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

To: MarcusTulliusCicero

now wait a second here. Fitzy said Libby WAS the beinging of the issue. That he in fact was the FIRST to "leak" the indentity to journalists.

If what Woodward is saying is true, sure looks like he got that wrong. In regards to the 'lie' Libby told is it not possible that he said Russert when it was Woodward that said something to him and he simply erred in memory?

When is Andrea Mitchell gonna speak up?


151 posted on 11/16/2005 3:14:11 PM PST by BlueStateDepression
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]


To: BlueStateDepression

But he isn't charged with anything relating to the link. He is only being charged with giving contradictory statements under oath and that is what the trial will be limited to. Many FReepers were also assuming that Plame and Wilson would be called to the stand, but unless they are the ones providing the evidence that he gave contradictory statements under oath, their testimony (and for that matter, Plame's covert status) is irrelevant. That was one reason for the outrage about these particular charges - i.e. they do not address the original issues that Fitzgerald was investigating but only stem from Libby possibly trying to cover himself during Grand Jury testimony.


156 posted on 11/16/2005 3:18:03 PM PST by MarcusTulliusCicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | 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