Posted on 03/06/2007 3:06:48 PM PST by bw17
There has been a lot written about the Libby ordeal being a covert op run by certain elements in the CIA who were out to undermine the Bush administration's case for war. Zell Miller wrote an op-ed piece in the Atlanta Journal and Constitution about it. So did a Washington Post journalist named Jim Hoagland (http://www.amazon.com/SPYING-Secret-History-Denis-Collins/dp/1579123953/ref=sr_1_3/102-7588602-9384907?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173221001&sr=1-3)
The thing that strikes me as odd about this Libby trial, is that the spokesman for the jury is a Washington Post journalist, Denis Collins. Since the entire trial essentially boiled down to Libby's words vs. Russert's words, how can a fellow journalist be allowed to sit on and have so much influence over a jury, when journalists are the key witnesses in the trial?
I did some searching on "Denis Collins", and what I found is a bit too coincidental. He authored a book entitled "Spying: The Secret History of History". The link is in the source URL for this post. Wouldn't it make sense that a Washington Post journalist writing a book on the history of spying would have contacts within the CIA who helped him author the book?
Somebody needs to look into the background on this "Denis Collins" and find out if he's ever had contact with Plame, or Larry Johnson, or Vincent Cannistraro, or any of the other former CIA agents who worked so diligently to undermine the President's case for war.
I smell a rat.
Mistrial.
I hope so.
I met Denis Collins in the early 80s. He was then an outdoor writer for the Washington Post. Hardly the spy type then.
"Was Libby's lawyer appointed?"
I doubt it.
A smooth talking salesman can sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo living in an igloo in the Antarctic.
Presuming you are correct that this is the same Denis Collins, it would seem to this non-lawyer that his statements, along with the other juror with the "this sucks" statement, created some additional grounds for reversal on appeal.
"I met Denis Collins in the early 80s. He was then an outdoor writer for the Washington Post. Hardly the spy type then."
I didn't call him a spy. I said that he was a reporter who:
a) likely shared a bond with the reporters on the witness stand, making him a tainted juror,
and
b) likely had contacts within the CIA...perhaps even one of the people who worked with Plame to undermine the President.
It has to be the same guy. Go to the link for the book:
"About the Author
Denis Collins is a journalist who writes for the Washington Post, the San Jose Mercury News, and the Miami Herald. He lives in Washington, DC."
I met Denis Collins in the early 80s. He was then an outdoor writer for the Washington Post. Hardly the spy type then.
yes, you've said that twice billhilly.
I heard you the first time...I heard you the first time [echo]. ;)
"A smooth talking salesman can sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo living in an igloo in the Antarctic."
I don't know about that, but I once sold a lady a vacuum cleaner who didn't have any carpets.
Her husband made her give it back! :0(
The Mole.
The CIA didn't need a mole. Just an ordinary DC Jury. However, during the Juror's comments at the press conference, when shown on Fox, there was a lady standing in the background during his comments. After about two minutes into his comments, someone gently took her by the arm and led her away. I thought it a bit odd -- at least enough to get my curiosity going.
What makes me feel that you are probably right is the difficulty that I am having with finding any story on the Washington Post website about the jury press conference. Some stories need a registration so...
Surely the Washington Post would love to cry this jury's "what about the higher ups" questions to high heaven. But it could be that they feel the jury's comments will get enough play on other news sites to do the job without having to acknowledge their conflict of interest.
Just went back and found this WAPO story where Collins is noted just as a juror.
Evidently the book is about the International Spy Museum in Washington. It looks like a pretty lightweight piece of work. Here's one of the reader reviews from Amazon, which describes it as "Espionage for dummies":
Make sure you have the proper expectation of this book. It is a picture book with no more than a paragraph or three on each page. The main emphasis is visual imagery. The accompanying paragraphs offer a thumbnail sketch of the individual or historical incident pictured, but the text does not go in depth. This is really more like an "Espionage for Dummies" type of introductory book on the topic. After thumbing through this book you might know the names "Oleg Penkovsky" and "Operation Overlord" but you would need additional texts to really understand the topics presented.
My guess is that this Denis Collins and Willima Arkin (also a WA PO contributor) are friends and share the same sources. Arkin is the one who leaked all the secret information on the Iraq war.
By the way, it seems that Collins is not a "former" WaPo reporter, he is a contributor to the WaPo and the San Jose Mercury among other media outlets. He is only "former" in that he is not currently contributing, but may in the future.
The jury had a ton of evidence to work through and according to one of them they mapped it all out and came the conclusion that Libby was FOS. Some people here simply want to believe that Libby was not guilty of what he was charged with by Fitz was able to prove it in their eyes.
You can read all the spin you want on this case but in the end Libby's attorneys couldn't cast enough doubt in even one person's mind that their guy was innocent. I think that this was ultimately a pissing match between Fitz and the WH and he got Libby as the consolation prize.
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.