Posted on 10/28/2005 5:00:46 AM PDT by kcvl
Per Fox News...
Don't be ridiculous, his agenda is not impeachment.
He's a prosecutor who gets pissed and stubborn when someone tries to lie to his investigators. No different than the reaction of a good mom or dad when their kid tries to lie to them. It just makes them more stubborn and determined to teach them a lesson, though sometimes so dogged that they lose some perspective.
Please ask Peach to tone it down as well. He/she/it comes onto just about every thread I post on with the same crap.
Or is he/she/it a protected species?
Can anyone find that article?
quit your crying. if libby wasn't a liar, he wouldn't be in the situation he is today
He's implying a national security jeopardy from a leak he can't prove?
He has to hire them first. See kcvl post -- he didn't hire criminal attorneys to help him.
Do you remember when Clinton downgraded the West Wing phone system so that calls to individual extensions could no longer be tracked? I think Paul Sperry did an article on WND about this in their very early days, during the lost email and porn in the White House days.
-PJ
The press is looking for a sound bite that they can play on the evening news. Unfortunately (for them) Fritz is stumbling so much that he hasn't provided a sound bit that they can use. This means that the MSM will have to create its own sound bite and share that among themselves.
That's what I'm wondering. It looks to me that after all of this time and money, they decided that someone had to be charged. The tried to make it Rove, but couldn't even stretch it to that, using every law on the books. So they settled for Libby.
"Please don't keep posting the same information on every page of this thread."
Truth Hurts doesn't it.
Hanoi Kerry goes unpunished for treason and Libby gets indicted.
He is going to lose this case when it goes to court
Hmmm - let me see.
First of all, Clinton was never convicted.
Second, Clinton, under oath, stated that a affadavit from Monica saying there was no sexual relationship was true. That affadavit had been suborned by Vernon Jordan and Clinton KNOWINLY said it was true - that is why he subsequently did the "meaning of IS" defense.
Whereas Libby is being indicted for discrepencies in his statements regarding two conversations he had with reporters - and those discrepencies did little to affect the overlying case (which yielded NO indictments on the initial charge, the entire reason for Fitzgerald doing the investigation in the first place).
So the charges are the same. But the underlying facts are vastly different.
SO Fitz, WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED?? That was your job as you have reminded us.
Mrs. Wilson hides behind her scarf and shades, I know her neighbors did not even know who she was when she was driving into her garage each day.
The problem is: Novak was told not to talk until this was over. With a new grand jury to be convened, this is not over or is it. I'd blow'em away anyways.
He's saying he doesn't know how long it will take to determine if there was an underlying crime. This is LAME. Was she covert or wasn't she. The law spells out what the requirements are. This is a law-based question first. How much more money will be spent for him to determine if she was covert under the statute. Or will he just keep interviewing people hoping to catch them in these secondary crimes.
Did Fitz say they've been unable to determine if the underlying crime (leaking a CIA agent) was committed?
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.