I don't agree with any moral equivalence drawn between Berger and Libby. Berger's offenses are obviously more criminally and morally reprehensible. I am not entirely clear on Libby's alleged offenses, though I know he has not convicted of anything close to what he was charged with and the one who actually "outed" Plame remains unpunished.

I certainly do agree with your assessment of the traitorous Lynne Stewart. I was much surprised to learn of Judge Andrew Napolitano's (of Fox News fame) defense of Stewart. Here is a critique of Napolitano's opinion. I have lost a bit of respect for the man.

Napolitano is a strange bird. I either agree with his opinions or I disagree vehemently. It's obvious that his opinions sometimes over-ride jurisprudence.

I think the point, Jeff, is that there are those who remain silent on Stewart's being free pending appeal, but had no problem with Libby having been denied the same opportunity to remain free pending an appeal. The actual charges can't be compared, true, but the treatment is a separate aspect that highlights the difference in the charges.

Let me get this straight. Scooter Libby is convicted of a crime that does not involve physical harm to others, nor endangers national security (remember it was perjury, not outing Plame). And his judge says he has to go to jail while waiting for an appeal, prompting a commutation by Bush. Stewart is convicted of an offense related to the killing of Americans on American soil, and aiding terrorists committed to doing more of it, and she is allowed to stay out of prison pending her appeal.

Go ahead libs. Explain to me how justice has been served here in the Stewart case. I dare you.

John Not Kerry, you will get no explaination for this from liberals. Their sole motivation is hatred of all things GW. If selling out our country would damage Bush, they would and have done that. Leaked secrets to the NYT, Flushing korans down the toilet, torturing prisoners, Abu Grahib, etc. They have done and are doing anything to bring GW down. So, they cannot honestly explain anything. ww

Stewart's sentence was a travesty, but sadly typical for the lefist-dominated judicial system in the U.S. (Can you say O.J.?)

The first 2 paragraphs of Jay Tea's post were pretty stupid, IMHO.

Mr. Tea,
I completely agree with your take on Ms. Stewart's crimes. Treason is the word, and in a just world, public hanging would be the punishment.
However, your rather glib comparison of the Libby matter and Berger's theft of classified documents from government archives does not seem well thought out.
Berger is a sleazy operative for Clinton Inc. who stole classified material, destroyed it, lied about it, and subverted Congress.
Libby may or may not have (remember how the prosecutor gamed the charges and testimony) somehow confirmed information that was already public (Armitage anyone?), pertaining to a matter which was found to not be a crime in the first place. If it were a crime, wouldn't someone have been charged?
For his very real crimes, Berger got a fine and loss of security clearance for three yrs.
For his made-up crime, Libby faces very real prison time, and loss of his livelihood.

If justice is the goal, our system has failed miserably. Berger should be hanging from the next lampost down the block from the one Stewart occupies, and Libby should be sueing Fitzgerald's jock off for prosecutorial misconduct throughtout this political witch hunt.

Its good when one of those vulture lawyers has the career ended by their own coruption

I'm curious why Hillary has accepted Joe Wilson's endorsement.
=====================================

I thought he'd signed on with Richardson. Was Richardson smart enough to boot him, mantis, or what? Does Clinton realize that had John Kerry stuck with Joe Wilson in 2004 after the SSCI revealed his lies, that he would be President today? Is she willing to risk the revelation of Joe's lies in order to sustain the powerful, but false, meme, that 'Bush Lied, People Died'? Is she gambling that the meme still has staying power? This tactic gets her out of her war vote, but it doesn't get her around Bill. Thank God Berger couldn't possibly have found all the pencilled marginalia, nor can he hide their perfidy forever.

What happens when it turns out that Val Plame and Company disinformed us into war, and not Cheney?
==================================

[Its good when one of those vulture lawyers has the career ended by their own coruption]

True, but, did anyone think Klinton actually had any intention of practicing law again?

My blood boils every time I read about bag-lady lawyer Lynne Stewart. The bar for being disbarred is high, so she really must have screwed up.

I love calling her a bag-lady lawyer. It makes me giggle.

