fayfreethinkers.com

Scooter Libby has been found guilty on four out of five counts, but Faux News is reporting:

a. In their video headline (see below), that Libby is "not guilty"--of one count.
b. That since the jury found Libby guilty on 4 out of 5 counts, they were obviously confused and lost since otherwise they would have given him a 5 out of 5. So Libby was obviously only found guilty because the jury did not know what was going on at all...

See here.

But was there a crime involved in the first place?

Darrel wrote:But was there a crime involved in the first place?

DOUG
Right. No doubt those liberals think that obstruction of justice is a crime! Sheesh!

You KNOW the Rs don't commit crimes. Only Bill Clinton (and sometimes Hillary) commits crimes.

Is "outing" a government agent a crime under natural law? No - it does not constitute aggression aka violate anyone's rights. It is, like smoking pot, a "victimless crime," a faux crime.

There is no aggression is telling a truth about someone's occupation. Obviously. I really haven't been following the trial since the whole thing is ridiculous. Mainly one of those partisan political soap operas - full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Hogeye wrote:Is "outing" a government agent a crime under natural law?

Natural law? We aren't governed by natural law. You may as well ask whether it is a crime in the Bahamas. Exposing a covert CIA operative is a crime under U.S. law.

Doug wrote:We aren't governed by natural law. You may as well ask whether it is a crime in the Bahamas.

Most people have some concern for morality. Natural law concerns what is right; political law concerns what the rulers want to enforce. Natural law is used to evaluate the justice of man-made decreed law. E.g. When Martin Luther King questioned govt laws discriminating against blacks, he appeals to a "higher law," aka natural law. When anti-war people protest totally legal govt mass-murder by aerial bombing, or starvation of civilians by embargos, they appeal to natural law. One cannot question govt law without stepping outside the "theory" (faith) of government rulership.

I think it's highly commendable to expose govt thugs and spies early and often. If only more narcs, CIA jackels, "economic hit men", and such were exposed...

Outing a covert CIA agent is against U.S. law, and should be. Outing Plame endangered her mission (to find out about covert nuclear arms and component sales - rather important for domestic security), and also endangered the lives of anyone who aided her in her mission.

You seem awfully sure of the rectitude of Plame's covert missions. Did she "find out about covert nuclear arms and component sales" by kidnapping people and taking them to torture-friendly crony States? After all, that's one thing her employer is known to do. Why is it okay for her State to produce , keep, and sell such weapons, but not other States? Is she not simply amorally trying to keep/increase mass-murder power for her criminal organization, while obstructing similar power for competing criminal organizations?

As for me, I'd be thrilled to endanger such govt goons and those who "aid in such missions." If you are a narc or govt agent of some sort, you'd better not tell me - I might tell everyone I know and even publish it on a web page!