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

Skip to comments.

Woodward testifies in CIA leak case
The Washington Post via MSNBC wbsite ^ | Nov. 16, 2005 | Jim VandeHei and Carol D. Leonnig

Posted on 11/16/2005 3:29:14 AM PST by thegreatbeast

Washington Post Assistant Managing Editor Bob Woodward testified under oath Monday in the CIA leak case that a senior administration official told him about CIA operative Valerie Plame and her position at the agency nearly a month before her identity was disclosed.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: cialeak; fitzgerald; forever; neverending; pincus; specialprosecutor; specialrules; wilsonplame; woodward
"The second question I would have is: Why did Mr. Fitzgerald indict Mr. Libby before fully investigating what other reporters knew about Wilson's wife?"

"Are you kidding?" Pincus said. "I certainly would have remembered that"...
Pincus said Woodward may be confused about the timing and the exact nature of the conversation.

What the fudge? Fitzy is still taking testimony? Woodward gives a deposition not at the eleventh hour but at 1am?
This highlights the nebulous standards that Woodward is held to. This highlights how poorly Fitzgerald's "investigation" has been. Given unlimited money & time, my six year old nephew could have got at tleast two indictments. This makes me sick.

1 posted on 11/16/2005 3:29:14 AM PST by thegreatbeast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

When there was a real security problem with Sandy Berger stuffing highly classified documents in his pants the MSM just yawned. The double standard is incredible.


2 posted on 11/16/2005 3:36:30 AM PST by libertylover (Abortion is a crime against humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertylover

P.S. Libby was indicted for lying to federal investigators. Why isn't Wilson indicted? He's lied continuously to the world. The mofo is still lying!


3 posted on 11/16/2005 3:42:41 AM PST by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

Well, he didn't lie under oath so he gets to go around lying till someone calls him out on it--I won't hold my breath waiting for the media to hold his feet to the fire :P


4 posted on 11/16/2005 3:45:18 AM PST by ECM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
I understood Wilson's wife worked at the CIA as a WMD analyst

This phrase again.

No one who has talked publicly had any notion that the ditzy blond was undercover, if she ever was for intelligence reasons.

Pincus is lying, Woodward hasn't forgotten what he had for a recess snack in 1952.

I feel another Rove smackdown coming, and the end of a political career for Fitzgerald.

In the Woodward style of speech, I hear the following...Now Mis..ter Fitz..ger..ald; why..didn't..you..talk..to..all..the..Wash..ing..ton..report..ers..to..find..out..who..knew..what..?

5 posted on 11/16/2005 3:46:22 AM PST by leadhead (Itís a duty and a responsibility to defeat them. But it's also a pleasure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

Looks like woodward maybe shite in somebody's grits, don't it?


6 posted on 11/16/2005 3:47:35 AM PST by Waco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Does anyone have a link that was on Drudge originally I think where Robert Novak wrote a column stating he would reveal what he knew after the special prosecutor wrapped up?
Why is Novak not speaking out by now?
7 posted on 11/16/2005 3:55:12 AM PST by ricoshea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
I've been trying to ignore this MSM generated investigation simply because I can't afford to vomit that often but something just dawned on me:
The media has given us the answer to the who-dunnit all along "The CIA Leak Case" Look at the name the "CIA LEAK" look at all the other leaks coming out of that agency (black prison sites, all the memos and documents during the campaign...)
Time to clean out the CIA and get some patriots in there, we have enough weenies in the State Dept.
8 posted on 11/16/2005 3:59:24 AM PST by warrior9504 (All gave some. Some gave all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
A reporter gives testimony under oath. I have never seen a reporter that did not lie. So how can they give testimony under oath?

