I'm proud of our Government for going after Corrupt Libby and Corrupt Border Patrol Agents
Of course, it took an Irishman to take on Corrupt Libby and a man far away from Washington to take on the corrupt felons, the Border Patrol Agents, who shoot at fleeing suspects for sport, then obstruct justice to protect themselves.
"Obstruction of Justice" is the catch-phrase of this Administration. Once again, on that point, reasonable minds must agree.
posted by Marco @ 6:25 PM
26 Comments
26 Comments:
What do you think the Border Patrol did wrong?
i thought it was "i did not have sex with that woman!" or "it depends on what you mean by the word, 'it'".
In January 2001, Libby was the lawyer for millionaire financier Marc Rich, whom President Bill Clinton pardoned shortly before leaving office. Fitzgerald, who was then an assistant U.S. attorney in the southern district of New York, and U.S. Attorney James Comey spearheaded the criminal investigation of that pardon.
Conspiracy? you bet.
picadilly: the border patrol agents shot 15 times at an unarmed, fleeing man, and thereafter covered up their crime.
Mr. conspiracy: Yeah, right. Our government was so angry with the Rich pardon that we secretly named his attorney Chief of Staff of the Vice President so that, six years later, then tricked him into lying to a grand jury, so that we could charge him with perjury and obstruction of justice. Yes, a conspiracy to the highest levels of government, and clearly, Bush and Cheney were in on it, as they hired Libby, knowing that, six years later, he would lie to what they had to know would be an inevitable grand jury investigation.
Or, Libby is just one of many liars in the Administration.
Border Patrol Agents are issued the Beretta 96D in .40 cal. The magazine capacity if a Beretta 96D in .40 cal. is 11 plus one in the chamber. Each agent has at least two more magazines on his person for a grand total of 34 rounds. Since at least seven agents, including two supervisors, were involved in the incident which you are trying to describe, I find that a grand total of 238 rounds should have been fired at the drug smuggler you are refering to. Furthermore mexican drug smugglers who have illegally entered the United States do not have civil rights therefore his civil rights could not have been violated. If you would like to test this just enter mexico illegally with your dope and see what rights you have.
picadilly:
I don't measure the rights provided by our Constitution by what is done in Mexico. I measure it by what it says. And aliens, even criminal aliens, have civil rights in this country. The alien in question tried to surrender, with his hands up, to one of the criminal agents. Rather than arrest him, the criminal agent tried to skull the guy with the butt end of a shotgun. However, the agent was even inept at Abu Gharib tactics, and fell over. Rather than wait for a beat-down, the unarmed alien high-tailed to to the border. Then, the two agents opened fire, unloading 15 shots at the fleeing, unarmed subject (note at the time, the agents had not searched the truck so they did not know the alien was a drug dealer). One of the shots hit the alien. However, rather than track him down and arrest him (and rather than advising other agents to do so), the felonious agents instead proceed to scoop up their empty shells and cover up the shooting.
Interesting that you say there were all of those other agents there, but only the two convicted felons felt it necessary to fire at the fleeing, unarmed suspect (because the others knew it was wrong and illegal).
Lastly, in the ultimate irony, because those agents were more concerned about covering up their own criminal acts, the drug dealer was able to get away. They were more concerned about protecting themselves then protecting our border. Prison is where they belong.
The conspiracy involves Fitzgerald and Libby.
Apparently I must type slower...When Marc Rich was put in jail, Fitzgerald helped put him there. Libby was Rich’s lawyer and got him out with a presidential pardon...That had to be real embarrassing for Fitzgerald so now he must get Rich's lawyer.
All politicians lie, you act surprised?
I think you mean human rights and not civil rights. I do not remember reading anything in the constitution about a civil right to surrender while fleeing the scene of a crime without being shot.
He should have taken his "issue" on the ground and then filed a lawsuit against the border patrol and US government and then he would have enough money to buy those corn tortillas. Texas should sue the Mexican government for violating the human rights of the people still living in Mexico and we would have "corn tortillas for all ".
...believe me I had to read that thing to become a US citizen. Do you believe money can't buy everything...
btw. I am taking bids from Exxon shareholders to help me convince my Arab brothers to cut production of the bubbling crude. 361-241-3200 ask for King Louie.
