Posted on 11/07/2005 12:11:50 PM PST by sofaman
My Dad and I think McCain in all seriousness, is not right in the head anymore since he was tortured like he was by the vietnamese while a POW there. I've heard several people who knew him before he was a POW, and they've all said that he just wasn't himself, just isn't "right in the head" when he got back. Understandibly so, but truly, I think mccain just isn't who he used to be. And he definitely isn't a conservative.
It is the old classified v covert ploy. If you can't get him on one, go for the other. Who told what to whom first. Crazy.
If I can find some time. Right now I'm in the middle of something else.
I sure hope he is. A similar interview to the one he gave on t he radio would hit about 20 or more million people this week as it's spread around all over on radio, emails, and blogs like FR. I hope he is on Hannity and colmes tonight. 8)
"Don't you dare tell the truth about me General! Don't you dare! I'll sure you if you don't take it back! I'll sue!" 8)
Get over to the Levin Thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1517591/posts
He's replaying the general.
Blech. RINO speak.
Couldn't have said it better. Respect his service, reject his milk toast RINO behavior.
Heheheh. Except the "classified" one is meaningless mumbo jumbo with no legal ramifications whatsoever. IOW, you can't get him on the "classified agent" charge, because there is no such thing as a "classified agent."
When people outside the CIA know you work for the CIA, you are not "covert CIA."
I got a kick out of the "not widely know outside the intelligence community" throwaway line too. The intelligence community includes people from many many countries, most of whom are not covert agents.
That's my Russerty side.
they may have claimed no crime was committed on the technicalities of the statutes (they were correct about that) - but I don't see anywhere there where they admit that Russert, Cooper, and Miller were amongst the people "in the know" about who she was - that she had been outed to them.
to have admitted that, they would have had to admit that the conversations with Libby and Rove were setups (since they already knew who WIlson's wife was), they would not have been able to send those reporters in there with their BS testimony "oh, we knew nothing, we found out everything from Libby and Rove". it would have changed the entire case.
he wanted to trump up his prose on the outing charge (for which there was no indictment), by trying to show that her identity was not "common knowledge". so he sends the FBI to interview the coached neighbors, so he can say "see, wouldn't the neighbors have known if it were common knowledge?". its pure BS, and it gives great insight into Fitzgerald that he would do that.
in my opinion, the biggest risk to Libby is if Fitzgerald can show he destroyed his notes (or otherwise had easy access to them but did not provide them), Fitzgerald was able to obtain and authenticate those notes from an independent source (someone made a copy, an attachement on a saved email), and Libby testified to the contrary and can't get by with simply saying "I forgot about that meeting".
Yes....you do have a good point.
President Bush said he wanted all to cooperate fully, and tell the truth...so, for Libby's sake, I hope he did tell the truth, but something else went haywire.
However, when it was Libby that they were "going after"...he seemed like a big target to the dems...but, now that he is the "only one" that Fitzy has indicted..do you notice how fast Chrissy Matthews has changed his tune....
and the dems have changed theirs, to pre-war intelligence again??? LOL
my own opinion - unless our side can do some thing to knock this story down; in time, Rove will be indicted also.
GACK..don't like the sound of that.
I hope that Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely coming out against Wilson's contention that his wife wasn't known before Novak's article....will make Fitzy and others think twice about having this go to trial...
I mean, just think of how much fun Libby's lawyers could have calling people in media and politics to testify!
Not necessarily, "in the know," but Cooper is alleged to have brought Wilson's wife up to Libby, rather than Libby bringing it up to Cooper. The indictment does not probe, nor does it need to probe how and when Cooper learned.
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_indictment_28102005.pdf
Page 8, paragraph 23: "On or about July 12, in the afternoon, Libby spoke by telephone with Cooper, who asked whether Libby had heard that Wilson's wife was involved in sending Wilson on the trip to Niger. Libby confirmed to Cooper, without elaboration or qualification that he had heard this information too."
... they would not have been able to send those reporters in there with their BS testimony "oh, we knew nothing, we found out everything from Libby and Rove"
The case is not about where the reporters heard it first. The case is about where Libby heard it first. Libby is the one who is charged with not being truthful with investigators regarding where he first learned of Plame, he relationship to Wilson, and her relationship to Wilson's trip.
You are thinking in terms of "who did the outing," but the case is not about that - it is about whether or not Libby gave truthful testimony to investigators.
I believe Cooper's claim is that he heard it from Rove - he mentioned it to Libby because he heard about it from Rove. None of the reporters claim prior knowledge.
yes, I know the case is not about when the reporters knew. but had it been established that they knew already, it simply lends credence to the idea that the only reason they were asking - was to entrap Rove and Libby. already this case involves no crime on the underlying statute, if we then add entrapment to that - making the indictments seem "fair" becomes even harder.
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.