Is perjury a fugging crime?

[malaise]

Yes or no. As David Corn points out
Credit the members of the Libby Lobby with gratitude, though it comes at a high price: exposing themselves as partisans for whom the war and politics mean more than the truth and law.

Tweety is taking on Miss Kate this afternoon re Clintin and perjury and Rethugs and perjury.
Where is your consistency here? This is sickening. Kate O'Beirne is saying that a jury of Scooter's peers cannot be right.
The juror is shaking her head in disbelief.

These fuckers have no shame.

[whistle]

1. Yes, it is a crime

[malaise]

2. You'd better tell

Kate O'Beirne.

[City Lights]

3. KateO has always made me sick.

Today is no different. :puke: Listening to her now on Tweety, I find myself wanting to punch her right in the mouth. :mad:

[fooj]

4. Why does he even have this wench on his show?

HE KNOWS who her husband is and the danger he has put our troops in by filling positions in Iraq with partisan hacks. He has to know. It boggles the mind...

[malaise]

7. Fineman just slaughtered Kate

by quoting Bush. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

[City Lights]

8. Did you notice how bored she tried to look when Fineman was talking?

:rofl: Trying so hard to minimize the importance of Howard's words. Pathetic.

[malaise]

5. I can't believe she is so willing to expose her ignorance

re the notion of a pardon on national TV. Damn these hacks are incorrigible. She is beyond sickening.

[sam sarrha]

6. they said of the possible 25 yrs he will do less than 2yrs by the sentencing guidelines

[sandnsea]

9. They have no shame is exactly it

The list is long, as we all know. They invite Ann Coulter to their most prestigious event of the year, snicker with her 'jokes', and then denounce her when she predictably blows up in their face. Bush nominates a key contributor to the swift boat disgrace, who then has the nerve to praise John Kerry as a hero to his face, then they turn around and blast Kerry again for daring to question Fox on the issue he brought up. They've continue to play politics with the war by daring Democrats to defund, when they know any legislation needs 67 votes to override a veto and that the only reason they're saying it is to create an issue to beat the hell out of Democrats with. It goes on and on. They don't care about this country, the troops, people, nothing. I don't know what's wrong with them, but they are some sick twisted people for sure.

[malaise]

11. Sick twisted people

you have that right. Tweety is now calling for a pardon now. He's even sicker than most of them - he can change his position in a split second.

[walldude]

10. Yeah, when Clinton lied about his BJ all the could do was

scream about the "RULE OF LAW". I guess it only applies to Democrats or liberals.

[sam sarrha]

12. actually he said a door was shut that was actually open... thus he LIED

[SoCalDem]

13. The problem with perjury is this..

If you are guilty, and by telling the truth, you send yourself to jail, MOST people will at least TRY to lie..

If you claim the 5th, you automatically LOOK guilty, so my guess is that MOST people will lie to save their own skins..

If they get caught, they are punished, but they would have been punshed for telling the truth, so they are in a bind either way

[Solo_in_MD]

14. ITs the most ignored crime in court...every divorce or custody fight seems to have massive perjury

[Kingshakabobo]

16. I certainly agree with you on THIS.

I know plenty of cops but I've never met one that hasn't admitted/bragged about "testilying."

[Solo_in_MD]

17. I was thinking more of family vs criminal court

[Kingshakabobo]

18. That too.

Come to think of it, would you consider it a thought crime if the penalty was worse for someone testilying to deprive you of your liberty versus depriving you of, say, the 2007 Jaguar?

Anyway, I'm sure you have seen this:

http://www.constitution.org/lrev/dershowitz_test_981201.htm

Testimony of Alan M. Dershowitz

House of Representatives Judiciary Committee

December 1, 1998

My name is Alan M. Dershowitz and I have been teaching criminal law at Harvard Law School for 35 years. I have also participated in the litigation — especially at the appellate level — of hundreds of federal and state cases, many of them involving perjury and the making of false statements. I have edited a casebook on criminal law and have written 10 books and hundreds of articles dealing with subjects relating to the issues before this committee. It is an honor to have been asked to share my experience and expertise with you all here today.

For nearly a quarter century, I have been teaching, lecturing and writing about the corrosive influences of perjury in our legal system, especially when committed by those whose job it is to enforce the law, and ignored — or even legitimized — by those whose responsibilities it is to check those who enforce the law.

On the basis of my academic and professional experience, I believe that no felony is committed more frequently in this country than the genre of perjury and false statements. Perjury during civil depositions and trials is so endemic that a respected appellate judge once observed that "experienced lawyers say that, in large cities, scarcely a trial occurs in which some witness does not lie." He quoted a wag to the effect that cases often are decided "according to the preponderance of perjury."<1> Filing false tax returns and other documents under pains and penalties of perjury is so rampant that everyone acknowledges that only a tiny fraction of offenders can be prosecuted. Making false statements to a law enforcement official is so commonplace that the Justice Department guidelines provide for prosecution of only some categories of this daily crime. Perjury at criminal trials is so common that whenever a defendant testifies and is found guilty, he has presumptively committed perjury.<2> Police perjury in criminal cases - particularly in the context of searches and other exclusionary rule issues - is so pervasive that the former police chief of San Jose and Kansas City has estimated that "hundreds of thousands of law-enforcement officers commit felony perjury every year testifying about drug arrests" alone.<3>

......more at link

[rasputin1952]

15. I saw the whole exchange in the repeat...

several things here.

I have no idea why O'Berne thought she could tackle this issue, she was clearly out of her element.
I have seen defensive body language many times in the past, and she just exuded the stench of someone who was trying desperately to try and make something positive about this...it didn't work.

Here voice cracked several times, which I find very odd for someone who makes a living out writing and oration. I had never seen this in her before, and Ive seen her plenty of times.

She was desperate when she took on the juror about the verdict. It was up to the jury to find guilt or innocence, it is not up to O'Berne, or anyone else, to decide the issue. While it might be fine to proselytize what you think about the case and the finding...one would be well advised when facing someone who spent every minute of the trial, and then some, looking at the evidence.

By doing what she did, in the manner she did, she broke down her own credibility, it would have been better if she had said nothing.

The RW has gone into denial mode, and will be there for quite some time. If they admitted the truth, they would have to look at Cheney and Rove, there are no alternatives. They would have to ask why this was such an issue and had to be covered up. If Libby had come clean from day one, the issue would most likely have dropped off the radar.

And, as to the original query, yes, perjury is a crime. That was why he was there, he was caught lying under oath, and then convicted of the same. Any time an individual takes an oath, or assertion, whether it be to the GJ or in a court room, or under indictment, and then lies; depending on the court all kinds of stuff can happen, from nothing to serious jail time.

I actually was sitting on a jury when at the end of the session, and after sentencing, the defendant was told to return to court to show why he should not be charged with perjury, but this guy was so full of it, it was almost a cake walk for the prosecution...nothing this guy said added up, he was caught w/the articles in his possession, and 19 witnesses identified him as the perpetrator.