President Bush guilty of OBSTRUCTION of JUSTICE, PERJURY, and Criminal 'OUTING' of an entire CIA undercover organization...?!!

It is time that Democratic "leaders" and the 'MSM' - mainstream media - face the facts: Our president, George W. Bush, is almost certainly guilty of CRIMINAL CONDUCT from within the White House.

On the Valeria Plame/Rove-Libby-Plamegate scandal ALONE we have: #1. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE; #2. PERJURY; and #3. the CRIMINAL DISCLOSURE - 'outing' - of NOT ONLY AN UNDERCOVER CIA AGENT, Valerie Plame, BUT HER ENTIRE COVER ORGANIZATION, Brewster-Jennings Co.

Under the direction of President Bush and Vice President Cheney; Karl Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby made a CONCENTRATED, SYTEMATIC EFFORT to "SHOP AROUND" those stories using SECRET, CLASSIFIED INFORMATION that would best bolster the administration's efforts to drum up support for the invasion and bombing of Iraq. This overall effort to publicize - propagandize - the need for war using "cherry picked" secret intel, also included a 'DISCREDIT/DEMEAN" component (i.e. "to SMEAR") against the war's critics, especially those whistelblowers in high places who could... line-by-line, issue-by-issue, CONFRONT and DISCREDIT the administration's rational for war.

C-Dems.blgspt.com does not have the time or space to outline fully the administration members and press/reporters who were part of the effort to steamroll opposition to the war using secret, classified intel, except to note that that effort certainly includes Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney, Judith Miller of the New York Times, Matt Cooper of TIME, Robert Novak, and Bob Woodward of the Washington Post (he of "Watergate" fame). And, we now learn, PRESIDENT BUSH himself was a willing participant in the "outing" scandal, and, we now know, President Bush was LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH when he told the American public in 2003 and 2004 (before the 2004 presidential elections) that his administration would "COOPERATE" with the investigation into the illegal "outing" of Ms. Plame and her organization, especially after Attorney General Ashcroft HAD TO recuse himself from the investigation, and the new prosecutor was given SUBPOENA POWERS, the power to question, UNDER OATH, those senior White House officials (Libby, Rove, Hadley) who answered DIRECTLY TO THE PRESIDENT and VICE PRESIDENT. Technically, White House defenders can say that neither President Bush nor Vice President Cheney was ever sworn under oath for the investigation, but SUBORNING PERJURY is every bit as bad as PERJURY, itself.


FOR NO MORE THAN POLITICAL MEANS TO HUMILIATE HER HUSBAND, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, Valerie Plame was "OUTED" from her undercover CIA job by the Bush White House, using a systematic and premeditated effort to "shop around" her secret identity to reporters who would write the story, intended to be in a manner to discredit Ambassador Wilson's testimony and NY Time op-ed that not only did Niger NOT ship 'yellowcake' uranium ore to Iraq, but President Bush and Vice President Cheney were both well aware that there was NO evidence held by the US government to support that contention.

The allegation that Iraq was purchasing uranium ore to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program was one of the three or four major props for Bush's invasion of Iraq, an allegation that not only did Amb. Wilson disprove, but he publicly rebuked President Bush for including the "yellowcake Niger uranium ore to Iraq" in the January 2003 State of the Union speech ('SOTU'), the President KNOWING THAT STORY WAS_NOT_TRUE. The other Bush-Cheney rationals for war were that Iraq was purchasing aluminum tubes for centrifuges - another easily discredited story - and that Saddam "would not allow international weapons inspectors in Iraq" - when in fact Hans Blix's inspection team was in Iraq, on the ground, doing their jobs effectively, and investigating any site within Iraq (many at the direction of US intel agencies) AT A MOMENT's NOTICE, when they were FORCED TO DEPART IRAQ as the US prepared to unleash "SHOCK and AWE," the undeclared war on Iraq.

This brief, 4-5 paragraph exposition on the Rove-Libby-Brewster-Jennings Plamegate scandal may seem convoluted and confusing, but it (this analysis) is far more informative than any 3, 4 or 5 page report coming out of the New York Times or Washington Post, both of which (via their reporters and editors, some of whom have WITHHELD EVIDENCE and possibly contributed to OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE) may be COMPLICIT IN the "outing" scandal.

