this is just to shocking to believe

While the RezzziDUNCE's press secretary, Scott McClellen lied. He admits this in his new piece o' crap book:

The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.

There was one problem. It was not true.

I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President’s chief of staff, and the president himself.

Free Scooter! (cont'd!)

Thompson: jackass?

There's a Scooter Libby Legal Defense Fund?

respect for the law at an ALL TIME LOW

Leaker invokes Libby commutation in plea for leniency

SARA CISCO — An attorney who admitted leaking the confidential grand jury testimony of slugger Barry Bonds to the media asked a federal judge for leniency Tuesday, noting that President Bush commuted I. Lewis "Scooter" "Stooge" "Fall Guy" "Not Dick 'Dick' (Dick) Dick" "Wrong Guy" Libby's prison sentence for a similar crime.

In doing so, Troy Ellerman joins a growing a list of defendants across the country who have made the same arguments for leniency since Bush said the former vice presidential aide's 2½-year sentence for leaking the name of a CIA operative was too harsh and commuted it to probation and a fine.
...

Ellerman was a successful Sacramento attorney (in udder werds, not one of those minorities who belongs in prison) when Victor Conte, founder of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, hired him following the raid on the Burlingame nutritional supplements lab, as part of the government probe.

Ellerman pleaded guilty to four felony counts of obstruction of justice and related charges in February.

His lawyer, Scott Tedmon, urged the judge to consider Libby's commutation when he sentences Ellerman on Thursday.

"As with Mr. Libby, Troy Ellerman is a (white lawyer type) first-time offender with (white lawyer type) years of exceptional work as an (white lawyer type) attorney in both the (white) public and (lawyer) private sectors," Tedmon argued in the court filing... (you know, he's just like you and me... it would be like sending one of us to prison...)

Tedmon noted that Libby and Ellerman were both convicted of leaking confidential information to reporters and then lying to investigators.

But he said there was one dramatic difference between their cases: "Mr. Libby's conduct involved matters of national security, while Mr. Ellerman's conduct has no nexus to national security." (Sounds like dis Tedman feller is really starting to hate freedom...)

Tedmon said in an interview Tuesday that both men have suffered embarrassment... (well then... isn't that punishment enough?)

The John Hopkins University

What a piece of shit.

Fouad Ajami, a professor (and he has won prizes! They love to give each other prizes!) at the esteemed university I once thought seriously of attending, has written a piece for the Wall Street Journal attracting some attention in which he says of Bush's approach to morality: "the one defining mark of [his] moral outlook is the distinction [he is able to make(?)] between friend and foe," which really only illuminates how difficult it is to find something nice to say about Bush. Being able to tell the difference between friend and foe is something we expect of our five year olds, something we hope our presidents have managed long ago. As well, the action of marking friend and foe is only the beginning of a process to determine proper action and context of action for the self. In the Bush presidency, marking friend and marking foe involves a process that has typically led to great corruption and great heartache. We are not talking about Churchill here. Instead we are talking of roses for politically connected corporations and endless ache for others.

Now Ajami was writing this piece earlier and calling for Bush to pardon Libby. His piece, pedantic, insipid and superficial, went beyond straining the bonds of credulity however and entered the realms of the insultingly delusional. He wrote:

In "The Soldier's Creed," there is a particularly compelling principle: "I will never leave a fallen comrade." This is a cherished belief, and it has been so since soldiers and chroniclers and philosophers thought about wars and great, common endeavors. Across time and space, cultures, each in its own way, have given voice to this most basic of beliefs. They have done it, we know, to give heart to those who embark on a common mission, to give them confidence that they will not be given up under duress. A process that yields up Scooter Libby to a zealous prosecutor is justice gone awry.

How does one have the audacity or just the sheer stupidity to compare Scooter Libby to a soldier right now? How is he comparable? When soldiers in Iraq fall are they wearing custom tailored suits while being advised on their movements by lawyers who bill thousands of dollars an hour? Is the consequence of their falling an easy stretch in a minimum security jail? In another tack, was it a war that the White House was fighting in order to convince the American public that attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or any terrorism directed against the United States was the right move to make even as we invaded another more culpable foe? If it was then war, then are we accusing the Bush presidency, by application of this logic, of bringing civil war to the United States? An odd and idiotic defense of the indefensible.

Getting caught up in this part of his article is to miss the point elsewhere that this fool who has a koosh job in a comfortable university (a university started in much more a spirit of challenging established authorities when it was begun about 130 years ago which has clearly lost its way on that score) believes that Libby has sacrificed something out of a nobility of spirit in choosing to reveal the identity of a secret United States agent and obstruct the justice of the United States in the pursuit of a flawed and tragic policy that has not revealed anything of any nobility at all, but has just allowed the rotten fruits of this administration to smell more strongly in the light of the larger stage of war than they would have if Bush was simply giving the environment away (another thing he excels at).

Why do we suffer these fools so docilely?

How does Professor Ajami have a job when he so publicly reveals not just his ignorance, but an appalling lack of reason, intelligence or any sense whatsoever of a political philosophy that contains insight, distinction or foresight? He is an apologist. A flunky. Increasingly, our system of higher education rewards morons like this while the more original thinkers are included out of a process out of fear that those more original thinkers will reveal these flunkies for what they are: dangerous fools with no more right to pontificate and teach than the dogs they resemble.

So a big "Go Fuck Yourself" to The John Hopkins University and the lapdogs they hire for this pathetic and dangerous administration.

I wonder what's different in this case?

- Bush has granted fewer pardons than any President in the past 100 years
- Bush has commuted just 4 sentences (is no one paying up?)
- Bush has denied more than 4,000 commutation requests (PHOKK YOU)
- Bush has denied more than 1,000 pardon requests (see previous PHOKK YOU)

we are living in a golden age (cont'd)

News item: President Bush spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from a 2 1/2 year prison term on Monday, issuing an order that commutes his sentence.

Because when it comes to perjury, there's the trivial kind (lying about blowing the cover of a CIA agent in order to get back at the people who have been calling you on the lies you told to get a war started) and the impeachable kind (lying about a blow job).

let's clarify this once and for all

Perjury and obstruction of justice in the matter of lying about cheating on your wife is an impeachable offense entirely worthy of bringing down governments (plus you're going to Hell -- quite a double-whammy! that oughta learn ya...). Perjury and obstruction of justice in the matter of lying about blowing the cover of a CIA agent for your own political gain in preserving the value of the lies you told to get a war started (see also: s#i+ blowing up)... feh... let's try to move on.