I am not entirely clear on Libby's alleged offenses

Really? They were widely reported in the news. Let me help... perjury, making false statements to federal investigators, and obstruction of justice.

though I know he has not convicted of anything close to what he was charged with

He wasn't? Then what was he convicted of? And also please explain how someone can be convicted of things that they weren't charged with.

"Really? They were widely reported in the news"
They were widely MIS-reported in the news. As far as the lefty media were concerned, he was charged with "outing a covert CIA agent". That's been the narrative from the beginning. How inconvenient that it turned out that the person who did the "outing" was Armitage, who was something of an MSM darling due to his alliance with Powell. It also chafes that the "outed" agent turned out to not only be not covert, but was a spotlight hog married to another spotlight hog. In retrospect, that Van. Fair photospread probably didn't add to the credibility of those like Brian who were (and still are) looking for ANY crime, real or imagined, which they can hang on Bush.
When you hang your case on citing msm's slanted descriptions of a politically motivated show trial, buddy, you've got BDS.

They were widely MIS-reported in the news. As far as the lefty media were concerned, he was charged with "outing a covert CIA agent".

Really? Please site a "lefty media" source that stated that Fitz charged Libby with "outing a covert CIA agent".

When you hang your case on citing msm's slanted descriptions of a politically motivated show trial, buddy, you've got BDS.

So accurately listing the charges that were filed with a federal court, that a grand jury indicted on, and that a jury convicted on are "slanted descriptions"? Quick! You'd better contact the court and have them correct the record!

When you hang your case on... well... delusions, "buddy", you've got an illness.

Brian, you silly, watch for the Appellate Court findings. Fitz himself obstructed justice, Wilson himself outed his wife, in fact he outed the whole CIA, snort, snicker, and rickinstlouis has it. Listen up; he has been.
======

Here Brian, let me clarify. "charged in connection with the outing of a covert cia agent" has been media shorthand for the Libby case from the get-go. Ask around a little, that's been the intro line to a large percentage of msm stories on this fiasco.

And forgetting to mention that the federal judge in question may have had an ideological axe to grind, and that the jury pools were in DC (mecca of liberalism/leftism/elitism/BDSism), shows that you're not the honest stickler for facts you'd like to think yourself.
Yes, I have an illness. I'm seriously nauseated by people who would trash their country for political gain.

This is really outrageous.

Believe it or not there are also former IIS agents (Saddam's Iraq Intelligence) who have been caught in multiple instances inside the U.S. for espionage and many are still free because their cases are pending.

And forgetting to mention that the federal judge in question may have had an ideological axe to grind... shows that you're not the honest stickler for facts you'd like to think yourself.

Stickler for facts? You mean regarding this judge?

Bush appointed Walton to the U.S. District Court partly because of his reputation for upholding the law and giving tough sentences.

I see your point now. It was a liberal conspiracy perpetrated by the Bush Dept. of Justice, a Republican-appointed prosecutor, a Bush-appointed judge, a grand jury, and a trial jury, all of whom invented reasons to charge Libby with five separate counts and convict him on four. I can see why you would be nauseated by the political gain these people have achieved.

That Fitzgerald is a Bush appointee does not make it impossible for him to have seen the Libby matter as a way to put himself on the map, especially given that his assignment was to discover who "outed" Valerie Plame and that he knew it was Armitage three days into his investigation ... before he ever spoke to Libby.

As it is, he's now a veritable celebrity - a great result for him.

Judge Walton, as far as I can see, lived up to his reputation as a tough sentencer. I'm not going to impugn his motives.

And as for the jury? A politically charged trial, in which finding the defendant guilty would do serious damage to a Republican Administration, especially nowadays, is guaranteed to result in a guilty verdict. Especially since one of the jurors afterwards said that his thoughts were along the line that somebody in the Administration needed to "pay" for the War in Iraq.

Tired talking points, Brian.

That Walton was resentful of Libby's monied friends is a given, obvious from his own remarks.

It is nearly certain that Comey appointed, extra constitutionally, I might add, a fellow prosecutor from the Southern District of New York, Fitzgerald, at the direction of Schumer, the Democratic Senator on the Judiciary Committee, from New York, and that Fitzpatrick blindly proceeded to commit his injustice against Libby in the form of his pursuit of a hallucinated conspiracy by the White House to out Plame. Walton, too, aided and abetted Fitzgerald in his abuse of process and prosecution. This will all be clear on appeal, and retrial if necessary.

