Posted on 03/12/2007 10:04:10 AM PDT by OESY
...When a prosecutor speaks about "a cloud over the Vice-President's office" and "a cloud over the White House," he is speaking politically. There is no law about the amount of cumulus permitted over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The prosecutor is speculating on political capital — reputation, credibility, the currency of politics. Once damaged, they're hard to recover. So, even if it's not within the purview of the jury, his question is relevant to the wider world: How did this cloud get there and stay there even though it had no meaningful rainfall?
Answer: Patrick Fitzgerald....
As for Scooter Libby, he faces up to 25 years in jail for the crime of failing to remember when he first heard the name of Valerie Plame — whether by accident or intent no-one can ever say for sure. But we also know that Joe Wilson failed to remember that his original briefing to the CIA after getting back from Niger was significantly different from the way he characterized it in his op-ed in The New York Times. We do know that the contemptible Armitage failed to come forward and clear the air as his colleagues were smeared for months on end. We do know that his boss Colin Powell sat by as the very character of the Administration was corroded.
And we know that Patrick Fitzgerald knew all this and more as he frittered away the years, and the "political blood lust" (as National Review's Rich Lowry calls it) grew ever more disconnected from humdrum reality. The cloud over the White House is Fitzgerald's, and his closing remarks to the jury were highly revealing....
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
bump & a ping
pardon Libby, and do it now!
PING
Bush moves at a snails pace if it all. He's out of gas and out of touch. We have two border guards rotting in prison. I expect no action...once again. Sorry, but I'm afflicked with rinoelitism bitterness.
Much better for the appeals process to take its course, which if there is any justice will end with Libby exonerated and Fitz and Judge Walton chastized from the bench.
Oh great, now we get to listen to how Bush is an out of steam, out of touch leader.
Will the complaints on Bush never end?
Here - day after day for eight years the "conservatives????" criticized if he did something, if he did not do something. Support was withdrawn because he was not their perfect conservative president to enact each and every item they wished on the timetable they wished - of course, with a sword and cape and slaughtering of all democrats along the way.
So - the support was withdrawn, we lost the congress and stole away the power that Bush had. Now that we have what we wanted, we still have complaints about Bush as ineffective, out of touch, ya da, ya da, ya da.
So apparently the only man in Washington that is subject to our vile discrediting is our leader President George W. Bush. Note - not the democrats, not the turncoats, not the prosecutors out for blood - only George Bush.
And we wonder why he is out of steam?
Who cares - you still have your target - George Bush to blame for all the ills of government. A whole lot safer than attacking the real culprits - the dems, liberals, prosecutors wasting our tax payer money and destroying our agenda.
Let's see how many more come on here and attack George Bush. Of course, they never once supported the man and enabled the power we had one.
ClancyJ: I agree with you 100%
Oh c'mon. He's put himself in this position to have his base question his actions or inactions, best said. I have his back but am simply growing weary. His father sat out the last two years of his presidency and I simply see the same pattern here. Lets see how immigration reform pans out. Im sure he'll do whats best for the country, right?
So you are growing weary. Big deal.
So glad to have you "have his back". Might be a first around here. Is there still a back at all?
Wonder how much the dems pay to have Bush critics totally destroy this site and the support of George Bush.
Pretty effective to get his own people to do the work of the dems for them.
I agree with you. I am amazed W. is still on his feet with the battering he is taking from the RINOs, the MSM, the libs, the turncoats, etc., etc.
I'm not a lawyer, and I'm having a lot of problems trying to understand Fitzgerald's actions. If the primary impetus of the whole investigation was to find out who leaked Valerie Plame's name, and Fitzgerald knew who the leaker was (Armitage) at the outset, then why did he proceed with the investigation? Why did the judge allow the proceedings to go on if he too knew what Fitzgerald knew? I absolutely can't understand this at all, and hopefully some attorney on this forum can tell me what legal authority Fitzfong had to continue the whole bloody sham when he knew the identity of the person he was purporting to find out at the outset.
"Sometimes people forget things" isn't evidence. It must be tied to these facts. Who exactly got on the stand to provide the foundation for excluded evidence?
He also disallowed some video footage of Tim Russert saying witnesses could not have their lawyer with them in the grand jury room, in contrast to his testimony that he didn't know that.
The judge had a very narrow view of relevance. If an appellate court takes a broader view there could be a reversal.
The studies relied upon in the opinion related to eyewitness identification. There is no way under the Daubert standard that such evidence should be presented as scientific evidence of what Libby would and would not remember.
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.