Since this woman was not a covert agent who cares if she worked at the CIA or not? This is all a bunch of BS. They are spending my tax money for a bunch of crap and should be put in jail for robbery.
9 posted on 11/16/2005 3:59:37 AM PST by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Fitzgerald has turned into a political hack with only his career in mind. He is a becoming pathetic but unfortunately is having an impact with the mindless people in this country.
10 posted on 11/16/2005 4:10:49 AM PST by Archon of the East ("universal executive power of the law of nature")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ricoshea
Does anyone have a link that was on Drudge originally I think where Robert Novak wrote a column stating he would reveal what he knew after the special prosecutor wrapped up? Why is Novak not speaking out by now? I've asked this same question but did not get a reply. CAN ANYONE ELSE ANSWER THIS?!
11 posted on 11/16/2005 4:12:06 AM PST by rushfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rushfreedom

Also this makes three reports who have revealed their source. What hasn't Fitz asked Novak to reveal his sources?


12 posted on 11/16/2005 4:13:13 AM PST by rushfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Is this the same Woodward who started the rumor that the Democratic party had received funds from CUBA?
13 posted on 11/16/2005 4:26:54 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (expert, break it down, ex = has been, spurt = drip under pressure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rushfreedom

Maybe Fitzgerald is afraid of the answer he will get? So just don't ask the question.


14 posted on 11/16/2005 4:30:06 AM PST by Archon of the East ("universal executive power of the law of nature")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: libertylover

Berger, Leahy, Rockefeller, Kerry, Gorelick, the DNC, Hillary, Slick etc,etc...It never changes they, the true criminals get away with whatever they want. Can't someone force an invetigation on the treason committed by Rockefeller? I'd love to see him hang from the Gallows.


15 posted on 11/16/2005 4:34:03 AM PST by Archon of the East ("universal executive power of the law of nature")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

It looks like Woodward is still holding back on a lot of information that he has, and it makes me wonder why the special prosecutor isn't doing all that he needs to be doing. Libby is looking more and more as a fall guy, or a "cut-out!" Tis' amazin' to me...


16 posted on 11/16/2005 5:37:11 AM PST by geezerwheezer (get up boys, we're burnin' daylight!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Bob Woodward testified under oath

Like he cares ...

17 posted on 11/16/2005 5:41:57 AM PST by wotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
See also http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1522897/posts

WaPo article and a couple hundred posts by now.

18 posted on 11/16/2005 5:43:37 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

Get Rocky off the Intelligence Committee
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1523013/posts

Also, Bill Bennett wrote on the same point.


19 posted on 11/16/2005 5:45:10 AM PST by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rushfreedom; ricoshea
Fitzpatrick said in his press conference announcing the Libby indictment that the investigation is continuing. According to this article, Woodward was deposed Monday. Woodward also says later in the article that it's the first time in 35 years he's had to give info to a grand jury.

I haven't seen any report that Fitz has impanelled a new grand jury -- yet. But Woodward apparently believes his info is for a GJ.

20 posted on 11/16/2005 5:46:01 AM PST by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

STATEMENT OF BOB WOODWARD REGARDING DEPOSITION ON NOVEMBER 1.4, 2005

On Monday, November 14, I testified under oath in a sworn deposition to Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald for more than two hours about small portions of interviews I conducted with three current or former Bush administration officials that relate to the investigation of the public disclosure of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame.

The interviews were mostly confidential background interviews for my 2004 book Plan of Attack about the lead up to the Iraq War, ongoing reporting for The Washington Post and research for a book on Bush's second term to be published in 2006_ The testimony was given under an agreement with Fitzgerald that he would only ask about specific matters directly relating to his investigation.

All three persons provided written statements waiving the previous agreements of confidentiality on the issues being investigated by Fitzgerald. Each confirmed those releases verbally this month, and requested that I testify.

Plame is the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had been sent by the CIA in February 2002 to Niger to determine if there was any substance to intelligence reports that Niger had made a deal to sell "yellowcake" or raw uranium to Iraq. Wilson later emerged as an outspoken critic of the Bush administration.

I was first contacted by Fitzgerald's office on Nov. 3 after one of these officials went to Fitzgerald to discuss an interview with me in mid-June 2003 during which the person told me Wilson's wife worked for the CIA on weapons of mass destruction as a WMD analyst.

I have not been released to disclose the source's name publicly.

