Miller Testimony Contradicts Libby Story

Drudge /AP/ ^ | Jan 30 4:47 | MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN

[pinz-n-needlez]

Some of the signs at the Peace March (sic) read, "Remove Cheney, Impeach Bush."

Guess they finally figured out that if they impeach Bush, we'll have a President Cheney. Works for me. LOL (Wish he were running in '08.)

[roses of sharon]

Obviously (from the transcript of the crosses), Libby is not disputing that he learned and talked about Plame with numerous people, some short conversations, some longer, some in passing, ect.

Hume reported today that Libby also told the GJ that Cheney mentioned it too, when figuring out who sent Wilson.

Weird that a Pros would bring a case like this.

So Libby is just trying to defend that he was confused on who told him first.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

Was he orgasmic?

Did he roll over and light a cigarette?

[woofie]

The first Cheney then Bush are the "smart" ones...I got a real kick outta that....I say impeach Bush in 2012

[pinz-n-needlez]

Man! Sign me up!

And then we'll impeach Cheney - and Rumsfeld too! - in 2016!!!

I won't shower until then.... pass the granola!

[greyfoxx39]

sure hope you got to see the Chrissy/Spitty/Drooley video yesterday when Matthews actually was drooling on himself when discussing this case.

I watched the beginning of HB today and I swear, he did it again! I think he has a physical problem, probably the symptoms of BDS.

[greyfoxx39]

Tex-Mex?

[windchime]

(Wish he were running in '08.)


Me, too!

[ohhhh]

1. She wasn't covert.
2. The prosecutor knew the name of the leaker two days after he got the job.......hint: It wasn't Libby, yet the man who leaked has never been under investigation.
3. The prosecutor, knowing there was no crime, continued to press administration figures, including Libby.
4. This prosecutor is simply a fraud, playing to the liberal elites in Washington who believe that not being a Democrat is a crime.

Amen to all that, yet the miserable rabib neo nazi Fityz will continue to persecute poor Libby.

[ohhhh]

[Tell me again, somebody, why Ditz didn't resign in disgrace, dropping all charges, when it was revealed he knew who the leaker was BEFORE HE SPENT MILLIONS "INVESTIGATING" this non crime ?]

Ditsy Fritzy Frenzied Fascist Freaky Fitzgerald is still trying to make an crime where there is none. A true freak.

[pinz-n-needlez]

Maybe we should start a www.draftcheney.net movement. ;-)

We could say that we're bringing back the draft and Charley Rangel will help us with fundraising! LOL

[Della Street]

the jury saw notes Libby took on or about June 12 that indicated Cheney himself told Libby then that the war critic's wife worked at the CIA

Ouch. That'll leave a mark.

How do you figure? The defense said in their opening that Libby told the FBI in his first interview in the first 15 minutes that he first heard about Wilson's wife from Cheney on June 12.

[windchime]

If it got Rangel face time on television, he'd probably go for it.

[pinz-n-needlez]

LOL Too true! :-)

[RecallMoran]

That is an excellent question. The entire investigation was nothing more than a perjury trap because this Fitzgerald character knew before he opened shop who leaked the name -- that was his charter and it was finished quickly. However, no prosecutor got famous saying that no crime was committed, so here we are.

I feel terrible for Libby. This whole thing is high comedy except Libby's life is ruined by nefarious characters. What possible difference could it make if he knew it (and that "it" is never really clear) in June or July or on the Ides of March? We are going to put someone in prison because he was wrong about the specifics of conversations 3 and half years ago about who told him a piece of information in which no illegal infomration was transferred? We are going to trial when the prosecution witnesses can't remember details that help the defendant but have epiphanies about information when she is subpoenaed? Is this a ridiculous waste of taxpayer dollars or am I missing something? Should we simply plead the 5th Amendment whenever law enforcement asks us anything until we have counsel and get immunity agreements, even if it is a parking ticket?

This is why America has so little respect for Washington. We are in the midst of a war with ruthless enemies and our leaders are wasting their time on nonsense.

[norwaypinesavage]

"I have so little faith in the jury system anymore."

I was on a jury a couple of years ago where the defendant was tried for an assault. The defendant admitted he did it, his girlfriend said he did it, her son said the defendant did it, and the cop said the defendant did it. When we got to the jury room, one juror said: "I don't think he could have done it."....I don't have much faith in the jury system, either, although, the rest of us did convince this juror that the defendant was guilty.

[Sam Hill]

Aside from all of the who struck John nonsense, shouldn't Fitzgerald be up on charges for putting Miller in jail for 85 days when he was charged with finding out who had given Novack the Plame info.

Fitzgerald KNEW that it was Armitage who had told Novack. But he put Miller IN JAIL FOR THREE MONTHS -- and was pushing for longer time still.

Fitzgerald is insane.

[TNdandelion]

That's the version I have. These guys are so fickle.

"He loves me, he loves me not. He loves me, he loves me not."

[rwa265]

"Once just once, just one damn time I wish the main stream press would give a motive for Libby to lie."

The last three paragraphs of the source for this post gives the motive. Fitzgerald hopes to prove that Libby was worried about whether his conversations with reporters were improper and therefore he lied to conceal them.

With all the misremembering going on by the other witnesses, I think that this would be hard to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt.

[colorado tanker]

This reminds me of the political prosecution of Cap Weinberger and others over Iran-Contra. Bush 41 nipped that in the bud with pardons. I hope Bush 43 does the same.