[Jaidyn]

Fitzgerals isn't so stupid as to realize the American people will be up in arms over perjury charges to a case that is really a non-case. If there was no leak, then, how can Libby be indicted for lying? All it comes down to is a case about a person getting the dates wrong. It's too obvious that Libby didn't out anyone, so why would he cover-up something that never existed in the first place?

[em2vn]

It worked on Martha Stewart, why not Liddy?

[dinasour]

Fitzgerals isn't so stupid as to realize the American people will be up in arms over perjury charges to a case that is really a non-case

These wiil be the same people who were up in arms when Martha Stewart was convicted of obstructing the prosecution of "not committing insider trading"

[Preachin']

"Fitzgerals isn't so stupid as to realize the American people will be up in arms over perjury charges to a case that is really a non-case."

He's not exactly an elected official.

These career types have almost no one that they must please.

[beyond the sea]

Right!

[jern]

Fitzgerals isn't so stupid as to realize the American people will be up in arms over perjury charges to a case that is really a non-case. If there was no leak, then, how can Libby be indicted for lying? Because if the FBI asks you something and you lie about it (you are wearing a red tie, they ask you what color, and you say blue) you are breaking the law.