Fitzgerald asked for my impression about the context in which Mrs. Wilson was mentioned. I testified that the reference seemed to me to be casual and off-hand, and that it did not appear to me to be either classified or sensitive. I testified that according to my understanding an analyst in the CIA is not normally an undercover position.

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.

Fitzgerald asked if I had discussed Wilson's wife with any other government officials before Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003. I testified that I had no recollection of doing so.

He asked if I had possibly planned to ask questions about what I had learned about Wilson's wife with any other government official.

I testified that on June 20, 2003 I interviewed a second administration official for my book Plan of Attack, and that one of the lists of questions I believe I brought to the interview included on a single line the phrase "Joe Wilson's wife." I testified that I have no recollection of asking about her, and that the tape-recorded interview contains no indication that the subject arose.

I also testified that I had a conversation with a third person on June 23, 2003. The person was I. Lewis "Scooter° Libby, and we talked on the phone. I told him I was sending to him an 18-page list of questions I wanted to ask Vice President Cheney. On page 5 of that list there was a question about "yellowcake" and the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq's weapons programs. I testified that I believed I had both the 18-page question list and the question list from the June 20 interview with the phrase "Joe Wilson's wife" on my desk during this discussion. I testified that I have no recollection that Wilson or his wife was discussed, and I have no notes of the conversation.

Though neither Wilson nor Wilson's wife's name had surfaced publicly at this point, Pincus had published a story the day before, Sunday, June 22, about the Iraq intelligence before the war. I testified that I had read the story, which referred to the CIA mission by "a former senior American diplomat to visit Niger." Although his name was not used in the story, I knew that referred to Wilson.

I testified that on June 27, 2003 I met with Libby at 5:10 p.m. in his office adjacent to the White House. I took the 18-page list of questions with the page 5 reference to "yellowcake" to this interview and I believe I also had the other question list from June 20, which had the "Joe Wilson's wife" reference.

I have four pages of typed notes from this interview, and I testified that there is no reference in them to Wilson or his wife. A portion of the typed notes shows that Libby discussed the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, mentioned "yellowcake" and said there was an "effort by the Iraqis to get it from Africa. It goes back to February '02." This was the time of Wilson's trip to Niger.

When asked by Fitzgerald if it was possible I told Libby I knew Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and was involved in his assignment, I testified that it was possible I asked a question about Wilson or his wife, but that I had no recollection of doing so. My notes do not include all the questions I asked, but I testified that if Libby had said anything on the subject, I would have recorded it in my notes.

My testimony was given in a sworn deposition at the law office of Howard Shapiro of the firm of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr instead of appearing under subpoena before a grand jury.

I testified after consulting with The Post's executive and managing editors, the publisher, and our lawyers. We determined that I could testify based on the specific releases obtained from these three people. I answered all of Fitzgerald's questions during my testimony without breaking promises to sources or infringing on conversations I had on unrelated matters for books or news reporting--past, present or future.

It was the first times in 35 years as a reporter that I have been asked to provide information to a grand jury.


21 posted on 11/16/2005 5:47:18 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Uh, you go look at it, we are reading this one.


22 posted on 11/16/2005 5:48:38 AM PST by Ursus arctos horribilis ("It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!" Emiliano Zapata 1879-1919)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rushfreedom; ricoshea
I think where Robert Novak wrote a column stating he would reveal what he knew after the special prosecutor wrapped up?

I've asked this same question but did not get a reply. - CAN ANYONE ELSE ANSWER THIS?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1515133/posts?page=21#21

Novak: "After the case is concluded."

23 posted on 11/16/2005 5:50:01 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ursus arctos horribilis
Uh, you go look at it, we are reading this one.

Understood. But I'll continue to post cross links when I figure other readers will find them helpful, your snotty intrusion notwithstanding.

24 posted on 11/16/2005 5:51:09 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
If Fitzgerald asked Pincus about his discussions with Woodward, and Pincus and Woodward disagree on who said what, isn't that the same as the Libby/Russert condition that Libby is being nailed on?

My head hurts!