Libby didn't lie. Russsert did. And Fitz obstructed justice.
=================================

MAK, two on the jury want Bush to pardon Libby, because they considered him a scapegoat.

The Jury was biased to begin with and probably erroneously swayed by the juror who was a reporter and former employee of the Washington Post. He may not have been as candid as the law desires in voir dire. The verdict was 11-0. Instead of twelve angry men, the one angry woman was pitched from the Unanimity Express.
===========================

Fitzgerald is a Bush appointee, but one with close ties to Chuck Schumer. So Brian, one would hope you'd learn more "facts".

Brian is a notorious founder of the Brian 's spinning club. So his concern for the "truth" is probably not real. Brian was one the loudest member of the Murtha 's bandwagon on the fictitious Haditha massacre (to slander the US military). Murtha should be censured for this "high treason". Brian is probably beyond shame on this one.

Lets just hang them all. We'll strat with the most recent traitor, Scooter the "scapegoat." That OK with everyone? Oh, and while we're at it you can have a twofer and do Armitage on the same gallows.

Scooter Libbys' "lies" = 0 threat to national security

Sandy Burglar STEALING/DESTROYING classified docs= 0 truth known about crucial time in the countrys' history of "fighting" terrorism

Lynne Stewart acting as foil for a convicted terrorist= #1 consultant position in the Edwards campaign

The way libs deny the truth of the above,as an illustration of their total eclipse of reality- priceless

We'll strat with the most recent traitor, Scooter the "scapegoat."
------------------------------------
Let 's start with the known liars Wilson and Plame. They should be put under oath for their lies.

Let 's start with Sandy Bergers for stealing classified information.

Talking about "high treason", what should we do with people like Murtha and his enablers?

JFO and his buddies just love to support Berger and Stewart. This from the party that forbids you to question their patriotism. I don't think we need to question it, we have the answer. Support the troops but make them a political pawn like Reid. Relay messages to terrorists groups, okay by the left, destroy classified documents, okay by the left. Not remember who you talked to and when, go to prison. I see a pattern. ww

There you go again willie, putting your thoughts into a liberals mouth. Stick with your own willie, they're bad enough. I said hang all the traitors, left right center shortstop and 2nd base. All of them willie. I merely suggested we start with the most recent. Got it now?

Don't be silly, JFO, there was nothing "traitorous" about Libby's actions.

JFO is performing his cheap pretention. JFO cannot even be honest about who he is. He just conveniently mentioned Libby and Armitage. JFO didn't even try to mention one liberal name. JFO cannot even pretend to be honest.

As it is, he's now a veritable celebrity - a great result for him.

Oh yeah, great result. Why, I bet he'll be on Leno soon. And oh boy, lucky him, soon to be subpoenaed to appear before Congress. Even Tom Hanks doesn't have that kind of celebrity.

The rest of your post is just repeating the claim that Libby's conviction was a vast liberal conspiracy among all of the players in a Bush Justice Department investigation and trial.

Fitzgerald is a Bush appointee, but one with close ties to Chuck Schumer. So Brian, one would hope you'd learn more "facts".

Hmm, so the Bush Justice Dept. chooses, vets, and appoints a prosecutor, but ooops! He has some mysterious "ties" to a Democrat! Well, that trumps all! I didn't know that "ties" count as facts in a prosecution.

Such as, say, Cheney's long-severed "ties" to Haliburton, Brian?

J.

Brian is a notorious founder of the Brian 's spinning club. So his concern for the "truth" is probably not real.

It's not? What did I post that's not "the truth"? You mean that the Bush admin didn't appoint Fitz? That Libby wasn't convicted? Please, enlighten us.

Brian was one the loudest member of the Murtha 's bandwagon on the fictitious Haditha massacre (to slander the US military).

I was? Hmm, seems odd for you to challenge my ability to be truthful and attempt to support that claim by telling an obvious lie.

Are you even genetically capable of posting truthfully?

