"The evidence now on the public record is overwhelming and, if we could have a jury, Vice President Dick Cheney would be found guilty of cooking the intelligence and lying us into war. Three remarkable and compelling pieces of evidence have hit the streets within the last two weeks. Let's start with today and work backwards...* dr. elsewhere at cannon's place has a mega rove/leopold post - cautiously coming out in favour of leopold
To call someone a liar, particularly the President and Vice President, is considered stepping over the line of public decorum. However, given the facts on the record, there is no other logical conclusion. Bush and Cheney are liars and because of their lies, Americans are dead and grievously wounded. "
* oldschool re the possibility of a libby pardon:
"Fitz's war-gaming - fascinating stuff I think. High-stakes poker indeed. Bush has the ability to pardon, Fitz has the ability to bring more indictments. Fitz is holding more and better cards . IMO, Bush can play the pardon card maybe once while in office, once at the end of his term - tops. Two would be seriously pushing it - to even use his one in-office pardon on Libby is risky in a few ways: a) it smacks of Saturday-Night-Massacre a la Nixon, b) as per above, a blanket pardon makes Libby an potential unprotected witness against the administration, c) pardoning Libby as to only the areas charged (obstruction, perjury, false statements) might just induce Fitz to go all-in and charge the underlying offenses involving blowing the cover of a CIA agent (which play would not necessarily be limited to Libby - all sorts of fun names could pop up). I just don't see how GWB could extend an in-office pardon to Libby which would cover the possibility of Libby's outing a CIA agent - total political death - he needs to save that one for December 2008. Of course, in Dec 2008, he can just pardon anybody he feels like pardoning for anything they've ever done while 'serving' the president.nice work oldschool.
Now, a smart prosecutor might, if faced with a pardon of Libby's obstruction, realize that *Conspiracy* to obstruct is an altogether different, stand-alone charge (the crime is the conspiracy, not the obstruction). It would, I think, be sufficiently different from the original charges so as to stand on its own, and have the added benefit of once again necessarily bringing in some of those other interesting names.
I also like the conspiracy angle because the statute of limitations on a conspiracy to obtruct charge wouldn't even begin to run until said conspiracy has ceased functioning. Let's just say - no problems there."
* incidentally, this citizenspook post says:
"The Constitution Voids Presidential Pardons For Criminal Convictions Or Indictments Flowing From "Cases of Impeachment" Where The Senate Has Voted To Convict."let's hope that John Conyers writes his articles of impeachment with that in mind.
(as an aside, this citizenspook post argues that Fitz appears to have changed his understanding of the leak case in october 2004 - away from an assumption that the outing of Plame was in retaliation against Wilson. let's hope)
(thanks to LeeB for the links)