by 
One question I keep coming back to: I keep reading (all over the damn place) that in regards to Libby’s conviction, it was somehow erroneous because “no underlying crime had been committed” and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has not brought anyone up on charges (read: Dick Armitage) for revealing the name of an undercover CIA operative. Being as there is no statute of limitations on espionage, which, to be clear, is what we’re talking about here, the fact that no charges have been filed as of yet is utterly and completely meaningless.
Charges could be filed ten years from now and they’d be just as relevant and serious as if they had been filed last month. No one is out of the woods on this one.
Furthermore, how is it that the “failure” to indite (their words, not mine) someone for the “underlying crime” somehow trumps the fact that Lewis “Scooter” Libby was convicted of “perjury, making false statements and obstruction of justice” in the investigation of that crime?
You cannot seriously put forth the argument that witnesses, co-conspirators, and the like can give false testimony under oath and basically lie through their teeth to the Prosecutor, the District Attorney, the Judge, and anyone else asking question about a crime as long as no one is actually brought up on charges for said crime.
That is not the way it works. You’re under oath, you tell the truth. Or you face the consequences.
by 
why tell the truth if you could get away with Not….
What’s even more absurd is the fact that the Dipshit in Chief essentially made the same argument that his Justice Department has been shooting down since he took office.
Scooter’s obviously got tales to tell. In a perfect world he’d be kidnapped and whisked away to a prison in Outer Bumfuckistan to have all of Cheney’s dirty secrets waterboarded out of him.