They were widely MIS-reported in the news. As far as the lefty media were concerned, he was charged with "outing a covert CIA agent".

Really? Please site a "lefty media" source that stated that Fitz charged Libby with "outing a covert CIA agent".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian,
YOu simply cannot stop lying. Fitz knew who the leaker was before the start of the trial. Why did Fitz continue the investigation of the leaker when he knew the identity of the leaker already? You simply didn't want to consider that "truth". You are simply interested in spinning half-truths at best.

http://www.earthside.com/earthside/2005/08/libby_key_playe.html
Libby Key Player in Outing CIA Agent

So now you think Murtha should be censured for his slandering of the US military now?

MOre example of the dishonesty of the left that Brian has conveniently ignored

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/29/indictment-dissected-libbys-knowledge-of-plames-covert-identity/

This is the truth that Brian is not interested in. You can be proud of your spinning club.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9837835/
The vice president's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby Jr., was indicted Friday on charges of obstruction of justice, perjury and making false statements in the CIA leak investigation, a politically charged case that casts a harsh light on President Bush's push to war.

President Bush appointed a biased democrat as a prosecutor (demanded by the dhimmi's in congress) since he knew no crime had been comitted, but he had to placate the foaming at the mouth dhimmi's. The conviction of anyone on a non-crime came as a surprise to President Bush so he set aside the prison term to allow a correct not guilty verdict to come in later. Anyone that thinks there's a brain in the democrat party only has to look at Harry's Hoax, Harry's circus, Harry's pizza party, last night to disprove that theory. Throw in Turbin Durbin and his childesh display if you need more.

It is beyond me why there is such unjustified animosity towards Lynne Stewart. Don't people understand that the only two acts which the prosecution used as "evidence" were that one she made a phone call to a Reuter's news reporter and read to him a one paragraph message from her client, and two she visited her client in a maximum security jail and allowed a translator to read to him a few letters written by his family.
No one, no matter how much they "hate" Lynne Stewart can assert that the prosecution ever even hinted that she did anything except those two things.
It is very likely that Lynne Stewart's bizarre conviction will be overturned on appeal, as it should be.
Come one, people. There's are enough truly bad people out there to keep everyone busy 24 by 7.
There's no need to demonize Lynne Stewart.

Lynn is one of those truly anti-American radicals.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3340

Lynne Stewart is the radical attorney who has been indicted by Attorney General John Ashcroft for enabling her client, the terrorist Sheik, Omar Abdul Rahman, to carry out his murderous agendas while in prison by helping him to communicate with his terrorist organization in Egypt. Rahman was the spiritual leader of a cell that carried out the first World Trade Center bombing and was planning to blow up the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels. Stewart was recruited to the Rahman case by Lyndon Johnson's Attorney General, Ramsey Clark, who has a long history of anti-American causes dating back to the Vietnam War.

Actually, it was Ron Kuby who asked Lynne Stewart to join the defense team for the blind shiek. Ron Kuby is the star along with Curtis Sleewa of the popular NYC radio talk show on ABC, "Curtis and Kuby"
The Wall Street Journal published a very informative article about Rahman's conviction which concluded that he is most likely innocent. He was railroaded by a corrupt informant who was paid over $500,000 by the government to entrap the blind sheik.
It is not a crime for a person to have politics views that are not mainstream.
While it is true that Lynne Stewart believes that capitalism as currently practiced discriminates unfairly against the poor and the powerless and that the poor would be served better by Universal Health Care and similar "non-capitalistic" mechanisms, that certainly is not grounds to conclude she "hates America".
In any case, defending an unpopular client is not in itself a crime, despite the government's attempts to "criminalize" the good faith efforts of sincere lawyers to defend zealously, unpopular clients.

In any case, defending an unpopular client is not in itself a crime, despite the government's attempts to "criminalize" the good faith efforts of sincere lawyers to defend zealously, unpopular clients.
-------------------------------------
The unpopular client has been convicted of the 1st WTC bombing and Lynn has been convicted of aiding a known terrorist. If that is supported by the liberal left, then the term high treason is an appropriate term to use here. Basically you are supporting people waging war on America and blowing up American civilians.

