Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Phocion
The charges arise from the fact that Libby said under oath that Russert told him,

That's not even the charge that I see. Basically, Libby said one thing happened during the discussion with Russert and Russert said another. Libby was under NO compulsion to tell the truth to Russert.

19 posted on 10/28/2005 10:57:00 AM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: dirtboy
Basically, Libby said one thing happened during the discussion with Russert and Russert said another.

That's part of the one charge, and I agree that's a weak point of the indictment. He's more likely to get nailed about saying (about his conversation with Russert) "at this point in time I did not recall that I had ever known, and I thought this was something he was telling me that I was first learning." In the light of testimony from numerous individuals who had heard him speaking about Plame earlier, a jury might find that hard to believe.

20 posted on 10/28/2005 11:03:21 AM PDT by Phocion ("Protection" really means exploiting the consumer. - Milton Friedman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson