Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I may not be clear when discussing the potential crime of exposing a covert CIA agent, and perjury and obstruction of justice. Libby was found guilty of the crime of perjury and obstruction of justice. No one in the administration has been found guilty of outing a covert CIA agent. My questions on the second issue are important to me. I have already made up my mind on the Libby issue. I am not sure what you mean by saying I am using strawman arguements.
|
I hate to bring up Clinton but he wasn't found guilty of any crime either. Neither was OJ. That of course doesn't mean a crime wasn't committed. The point of an investigation is to find out A) was a crime committed and B) who broke the law. It is perfectly fine to have an investigation without conclusive proof that a crime was committed as long as there is reasonable evidence that one may have been committed. In this case there was evidence that a crime may have been committed. Libby decided to lie under oath about what he knew and thus perjured himself. I'm sorry but to say the someone can only be guilty of perjury if someone is found guilty of an underlying crime is hogwash because if people are lying then there is a good chance that no one will be found guilty of a crime! Don't you see the circularness of your argument?