Do any of you non-cynics
 

find the Libby matter worthwhile?

For the few non-lawyers, an indictment for obstruction of justice is really a very lame, made up crime. It is basically imposed when the prosecutor gets angry at somebody and can't find anything else to charge with. There isn't a person alive who couldn't be indicted, like a ham sandwich, for obstruction of justice. Usually, you're simply placed in a rock and a hard place, i.e., testify as the prosecutor wants you to testify or be charged with lying.

It's akin to trying to get Clinton for perjury about anything, Whitewater, sex anything. It's basically a hatchet job, most of the time. Personally, I believe the crime should be eliminated as it's usually used only in politically motivated situations.

you must not have watched the press conference.

He presented a very convincing case that Libby broke the law, and that second, the law is important to uphold, and three, he prosecutes obstruction of justice and perjury "all the time" in Chicago.

I don't think anyone gives a rat's ass about Libby. Before all this no one even knew his name. It's like tossing garbage over the side of the ship. No loss.

I've been turned off so completely by all politicians...
 

that I don't even care about it. I don't even follow what's going on and am not ashamed to be this way. As Archaea pointed out, there's really not much difference between either party when it comes to the national level. They're all sellouts - I just go with who my gut tells me is the lesser of the two evils.

When I turn on the evening news, it's to find out what the weather will be like for the next few days and to see what's happening in the sports world.

Mike I can't tell if your post was
 

sarcastic or not.

A convincing press conference? Geeze I'd never base anything on a press conference.

The law of obstruction of justice is important, no it's a prosecutor's bailout provision when he can't prosecute for real reasons.

I couldn't disagree with you more.

There are a number of things that I think are very interesting about this situation. First, the charges against Libby are the same charges that Clinton was impeached for. The same people who were calling for Clinton's head back then are now questioning the significance of the charges against Libby. I know, the reverse is true as well (re the Democrats). Politicians always have ulterior motives - which is why I find it silly to espouse the position that one side is sincere and right, while the other isn't.

Another thing that is interesting to me is the nature of the charge, itself. It was pretty clear why Clinton lied under oath and "obstructed justice" - His reasons for doing so were pretty clear - he was being sued for sexual harassment, and he did so to defend himself. (I'm not defending him - I'm merely looking at his motives)

All I'm hearing from the Bush supporters is, "There was no leak - there was nothing to leak - no laws were broken." Assuming there is evidence that Libby lied under oath and obstructed justice (and the evidence cited by Fitzgerald, if true, seems substantial to me), then why would he do it? Clinton was covering up his wrongful acts. Would Libby perjure himself to cover up something that wasn't illegal?

To me, the whole thing smacks of political gestapo - Wilson criticized the Bush administration, and they went after him. And then tried to cover it up. If that's true, whoever was involved should be punished. But they won't - Libby will take the fall, and business as usual will continue.

If you listened to the press conference, the impression is that about 15 people would have to be lying for Libby to have been honest. Not likely.

I have been consistent. I supported prosecution of Clinton. And I support prosecution of Libby.

And Bushies will want to attack Fitzgerald, but they can't. That guy is Eliot Ness.

I'm with you, with one caveat. I thought the whole investigation of Clinton was politically motivated in the first place. I don't believe the Plame investigation is. That being said, Clinton lied under oath and should have been prosecuted. I also believe he was absolutely wrong to use his position to satisfy his sexual desires.

Maybe, then, we'll be lucky enough to see Kevin Costner play him in a movie sometime soon. :lol:

I definitely think
 

white looks great on that girl.

Wait, what were we talking about again?

Re: I definitely think
 

You know I finally had to filter Archea's avatars. My wife and daughtet kept walking by and accusing me of visiting inappropriate sites.