Hey, art bell, your problem is not your typing, it's your thinking.
Let's recap: You said "the conspiracy involves Fitzgerald and Libby." Huh?? Are you saying that Libby conspired to have himself set up?? I assume even you aren't that crazy. So the conspiracy involves only Fitzgerald. One problem: by definition, a conspiracy involves at least two people. One person cannot conspire with himself (thus, as you admit that you, using the name "art bell," and the person using the name "conspiracy" are the same person, although you might have multiple conversations with the many people in your head, you cannot conspire with them as a matter of law).
So, this grand conspiracy you posit is actually just one guy -- Fitzgerald. And as you put forth the "conspiracy," Fitz, a republican appointed US Attorney, carried a grudge to such lengths that he was able to force a Republican Justice Department to appoint him to investigate activity that no one knew publicly even involved Libby, activity which the President's spokesman was a firing offense to anyone involved (Rove?? Cheney??). So Fitz laid in wait, got himself appointed special prosecutor, and then went, like a laser-beam, after poor little libby, chief of staff to what some would say is the guy in charge of the United States, because libby represented another guy who got a pardon (from a Democratic President). Wow. That's some theory.
A couple of more problems. First, contrary to your assertion, Libby did not get Marc Rich out of jail -- Rich was never in jail, so Fitzgerald most certainly never "put him there." As I'm sure you know, Marc Rich fled the United States to Switzerland just ahead of his indictment on tax evasion in 1983. Where was Mr. Fitzgerald in 1983 .... just finishing his first year of law school.
Even more lacking from your conspiracy claim is any suggestion that Libby is not, in fact, guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice. Your silence speaks volumes. You know he's guilty.
So type as slowly as you want. It won't change that there's no "conspiracy" (by your own admission) to frame Libby, there no basis in fact or reason to believe there is any sort of "grudge" behind the prosecution, and most importantly, as you tacitly concede, Libby is guilty. Perhaps that's why his lawyers didn't call him to testify in his own defense.
Maybe I should type faster.
Fitzgerald and James Comey make two (conspiracy). These two worked over the years starting in the 1980's on the Rich case. About this same time Libby was paid very well to work on getting Rich's charges dropped. Years later James Comey appointed Mr. Fitzgerald to investigate the Plame leak. It is believed that Comey refused to give the NSA approval for wire tapping that Libby attempted to get, so reportedly the Whitehouse goes over his acting AG head and gets Ashcroft to approve it while recoving from heart surgery or something.
Also, do not forget the Iran-Contra controversy in 1980's as it is widely speculated that Rich violated sanctions against Iran during that time. Under what administration?? A republican!
why do you act surprised.
It was also a republican administration that sealed the pardon records of Clinton. It does not matter about the appointing authority. People do what they have to do to get an appointment. Once the appointment is confirmed that person no longer has to talk out of both sides of his/hers mouth.
btw, it would not surprise me if this case drags out until the end of Bush's reign so Libby will not report to jail and Bush gives Libby a pardon.
OK, so now you want to change the membership in your conspiracy again, and add James Comey. OK. Conspirator #1 Fitzpatrick was in his first year of law school when Libby client Marc Rich was indicted. Conspirator #2 Jim Comey was not even in government at the time the indictment was returned against Libby (General Counsel for Lockheed). Some conspiracy.
Now, you add a new theory ... Comey (again, who had left government by the time the indictment against Libby had been returned) was angry because the White House went over his head to Ashcroft (while Aschcroft was recovering from surgery) to approve the (illegal) NSA spying program. Thus, according to you, Comey caused the indictment of the Chief of Staff of the Vice-President. Hmmm, here's a few questions, if he was so mad, why didn't he indict the people actually responsible for going over his head, like the President, Vice President, etc.?? If he was so mad, why didn't he stick around to see the indictment? How exactly did he cause the indictment when he was already gone?? Why exactly would he be so mad as to try to get some random person indicted??
And here's the last question: How is it that Comey appointed Fitzgerald to go on the attack becuase Comey was angry about the White House going over his to Ashcroft while Ashcroft was recovering from surgery when (please pay attention now, this is important) .... Fitgerald was appointed, with express authorization to investigate the crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice, on February 4, 2004 and Ashcroft did not go in for his gall bladder surgery until March 2004 (and of course you know, the Special Prosecutor did not report to Comey after his appointment).
So many inaccuracies, so little tim. I don't even no where to begin when you talk about the "speculation" of unnamed people that Marc Rich violated sanctions in dealing with Iran during the Iran-Contra scandal. All it tells me is that Scooter Libby really would represent the lowest of the low.
But again, you do not dispute that Libby is, in fact, guilty. Your silence (as was Libby's at his trial, when he had a chance to say he was innocent on the stand, but chose not to do so) is deafening.
As for a pardon by Bush, considering Libby's Marc Rich history, that truly would be "Rich."
You are getting it all confused. It is not about Marc Rich’s indictment. It about Libby’s work after the indictment trying to prove that Rich was innocent. It is during this period of time after the indictment that Comey and Fitzpatrick began to have a grudge.
Your internet search gave you the wrong date for Fitzpatrick’s appointment, as that date was in December 2003 however he was given complete power in February 2004.
It has also been found that Richard Armitaage was the source of the Plame leak. It has recently become clear that Fitz knew that Arm was the source however because Arm was one of the most vocal anti-war dissenters, he had not choice but to chase another goose. These indictments are his attempt at “revenge” against Libby simply because he could not put the leak charge on him.
It looks like the same crap they put on Martha Stewart!. “I can’t find any evidence to support our initial query, so how about a technicality, he said he heard if from Tim and now he says he heard it from Dick“. It sure looks like a conspiracy to me
I guess he is guilty of changing his story, you can never trust anybody that does not write it down.
What is most devious about the conspiracy you've identified as how it changes -- even today, as you describe it. The participants change, and even their roles.
First, you said the motive of the conspiracy stemmed from: "When Marc Rich was put in jail, Fitzgerald helped put him there. Libby was Rich’s lawyer and got him out." I pointed out the difficulty with your assertion because (1) Marc Rich was never in jail; (2) because of (1), Libby never "got him out;" and (3) Fitzgerald was a first year law student in Boston when Rich was indicted (and fled the country). Faced with those facts, now the conspiracy was that Fitzgerald had a "grudge" against Libby because Libby tried (unsuccessfully) to prove Rich was innocent. Libby lobby to have the charges (which were filed when Fitzgerald was in law school) dropped and they were not. It was only when Denise Rich bought a pardon that Marc Rich got pardoned. The conspiracy keeps changing.
Next, supposedly the conspiracy was because former DAG Comey was mad about the White House rejecting his (sage) advice that the illegal NSA wiretapping program was indeed illegal, and therefore appointed Fitzgerald as special counsel in a tiff. However (leaving aside the lunacy of that charge for all sorts of reasons), your timeline makes no sense, because Fitzgerald was appointed BEFORE the White House went over Comey's head on the illegal wiretapping (his authorization to investigate perjury and obstruction -- the operative charges here -- was effective more than a month earlier. You don't dispute how silly your claimed conspiracy was, but rather say that dates are too late on the authorization. But no, my date is accurate -- Comey started the process earlier and it became (for the operative charges) in February -- but either way, it was before the alleged "motive" to "get" anyone arose.
Now, Richard Armitage is yet another new part of the conspiracy. I'm not exactly sure I follow your description of how he fits into the conspiracy (something about goose and anti-war conspirators). However, Armitage was one of two sources (Rove being the other) of the Novak story that started the CIA inquiry. However, it quickly became clear that the leaks were part of a concerted strategy that pre-dated the Novak story. Further, regardless of the roles of other leakers, it does not give Libby a "license to lie." Especially not when his boss said anyone involved in leaking stories about Plame (which would include Libby, Rove, Fleischer, et al.) would be fired.
Libby lied. Martha Stewart lied. You don't get to pick and choose when you lie to a federal grand jury or federal agents. It's not a "technicality." A six year old knows the difference between the truth and a lie. Either tell the truth or remain silent. Libby and Stewart chose option #3 lie and then claim "vendatta."
