Posted on 11/16/2005 11:20:59 AM PST by Pikamax
Wow. What a concept - Libby is just pretending to be indicted(the bait) and Fitz is playing along and issued a fake indictment to trick the Dems?
Am I reading this right?
Yeah - that would be funny!
While those statements are not in the indictment, they will be brought into the trial, further mudding the already muddy waters.
It also helps in that Libby can claim that the perjury charges against him hold him to a higher standard of memory infallibility than all the other witnesses in the case.
Thank you, mattdono. That's very kind of you to say. The real tragedy in all of this is that Fitzgerald has shown himself to be totally uninterested in what we "pajamadeen" were able to figure out on our own. Fitzgerald continues the witch hunt into Libby, Rove, etc., but lets the real crime go without so much as a shrug.
It seems that a lot of reporters have a fuzzy recollection about their involvement in the Plame affair.
I still have trouble remembering who knew what, who said what, who talked to whom, when this or that happened. The reporters' accounts keep changing.
Why is it so important about Mrs. Wilson? She is of no significance in the CIA or anywhere else. No secrets were/are compromised, no agents endangered, no law broken or even nicked. There is nothing there. This is another case of the crats making an emotional lipquivering accusation that the president puts sugar in his coffee. The accusation has zero significance to anything but repeat it enough times in righteous indignation and the press sells the emotion and takes no thought for the substance. It is the intensity of the accusation and the identities of the accuser and accused that matter. It could all be done in nonsense syllables to the same effect.
Come on, now. Who doesn't love a major conspiracy within a conspiracy plot?
Who will investigate the prosecutor? The answer, no one, because these special prosecutors are unaccountable to anyone. I seriously doubt Fitzgerald did much more with this case than the minimum required to earn his paycheck.
TFB Liberals. Oh and that goes for your MSM too.
I think the Berger case is over - I think he got 6 months probation and a small fine - for overtly stealing top secret government documents - then destroying them.
What good do you know, and what makes you think he is going to tell on Bill and Hill?
You've got it. The Plame-Wilsons are small fish in a big pond, now out of jobs. Their media buddies are promoting this bull$it so the Plame-Wilsons can sell their book/movie/whatever, and try to remain Washington insiders.
When all is said and done, the Plame-Wilsons will be as beloved and popular in DC as John and Maureen Dean.
"I testified that after the mid-June 2003 interview, I told Walter Pincus, a reporter at The Post, without naming my source, that I understood Wilson's wife worked at the CIA as a WMD analyst. Pincus does not recall that I passed this information on."
So, did Pincus testify to the Grand Jury that Woodward had revealed Plame's identity to him? "Oh, what a tangled web we weave..."
Well you are kinda right. Libby really did get indicted, knowing all along that it was bogus and would never stick. Also knowing he would be totally vindicated when the truth does come out. Not so much is it a fake indictment as it is one that would lead to more evidence coming out of the wood work and eventually withdrawn.
"Not just probation, but also $50,000 fine, losing his security clearance for 2 years, and something like 100 hours community service - I think Libby would take that deal in a heartbeat."
Are you kidding me? What Berger did was obstruction of justice - obstruction of a congressional inquiry into the 911 disaster - on 3 different occasions, he deliberatly hid top secret documents that he knew the committe would uncover - and destroyed them.
And you think what he got was tough? I'll bet he didn't pay a cent of the $50,000 fine - and for losing his security clearance - that is about as bad as Clinton losing his license to practice law in Arkansas -
Just think of you or I would have done something like that. Libby has so much more to lose - Berger was already gone - Libby still has his job to do
I still wonder about your original theory.....Tenet. Has he even testified?
"That is not what Woodward said .. he said she knew she was a CIA ANALYSIS"
You're correct. The Post can't even get straight what Bob Woodward said. All they have to do is read his statement.
"Not so much is it a fake indictment as it is one that would lead to more evidence coming out of the wood work and eventually withdrawn."
Kind of like Rathergate...
In response to a direct question from fisherManFitz on Monday, Bob did not deny he knew Valarie Plame was CIA.
That link is very interesting!
Thanks!
Maybe someone can explain the basis of this "case" to me. Fitzgerald is investigating the leaking of an undercover CIA agent's name. Plame is clearly not undercover and therefore the law doesn't apply. He should have immediately ceased the investigation. Any lying done in the course of this investigation should not be a crime as there should have been no investigation to begin with. Why would this not be "fruit from a poisonous tree" - like an illegal search?
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.