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.
Yeah, sure.
well, obviously Libby didn't hire one then
There was also a member of the jury who was a neighbor of Tim Russert, could be this reporter I suppose. Was he the jury foreman? Scooters attorney must have run of his challenges and figured he was the best of what he had to choose from. I would think the neighbor and the journalist should have both been excused for cause though.
One of the things that the WaPo reporter said that convinced the jury was the person who said that Libby had a bad memory and then later in his testimony said that Libby had an excellent memory. WaPo guy missed the point of the witness, as did the entire jury. The point was that Libby had a bad memory for who, when or where he heard something, but that he had an excellent memory for the facts that he had heard. I can relate to this perfectly, but the jury missed it so I guess Libby's lawyers didn't hammer it home enough.
Did Mark Levin just say that the journalist was Russert's neighbor?
"yes, you've said that twice billhilly."
And you have responded twice. I could have you busy all night if I kept on posting this. Mine only requires a keystroke.
Whether or not Collins has any super-duper-secret-CIA contacts like Valerie "Harriet-the-Spy" Plame, it is indeed very odd that the defense let an obviously liberal journalist onto this jury. Collins also wrote a book on the Enron scandal, which someone said today has a passage trying to tie Dick Cheney to Enron as someone overly friendly to Ken Lay during the whole "Energy Commission" controversy. Now either the defense team did not bother to research this liberal journalist with an obvious paper trail, or else they knew about stuff like that and let him onto the jury anyway. Maybe some obvious material exists to support a motion for a mistrial????
http://www.amazon.com/Behaving-Badly-Ethical-Lessons-Enron/dp/1598581600/ref=sr_1_1/104-8753173-2039915?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173228694&sr=1-1
Ted Wells, Libby's attorney is a DEMOCRAT.....maybe Libby is a DEMOCRAT...his WIFE is....geesh....this was a Kangaroo Court for sure, but I don't have a soft heart for Libby.
He's also Tim Russert's neighbor.
Dennis Collins a REPORTER trying to evaluate Other REPORT's answers on the stand....hmmmmmm....do car salesmen normally sit on the jury of another car salesman??? I doubt it.....hmmmmmm...why didn't Libby object?
Keep saying it. WHY did Dennis Collins write a SPY book when that is NOT his "expertise"....and why the HELL was he PICKED for the JURY by Libby's attorney?? i smella RAT.
Who is that?
Yes, that's Denis "with one N" as this obtuse jerk noted when he came to the microphone. This is just sick.
Mind control rays.
No, The Democrats did. They threw one out, but the other spoke today.
A mistrial should have been called, when the ringer was found. He tainted the jury.
"How the heck did Libby's attorney let that happen?" I was surprised that Fitz was allowed to overtly try to seat anti-war people on the jury. I guess the talents of expert jury consultants like in "Runaway Jury" are fiction. I assume his lawyer at least asked for a change of venue. Can't imagine him choosing a D.C. jury pool.
What chiefly strikes me about this whole affair is the political stupidity of the Bush administration. How on EARTH did they let this go to a special prosecutor who works for the Democrats? Why on earth can't Bush get control over the top levels of his own agencies, such as the CIA, the FBI, and the Justice Department?
The Justice Department is key for any administration. JFK put his own brother in there to be sure of it. Clinton put Janet Reno in there. But Bush completely lost control of it.
As for the jury foreman, it does seem strange. It might possibly be advantageous for Libby to have grounds for an appeal and dismissal. I don't know. But that's assuming that his lawyer figured there was no way he could beat a jury trial, because it means he has to go through months or years more stress and expense before he's clear.
But it certainly isn't advantageous politically for the administration. This will surely be dragged out for as long as the Democrats can manage it, and meantime it makes great fodder for their propaganda. And Libby continues to be the goat, which can't be much fun for him, either.
"Keep saying it. WHY did Dennis Collins write a SPY book when that is NOT his "expertise"....and why the HELL was he PICKED for the JURY by Libby's attorney?? i smella RAT."
You have a right to ask those questions. The CIA has buried their operatives in every walk of life, sometimes for the good of the nation, and often to protect themselves and their patrons. Few people know their reach, and it is unlikely that we will ever know, because of their pervasiveness and influence, particularly with the press.
Does anyone know what their budget is, and for what purposes it is used?
You're right on all points, and I cannot understand why the Bush administration has so often rolled over for the vicious liberal political hacks who infest the major departments, not to mention Congress and many of its committee staffs, etc. Yes, you have to pick your battles, and the DBM makes it difficult to get any positive press when fighting against left-wing fraud. Still, this WH has too frequently disappointed us -- Bush needed a much better Atty. General and other key appointments/decisions have also been weak.
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.