Hannity Thread - Monday 11/7/2005

[sofaman]

Hannity Time!!! Three hours until the Great One!

[Zacs Mom]

"the media never claimed that at all."

There were thirty-six (36) major news organizations and professional reporters' groups (including CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Reuters, The Associated Press, The Tribune Company, The Washington Post, The New York Press Club and The White House Corespondents) who asserted that "no crime" had been committed in the "Plame Leak" case because, among other things, Valerie Plame's identity had previously been disclosed to both the Russians and the Cubans.

On March 23, 2005 these news organizations and professional reporters' groups filed this legal motion:

[Cboldt]

C whats Section 422? You know?

Section 422 is defenses and exceptions to prosecution under Section 421.

[TheForceOfOne]

I missed the show :( but I just wanted to say how happy I am that the Tony, Rush, Hannity, Levin, and other talk show threads have become a daily thing. For a while there we seemed to have problems with it.

We should all be free to enjoy our favorite hosts as we please.

[Txsleuth]

Those are good questions...and from the talk show hosts and pundits that I trust, one of their main questions is...

why would Libby allegedly tell a different story to the GJ, than the notes HE turned over to them??? and, why did he keep the notes to begin with?

This whole thing is confusing...and there could be a personal reason for his involvement...but, I want there to be a jury trial...and I want the defense attorney to put as many of the Washington "elites" on the stand that he can...

I will supply the popcorn!

[Primetimedonna]

The Gang of 14 = RINO's

Only half of them....the other 7 are REAL democrats! ;>)

[tiredoflaundry]

Yes, you are correct! McLame just pi**es me off!

[Cboldt]

Read 251, thoughts? Good or no good?

It's the "no crime" defense to giving testimony (in the case of Miller, Cooper, Russert, et al), and to giving false testimony for Libby.

Miller didn't pursue that defense, although the 36 media outlets did in their amicus brief. Libby may pursue it in the form of prosecutorial misconduct; but that's still a tough mountain to climb as a matter of giving false testimony.

[Primetimedonna]

I can't stand him either!! Allen H. pointed out how he dumped his sick wife to marry current wife Cindy, and isn't it her father we have to thank for his political career? Didn't he bankroll it?? Thanks a lot!

[gov_bean_ counter]

Libby tossed into the brier patch?

[tiredoflaundry]

He did? What a SOB!

[AmeriBrit]

"she's gone undercover."

It's a bit late now......duh!

But if she has she musn't have told Joe. If he had knowledge of it he'd be blabbing it to anyone who'd listen.

[Allen H]

A couple minutes ago, another stupid lib caller. They ALWAYS ONLY have the SAME STUPID talking points. How pathetic. I could argue for hours with a liberal about the war the economy abortion taxes, on and on and I'd never say the same thing two times, but a liberal has the same few talking points and they can never expound on them. NO WAY those idiots are getting back the Congress next year.

[Txsleuth]

Okay....I am really at the point where Libby isn't the point..if he lied...he was stupid...but he shouldn't be disciplined any harder than Sandy Burglar was...

BUT, this becomes a matter of setting the record straight...

BTW...Chrissy Matthews had on John Fund and a guy from C--span talking about the NEW charge of the media and dems being manipultated...

the guy from C-span said that the problem with THAT tactic, is that is shows the media and dems as weak and ignorant and easily manipulated...which puts them in a position of "weakness"....LOL loveit!!

[Cboldt]

why would Libby allegedly tell a different story to the GJ, than the notes HE turned over to them??

I don't know that it has been established that he turned over the notes (the pages faxed from CIA that had the names "Wilson" and "Joe Wilson" handwritten on them). Those pages did not mention Wilson by name, and the indictment makes no assertion that those note had any mention whatsoever of "Wilson't wife."

This whole thing is confusing...and there could be a personal reason for his involvement...but, I want there to be a jury trial...and I want the defense attorney to put as many of the Washington "elites" on the stand that he can.

It's not that confusing. People just naturally gravitiate to the "covert/not-covert" angle, even though in the perjury case, the underlying action is literally irrelevant. Libby's counsel has promised a vigorous defense.

[gov_bean_ counter]

These are not the droids you seek.

[GOP_Proud]

Does anyone know if Vallely will be on Sean's TV show tonight? Sometimes his radio guests double up for the TV show the same night.

[Allen H]

With men and woman like the General and his brave son, the nation will be safe.

[Txsleuth]

Possiblity....

[Cboldt]

I am really at the point where Libby isn't the point..if he lied...he was stupid...but he shouldn't be disciplined any harder than Sandy Burglar was.

The principle in play is that law enforcement and the court system depend on getting truthful testimony.

The time to raise the charge of "bogus prosecution" is before lying to the investigator.

[Txsleuth]

As long as I have you around to set me straight when I get things jumbled in my head and in my posts here on FR...

I know that I will be fine!! You amaze me...how you put things in their place and make the complicated, easier to understand...

Thank you!!!