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

Skip to comments.

Judge Threatens to Bar Leak-Case Comments
NYTimes.com ^ | April 14, 2006 | DAVID JOHNSTON

Posted on 4/14/2006, 7:00:47 AM by Lancey Howard

WASHINGTON, April 13 — The judge in the C.I.A. leak case against Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff threatened Thursday to issue an order barring the defense and prosecution from speaking publicly about the proceedings.

The judge, Reggie B. Walton of Federal District Court, acted after a prosecutor's court filing was provided to reporters on Tuesday evening before it was officially filed on Wednesday.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cialeak

1 posted on 4/14/2006, 7:00:50 AM by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Howlin
The judge, Reggie B. Walton of Federal District Court, acted after a prosecutor's court filing was provided to reporters on Tuesday evening before it was officially filed on Wednesday.

I don't know if this answers the question posed earlier today about the brouhaha and the judge's warnings, but this writer has apparently put 2 and 2 together and determined that Fitz's filing was indeed "leaked". You would think that it would have been Scooter's team who leaked it since it offers further evidence that Fitz is a buffoon, but would Scooter's team have even HAD the filing before Fitz filed it??

2 posted on 4/14/2006, 7:05:22 AM by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Judge Threatens to Bar Leak-Case Comments

"All parties in this matter are hereby ORDERED to coat themselves from head to toe."

3 posted on 4/14/2006, 7:06:07 AM by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Notice the NYTimes just can't get it right. It is NOT a C.I.A. "leak" case. It is a perjury or obstruction of justice case.

The city editors are not doing their job if the word "leak" does not show up in the story; e.g., Bush leaked classified info. [Clearly a preposterous assertion.]


4 posted on 4/14/2006, 7:09:47 AM by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the_Watchman
e.g., Bush leaked classified info

The liberals will never get it right. By definition, if Bush says it then it is no longer "classified" even if it was classified one second before Bush said it, since it is ultimately the President at the top of the food chain when it comes to what is and what isn't "classified".

5 posted on 4/14/2006, 7:17:11 AM by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

At least in this post, the NYT admits that it is Fitz that is leaking. In the next post (from a Wa ComPost), the author tries to pretend that the leak comes from Libby.


6 posted on 4/14/2006, 12:01:12 PM by norwaypinesavage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage
At least in this post, the NYT admits that it is Fitz that is leaking

It must have had them gnashing their teeth.

7 posted on 4/14/2006, 2:47:05 PM by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | 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