Did We Learn Anything In The Libby Trial?

After all the sound and fury I am stumped by this CNN poll result:

29.  Do you think Dick Cheney was part of a cover-up to try to prevent the special prosecutor from getting to the truth about who leaked CIA agent Valerie Plame's name to the news media, or was not part of any cover-up?

Figures for March 2007 / (Nov 2005)

Yes, part of cover-up  52%   (52%) 
No, was not               29%   (27%)
No opinion                 20%   (21%)

So from the period following Libby's indictment to the present, public opinion about Cheney's involvement, as measured by these polls, has not budged.

MORE: Or should Team JOM claim credit for the 2% surge in the "Cheney not involved" sentiment?!?  We are far too humble to do so.

UNRELENTING:  Cheney will survive.

Comments

[GnuCarSmell]

When the question is based on a false premise, a false conclusion is likely.

[maryrose]

Cheney and Rove and Libby are innocent of all possible charges. Now someone needs to tell Fitz before he ruins the life of another person like Conrad Black in Chicago whose trial begins Wednesday.

[Ralph L.]

This is a poll of the 3% of adults who actually know who Cheney and Plame are?

[Libby's a Liar]

The same poll shows 69% of Americans oppose a Libby pardon, while a whopping 18% support a Libby pardon.

These 18% make up the base of this site.

Meanwhile the "librul" Andrea Mitchell once again spins for the Administration by falsely claiming on Hardball that most people support the pardon.

[Ralph L.]

Libby's, that her guilty conscience talking.

[PaulV]

Mitchell has inside information that Libby told truth about Russert

[GnuCarSmell]

If the question had been "Do you think the prosecutor failed to indict the State Department 'leaker', Richard Armitage, in order to protect the Bush administration?" you'd get similar results.

First determine the result, then phrase the poll question accordingly. Push-polls are a CNN specialty.

[Spartacvs]

Time to move on folks, Libby was just the aperitif. Now Congress gets down to some serious oversight.

[TexasToast]

BTW Tom

When are you going to start each post with a picture or a photo? Keep up with the Jones' and all that.

[Tom Maguire]

When are you going to start each post with a picture or a photo?

Folks here can read.

[Topsecretk9]

--The same poll shows 69% of Americans oppose a Libby pardon, while a whopping 18% support a Libby pardon.--

Well, he's got the jury's vote on pardon too, so I guess it's a wash.

[TexasToast]

Touche'

One for the home team! :)

[Sara (The Squiggler)]

Now Congress gets down to some serious oversight.

The blind leading the blind.

[Ralph L.]

The pot poking the kettle.

[Ralph L.]

Where's the late-night crew? Don't let me kill three threads in one day.

[Neo]

And some people wonder why so many believe Saddam was involved in 9/11.

There was one piece of paper with a handwritten note on it .. the only evidence that Cheney was involved in any way with refuting Joe Wilson and we have a plot that continues today.

Too bad they didn't also poll to see how many people believe FDR sat on evidence that the Janpanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor in order to get the US into WWII.

Three myths .. all nonsense.

[Neo]

Forgot Lee Harvey Oswald and where are Jimmy Hoffa and Judge Crater ?

[Bill in AZ]

Fitz has an interesting theory on law enforcement, and has been working on proving and refining his theory. Like Communism, it sorta works on paper if you ignore a few simple things. His theory is to prosecute victims (such as Libby, Cowles). The idea is to get victims off the street and in jail where they belong. When crime victims are all jailed, criminals will naturally turn to honest work.

[Spartacvs]

There was one piece of paper with a handwritten note on it

Unfortunately discovered in the VP's office and in the VP's handwriting.

Ye God's, what kind of a place are you running here Maguire?

[Other Tom]

Shows you what rapt attention those CNN viewers were paying to the trial.

I don't think the pardon of Marc Rich had the support of 5% of the people. Doesn't matter: The power to pardon is absolute, and cannot be challenged. Judith Miller has already done 85 days more time than Scooter will.

And congress can oversee all it wants to oversee: oversight has been going on for two centuries now, and it never changes anything the president wants to do. The surge in Iraq will proceed apace; Mr. Bush will be commander-in-chief until January 20, 2009. An enlightened panel of the DC Circuit, all appointed by Republican presidents, has just held that the 2nd amendment guarantees a personal right to bear arms. John Paul Stevens is in his dotage, and Rudy has promised us strict-construction originalists. Oversee that.

