This is so ridiculous.  Cheney didn't jeopardize any CIA agent.  First off, there is absolutely no proof that Cheney "outed" her.  Secondly she was a desk agent and from the latest hearings she was widely known in DC as a CIA agent. 

Bush is not going to be impeached, get over that now.  There is nothing to impeach him for.


 

I just can't stop laughing. 

This is so ridiculous. Cheney didn't jeopardize any CIA agent. First off, there is absolutely no proof that Cheney "outed" her. Secondly she was a desk agent and from the latest hearings she was widely known in DC as a CIA agent. The release of Mrs. Wilson's status jeopardized any other contacts she had in past operations. The CIA said that and that is why a Special Prosecutor was appointed.

The Libby Trial does prove the involvement of Cheney in the outing of Mrs. Wilson. It was in retaliation for the report by Wilson that Bush and Cheney said not like. It is part of the sworn testimony in the Libby Trial!


That is the position of a Dictator or King.


I just can't stop laughing. You would not be laughing if our country becomes another Cuba, China or North Korea. When one leader substitutes his will for that of the majority, it is a Dictatorship!

In which he couldn't find anything that could pin this so-called "outing" on Cheney.  Face it, you are grasping for straws with these manufactured scandals. 




This is the perfect example of why I don't take you seriously.  You seriously have no clue what it's like in a place like Cuba or North Korea.  If it was even close you wouldn't be allowed to post all your anti-Bush nonsense.

The Presidency is not run on manufactured media polls even though that is how you would like it.  The "will of the people" is expressed every 4 years in a Presidential election.   

Island Dog

“In which he couldn't find anything that could pin this so-called "outing" on Cheney.”

That is NOT what was discovered. The reason Cheney, Rove and Libby were not charged was because the technical requirements of the statute to protect CIA Agents were so complicated.

The testimony and the statements of the Special Prosecutor clearly said Cheney, Rove and Libby were part of the identification of Mrs. Wilson as a reaction to the Amb. Wilson report about the Yellow Cake that Bush and Cheney did not like! It was a political retaliation that put in jeopardy CIA agents and contacts that had dealings with Valery Plame during her years as a CIA operative! Only the technical complication of the law stopped Chaney, Rove and Libby from prostituted for endangering our CIA Agents!

“The Presidency is not run on manufactured media polls even though that is how you would like it. The "will of the people" is expressed every 4 years in a Presidential election.”

No the will of the people is expressed every two years. That will was CLEAR in 2006. The will of the Congress which is elected to represent the will of the people is expressed each time they pass legislation! Bush is ignoring BOTH the will of the electorate as expressed in 2006 and the will of the Congress TODAY! If Bush were to veto a bill that provided funding for the war, it is he not congress that is denying the funding for the war. If it were up to me, each time Bush would veto a bill I would pass another bill with the same provisions until he allowed the WILL of the Congress and the people that elected Congress to become law! The Bill that passed the house contains the funding Bush requested for the war. It also contains the will of the people and Congress to end this war!

LOL.  Cheney was never the focus of the investigation.  Get over it. 




Not for the Presidency.  Democrats didn't have a clear stance on Iraq during the 2006 elections, and democrats won because the so-called conversatives were "punishing" the GOP. 




That bill doesn't contain the "will of the people", get over that nonsense now.  The American people do not want our military to lose.  The only thing that bill contains is more democratic pork in which you seem to have no problem with.

"Cheney was never the focus of the investigation. Get over it. " The Special Prosecutor said in Court that Cheney was involved. The testimony of several witnesses clearly showed Cheney was involved. The memo that Cheney wrote on clearly showed his involvement. You are full of BS!


That bill doesn't contain the "will of the people", get over that nonsense now. That Bill is the Will of the Congress that under our system represents us and passes our laws.As Senator Hagel said, it may be time to make Bush accountable and remove him from office!

Is that the testimony you have been asked repeatedly to prove?




No, that bill is pork and surrender.  Bush is not going to be impeached, there is no grounds for it.  End of story.