For us here at C-dems.blgspt.com, the big question is: WHAT ARE THE DEMOCRATS GOING TO DO, if it is revealed beyond a shadow of a doubt that the President and Vice President KNOWINGLY WITHHELD INFORMATION FROM dully sworn prosecutors, and further ENCOURAGED PERJURY and OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE by their SENIOR STAFF MEMBERS and aides?


suggestion: Here's a good place to start: dig up all those back issues of the New York Times and Washington Post, with breathless, boldfaced, above-the-fold scandal headlines screeching "THE PRESIDENT LIED, SENATORS CALL FOR IMPEACHMENT!"

_____________________________________________________

Libby Prosecutor Outlines Effort At High Levels
Fitzgerald Aims to Show An Organized Plan Led To Leak of CIA Agent's Name
By ANNE MARIE SQUEO
April 8, 2006; Page A6
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114443407090120247-e9XMcD7TTAyKnsZ5CRdxjcZIA_E_20060507.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

WASHINGTON -- The special prosecutor trying the case against former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis Libby will try to show that the leaking of a CIA agent's name grew out of a highly organized administration effort that commanded high-level attention, a court filing this week shows.

Pretrial filings by Mr. Libby's defense team indicate they intend to argue that any misstatements made in Mr. Libby's testimony to investigators and a grand jury were innocent mistakes because of his focus on more pressing national-security issues. They are seeking a wide array of classified and sensitive information they say is necessary for trial, including secret daily intelligence briefings given to the president.

This week's filing by Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, was intended to convince the judge to deny the defense's latest request for information. In doing so, the prosecutor also attacked Mr. Libby's bad-memory defense by introducing new information about the attention -- including by President Bush -- placed on responding to Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador and critic of the Iraq war.

Lawyers say in a high-profile legal battle like this, where the judge already has warned both sides not to try their case in public, pretrial motions become a critical element in the public-relations campaign.

"Mr. Libby's defense, as we understand it, is that because of his 24-7 national-security responsibilities, he just forgot his conversations with reporters," says Scott Fredericksen, a Washington defense attorney and former prosecutor. "And what Mr. Fitzgerald is telling the judge here is that Mr. Libby was expressly authorized to go have these conversations with reporters by the vice president and authorized to release classified information by the president. That is a unique situation and not very forgettable."

For instance, Mr. Fitzgerald cites the express permission by the president to disclose certain elements of a highly classified report about Iraq to a New York Times reporter. While the president has broad latitude to declassify information, the government's filing quotes Mr. Libby's grand-jury testimony as saying such an authorization was "unique in his recollection."

On Friday, the White House didn't challenge the assertion that Mr. Bush declassified intelligence information to counter war critics. White House spokesman Scott McClellan spent nearly an hour drawing a distinction between the leaking of information judged to be "in the public interest" and the willful disclosure of information that could endanger national security.

At issue are portions of the previously classified National Intelligence Estimate the White House made public on July 18, 2003 -- some ten days after prosecutors allege Mr. Libby discussed the information with a New York Times reporter. In that conversation, Mr. Libby also disclosed the identity of Mr. Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, a Central Intelligence Agency official, according to his indictment. (Leaking the identity of a covert official can be a crime, but Mr. Libby isn't charged with that violation.)

There is no suggestion by Mr. Fitzgerald that either President Bush or Vice President Cheney told Mr. Libby to leak her name. Mr. McClellan dismissed as "crass politics" the suggestion from some Democrats that Mr. Bush sanctioned or engaged in a scheme to disclose sensitive information that would presumably include releasing Ms. Plame's identity.

The case against Mr. Libby, who is charged with five counts of lying and obstructing a federal investigation, isn't expected to go to trial until next January at the earliest. He has pleaded not guilty.

Mr. Fitzgerald alleges Mr. Libby took the lead in disputing Mr. Wilson's claims, and in doing so disclosed Ms. Plame's identity to reporters. Thus, the government alleges, he sought to cover up his role in Ms. Plame's unveiling by lying under oath and trying to obstruct the investigation.

--Christopher Cooper contributed to this article.

Write to Anne Marie Squeo at annemarie.squeo@wsj.com