Posted on 03/06/2007 5:54:52 PM PST by windchime
So let me get this straight: Scooter Libby is going to jail for not remembering who he told what. He didn't lie, evidently. He didn't remember right, and that is a federal crime, of course, if you happen to be speaking to a FBI agent when your memory fails.
But at the same time, the same Justice Department has taken the case of a high government official who lied, who stole classified documents, who destroyed those documents, and he's walking around free as a bird. They won't even ask him to take a lie detector test to determine if he lied more than they already know.
People are saying the Libby trial is the key to the kingdom, that it stands for the trial of the entire administration and the war in Iraq.
Here's what it was about: Does the vice president have the right to say, see that guy named Joe Wilson who is going around saying I sent him to Africa to investigate Saddam's nuke bombs? I didn't send him. His wife did.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
So why would send an anti-war activist to investigate a key fact in the decision to go to war? Answer: He wouldn't. And the person who did was trying to sabotage the president.
That is the real story behind this entire saga.
Concise, except for the fact that plame wasn't covert and not covered by the ruling.
Your post perfectly describes what happened here. Thanks!
The jury disagreed. I'm not sure what grounds the author has to come to this conclusion.
I agree. Gibson qualified his statement with the word 'technically', but it wasn't sufficient to stifle the word 'covert'.
Classic!
Never proven to have lied about anything.
I do not believe the jury thought he lied either. They wanted to punish George W Bush and Dick Cheney. Period.
If the jury thought he was a liar, why did they feel bad for the guy? Sounds to me they believed he couldn't remember what the exact details were and when what was said. They still wanted to punish someone.
And 11 jurors in a DC court are certainly going to punish the republican everytime.
I think what the author means is that Libby and the reporters had faulty memories.
Juror Denis (with one n) Collins was having difficulty relating information from the past ten days in his press address.
My point is that the jury, in our system, is the decider of fact. They decided he lied.
God and Mr. Libby are the only ones who know whether he did or did not lie in reality. But legally the issue has been settled.
I doubt I could have voted as the jury did, as I know how little I remember of what happened on a busy day several years ago. But my opinion, and yours, is comprehensively irrelevant at this point.
"They decided he lied."
Juror Collins was less definitive when he described their decision.
I doubt that I could accurately relate in detail conversations from yesterday!
So let me get this straight: Scooter Libby is going to jail for not remembering who he told what. He didn't lie, evidently. He didn't remember right, and that is a federal crime, of course, if you happen to be speaking to a FBI agent when your memory fails.
But at the same time, the same Justice Department has taken the case of a high government official who lied, who stole classified documents, who destroyed those documents, and he's walking around free as a bird. They won't even ask him to take a lie detector test to determine if he lied more than they already know.
People are saying the Libby trial is the key to the kingdom, that it stands for the trial of the entire administration and the war in Iraq.
Here's what it was about: Does the vice president have the right to say, see that guy named Joe Wilson who is going around saying I sent him to Africa to investigate Saddam's nuke bombs? I didn't send him. His wife did.
The bush justice dept..................
Me either. Sometimes I forget 10 minutes ago.
The other day I threw an important document in the trash and carried a napkin back to my desk. Rescued the doc just before it got hauled away.
GREAT cartoon. PERFECT! (of course, it IS Ramirez)... :)
Fox ping... (John Gibson)
Juries do not decide 'fact'.
Juries determine whose version of the 'facts' they will accept.
Juries are better than most alternatives but they are not magically given the ability to know which 'facts' are, in fact, the real facts.
Hint: juries can screw up, juries have screwed up, this jury took time to wonder why Rove and probably Cheney were not being prosecuted...and that is a fact.
ping
Oh, sorry!! No it certainly wasn't - it's excellent - I'm just a bigbig Ramirez fan and never saw that one ;).
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.