Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Libby indicted on obstruction of justice, false statement and perjury charge - RESIGNS
http://drudgereport.com/ ^ | October 28, 2005

Posted on 10/28/2005 9:45:41 AM PDT by West Coast Conservative

Libby indicted on obstruction of justice, false statment and perjury charge...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: beltwaywarzone; cialeak; fitz; fitzgerald; hero; indictment; judymiller; libby; liberalinquisition; liedtofbi; liedtograndjury; marthastewart2; martyr; mattcooper; obstruction; pardon; phishing; plame; politicalpersecution; timrussert
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 741-751 next last
To: dogbyte12
I completely, absolutely disagree with you.

Libby should never have had to testify. He was called in on a subpoena on a phony, non-existent crime. How about we charge you with wearing blue shoes and bring you into the grand jury. During the prosecutor's questions, you say you only wear red shoes. They find out that you once wore blue shoes, and indict you for perjury. Who cares if what you misspoke about didn't pertain to an actual crime?

It's like evidence obtained by a violation of the law, which is subject to the exclusionary rule.

141 posted on 10/28/2005 10:02:10 AM PDT by Defiant (Dar al Salaam will exist when the entire world submits to American leadership.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

Big Dud

After 22 months Fitzy charge LIbby because he got his info from Cheney, not Matt Cooper.......zzzzzzzzzzzz
The average American still can't figure out what this was all about, and this won't help matters. This ain't no Watergate or Monica Lewinsky scandal, it's a snore-fest.


142 posted on 10/28/2005 10:02:24 AM PDT by WillT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

POST THE INDICTMENT.


143 posted on 10/28/2005 10:02:47 AM PDT by GVnana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rokurota
Or Libby has been "over-charged" in order to get him to plea to the lesser of the counts.

Over-charged........ a prosecutor would never do that.(/s)

144 posted on 10/28/2005 10:02:50 AM PDT by pepperhead (Kennedy's float, Mary Jo's don't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: conserv13

nah, they would get him if they wished he had lied. fitz has a history of nasty tactics with witnesses in the ryan case.


145 posted on 10/28/2005 10:02:51 AM PDT by fooman (Get real with Kim Jung Mentally Ill about proliferation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

Not from what I saw with Clinton on his "crimes"......


146 posted on 10/28/2005 10:02:51 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: nmh
It's maddening ... what the Clinton's GOT AWAY WITH!

The Bush Justice Department will Now Go After the Clinton's Once and For All!

147 posted on 10/28/2005 10:03:08 AM PDT by H. Paul Pressler IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Stuart Scott

What "stuff"?


148 posted on 10/28/2005 10:03:24 AM PDT by WayneM (Remember; "Saturday people first. Sunday people next.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Comment #149 Removed by Moderator

To: Dems_R_Losers

Yes, that's an important point to understand about hard drives: when you delete data, the data isn't actually erased from your hard drive. The deleted area is just marked as unused and then can be overwritten with new data. Numerous people have been nailed for various offenses when they thought they had permanently deleted files from their hard drives. To really get rid of data on a hard drive, you have to destroy the hard drive's storage disk.


150 posted on 10/28/2005 10:03:33 AM PDT by carl in alaska (Blog blog bloggin' on heaven's door.....Kerry's speeches are just one big snore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Two years and a gazillion dollars to accuse someone of not going along with the investigator?

No investigated crime was found. Just the problem of getting in the investigators way.

If Bush had any real backbone he would have the Justice department go after Wilson and uncover the whole sordid scheme. But I doubt anything will happen like that.


151 posted on 10/28/2005 10:03:43 AM PDT by Pylot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pete

The assertion that "leaking" Plame's name was a crime was bogus all along. She wasn't a covert agent, and she would have to have been one for a crime to have been committed. Everyone knew that all along, including the reporters who dubbed this the "CIA leak case".

The CIA has certainly gone downhill. No wonder our intelligence operations are in such poor shape. Why are mediocrities, phonies, and tabloid types like Wilson and Plame even allowed near the CIA building?


152 posted on 10/28/2005 10:03:45 AM PDT by puroresu (Conservatism is an observation; Liberalism is an ideology)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BladeLWS

So, there was no crime of "outing" after all, so they drug as many people in and questioned them about conversations they had three years ago in order to get these trumped up charges. Absolutely disgusting. They have to prove he did any of them willingly.

I am getting where I can't stand politics, period.


153 posted on 10/28/2005 10:03:49 AM PDT by greccogirl ("Freedom belongs to those who are willing to sacrifice the most for it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
Russert just appeared on NBC. HE IS DENYING THE FACTS AS PRESENTED IN THE INDICTMENT. He says he testified under oath that he did not receive any information from Libby about Plame as the inictment alleges. This is important if it shows that Fitzgerald is going beyond the facts of the case to draw political blood.
154 posted on 10/28/2005 10:03:58 AM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

ping!


155 posted on 10/28/2005 10:04:09 AM PDT by beansox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
There is no justice for anyone if you can lie just as long as the case turns out a certain way.

You know, don't you, that perjury is one of the most difficult charges to prove, because it has to be shown that the accused intentionally lied?

I happen to think Fitzgerald had to come up with something to justify two years, $2 million, so he keeps calling Libby back until he traps him in a "lie." Then he fashions obstruction charges around the "lie."

This will be laughed out of court.

156 posted on 10/28/2005 10:04:14 AM PDT by sinkspur (Trust, but vilify.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: conserv13
Yeah I think so. It'll be pled down to a misdemeanor and the case will be wrapped up. For a couple of million dollars this case ended not with a bang, but with a whimper. Its good news for the President. It could be a lot worse and Watergate it ain't.

("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")

157 posted on 10/28/2005 10:04:14 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
Libby's client Marc Rich is involved in the Oil for Food scandal also......I think Libby could be Cheney's weakest link!

And also the Hollywood Gala campaign finance scandal being investigated against Billary Clinton. Libby is knee deep in helping the Clinton's.
Replacing Libby may not be a bad thing.

158 posted on 10/28/2005 10:04:32 AM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
If purgery is a felony, why is Bill Clinton still allowed to vote?

He was held liable in the civil sense, not the criminal sense. Therefore, he is not subject to laws governing convicted felons and voting.

159 posted on 10/28/2005 10:04:32 AM PDT by Forest Keeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: puroresu

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/10/how_covert_was__1.html

She wasn't very covert and the leak of her name caused no real damage.http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/10/how_covert_was__1.html


160 posted on 10/28/2005 10:04:36 AM PDT by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 741-751 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson