Lying under oath--- is lying under oath!!!!!!!!
Regardless of party!
2007-03-09 16:13:00 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Libby is going to Jail. Shouldn't Clinton have to go to Jail too?
Maybe you meant to turn that question around: "Why is lying under oath OK for Clinton, but NOT for Libby?"
2007-03-09 16:37:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Yes, you are right. Sandy Berger's lies, the continuing lies about 9/11 and Oklahoma City and failure to get Bin Laden, the lies by Joe Wilson, (if you follow his contemporary reports not his revisons years later), all ad up to a disturbing picture of no one telling the truth about the failure to prevent bad things happening, all we know for certain is nothing spectacular has happened since 9/11, but it's becoming apparent that terror related incidents like the Salt lake City shooting, will be made to look as non-terror related. If you show me an honest politician in Washington (or any place) that never lies I would faint. How do you think they get elected? By honest campaigning and clear thinking people deciding who the best qualified person is for the job? It's all a matter of compromise, those who get sloppy are the ones who get caught, it's the fact that they look foolish and lose credibility that neccessitates they leave office. I'm looking at joining some third party, reformed tree worshipping druid pygmie cannibals or something respectable sounding like that. See my question on Hegel, and maybe read George Orwell's "1984" sometime for kicks.
2007-03-10 00:26:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
You are absolutely right, "lying under oath is lying under oath"! Now for a test of character, will Bush pardon Libby for lying under oath?
2007-03-10 00:16:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
To Kyle H....Who's the apple....and who's the orange??? Lying is lying....under oath is under oath.... Didn't ya read the question??
2007-03-10 00:24:52 · answer #4 · answered by classic 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Marianddoc nailed it. You do have to look at what was lied about. And, if one person jaywalks, and lies under oath about it, and another person commits armed robbery and lies about it, without being under oath, why should the jaywalker be more guilty than the armed robber, just because the jaywalker lied under oath, and the armed robber wasn't under oath??????
2007-03-10 04:09:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Lying is not a punishable behavior for Republicans/Neocons.It is a vital part of their philosphy in life. Just look at the Nixon and current Bush administrations. Both built on lies.The sad part is that they were elected/selected into office,which doesn't say much for the American state of mind.the rest of the world understands this weakness better than the American electorate..and that's theTRUTH!!!
2007-03-10 00:44:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Lying under Oath is NEVER ok.
And no one is above the law.
2007-03-10 00:17:19 · answer #7 · answered by Villain 6 · 8⤊ 0⤋
It's the height of arrogance for all these Republican rags and pundits to be calling for a pardon for Libby. They are crying and moaning about everything to do with that trial, without acknowledging the obvious - he's the fall guy for his bosses. He lied to the FBI, the evidence was there and he was convicted. I watched one of the jurors on Hardball this week, Juror #10, express cautiously that she hoped he received a pardon. Not because he didn't commit those crimes, she was clear about that, but simply because he was the fall guy for the bigger heads above him. Clinton was impeached for his lying under oath, and he was disbarred. But Libby, who clearly committed every crime he was found guilty of, should be set free - and why was that again? It ranges from everything from he shouldn't have been charged in the first place to he was unfairly prosecuted for something that was no crime. All of a sudden it's not a crime for a Republican to lie under oath, just a Democrat. The hypocrisy is stunning and sadly, not unexpected.
EDIT: Kye H.? Better check again, Libby was also convicted of perjury for lying to the grand jury. If you're going to stand up for this criminal you should at least know what he was convicted of.
2007-03-10 00:26:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 6⤋
Perjury is not okay for anyone. We agree.
If the impeachment against Clinton had been successful (meaning removal), he would likely have been pardoned by his successor.
If Libby is truly guilty of perjury, after his appeals are exhausted (remember appeals, y'all?), he might likewise receive a pardon.
EDIT: Clinton confessed?! No crime was found (what about the perjury)?!
2007-03-10 00:27:46 · answer #9 · answered by Shrink 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I agree.
But isn't it also important WHAT they're lying about?
Clinton lied about a bl0w job.
Libby lied about the treasonous disclosure of a covert CIA operative's identity.
If a democrat had "outed" a CIA agent, the diaper-wetting from the right would have reached flood stage.
2007-03-10 00:52:10 · answer #10 · answered by marianddoc 4 · 5⤊ 3⤋