Skip to comments.
Some See Indictment as 'a Devastating Day for Journalism'
Los Angeles Times ^
| October 29, 2005
| James Rainey and Matea Gold, Times Staff Writers
Posted on 10/29/2005 5:58:46 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-76 last
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"has had an obvious chilling effect on other reporters" around the country, Specter said. It also has a chilling effect on Pols. They're the ones leaking and therefore the beneficiaries of the shield. This is another political Rorschach test -- those who support a shield law are the con artists that don't want their constituents to know what they're doing.
61
posted on
10/29/2005 11:00:15 AM PDT
by
Anthem
(The only 20th century advance in the science of government was to tax a little less to take more.)
To: pepperdog
Weren't the Ellsberg papers classified?
To: pepperdog
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
This "case" and the DeLay "case" are the biggest bunch of hooey that I can remember.
The only person telling palpable lies with any resemblance to national security matters is Mr. Wilson, yet somehow three reporters who disagree under oath with Mr. Libby as to what he said to them is somehow a five-alarm felony case?
I had the misfortune of hearing on the radio a few minutes of Mr. Fitzgerald's news conference, and from it I repose no added confidence in him as a fair or honest prosecutor -- and I had none to begin with.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I especially relish Hillary Clinton's role being explored in all this. The Time Magazine vermin is married to one of Hillary's key employee/strategists.
I can't wait for Liddy's lawyer to do some discovery with these low-lifes.
To: snowsislander
You raised an outstanding point. Wilson blatantly and repeatedly lied under oath, and there are no indictments of this sc*mbag?
What gives? What kind of "investigation" was this?
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Looks like the party is over for the mealymouth slimey reporters.
67
posted on
10/29/2005 1:32:30 PM PDT
by
marty60
To: cynicom
"Indictments are a sure indication that some republican politicians and their minions are not overly smart, chatting off the record with MSM. Dumb they are and if Libby lied, put him in jail."
Good post. If Libby did in fact do what he is accused of, he's too stupid to be wandering around freely.
68
posted on
10/29/2005 3:00:18 PM PDT
by
tjg
(Being a liberal means never having to grow up.)
To: scotiamor
Therein lies the problem - the jury will be picked from that sterling population of Washington DC, which is about 99.9% democrat. Libby doesn't have an iceberg's chance in hell (but better chance in global warming) of getting a fair trial. Someone correct me if I am wrong, (kinda shaky on legal grounds) but because of you just said, the defense might want to move the trial else were were the odds are better for a true and fair trial.
69
posted on
10/29/2005 3:27:20 PM PDT
by
danmar
("The cause of slavery is legislation. Legislation rests on organized violence" Lyoff N. Tolstoy)
To: speedy
Thank you for that very timely explanation. I've always wondered why anyone in a responsible position in private industry or the government would bother to "shoot the breeze" with today's "journalists".
It is interesting to know that a person who receives classified info isn't responsible for protecting it, even if he knows it to be classified. It is, as you said, an idiotic law.
I find this whole scenario very frightening for the country as it appears the CIA, in conjunction with the press, has cleverly manipulated the Vice President's Chief of Staff into a position where he can be prosecuted. That is if you can believe the testimony of the presstitutes, which I question.
To: Revolutionary
Libby's team now has the right of discovery.Read on one of yesterday's threads that the right of discovery does not extend to this type of indictment in Federal Court. Correct or incorrect? Any lawyers out there?
71
posted on
10/29/2005 6:51:11 PM PDT
by
CedarDave
(Life was simpler before Cindy showed up in Crawford.)
To: CedarDave
Read on one of yesterday's threads that the right of discovery does not extend to this type of indictment in Federal Court.I find that hard to believe.
To: ironman
Further they are not eyewitnesses to the crimes Libby is charged with.Exactly. Libby's not being indicted for misleading the reporters. He's being indicted for misleading the grand jury. Libby committed no crime when he misrepresented to Russert, Cooper, et al his knowledge of Plame's being employed by the CIA. So there's no way they were "eyewitnesses" to the crime. In fact, there was no crime until he gave misleading testimony to the GJ, when he claimed he wasn't aware of Plame's employment status at the time he spoke with Russert and the rest, when in fact he did.
You can lie to reporters. You can't lie to grand juries. It's odd how this thing is being perceived by some as being about Libby lying to reporters. Over at NRO you can see a Corner entry in which Michael Ledeen seems to make this error.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I find that hard to believe.So do I; that's why I asked the question, which has not been answered
74
posted on
10/30/2005 2:18:31 PM PST
by
CedarDave
(Life was simpler before Cindy showed up in Crawford.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
My money is on Libby rather than the squirming toad-brained mock-journalists cited in this article. This is all due to Fitzgerald's reluctance to bring indictments against Miller, and Cooper for attempting to create crime with their rumor.
75
posted on
10/30/2005 2:28:50 PM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Atheist and Fool are synonyms; Evolution is where fools hide from the sunrise)
To: bray; Ernest_at_the_Beach
"What doesn't make any sense is why Libby would lie about something that wasn't a crime in the first place? There was no reason to give false information or cover-up a non crime. Who was giving him legal advice??" You seem to assume that he did lie; why? Do you see any credible evidence or witnesses to cause such a belief?
76
posted on
10/30/2005 2:34:34 PM PST
by
editor-surveyor
(Atheist and Fool are synonyms; Evolution is where fools hide from the sunrise)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-76 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson