Posted on 02/03/2006 11:39:53 PM PST by Daralundy
Whether Libby told the truth is a matter of fact for a jury to decide. A person is innocent until proved guilty. This is a tough one for Fitz to prove, especially as to the required intent to deceive or obstruct.
Do you condone lying to investigators?
Don't be silly, what does what I condone have to do with anything?
Don't be silly, what does what I condone have to do with anything?
It's a discussion point. To take your point literally, "what does [it] have to do with anything?", would reduce ALL outside discussion of political and legal events to crap.
You are avoiding answering the question.
Answer: Not as a rule.
Answer: Not as a rule.
Granted, lying to investigators is not "per se" okay. You are still avoiding the question of whether (if he did) Libby can be excused, under the circumstances.
Except FR was calling for Bubba's hide for false testimony ....
I really didn't think that a /sarcasm tag was needed for my reply, but maybe I was wrong...
Mark
Excused by who? By me? I guess Bush could pardon Libby. I guess I could excuse Libby if I felt he was unfairly convicted.
If Libby knowingly lied and obstructed and is convicted then he deserves what he gets.
"It's to make sure that the press has plenty of time to try to link republicans to the "scandal" in the lead up to the 2006 congressional elections, as well as giving plenty of lead time for the 2008 presidential elections."
They do tend to do that, and end up shooting themselves in the foot. ;o)
bcsco had the report that it was the defense attorney who wanted the delay.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1571572/posts?page=42#42
And, smoothsailing had wonderful thoughts about this.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1571572/posts?page=23#23
After thinking about it, I agree with both of them.
Scooter, and the Rs, want this fight.
They are going to make Fitzgerald rue the day when he decided that
it was NOT a top priority to investigate if a crime was committed.
LOL!
If I caught the sarcasm,
most folks should. ;o)
But really,the antique media and the dems are just so easy to figure out,aren't they?
HA!
They telegraph their punches for all to see. :-)
Ain't it GREAT!
;o)
Equivocation. You may know where you stand on the case, as currently presentented. But I think you don't (know where you stand).
You are still avoiding the question of whether (if he did what the indictment alledges) you would excuse Libby, under the circumstances.
Actually what I wrote was that the judge was going to set the date for sometime in September but the defense attorney had a scheduling conflict. The judge then set the date for January, '07.
It could be that the defense attorney used the idea of a 'conflict' to have the trial postponed further so that it didn't occur during the election cycle. But nothing in what I read or saw on TV alluded to that as a tactic. Everything pointed to a simple scheduling conflict.
I would agree with the person who said the defense is on a 'roll' right now. However, there's a lot of discovery yet to come out and that's going to take awhile the way Fitzgerald is acting. I think, perhaps, the January date is a good one for the defense.
I don't know the circumstances other than what the indictment and the prosecutor say are the circumstances. I do not condone the actions described in the indictment.
In the past, some national security trials have been dismissed for this cause, when the witness refused to testify on "national security" grounds.
The court may also sanction the witness with jailing for contempt. But that is independent of whether the court dismisses the criminal charges.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column: "NY Times Touts Dubious Conclusions on School Quality"
"Actually what I wrote was that the judge was going to set the date for sometime in September but the defense attorney had a scheduling conflict. The judge then set the date for January, '07."
You are correct.
My apologies...
Muddying the waters here. If true and significant, why weren't these counts in the indictment?
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.