I am telling you, it all makes sense. It all started when Nancy stole Ronald from Jane. You see Jane’s nephew is married to a niece of a cousin of Comey. This cousin is also the HR Block representative that told Marc to not pay his taxes and flee the country. At about that same time, the Reagan administration needed someone to help sell arms to Iran thru Israel. Rich was asked to participate in the arm trade for a presidential pardon. You see the pardon was already prearranged. However, some of the money from the sales were parlayed into a secret account that Denise used to “pay” the Clintons for the pardon. The Pardon had to come from Clinton because it would raise suspicion if a Bush pardoned Rich. In the meantime, due to his wealth building skills, Rich did not need a pardon however a deal is a deal. Back to Comey and Fitz, Libby had the HR Block representative knocked off in a similar way that Vincent Foster met his maker. This background leads us back to my original theses that Comey and Fitz have conspired to catch Libby in a lie.
I guess it okay for the "feds" to lie when they are trying to catch somebody in a lie...
“Attorney General James Comey in charge, and he also presumably knew about Mr. Armitage's role as the leaker who started it all...he too misled the White House”
“Mr. Fitzgerald has nonetheless also tried to spin an aura that Mr. Libby was responsible for outing Ms. Plame. In his press conference on October 28, 2005, the prosecutor asserted that ‘In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked”
“So what have the last three years been all about anyway? Political opportunism and internal score-settling, among other things.”
“All of this matters because it also casts doubt on the thoroughness and fairness of special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's probe that began in December 2003. The prosecutor never did indict anyone for leaking Ms. Plame's name, though this was supposedly the act of ‘treason’ that triggered the political clamor for a probe”
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008872
More? If Fitz knew in January 2004 that Libby was not the leak then why in August 2004 did Fitz tell the court that testimony of one of his witnesses was essential in determining if Libby was the leak.
and, why did he call him to testify before the grand jury? Sounds like a trap for perjurious statements to me.
Wow. So Jane Wyman is part of the conspiracy too. Wow. It really is far-reaching. It keeps growing, and in the sign of a true "great" conspiracy, facts which prove it cannot be true are ignored by the wingnuts.
You can say "Libby was not the leak" until you're blue in the face. The problem is that Libby ADMITTED he was one of the leakers, and his own collegues acknowledged talking to him about a campaign to leak the information, and a number of reporters acknowledged Libby leaked the info to them.
Spout of your theories about Jane Wyman and the vast Wyman-Fitzgerald conspiracy. It doesn't alter the fact that Libby lied and obstructed justice. Previously you tacitly admitted as much. Now, with you comments about a "perjury trap," you've expressly admitted as much.
Libby is a liar and a scoundrel. Perhaps that's why Cheney hired him.
No shotgun was used to beat the Mexican. The Mexican was not arrested because he reentered Mexico and was driven away by a vehicle waiting for him and occupied by members of the Mexican army. The agent did not pick up his shells, they don't work on a beach, he picked up his brass which is instinctive after firing thousands of rounds on the firing line and then being required to pick up all of the brass. Judging by your comments you have never trained to protect and defend your country with your life much less had to put that training into action. These agents are defending the constitution which you must have rewritten in your mind to include and protect hostile illegal aliens. I have been there and done that, have you? Oh never mind, I believe your use of the term "shells" answers that question for me.
picadilly:
You could not be more wrong. The first agent attempted to hit the alien with the but end of his shotgun. That was testimony at the trial. Another agent (not one of the two criminal agents) heard someone yell "hit him!!" Then, the first agent, in true incompetent form, fell down trying to hit the surrendering alien with his shotgun. The alien, seeing he was in for a beating, took off. That's when the two agents opened loose their barrage of 15 shots at the fleeing, unarmed man (whom they had no evidence had committed any drug-related crime).
Then, rather than go after the alien (who'd been hit), they scooped up their spent casings (feel beeter now??) for the sole purpose of saving their own skin. They knew full well that once they opened fire, agency requirements meant all casings were to be left undisturbed for internal and possibly FBI crime-scene units to take evidence. They knew that becuase they'd been so trained and one of the two had trained other agents on what to do.
