Skip to comments.
Sources: No Indictments Wednesday in CIA Leak Probe
Fox News ^
| October 26, 2005
| Jane Roh
Posted on 10/26/2005 9:36:57 AM PDT by West Coast Conservative
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-125 next last
To: West Coast Conservative
Th news is There is no news?..........This is news?............
2
posted on
10/26/2005 9:38:16 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(I've eaten so much crow in my life that I'm immune to bird flu.........)
To: West Coast Conservative
FoX NeWs ticker on FNC
Grand jury appears to have broken for lunch or possibly for the day..
3
posted on
10/26/2005 9:39:08 AM PDT
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: West Coast Conservative
The "gurus" like Judge Napolitano on Fox said that if they were coming, indictments would have to come by today, or, absolutely the latest, tomorrow, to allow some "Ronnie Earle" time in case something was screwed up before Friday.
I think this is over.
4
posted on
10/26/2005 9:40:00 AM PDT
by
LS
(CNN is the Amtrak of news)
To: NormsRevenge
5
posted on
10/26/2005 9:40:07 AM PDT
by
Rokurota
(.)
To: NormsRevenge
Grand jury appears to have broken for lunch or possibly for the day..
breaking for a ham sandwich perhaps?
6
posted on
10/26/2005 9:40:27 AM PDT
by
Kokojmudd
(Trade the US Senate for the Iraqi Parliament!)
To: Kokojmudd
Looks to me like they're vegetarian.
7
posted on
10/26/2005 9:41:18 AM PDT
by
Rokurota
(.)
To: West Coast Conservative
I wish this thing would break one way or another, it seems it's got half the government paralyzed.
8
posted on
10/26/2005 9:43:12 AM PDT
by
Fido969
("And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).)
To: West Coast Conservative
It's the jury, not the prosecutor, that indicts? Right?
Although the routine is that the jury does whatever the prosecutor asks, that might not happen in this case.
9
posted on
10/26/2005 9:46:09 AM PDT
by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: West Coast Conservative
cold water-orgasm ending-buzz kill for the left wing(nut) media, eh?
10
posted on
10/26/2005 9:46:55 AM PDT
by
xcamel
(No more RINOS - Not Now, Not Ever Again.)
To: Fido969
Just curious.
If Tenet told Cheney and Cheney told Libby, Why aren't they going after Tenet?
11
posted on
10/26/2005 9:47:08 AM PDT
by
EQAndyBuzz
(Liberal Talking Point - Bush = Hitler ... Republican Talking Point - Let the Liberals Talk)
To: LS
LOL...Yes I heard the judge say this the other day on FoxNews. However, maybe Fritz's is so good, he'll not need the GJ 'cause the indictments will be in perfect order?
I hope you're right...this is over.
12
posted on
10/26/2005 9:47:30 AM PDT
by
shield
(The Greatest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God!!!! by Dr. H. Ross, Astrophysicist)
To: LS
I would like to be as optimistic. I do find it interesting, however, that there are reports of last-minute interviewing of Plame's neighbors. I heard her old CIA boss interviewed some time ago and he said her CIA association was well known by some of her neighbors and that in turn was known by the CIA. He thought this was a political witch hunt and nothing more.
13
posted on
10/26/2005 9:47:46 AM PDT
by
twigs
To: EQAndyBuzz
Because it is not illegal for the CIA boss to give classified info to the Veep, who is cleared to receive it?
14
posted on
10/26/2005 9:48:53 AM PDT
by
lugsoul
To: West Coast Conservative
This makes absolutely no sense. You've been conducting an investigation for this long and you just now are trying to find out if people knew she was an agent. Something is really screwy about this.
To: West Coast Conservative
Lefkowitz was asked if he knew that Plame worked for the CIA before her name appeared in a July 14, 2003, column by Robert Novak. Is it possible that the visits with the neighbors were staged to distract from some official letter being handed to Val or Joe Wilson at their home?
16
posted on
10/26/2005 9:49:39 AM PDT
by
syriacus
(Bush hasn't done a bad job, all things (WOT, vagaries of Nature, Lib lies + obstruction) considered)
To: LS
I think this is over. Aaaw dang it. Don't pop the fantasies in the idiot press yet. I want to see all the subpoenas that would get issued to the lying lefties and watch them squirm.
To: EQAndyBuzz
They all have clearance. They would have to have had proveable malevolent intent to indict them on the discussions you mention. It's their discussing it outside of this group, which I do not think has been proven, that would cause the problem. To all appearances, that is now a moot question anyway. The indictments would be regarding Libby's and Rove's testimony to the GJ. Did they forget to tell about every conversation they've had in years that may have had something to do with Plame? It's down to being a witch hunt.
18
posted on
10/26/2005 9:52:32 AM PDT
by
twigs
To: EQAndyBuzz
It's not illegal to tell someone who has clearance. So Tenet could tell Cheney and Cheney could tell Libby, but Libby can't tell Miller (assuming Plame really was undercover).
To: half-cajun
They weren't being interviewed for the first time. Several sources report this.
My guess is it is a push back on someone raising the "She wasn't covert - all her friends and neighbors knew" defense when negotiating with Fitz.
20
posted on
10/26/2005 9:52:52 AM PDT
by
lugsoul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-125 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