I am amused by people who can make excuse for Lynn and at the same time want Libby to go to prison.

You know darn well that Bush is going to pardon Libby. The only reason he commuted the prison term is because his hand was forced when the judge would not let Libby stay out of jail until lengthy appeals went long enough for Bush to pardon him on his last day of office.
The blind sheik was never charged nor was he ever convicted of the 1st WTC bombing. You have your facts wrong. His actual conviction was for a different situation entirely that happened years later and that had to do with pure talk. Absolutely nothing happened or was alleged to have happened except for pure talk that never even extended to the planning stage.
But that is not the point. The point is that all Lynne Stewart did was read one lousy paragraph over the phone to a Reuter's reporter, and read a few letters to the blind shiek when he was in jail.
That is a heck of a lot different than those evil, horrible, totally worthless animals who did the subway bombings in London.
Let's put this in perspective.
Most people feel Libby was the fall guy and that the real masterminds were Rove and Cheney. Libby was just a pawn who was sacrificed. The fear was that he would not fall on the sword but would instead tell what he knew really happened.

Absolutely nothing happened or was alleged to have happened except for pure talk that never even extended to the planning stage.
------------------------------------
SO liberals like you support people advocating blowing up American women/children since these are simply doing pure talk?

Stewart shares the Communist beliefs of the WWP and IAC and the Center for Constitutional Rights. She is anti-capitalist and believes the USA is an imperialistic nation, and that anti-capitalist violence is justified. In a 1995 New York Times interview she said, "I don't believe in anarchistic violence, but in directed violence. That would be violence directed at the institutions which perpetuate capitalism, racism, and sexism, and at the people who are the appointed guardians of those institutions, and accompanied by popular support." Obviously, Stewart's worldview meshes seamlessly with that of Saddam Hussein, Yassir Arafat, the blind sheik and Osama Bin Laden. And with that of Deirdre Griswold Brian, Becker, Ramsey Clark and the Workers World Party.

The dishonesty of the left is in full display here again. Obviously, the identity of Plame is not such a secret. Fritz kwew that Armitage was the leaker, but he obviously concluded that no law was broken. Otherwise, he would have prosecuted Armitage. So all "outing a CIA agent" is simply a propaganda or a lie used by the left to attack Bush. And for what purpose? To aid Saddam Hussein and now the AlQ terrorists.

I guess liberals don't want terrorist propagandist to face jail time in Britain

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=469285&in_page_id=1770

Dozens of veiled women gathered outside the Old Bailey to protest against the jail sentences given to four Muslim men for encouraging terrorism.

You raise an interesting point. Because the provocative statements were made after the London subway bombing, I can see why it makes sense to put the instigators in jail. I do not disagree with that sentence because those bombings changed everything.
Similarly, if Lynne Stewart had done what she did after 9/11 then it would be different. But what happened in her case is that she did something before 9/11 that at that time was considered at worst an act which might result in her losing her right to visit her client in jail. It wasn't even a law that she broke, it was an "administrative order".
Who on earth in the pre 9/11 world would think that reading one lousy paragraph over the phone to a Reuters reporter would result in the government asking for a 30 year jail sentence? If that isn't an overly harsh sentence then what is?

Lynn Steward was convicted in a court of law and she still aided a known terrorist. She advocated and supported violence against the US. So it is hypocritical for her and her supporters to be against violence to remove a dictator like Saddam Hussein and the terrorists.

Who on earth in the pre 9/11 world would think that reading one lousy paragraph over the phone to a Reuters reporter would result in the government asking for a 30 year jail sentence? If that isn't an overly harsh sentence then what is?
It is this thinking that led to 9/11. Now the liberals want us to go back to that thinking!

Such as, say, Cheney's long-severed "ties" to Haliburton, Brian?

Severed? If Haliburton goes out of business, Cheney loses money. I'm not aware of a similar arrangement between Fitz and Schumer.

No matter how the liberals are trying to spin, here is the truth. The liberal left has been promoting and supporting known liars like Wilson/Plame. This whole "outing a CIA agent" is another hypocritical lie of the left. IF the left is honest, Schumer would have called for the investigation of the leaks by the NYT for example. Again, the left is not honest as usual.