If you have any law enforcement background, then you would know that every law enforcement person in this country knows that if they they fire their service weapon at a suspect, they are not to tamper with the scene in any way and will have to give a full account of the shooting. The fact that you would suggest that it would be "instinctive" for any law enforcement officer to pick up his casings after unloading on a suspect shows you have no idea what you're talking about.
Oh yeah, and the alien did reenter Mexico only because the agents failed to go after him. And I'd love to see a source for your claim that he was picked up by the Mexican Army, who was waiting for him. What a joke.
These agents weren't defending our Consitutition...they were making a mockery of it. They were going to skull a surrendering, unarmed man with the butt-end of a shotgun. Then, they fired 15 rounds at the same fleeing, unarmed man (as their fellow agents described). Lastly, and most cowardly, rather than pursue the man, they tried to cover up their own criminal conduct.
They are criminals and cowards.
Thanks for the rehash of your original erroneous post but just because you have said it twice now doesn't make it so. There was no crime scene, if there were one the supervisor(s) on duty would have sectioned it off for further investigation. Since there was no crime scene and no pending investigation the spent brass had to be collected to be returned to the armory for replacement amunition. Contrary to your TV detective work replacement amunition must be of the brand and type originally issued and can't be picked up at Wal-Mart. Sorry that doesn't sit well with the training that you received from CSI Miami or was it NYPD Blue. The Mexican Army makes incursions across our border every day but the real life happenings along the border don't make it on Law and Order so you have no idea of what is really going on at the border. Glad to see you think that the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Border Patrol can not distinguish between a coward and a nominee for agent of the year.
Here at the picadilly where I cook the roast beef I always pick up my brass after firing at the illegal mexican dish washers.
Let me get this right, two were firing. Of the 5 witnesses, two were yelling “run forest” and the other three were yelling “kill the bastard’? I hope the two supervisors were the ones yelling run.
I feel so warm inside knowing Margo that you are protecting the Canadian border from the Americans flocking over for the free meds. I do not understand how that wanker from louisina the escaped Federal inmate managed to slip through your hands and made into Canada.
Well, well, well, picadilly has shown his true colors. Just what I would expect from someone backing these two gutless felons.
My favorite was his ludicrous assertion that officers who fire their service weapons at suspects while on duty routinely just scoop-up their spent casings so they can get replacement ammo before anyone clears the scene. Laughable. Every law enforcement agent and officer, federal, state and local, knows that if they fire their weapon at a suspect, that scene is instantly and investigative scene and they are not to tamper with the evidence, including the casings, unless and until the scene is cleared by whatever internal agency has jurisdiction. These agents scooped up the evidence of their crimes before any supervisors got to the scene, much less any internal (or external) investigators got there. More to the point, the two agents knew it (as the trial revealed) because they'd both been trained on the topic -- and one of them actually trained other agents on the topic. They knew they were not permitted to pick up the spent casings, but they did it anyway because they were cowards worried about their own skins for their wrongful shoot.
Criminals and cowards, and as evidenced above by picadilly, the true colors of their supporters are not far from the surface.
I believe border patrol agents are discouraged from apprehending runners. I guess because most agents are clumsy and may fall and get dirt in their eyes like Nacho did while trying to hit that pusher in the mouth with the butt of his gun. Why carry a shotgun anyway, I guess they were hunting rabbits also.
My guess would be that the guy that shot once got the hit (50 points for wounding but minus 45 because he was shot in the back). They did manage to shoot at him a couple times but what if they had killed him. How would the agents cover up a dead body? I wander if they had their “throw down” gun and dope handy. I still got mine, I could work out a loan program it they need it. You would think that if they “wanted to kill Mexicans” that after he fell after being shot they would have finished the job. What happened to their killer instinct? They needed a father like mine that taught me, as we would gun down elk in Alaska, “don’t shot unless you intend to kill”. At that time I thought he was lazy and did not want to track down a dying elk but later in life I realized what he was talking about. And besides a dead drug smuggler talks less than a wounded smuggler.
I hope he gets his money from his lawsuit against the U.S. for violating his “civil rights” so he can give up the dope trade. He should take up farming corn for tortillas and fuel.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home