Shady's Back...Tell a Friend!

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Scooter Libby: Still Guilty

If you were watching Brit Hume yesterday, you might be a little confused about whether or not Scooter Libby was actually convicted of two counts of perjury, one count of obstructing justice in a grand jury investigation, and one count of making false statements to federal investigators. We are here to tell you that he was in fact convicted, he does in fact face prison time, and he is NOT the Scooter that writes this awesome blog. All I can think is that FOX NEWS makes up their fair and balanced graphics in some sort of magical fantasy design studio and assume that they live in a world where if they put it on the air, it becomes true. That might have worked for the 2000 Presidential Election, but it isn't going to help the other Scooter avoid the clink.

*Thanks to Howlingjay for the tip!

Labels: ,


Anonymous reebs said...

Boooo, Fox news. I bet they've already got their headline for January 8, 2009 all set up: "Scooter Libby pardoned by outgoing President".

9:43 AM

Blogger scooterlulu said...

P.S. Before anybody writes in to tell me that Scooter WAS found NOT guilty of 1 count of lying to federal investigators, I'm hip to that. I'm merely pointing out what Fox chose to highlight, the one not guilty vs. the four completely guilty ones. Just wanted to clarify before the Fox News lovers come out of the shadows. -Lulu

10:21 AM

Anonymous -scooter said...

Thanks for pointing that out lulu. But i think your overall point stands strong. Can you imagine if a democrat was found guilty of a crime on say 3 counts and not guilty on one count. Would they flash across the screen, "Clinton not guilty"

Doubt it.

10:56 AM

Anonymous scooter said...

Actually to Fox News' credit, i just watched the clip from here and they do also say "guilty on 4 of 5 counts" or some jazz like that.

Of course in noticing that fine journalism i couldnt help but listen to the garbage spewing from Novak and Hume's mouths. Still defending this guy saying things like they "found it necessary to press on and ... he's [fitzgerald] now convicted somebody of a crime that did not occur until the course of his investigation.

Well i'm so sorry Hume but last time i checked a crime is a crime. The jurors found that he intentionally lied to a grand jury (in addition to four other things) which is a punishable offence, so the man is guilty.

Although I probably would agree, and it appears the jurors did too that this is not the guy that they should be going after. Apparently the jurors felt bad about punishing this man saying things like "where's karl rove" knowing damn well that this guy was their "fall guy." So I guess your right Brit, we did get the wrong guy, but only because his higher ups put him out for sacrifice.

11:07 AM

Blogger (A Little) Gris Gris said...

I'm sorry to feel the need to say this again, but I just can't fight the urge.

Fair and balanced my ass.


11:42 AM

Anonymous Jono said...

Brit Hume makes me want to puke. That "convicted of a crime that did not occur until the course of his investigation" quote must be kind of a sick joke. You could say a similar thing about Ken Starr and Bill Clinton's impeachment - that investigation was originally about Whitewater, which led nowhere, and then along the way Clinton lied under oath about those troubling BJs.

Of course, in that case, two years and millions of tax dollars didn't even lead to a conviction. Hume didn't seemed bothered back then. So fast forward 8 years, when the Executive Branch has commited real crimes over matters of grave consequence, and Hume leaps to their defense???

Oh, and no one should feel bad for Libby for being the fall guy. He was a willing and active participant and broke the law. That he was doing so on the orders of his bosses does not make it ok. That his bosses protected themselves and hung him out to dry does not make it ok, either - it just makes him the textbook definition of a partisan hack.

1:32 PM

Blogger tracer said...

remember 'watergate'? and that was just a gop prank, right?

3:04 AM


Post a Comment

<< Home