Pardon?

[yellow_crane]

It wasn't the blow job nearly as much as committing perjury.

Yes, actually, Clinton was caught in a perjury trap.

The Helms/Starr posse set it, to get him to lie, in order to have something to prosecute him on, which, they hoped, would mitigate the obvious glare of persectution.

There is nothing that Fitzgerald could do in regards to setting perjury traps that the Right can bitch about. 

They set the precedent.

I should also mention that Libby's transgressions were far more grievous than a sex act conducted by two consenting adults.




One thing about the Libby testimony intrigues me no end--why did Libby think that Tim Russert would lie for him?

Maybe it was assumation gained while socializing at Cheney's house--Russert lives only a few doors down, and socializes regularyly with Cheney.

[sirs]

It wasn't the blow job nearly as much as committing perjury.

Yes, actually, Clinton was caught in a perjury trap.

Yea, how dare he be made to lie under oath.  Who was it that put that '38 to his head, that forced him to commit perjury?  THAT's who we really need to go after       

[yellow_crane]

[..................]

The CIA declined to discuss Plame's intelligence work, but an agency official disputed suggestions that she was a mere analyst whose public exposure would have little consequence.

"If she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral," the CIA official said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

[..............]

http://www.billingsgazette.com/newdex.php?display=rednews/2003/10/01/build/nation/25-leak.inc





" . . . . a batch of subpoenas . . ."


What a poetic phrase!

[Mucho]

It wasn't the blow job nearly as much as committing perjury.

Yes, actually, Clinton was caught in a perjury trap.

Yea, how dare he be made to lie under oath.  Who was it that put that '38 to his head, that forced him to commit perjury?  THAT's who we really need to go after       

Just because Bill Clinton, in a moment of uncharacteristic Republicalike stupidiyu, fell for the perjury trap doent make it anything else. Such tactics were common in the middle ages where all your backward RW brains, such as they are , still live in. BTW - what is with the idiotic icons? They make you look like the juvenile jerk that you are.

[Plane]

Do Presidents have a fifth admendment right?

[Mucho]

Do Presidents have a fifth admendment right?

If they do,I am sure the Bushidiot will avail himself of it art his War Crimes trials.

[Amianthus]

If they do,I am sure the Bushidiot will avail himself of it art his War Crimes trials.

So, the "smart" man and lawyer Clinton was "trapped" into perjury because he didn't understand that he had rights under the 5th Amendment?

While the "idiot" and non-lawyer Bush will avail himself of the same right?

[The_Professor]

All this is just dodging the issue. If you do nothing wrong, then how can you be "trapped"? The answer: you can't. Bill Clinton lied under oath, aka he perjured himself. Regardless whether he is to be considered an effective President or how good or bad other Presidents were, the man committed a felony. How can anyone with a sane mind disagree with this?

[yellow_crane]

It wasn't the blow job nearly as much as committing perjury.

Yes, actually, Clinton was caught in a perjury trap.

Yea, how dare he be made to lie under oath.  Who was it that put that '38 to his head, that forced him to commit perjury?  THAT's who we really need to go after       

The technical term for the legal technique is called a "perjury trap."

I did not invent the term, nor did I use it inappropriately.

Your extrapolations are a tad too plastic.



In your opinion, why did Libby think that Russert would lie for him?

[sirs]

Yea, how dare he be made to lie under oath.  Who was it that put that '38 to his head, that forced him to commit perjury?  THAT's who we really need to go after       

The technical term for the legal technique is called a "perjury trap."

Actually the technical term we can apply is "breaking the law".  And to this date no one has yet to demonstrate how Clinton was forced to break the law and commit perjury.   Perhaps if evidence can be shown how Bill was in fear of his mortal life if Hillary found out, then maybe you might have something

In your opinion, why did Libby think that Russert would lie for him?

What makes you think Libby thought that?  Did Libby claim such?  Is Libby on record stating he thought Russert would lie for him?

[Plane]

It wasn't the blow job nearly as much as committing perjury.

Yes, actually, Clinton was caught in a perjury trap.

Yea, how dare he be made to lie under oath.  Who was it that put that '38 to his head, that forced him to commit perjury?  THAT's who we really need to go after       

The technical term for the legal technique is called a "perjury trap."

I did not invent the term, nor did I use it inappropriately.

Your extrapolations are a tad too plastic.



In your opinion, why did Libby think that Russert would lie for him?

How does this work?

President Clinton was being sued by a woman  claiming that he sexually harrassed her.

Was he unprepared for questions on that subject?

[yellow_crane]

It wasn't the blow job nearly as much as committing perjury.

Yes, actually, Clinton was caught in a perjury trap.

Yea, how dare he be made to lie under oath.  Who was it that put that '38 to his head, that forced him to commit perjury?  THAT's who we really need to go after       

The technical term for the legal technique is called a "perjury trap."

I did not invent the term, nor did I use it inappropriately.

Your extrapolations are a tad too plastic.



In your opinion, why did Libby think that Russert would lie for him?

How does this work?

President Clinton was being sued by a woman  claiming that he sexually harrassed her.

Was he unprepared for questions on that subject?

Why did Libby think Russert would lie for him?

[Lanya]

Yellow Crane: " Why did Libby think Russert would lie for him?"

He may not have thought it would ever get that far.  Russert would go to the mat for the White House, claiming confidentiality of sources----or so Libby may have thought.

I was reading over at Hullabaloo earlier that Russert has different rules about what he'll use than any other reporter I've ever heard of.  If a source says it, it's confidential unless the source or Russert specifically says/asks that it be used.

Quote: But Russert's policy is one of his own invention, and it's the kind of policy you'd have if you prized your cozy relationship with powerful people more highly than you prized your role as a reporter. Unquote.  http://digbysblog.blogspot.com

And in the Libby trial, a witness who worked in the VP's office, Cathie Martin, said that Meet the Press was a good program to get the VP on because it offered "good message control."

OK then.  Russert's pliable, prizes access to important people, and wouldn't do a thing to mess that up,  right? 
Nope.    He answered all their questions the very first time they asked him in 2004.  Made a big deal about protesting but in fact he simply answered their questions.

But he had that access for the next 3 years, unimpeded. 

[Plane]

Are we clear yet on what the lie was?