Skip to comments.
Verdict in Libby Trial in....reading at noon. (Guilty On 4 of 5 Charges)
MSNBC
Posted on 03/06/2007 8:34:59 AM PST by Dog
Breaking on MSNBC
TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: armitage; beltwayjustice; bushpardon; callwhitehouse; cialeak; contemptiblecourts; cooper; corn; doublestandard; elctnshaveconsqncs; fitzfong; fitzgerald; fitzmas; getbush; injustice; libby; lyingliars; miller; mitchell; movie; muckthefedia; nationalinsecurity; neomccarthyism; nojusticeforlibby; nomorenewtone; novak; ojjuryparttwo; pardon; pardonscooter; partisanwitchhunt; pincus; plame; plamegate; playingwithfire; pokingthebear; powell; puckflame; reporter; russert; scooterlibby; sharonstone; showtrial; slimeyjoe; stalinistmedia; trolls; tyranny; vengeance2008; washingtonpost; watchoutfortrolls; whataboutmarcrich; whynotberger; wilson; witchhunt; woodward; wuckfilson; zogbyism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500, 501-520, 521-540 ... 1,341-1,342 next last
To: Howlin
Somebody else who was carefully screened out of this process...Andrea Mitchell.
To: machogirl
i've come to the realization with all libs, that the ends justifies the means, the leaks don't matter when it's a lib doing it, their end is "noble" and "right" After all this time you would think everyone would finally know what Libby was charged with. Get it straight. Libby wasnt charged with leaking. He was charged with obstruction and lying to FBI and the grand jury. Your comment is nonsense.
502
posted on
03/06/2007 9:48:22 AM PST
by
Dave S
To: prairiebreeze
"I must've hit a nerve."
Lugsoul is all nerve.
503
posted on
03/06/2007 9:48:30 AM PST
by
popdonnelly
([Democrats] are jubilant at our disasters and are cast down when the rebels are defeated -Sept. 1862)
How can this be a fair trial when this is such a partisan case and you have it in DC where RATS outnumber Republicans 8 to 1? The jury can't be trusted to be fair.
504
posted on
03/06/2007 9:48:31 AM PST
by
KavMan
To: You Dirty Rats
I believe Nixon was pardoned of any "possible" convictions that would have come about in a future trial. he was never tried and couldn't be because he was pardoned in advance. I this case the trial went forward and I suppose has to be completed including all appeals before a pardon can be issued.
To: Txsleuth
This is just sickening. To have to listen to these rats take the high ground while knowing what CLINTON did is enough to make your stomach turn.
506
posted on
03/06/2007 9:48:46 AM PST
by
txroadkill
(Free Ramos and Compean. Duncan Hunter'08)
To: Texas Songwriter
I hope ex AG Ashcroft sleeps well tonight. Why the hell to satisfy stinking miserable demonrats this case was ever handed over to a special prosecutor I'll never understand. Questioning by justice would have turned up Armitage, case closed. WHY the hell justice doesn't do anything about real dangerous leak cases is beyond me. Maybe we need to question what the hell is going on.
507
posted on
03/06/2007 9:48:48 AM PST
by
mimaw
To: Howlin
Some people thought it wouldn't have stood up.The pardon of Nixon ended any efforts to prosecute him. Here we already have a conviction. It is not legally necessary to wait for the appeals process to run its course.
Having said that, I do not believe it would be a good idea for the President to pardon him just yet. Pardon him on January 19, 2009 or on the day he is sent to prison -- whichever comes first.
To: Wyatt's Torch
I agree that the President can do this. I think the hitch comes in with the "Offenses against the United States". Naturally, Libby's defense was that he committed no offenses, so a pardon before the verdict would have looked bad, both for the President and Libby. Now that he's convicted (erroneously in my opinion), the President should pardon him.
509
posted on
03/06/2007 9:49:05 AM PST
by
CaptRon
(Pedecaris alive or Raisuli dead)
To: burzum
While not every government official gets fired and thrown in jail for false statements under oath Except for Libby, I can't think of one. I'm sure there may be 1 or 2, but maybe you could educate me. In any event, for the most part, this prosecution was useless and absurd.
To: GOP_Muzik; Steve_Seattle; STARWISE
Interesting take. Irregardless it certainly sets up easy grounds for an appeal.You generally can't appeal based on something you failed to object to in the trial court.
To: weegee
but...........she is the smart-assed woman in america
To: Red Steel
Bill Clinton getting a bj from an intern was not a crime. Are you saying that therefore lying to a GJ about it was not a crime?
Conservatives believe that lying to a grand jury is a crime. Those who believe that it depends on what the lie is aren't conservatives.
513
posted on
03/06/2007 9:49:40 AM PST
by
lugsoul
(Livin' in fear is just another way of dying before your time. - Mike Cooley)
To: Howlin
A Reid blowing in the wind. What an idiot.
514
posted on
03/06/2007 9:49:44 AM PST
by
Syncro
To: processing please hold
Rudy Giuliani's account has been banned or suspended from FreeRepublic!Sorry. I couldn't resist! ;^)
515
posted on
03/06/2007 9:49:57 AM PST
by
airborne
("Why in the hell are we so afraid of being what we are?" HUNTER 2008!)
To: reagan_fanatic
If he did, Berger wouldn't be walking free since he was unchallenged and this case wouldn't have gotten to where it has.
516
posted on
03/06/2007 9:49:58 AM PST
by
AliVeritas
(Stop Global Dhimming. Demand testicular fortitude from the hill. Call the crusade.)
To: jackv
And how many jurors lied to get on the jury?
517
posted on
03/06/2007 9:49:58 AM PST
by
TwoSue
To: Howlin
Fitz seems to fancy himself as a modern day Elliot Ness ..or Jim Garrison...
518
posted on
03/06/2007 9:50:17 AM PST
by
WalterSkinner
( ..when there is any conflict between God and Caesar -- guess who loses?)
To: Dog
The CNN article mentions that Libby was fingerprinted and then released. Ah, bureaucracy at work. As a Federal employee with a security clearance, Mr. Libby has been fingerprinted at least once and probably several dozen times. But, just in case his fingerprints changed during the trial, lets go by the book and print him one more time!
519
posted on
03/06/2007 9:50:29 AM PST
by
brothers4thID
(Hillary: "We are going to take from you.. to provide for the common good")
To: HawaiianGecko
I'm always amazed at how stupid journalists actually are. Here we have a bevy of
correspondents, newspapermen, columnists, writers, commentators and reviewers with Fitzgerald answering questions openly in front of cameras and not one of them says:
"Why have you not indicted Richard Armitage?"
This simple question which is nearly impossible to duck would clear up all of the media hullabaloo.
520
posted on
03/06/2007 9:50:34 AM PST
by
HawaiianGecko
(Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500, 501-520, 521-540 ... 1,341-1,342 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson