He was convicted because the Jury was convinced he made up the story
about Russert telling him so he could throw off the investigation. Why
would Libby do that knowing he wasn't the one that leaked to Novak?
Meanwhile, Russert lied under oath about when he knew about Plame and
he's a hero. Makes you think the system doesn't always work.

Libby had nothing to do with the leak, it was Armitage, and Fitzgerald
wouldn't say if a law was even broken, yet at sentencing he said
punish him as if he interfered with an investigation of a crime that
possibly cost lives. Why isn't Armitage charged with anything if it
was to be treated that severe?

The probation office recommended 15-20 months. He got 30.

One more point; The WaPo juror Collins said Libby was the Fall guy for
the White House. This is proof they got it wrong because it was the
State Department that leaked to Novak.


On 7/3/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sam wrote:
> > Russert is a respected journalist jurors see on TV all the time.
>
>
> So your theory is that FItzgerald, a grand jury, a jury, and multiple
> judges were all duped by Russert?
>
> You'd say that the judge, who called Libby "overwhelmingly guilty",
> was basing that opinion solely on Russert's say so?
>
> You sure have a high opinion of Russert's powers.
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Deploy Web Applications Quickly across the enterprise with ColdFusion MX7 & 
Flex 2
Free Trial 
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJU

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:237793
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