25 posted on 11/16/2005 6:01:13 AM PST by leadhead (Itís a duty and a responsibility to defeat them. But it's also a pleasure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Inspector Valerie Clouseau in France in 1995?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1522813/posts

26 posted on 11/16/2005 6:05:54 AM PST by wouldntbprudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

I cannot believe the Libs are dragging out Woodward now. What's next? Alger Hiss? Or maybe Henry Wallace?




27 posted on 11/16/2005 6:36:29 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (Liberal Talking Point - Bush = Hitler ... Republican Talking Point - Let the Liberals Talk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Bob Woodward testified under oath Monday in the CIA leak case that a senior administration official told him about CIA operative Valerie Plame and her position at the agency nearly a month before her identity was disclosed.

Was this person in a coma at the time?

Count on Woodward to get on the bandwagon.

28 posted on 11/16/2005 6:38:38 AM PST by AmishDude (Amishdude, the one and only.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

LOL! The Dems have been demanding time-lines in Congress, well here is a time-line the Dems can choke on. Looks like Libby is going to walk out of court (If it ever gets that far) with a $hit eating grin on his face


29 posted on 11/16/2005 6:39:49 AM PST by hflynn ( Soros wouldn't make any sense even if he spelled his name backwards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: js1138
It was the first times in 35 years as a reporter that I have been asked to provide information to a grand jury.

I love this part. It's completely irrelevant, but it lets him scream "I'm the Watergate guy! Remember? Remember Watergate?

30 posted on 11/16/2005 6:42:22 AM PST by AmishDude (Amishdude, the one and only.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
What the fudge? Fitzy is still taking testimony? Woodward gives a deposition not at the eleventh hour but at 1am? This highlights the nebulous standards that Woodward is held to. This highlights how poorly Fitzgerald's "investigation" has been. Given unlimited money & time, my six year old nephew could have got at tleast two indictments. This makes me sick.

It strikes me that when a prosecutor indicts someone, he/she should be prepared to go to trial that same day (if the courts and the defendant wish it). That having been said, what in the name of all that's holy is anyone in a Republican Whitehouse doing talking to Bob Woodward, BOB FREAKING WOODWARD, for gosh sakes. Is there no institutional memory left in the GOP?

31 posted on 11/16/2005 7:14:23 AM PST by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
If Colin Powell ever stopped short it would take the jaws of life to rescue Woodward from his butt. Plus we know of one Colin Powell trip where this information was passed around with a (S) indicating that it was secret. Does anyone have a guess who told Woodward? Anyone? Anyone at all?

So it appears lots of people, including the press, knew "Wilson's wife" worked at the CIA, feverishly screwing up WMD assessments. All Novak had to do was consult "Who's Who" to get her name. There no "here" here. Release Libby!

32 posted on 11/16/2005 7:21:54 AM PST by Dilbert56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
What the fudge? Fitzy is still taking testimony? Woodward gives a deposition not at the eleventh hour but at 1am? This highlights the nebulous standards that Woodward is held to.

The libs are correct, Fitzmas will eventually come for them if this is allowed to go on and on and on, and even take a turn in direction. The libs and the Senate Rats want Fitz to take a turn into the question of why GWB lied us into war. Forget that Fitz said in his press conference "Fitzgerald: "This indictment's not about the propriety of the war, and people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who are--have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel."

33 posted on 11/16/2005 7:42:02 AM PST by p23185 (Why isn't attempting to take down a sitting Pres & his Admin considered Sedition?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertylover

"When there was a real security problem with Sandy Berger stuffing highly classified documents in his pants the MSM just yawned."

Yep, there was probably a Pulitzer prize just waiting for somebody there. How could you pass up the story of a former National Security Advisor going into the Archives and violating numerous security regulations, including taking documents? I guess the MSM takes care of its own.


34 posted on 11/16/2005 8:10:19 AM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Archon of the East
Fitzgerald has turned into a political hack with only his career in mind. He is a becoming pathetic but unfortunately is having an impact with the mindless people in this country.

Indeed. His pouting, baby-face probably helps to accomplish some of the latter.

