That's the point, he wasn't lying to protect somebody.He wasn't lying to
protect Rove, as seems to be the implication in all of this bluster, because
Rove was not the original source of the leak.

On 1/30/07, Gruss wrote:
>
> > RoMunn wrote:
> > Blah, whatever, that means nothing. Libby's conduct had no material
> impact
> > on the case.
> >
>
> But it DOES have material impact on THE LAW.  If Libby lied to protect
> somebody then he was subverting the law and, believe it or not, there
> are some people that very righteous about this type of thing.  From
> what I've read Fitzgerald is such a person; he's been compared to
> Elliot Ness.
>
>

-- 
---------------
Robert Munn
www.funkymojo.com


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 
Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs 
http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:226211
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to