[Other Tom]

"...discovered in the VP's office and in the VP's handwriting."

Seems to mean a lot to you. Meant nothing to Fitz. Santa has gone back to the North Pole; Fitzmas is over. Twenty-two imminent indictments turned into one. Rove, Cheney go on happily about their work, while steam comes out of the ears of the moonbats.

[perc]

It's incredible to me that there are jurors who voted to convict yet now wish for a pardon. If it had been just an ordinary person on trial instead of a White House staffer, does that mean that they would have actually paid attention to the evidence (or lack thereof) and taken responsibility for their verdict?

If the jurors are hoping for a pardon, it is to ease their own consciences.

[Other Tom]

Testimonials from lawyers in the CIA's Office of the General Counsel, as quoted in "America's Greatest Places to Work With a Law Degree":

"There are many, many misconceptions people have about working for the CIA. Actually, people are surprised when they hear that the CIA has a General Counsel's Office at all! . . . Another misconception is that the CIA is extraordinarily conservative. That's totally not the case. I'd say that most people here would consider themselves very liberal. . .

"Another big misconception has to do with who gets into the CIA. There's a totally wrong-headed picture in people's minds that if you've ever smoked a joint, you can't get into the CIA. That's not true. Maybe you'd say, 'Oh, when I was a freshman in college, I'd light up a doobie, I drank a lot, but when I got to law school, I grew up, and I don't do that anymore.' That's not going to remove you from consideration. . . . There are a lot of people who self-select out, thinking that because of some old, casual drug use they won't get in. That's a shame."

I'm not making this up. [Link]

[TexasToast]

An enlightened panel of the DC Circuit, all appointed by Republican presidents, has just held that the 2nd amendment guarantees a personal right to bear arms.

Pining for the day, OtherT? Can you hear those four horseman coming? Sutherland!, McReynolds!, Van Devanter!, Butler!

Of our current SC, only Bryer and Ginzburg were appointed by democtatic presidents. Rudy, appoint pro-lifers? Take another shot.

I hate to tell you this, but our children don't share your hopes. The court, like King Canute, can't hold back he tide.

[topsecretk9]

--I hate to tell you this, but our children don't share your hopes.--

Don't speak for other people and particularly children.

[arcanorum]

"Of our current SC, only Bryer and Ginzburg were appointed by democtatic presidents. "

"During the interview Crawford commented on the appearance of Justice Ginsburg during Wednesday’s oral argument in the case of Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation. Greenburg stated that “all the reporters who covered the oral argument were just struck by the appearance of Justice Ginsburg….it took her a good 15-20 seconds to leave the courtroom, very unusual. Justice Souter kind of stood behind her and helped her out of the courtroom.”

Greenburg emphasized that she is not speculating that Ginsburg’s health is in decline, but remarked, “everyone kind of stopped and said, wow, maybe President Bush could get another one.”"

[arcanorum]

"our children don't share your hopes."

dreamers, not doers.

the man who is not a liberal at 20 has no heart;
the man who is not a conservative at 40 has no brain.

"Citizens age 65 and older had the highest registration rate (79 percent) while those age 18 to 24 had the lowest (58 percent). The youngest group also had the lowest voting rate (47 percent), while those age 45 and older had the highest turnout (about 70 percent). "

[Daddy]

My humble prognostication (which was worth exactly what you paid for it) was that in the back of the Juror's minds they had the expedient assumption that Bush was going to pardon Libby regardless, so there was little downside in erring towards giving Fitz the benefit of the doubt, as that way, having slammed the Administration, they'd be able to hold their heads high 'mongst their fellow Starbuckers in D.C. If they are recommending a Pardon, I think it's at least partly a handwashing or conscience-salving exercise, with the added benefit of continuing to let the MSM paint Bush to an uneducated public as protecting a crony. As for Andrea Mitchell, I think she can wash her hands (or do Hardball) for a million years, even with Russert and Gregory helping with the scrubbing, but until she fesses up, she's gonna' have about as little success getting that damned spot out as Lady MacBeth.

[Jane]

Good morning folks. For some reason it is still dark here.

[BumperStickerist]

Dick Cheney Karaoke:

Tune: "I will Survive" Gloria Gaynor
---------------------------

First I was annoyed
my patience, it was tried

Kept thinking that the CIA
was on our side

But I spent so many nights
learning how Saddam did wrong
I grew strong
I learned how to carry on

but then Langley
sent Joe Wilson
who later wrote a story that was pure fiction

I wondered "how the hell could he
have written all those dirty lies?"
I asked my staff to check it out
and they did - so why oh why?

Did Scotter lie, when he said 'no'?
The Dems think that that he did
because I told him so.

Well, I hate to bust their balls
but Fitz investigated me
And as it turns out,
no indictment
no Fitzmas

Oh no, not I
I will survive

as long as I know how to growl
I know I'll make them howl

I've got two more years as Veep
I've got powers vast and deep

and I'll survive
I will survive

-----------------------------------

[Pofarmer]

There was one piece of paper with a handwritten note on it

Unfortunately discovered in the VP's office and in the VP's handwriting.

Which was such powerful evidence of, well, er, something or other, that absolutely zero charges were brought based on it.

It's sole use was to create the illusion of some grand conspiracy when used to help illuminate Libby's "state of mind". Yep, from a document he never saw till he testified before the GJ.

[ed]

Hmmmm.

1. I learned to get an immunity deal before testifying before a GJ.

2. I learned to respond to any and all questions with the "I cannot remember the details accurately and anything I say is merely a guess."

[djl130]

"The same poll shows 69% of Americans oppose a Libby pardon, while a whopping 18% support a Libby pardon.

These 18% make up the base of this site."

If you are part of the 69%- an obvious majority, why do you feel compelled to post here at all? A puny 18% could hardly effect your progressive world view and its ultimate accomplishments. Surely this paltry 18% doesn't worry you in any way? How could it?

Just asking.

[ErnestAbe]

Has Gov. Richardson appointed a Democratic replacement for Sen. Dominici yet?

I say it happens by the June 1st. Any other bets on timing?

It certainly will be rid Lieberman from the Democratic caucus, and send him off to the Republican party where he belongs.

[Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report]

Blogs full of photos are for teenie boppers, not the geniuses of JOM. Stay the course, Tom.

Ed, you're right: The smartest legal advice for anyone in Washington, no matter how innocent or well-meaning, is to answer every question with "I don't remember." Anything more, you're cutting your own throat.

[PMII]

Almost all polls are useless due to parts of them being biased.............

Still would like to see a petition online to send to the President for pardon

[emam]

CNN polling, surely you jest, Snicker Snort Snort.

Now as you know - polls use methodology so it’s important to find out just who did they ask. CNN doesn’t tell us - because it’s incredibly slanted - you guessed it - to the left. Here is the quote from the front page of the report.

“Interviews with 1,027 adult Americans, including 401 registered voters who describe themselves as Republicans Independents who lean Republican, conducted by telephone Opinion Research Corporation on March 9-11, 2007. The margin of sampling error for results based on the total sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points and for results based half-samples is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.”

First, polling on the weekend always means a left slanted poll (Republicans are never home on the weekends as they know how to enjoy life). So 1027 - 401 (supposed Republicans) leaves a split between 626 Democrats, middle of the road independents and undecided.

Not hard to see how they got 69%.

And they call themselves “The Most Trusted Name in News”.

Yeah, bogus news.

via macmind

[Sue]

Now Congress gets down to some serious oversight.

You really believe that, don't you?

[SunnyDay]

Bunperstickerist, that is funny!!

[PeterUK]

"Now Congress gets down to some serious oversight."

To fools like Spartacus "oversight" is a euphemism for "revenge".Oversight will be for political reasons,simply to destroy the power of the elected administration.The country will become ungovernable,foreign policy impossible.
Shame about America,it had such promise.

[Other Tom]

How many children do you have, TToast? And if they all vote for Hillary, ya think that'll swing the election?

I'm not looking for Rudy to appoint any pro-lifers; I couldn't care less if he does. Even if Roe were overturned, most states would preserve abortion rights. (But it would be nice to have the issue decided by those who are actually supposed to decide it.) All that matters to me is that no Democrat gets to appoint anyone to the federal bench at any level.

As for Justice Ginsberg, I'm quite sure that I recall her being diagnosed with colon cancer perhaps five years ago or so. I have heard nothing of any decline in her health since then, and don't know whether her recent appearance of illness is in any way related to that. I would pray for her full reovery, although it is too late for poor Stevens, who as everyone knows is brain-dead.

