Is Bush guilty of Obstruction of Justice?

[JohnnyCougar]

There are a lot of you on here that are suspicious of the NY Daily News story being a planted story by Bush. But I think it is very bad for him.

Via The Talent Show we can speculate that Bush could have committed obstruction of justice when testifying before the grand jury. Why?


There have been two accounts of what Bush knew, and when Bush knew it. The New York Daily news report claims:

Other sources confirmed, however, that Bush was initially furious with Rove in 2003 when his deputy chief of staff conceded he had talked to the press about the Plame leak.

Then there is the other account that Bush was totally unaware that someone outed Valerie Plame. Bush spoke to Fitzgerald in the Summer of 2004. Which story was he sticking to a year ago, before all the shit was hitting the fan? My intuition says it was the "naive" rendition. He wasn't under oath, but if Fitz decides Bush mislead him, this could be a clear cut case for obstruction of justice. This is, of course, only if the NY Daily News report is true.

Let me just add my opinion on this. These people (meaning the entire Bush cabal) are not used to facing any consequences. One could think "How can all of these people have been so stupid and perjured themselves over one small leak?" Instead of the original leaker going to jail, now there may be a whole boatload of them behind bars. But then you have to realize that this regime has been getting away with their lies for quite some time now, and their whole career, MO, and profession is to lie all the time. Why would they deviate from this strategy in the Fitzgerald case? Especially a year ago when it seemed as if nothing would ever touch them.

Obstruction of Justice for Bush. That's huge. And Abramoff hasn't even been put on the stove yet.

[kentuck]

1. And perjury...

Because if he lied to the Special Prosecutor, then he could be convicted of perjury. And if it is true that he said he would take care of anyone that leaked in the White House, and that he knew who the leaker was, then he would also be guilty of obstruction of justice, plain and simple.

[JohnnyCougar]

2. Well, Bush was not under oath when he spoke to the DA.

So he can't be convicted for perjury. Obstruction of Justice is another matter.

[kentuck]

3. Oh, I forgot.....

You have to be under oath or your lies don't count....

[JohnnyCougar]

6. Well, they do count.

It's just called obstruction of justice if you're not under oath.

[Neil Lisst]

5. true dat, but the Martha Stewart gig is always there for lying ...

... for lying during an investigation.

You're right. Obstruction of Justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice.


will bush replace cheney? today ...
http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst/

[pa28]

4. Nice Summary.

Lying to investigators is what put Martha behind bars. I don't believe she was ever under oath.

[JohnnyCougar]

7. This is kind of wierd, though...

Fitz it taking down the very people that appointed him.