Is that the testimony you have been asked repeatedly to prove? It was reported at the time of the trial.

this is one of many stories:

Wednesday, March 07, 2007R. Jeffrey SmithWashington Post
Washington - In a small room on the third floor of the District of Columbia federal courthouse in late March 2004, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald stood before I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and asked him three times whether his boss, Vice President Dick Cheney, had discussed telling reporters that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.

The question was not insignificant for Fitzgerald, who saw his mission as revealing the full chain of events behind the security breach involving Plame's work as an undercover CIA officer.

Fitzgerald was unconvinced by Libby's response that even though he "may have" had such a conversation with Cheney, it probably occurred after Plame's identity as a CIA employee had been published in a newspaper column.

Advertisement





Fitzgerald would respond with great frustration in his summation at Libby's trial almost three years later, saying that Libby's lies had effectively prevented him from learning about all of Cheney's actions in the administration's campaign to undermine Plame's husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, a critic of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

More than he had previously, Fitzgerald made clear in those remarks that his search for truth about Cheney was a key ambition in his investigation and that his inability to get it was a key provocation for Libby's indictment. Although Cheney was the target, Fitzgerald's investigation could not reach him because of Libby's duplicity.

Fitzgerald's summation explained, in part, why he brought charges based on imperfect evidence against Libby, even though Libby was not a source for Robert Novak, the author of the July 14, 2003, newspaper column that outed Plame as a CIA employee.

The jury's verdict addresses Fitzgerald's first conclusion - that Libby lied deliberately and did not misspeak from faulty memory.

But the trial showed that the prosecutor finished his investigation with his mind made up that Libby's account was meant to hide his own involvement as well as to conceal the potential involvement of the vice president.

At the trial's close, Fitzgerald expressed his concern in unusually blunt terms. After Libby's lawyers complained that he was trying to put a "cloud" over Cheney without evidence to back it up, Fitzgerald told the jury on Feb. 20, "We'll talk straight." There was, he said, "a cloud over what the vice president did" during the period before the publication of Novak's column, and it was created by testimony showing that Cheney directed Libby and others at the White House to disseminate information about Wilson and Wilson's criticisms.

I didn't ask for a Washington Post story, I asked for a transscript of testimony that clearly says Cheney was maliciously involved.

 As usual you are changing the subject from your original post which has lost it's reasoning already.

political hack at work don't seek reason jsut mindless hate.

I didn't ask for a Washington Post story, I asked for transcripts of testimony that clearly says Cheney was maliciously involved.

As usual you are changing the subject from your original post which has lost it's reasoning already. That is pure Bull S**t!!!!!

You can dig out the transcripts. I have PROVEM the truth of what I have said however you and the other Bushies do not care about truth. The current situation with how the Dept. of Justice LIED about why they fired the U.S. Attorneys proves that. Who would say they fired the 1, 4 and 7 performing Attorneys for CAUSE? Now one official in the Justice Dept will take the 5th. I hope Congress gives her a grant of immunity to force her to testify. And Bush wants his top aids intervened in SECRET NOT UNDER OATH AND WITH NO TRANSCRIPT. WHEN PIGS FLY! Time to impeach Bush and Cheney! Just like Donald Trump said, the Bush administration are all liars!

LOL.

The attorney nonsense is another manufactured scandal.  Keep grasping for straws.  You have a great chance of Bush not being re-elected if you keep it up!

No such sworn testimony occurred and no proof of this "motive" has been established.

Impeachment is not a tool for resolution of political differences - God forbid it ever becomes one. That's what elections are for in the U S and A. You want a parliamentary form of government, head to the UK. Senator Hagel would do well to remember that. There are no grounds for impeachment, no matter how many House members "decide what an impeachable offense is" - sure, anyone can sue anyone else for anything, but you know perfectly well that the House will not vote a bill of impeachment based on Bush's political resolve.

The bill doesn't contain the will of the people. That bill is the will of the congress....who are NOT acting in our best intrest as a nation or representing us accuratly....should we impeach all of them?