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

To: Cboldt

I am not talking about the outing.

my point is, once the case was no longer about the outing - which we both agree did not happen - then the case became about false statements to the GJ/investigators. Who is alleged to guilty of that? Libby is. But should the reporters also be, if they went in there and claimed they knew nothing about who Wilson's wife was before talking to Libby and Rove? The indictment would not contain anything about whether the reporters were asked that - its an indictment against Libby. I would be astonished if the reporters were not asked that basic question - did they answer it truthfully if they said "no, we knew nothing"? There is alot of evidence out there that Wilson was blabbing this all over the place for these reporters not to have known. Were their statements investigated for a possible perjury charge? Probably not, which shows that Fitzgerald's motivation was to make the GJ a perjury setting for only Rove and Libby. Russert could walk in there, and tell the GJ that he didn't know Wilson's wife from a Hooters waitress down the block, and skate - while Andrea Mitchell is busy telling CNBC that "everybody knew". That is the thing I am complaining about.


311 posted on 11/08/2005 8:18:53 AM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies ]


To: oceanview
But should the reporters also be [about false statements to the GJ/investigators], if they went in there and claimed they knew nothing about who Wilson's wife was before talking to Libby and Rove?

Sure. But Ccooper's testimony already admitted that.

There is alot of evidence out there that Wilson was blabbing this all over the place for these reporters not to have known.

So what?

Were their statements investigated for a possible perjury charge? Probably not ...

Turn the tables, turn the facts around. Make it so Libby did not lie to investigators, but some reporter did. Thr GJ would need to resolve the conflicting testimony. We can't know for sure, but I recall a good deal of specuation here that Miller or Cooper was going to charged with perjury - and that speculation was based on the assumption that the reporters told Libby about Plame, not the reverse.

I hear your complaint, BTW, but it seems to miss the gravamen of the indictment. The indictment stands EVEN IF the reporters independently knew of Plame before Libby called the CIA and made his inquiry.

312 posted on 11/08/2005 8:36:45 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies ]

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