn’t mean you should read anything into that one way or the other.
Q Have you attempted to clarify it with the Vice President’s Office?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, this is an ongoing investigation, and what the President directed us to do was to cooperate fully with the special prosecutor. And so, as part of doing that, we’ve been carrying out the President’s direction from the White House. That means — we’re not doing that ourselves, the special prosecutor is doing that.
Q So that’s, no, you have not sought clarification?
MR. McCLELLAN: So, no — no.
Q Does Vice President always tell the truth to the American people?
MR. McCLELLAN: Yes.
Q The President then stands by the Vice President’s account in September of —
MR. McCLELLAN: I think it’s a — frankly, I think it’s a ridiculous question, Terry, because —
Q Well, no, we now have reports that there are documents that directly contradict the public statement of the Vice President of the United States.
MR. McCLELLAN: Reports. The Vice President, like the President, is a straightforward, plainspoken person.
“While his appeals will continue, the Libby case is done”
Only problem is, that’s not true. This may be precisely why Bush commuted instead of pardoning. With Libby appealing the conviction itself, the case technically is still in process, allowing Bush to continue to use it as an excuse.
The GOP dominated appellate court today signaled that Libby’s appeal was weak. My understanding is that by accepting the commutation, he also tacitly accepts guilt — same as if he’d accepted a pardon. The appeal will move forward but only on the amount of the fine and the length of probation.
No worries for Libby as his defense fund will pay the fees and he will receive a full pardon at the end of Bush’s term.
Answers to long standing questions should be demanded but Bush isn’t going to give them. The whole crowd is as guilty as Libby and the last thing they want is for the scheme to make the front pages even more than it has.
The only sensible and responsible response to Bush’s running his administration like a crime family is impeachment. Let’s get it on.
This is what terrorist look like!!!
1). Richard Perle—-One of Bush’s foreign policy advisors, he is the
chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board. A very likely Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson’s office in the 1970’s after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle is one of the leading pro-Israeli fanatics leading this Iraq war mongering within the administration and now in the media.
2). Paul Wolfowitz—-Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle’s Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate of Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military. His sister lives in Israel. Wolfowitz is the number two leader within the administration behind this Iraq war mongering.
3). Douglas Feith—-Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon. He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don’t agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one
International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is
representing Israeli interests. His firm’s own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith “represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer.” Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine. Feith, like Perle and Wolfowitz, are campaigning hard for this Israeli proxy war against Iraq.
4). Edward Luttwak—-Member of the National Security Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war against Iraq.
5). Henry Kissinger—–One of many Pentagon Advisors, Kissinger sits on the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board under Perle. For detailed information about Kissinger’s evil past, read Seymour Hersch’s book (Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House). Kissinger had a part in the Watergate crimes,
Southeast Asia mass murders, Chile dictatorship, and more recently served as Serbian Dictator Slobodan Milosevic’s Advisor. He consistently advocates going to war against Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S.
6). Dov Zakheim—-Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) for the Department of Defense. He is an ordained rabbi and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship. Zakheim attended attended Jew’s College in London and became an ordained Orthodox Jewish Rabbi in 1973. He was adjunct professor at New York’s Jewish Yeshiva University. Zakheim is close to the Israeli lobby.
8). I. Lewis Libby —–Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff. The chief pro-Israel Jewish advisor to Cheney, it helps explains why Cheney is so gun-ho to invade Iraq. Libby is longtime associate of Wolfowitz. Libby was also a lawyer for convicted felon and Israeli spy Mark Rich, whom Clinton pardoned, in his last days as president.Receantly convicted for obstruction of justice in the CIA network outing.
10). Elliott Abrams—–National Security Council Advisor. He previously worked at Washington-based “Think Tank” Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State,handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua’s Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby
faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year’s probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior) granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration’s State Department.
14). Ari Fleischer—-Official White House Spokesman for the Bush (Jr) Administration. Prominent in the Jewish community, some reports state that he holds Israeli citizenship. Fleischer is closely connected to the extremist Jewish group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics, who follow the Qabala, and hold very extremist and insulting views of non-Jews. Fleischer was the co-president of Chabad’s Capitol Jewish Forum. He received the Young
Leadership Award from the American Friends of Lubavitch in October, 2001.