Fitzgerald increasingly appears intent upon bringing down, through accusations and tainting if not convictions, as many members of the Administration as possible.

It is often noted, glowingly, that he is the son of a former doorman. That is surely admirable - unless he has inside him something of a residual, life-long inferiority complex which propels him to attempt to bring down and destroy, with little or no real cause, those of long-time high position and repute.

Why isn't Fitzgerald putting Joseph Wilson IV and Plame before a grand jury???

He feverishly proceeds no matter how much chaos this creates, and how it directly undermines this nation's national security - including placing our armed forces in Iraq and other places in greater peril.

35 posted on 11/16/2005 8:18:39 AM PST by mtntop3 ("He who must know before he believes will never come to full knowledge.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
"When the story comes out, I'm quite confident we're going to find out that it started kind of as gossip, as chatter," he told CNN's Larry King.

Woodward also said in interviews this summer and fall that the damage done by Plame's name being revealed in the media was "quite minimal."

"When I think all of the facts come out in this case, it's going to be laughable because the consequences are not that great," he told National Public Radio this summer.

Sensible criticism of Wilson and the Democrats.

36 posted on 11/16/2005 8:40:44 AM PST by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Maybe Woodward got his info from a comatose Bill Caseysarc on.
37 posted on 11/16/2005 8:50:10 AM PST by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

You responded to: "I think where Robert Novak wrote a column stating he would reveal what he knew after the special prosecutor wrapped up?

I've asked this same question but did not get a reply. - CAN ANYONE ELSE ANSWER THIS?"

by saying that Novak promised to do so "after the case was closed"

Isn't the likely reason Novak never went to jail etc. is because both of his sources were interviewed by Fitzgerald and admitted they had been Novak's sources? If so, then a) he has no need of finding this out directly from Novak; OR b) in light of his sources already revealing themselves, Novak may have felt comfortable confirmingg this for the grand jury: there would be no point in pulling a Miller-like
go-to-jail stunt to protect a source that was no longer hidden etc.


38 posted on 11/16/2005 9:06:26 AM PST by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: pawdoggie

They probably figure it doesn't matter 'cos ol'Bob is gonna claim to have interviewed them anyway. You really think Casey gave him a deathbed interview and spilled his guts?


39 posted on 11/16/2005 9:07:01 AM PST by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast

Heh-heh, Fitz must feel like a vice is tightening around those two tiny little raisins of his that everyone else calls b*lls when referring to theirs...if he goes ahead with the Libby trial now he'll come out looking like Jimmy Carter did after the Iran hostage rescue fiasco back in '80!


40 posted on 11/16/2005 10:49:50 AM PST by meandog (FUDU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry

yes, but unfortunately for Libby - he fell into the perjury trap that Fitzgerald turned his GJ into. I don't know that this Woodward stuff will help Libby that much at trial. It certainly helps us understand the BS surrounding this case, the media involvement in it, but Libby is holding the bag right now.


41 posted on 11/16/2005 10:58:32 AM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DrC

Miller didn't go to jail to protect Libby - that was a convenient excuse.


42 posted on 11/16/2005 10:59:46 AM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ECM

In light of all this, indict Woodward and drop the indictment against Scooter! Scooter was indicted for obstructing justice in WHAT? A NON-criminal investigation? So...drop the dang charges, for Pete's sake!


43 posted on 11/16/2005 11:01:29 AM PST by txboss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rushfreedom
What hasn't Fitz asked Novak to reveal his sources?

Novak did testify. And, presumably, revealed his sources.

Fitzgerald said that he is aware of who Novak's sources were.

44 posted on 11/16/2005 11:13:07 AM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rushfreedom

Because the special prosecutor has not "wrapped up". He's empaneling another GJ.


45 posted on 11/16/2005 11:23:37 AM PST by MortMan (Eschew Obfuscation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

We don't know that Woodward's take is correct...only that it seems very likely. I do not understand why Libby so obviously lied. Neither does anyone else.


46 posted on 11/16/2005 1:01:18 PM PST by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

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.

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