U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-12-2007, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Tucson, AZ
1,696 posts, read 3,063,689 times
Reputation: 1535

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
I hope the Democrats will get the idea of impeaching if this "War with Iran" drum keeps beating louder and louder all the time.

The last thing we need is to start a war in another country with NO ALLIES!!
I would hope that they get the idea now that it's coming out how Cheney had his pawprints all over this outing. Hopefully they'll get around to it BEFORE we mess with Iran, but probably not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-12-2007, 12:19 PM
 
Location: Journey's End
10,189 posts, read 24,514,876 times
Reputation: 3826
The press, both here and internationally say today that Cheney will be very vulnerable as a witness for Libby:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/12/news/cheney.php
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2007, 06:09 PM
 
Location: Journey's End
10,189 posts, read 24,514,876 times
Reputation: 3826
The Monitor reports the update, and I quote from the article,

"This trial stands for something much bigger than what it is," says Paul Rothstein, a law professor at Georgetown University. "In the public mind, it stands for, 'Was Bush lying about the war, and was he willing to destroy a woman's career to cover up a lie about the war?' Viewed that way, it's a big case. The case doesn't actually go that far, but that's how it will be read if Libby is convicted."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070212/ts_csm/alibby (broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-12-2007, 08:27 PM
 
9,715 posts, read 12,985,168 times
Reputation: 3315
The trial was ever-so-boring today. Did you ever see a bigger group of journalists who had won Pulitzer prizes? Did you ever see so many people who didn't talk to Libby?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2007, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Journey's End
10,189 posts, read 24,514,876 times
Reputation: 3826
Bad news!

The Defense will not call Cheney and Libby won't take the stand!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070213/cm_thenation/3165904 (broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2007, 09:05 PM
 
11,602 posts, read 17,591,466 times
Reputation: 17351
The trial is becoming a borefest. Sorry guys, looks like the the Mother of All Political Trials is losing it's focus. No Cheney, no Bush, they can't even bring up the actual crime, they can't even decide if Plame was covert or not (probably not when you drive your SUV into CIA headquarters every day for 2 years).

From
WHAT WE'VE LEARNED - AND HAVEN'T - AT THE BIZARRE TRIALBy BYRON YORK
MILLER:

"Major memory problems.
February 11, 2007 -- THE judge in the perjury and obstruction of justice trial of Lewis Libby is trying mightily to keep courtroom pro ceedings focused on the narrow question of whether Libby lied to a grand jury in the CIA leak case. But it's not working.

With each new witness, and each new document entered into evidence, we're learning more about the politics of the Valerie Plame scandal - it that's what it was - that exploded in the summer of 2003. ...

WE'RE also learning more about the so-called "con spiracy" to out Valerie Plame: There wasn't one.

Rather than a carefully-planned conspiracy, testimony in the trial has revealed a confused and disjointed White House reaction to Joseph Wilson's broadside against the Bush administration.

When Wilson began taking very public shots at the administration's case for war - first anonymously, then by name in a Times op-ed and an appearance on "Meet the Press" - the first reaction in the vice president's office was not to develop an evil plot. It was to ask, "Who is this guy? and "Did we really send him to Africa?"

When they found out about Wilson's wife and her role in the matter, they quite reasonably thought that answered part of the questions. "To me, it was an explanation as to why we had found this Ambassador Wilson and sent him off to Africa," Grenier testified. "I thought that was germane to the story." So they passed it on.

ONE thing we're not learning more about is Valerie Plame herself. Was she a covert CIA agent - was her job status classified?

Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has said publicly that she was classified, but the jury hasn't been allowed to hear any of it. "What her actual status was, or whether any damage would result from disclosure of her status, are totally irrelevant to your decision of guilt or innocence," Judge Reggie Walton told the jurors on the first day.

Whatever her status, don't expect to learn it from this trial."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2007, 09:19 PM
 
Location: Tucson, AZ
1,696 posts, read 3,063,689 times
Reputation: 1535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
The trial is becoming a borefest. Sorry guys, looks like the the Mother of All Political Trials is losing it's focus. No Cheney, no Bush, they can't even bring up the actual crime, they can't even decide if Plame was covert or not (probably not when you drive your SUV into CIA headquarters every day for 2 years).
That's because none of this stuff ever was the focus of this trial. AGAIN, Libby is on trial for obstruction of justice for lying to a grand jury under oath- NOT for outing Plame. This trial isn't even to try to determine what Plame's status was. The reason the trial lost focus was because of Libby's convoluted defenses and Fitzgerald's ease in trashing 2 hours of defense work with 4 questions.

I would be shocked if this didn't result in a conviction, but I would be much less shocked to see him get pardoned before doing a day of jail time No one in this administration seems to be under the rule of law, so why should Libby be any different?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2007, 09:22 PM
 
Location: Northeast
1,298 posts, read 2,370,136 times
Reputation: 618
Every time I see this thread bump to the top it's like nails on a blackboard.

The NAME drives me absolutely insane!!!!

I swear if a grown man introduced himself to me as "Scooter" I think I'd have to stooge slap'em a few times

-TT
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2007, 12:20 AM
 
9,715 posts, read 12,985,168 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb919 View Post
I would be shocked if this didn't result in a conviction, but I would be much less shocked to see him get pardoned before doing a day of jail time No one in this administration seems to be under the rule of law, so why should Libby be any different?
Did you see the juror questions today? Obviously the jurors are quite intelligent and I can't see Libby NOT being convicted.

I'm wondering about the sealed indictment from the original grand jury. I'm wondering if Cheney hasn't been indicted. It's pretty obvious from the testimony that he was the original leaker.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2007, 05:59 AM
 
Location: Tucson, AZ
1,696 posts, read 3,063,689 times
Reputation: 1535
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
Did you see the juror questions today? Obviously the jurors are quite intelligent and I can't see Libby NOT being convicted.

I'm wondering about the sealed indictment from the original grand jury. I'm wondering if Cheney hasn't been indicted. It's pretty obvious from the testimony that he was the original leaker.
If Cheney was the source (and apparently he was), then I sure hope that the indictment has his name on it. Of all the things I hate about this administration, their being above the law tops the list. Some proof that they're not, like the rest of us, would be nice.

I do believe this trial is only scratching the surface. Fitzgerald has conducted this prosecution like this is just one step of many to come.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top