2007-03-11 11:52:17 · 16 answers · asked by marcusm15 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
For some of them. But the Bush administration has had so many failures that they're going to need multiple fall guys. Libby is one, definitely. So was Rumsfeld.
And a note to the brilliant folks who bleat, "Clinton! Clinton!" after every comment about the Bush administration:
"Mommy, he did it too" isn't a very strong or convincing argument.
2007-03-11 12:02:03 · answer #1 · answered by Havick 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Next lets go after the ones that leak national intelligences like the NY Times. Forget about Libby's miss speak before a grand jury.
2007-03-11 11:59:17 · answer #2 · answered by Sgt 524 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I dont think so,he told the truth and was destroyed for it,the evidence was held back that would have cleared him in the jury trial.The actual trial was supposed to be about a security leak and it wasnt done by Libby,or Cheney,but it is a payback from the left whom have been on a witch hunt since 2004.Watch as details unfold more and more and youll see the truth
2007-03-11 11:58:49 · answer #3 · answered by stygianwolfe 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
So a juror admits that they (the jury) felt that somebody else had commited a criminal offense and that Libby grew to become into taking the autumn for that. And yet, the jury convits Libby of the crime. that's a travesty of justice. shame on the jurors.
2016-10-18 03:34:08 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Scooter Libby is the first of many corrupt Bush officials to fall.
2007-03-11 11:55:16 · answer #5 · answered by Villain 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Libby wants to talk
and give chenney up for a lesser charge, 20 years is long
ha ha ha ha hah ha h ah
repukes
2007-03-11 11:57:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
A fall guy for what? He was convicted of obstructing an investigation of a crime that was not committed. You seem to be one of the few that does not know it was a farce. He will win his appeal.
2007-03-11 11:59:56 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nope he just lied under oath like Clinton did and got caught. He was covering his own rear end like Clinton did and not anyone else.
2007-03-11 11:56:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No... He was points for a prima donna prosecutor that had no case for the actual crime being investigated. In fact there was no crime, and the "leakier" was known by him from the beginning.
2007-03-11 12:12:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Are You still doubtful Sir
2007-03-11 12:01:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