[azaghal]

I hope I don't sound naive, but I learned some things about the MSM and especially Tim Russert from this story.

[Pofarmer]

2. I learned to respond to any and all questions with the "I cannot remember the details accurately and anything I say is merely a guess."

Uhhmmm.

You might rethink that one.

That's basically what Scooter told Eckenrode in the first FBI interveiw, probably the 2nd too.

[bio mom]

Except for the far left, the country wants to see legislation worked on and their causes discussed and dealt with. All this other junk just infuriates most voters who will get so sick of it that their opinion of Congress will sink even lower. I predict that no one associated with Washington will win the presidency in 08.

[Neo]

This 52% will be at risk when Schumer and Waxman make thme look sympathic

[Other Tom]

"The court, like King Canute, can't hold back he [sic] tide."

Maybe not the tide, but the D.C. Circuit just did a pretty good job holding back that unconstitutional gun law.

[Pofarmer]

It certainly will be rid Lieberman from the Democratic caucus, and send him off to the Republican party where he belongs.

Lieberman might fit in with the RINO's. He's definately no conservative. He lines up almost perfectly with the Dims on everything but the GWOT, and for that they toss him overboard. Who's the goose steppers again?

[azaghal]

story = trial

maybe i was thinking "sage"

[Pofarmer]

I predict that no one associated with Washington will win the presidency in 08.

Thompson might have been out of Washington long enough for the stink to wear off. The whole place needs fumigated though.

[Pofarmer]

Except for the far left, the country wants to see legislation worked on and their causes discussed and dealt with.

Personally? The last thing I want is legislation worked on. Too many laws, too much govt. If they wanna work on legislation, they can start by seeing how much of it they can get rid of. Layers and layers and layers of crap.

[maryrose]

Spartacus:
Oversight this!
These dems are the gang that couldn't shoot straight. They've changed their Iraq stategy oh let me see about 10 times. No wonder the American public doesn't trust them with security or any form of foreign policy. They are a bunch of goofballs who got lucky in the midterms because the voting public elected some Blue Dog democrats. Webb is the classic example of their one trick pony who doesn't know squat about foreign policy. I hope he's at least on some committees where he can actually learn something instead of just pontificating a bunch of nonsense. Someone please bring him up to speed on the vital issues of the day.

[Tom Maguire]

One for the home team! :)

And it's only March! (Can I quit now?)

Forgot Lee Harvey Oswald and where are Jimmy Hoffa and Judge Crater ?

Given the haze over Libby's testimony, maybe he obstructed those investigations as well. After all, who knows what truths he might have told?

[hit and run]

Now Congress gets down to some serious oversight

OK, I am calling for a new era of bipartisanship! Pelosi has been doing a hell of a job committing oversight

o·ver·sight [oh-ver-sahyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. an omission or error due to carelessness: My bank statement is full of oversights.

Like putting Jefferson on homeland securty, obviously some serious oversight on Pelosi's part.

Or Pelosi trying to get Murtha as majority leader....serious oversight on her part.

Pelosi trying to put Alcee Hastings as chair of intelligence....serious oversight on her part.

yada yada yada

[Semanticleo]

"Given the haze over Libby's testimony, maybe he obstructed those investigations as well. After all, who knows what truths he might have told?"

Why is this man laughing?

[cathyf]

2. I learned to respond to any and all questions with the "I cannot remember the details accurately and anything I say is merely a guess."

Uhhmmm.

You might rethink that one.

That's basically what Scooter told Eckenrode in the first FBI interveiw, probably the 2nd too.

Furthermore, Rove had another variation: "I don't remember this happening, but here's this email that was found on the White House computer system that apparently I wrote at the time, and I don't have any reason to believe that it is inaccurate." And if we interpreted Fitzgerald's actions correctly with his last-minute interviews of Luskin and V. Novak, Rove also came extraordinarily close to indictment for that.

So I'm still working on a better formulation. The problem with "I forgot" is that it's a lie if you in fact remembered, and it doesn't actually matter if they have no proof that you remembered, they will convict you anyway. To go back to the thread title, that is what I learned. So what's a formulation that is better? Something like, "I don't speak English well enough to answer the question. I am sure that I can't tell you what happened in words that you can't twist into meaning something else."

[PeterUK]

"Why is this man laughing?"

Have you seen the way you look Septic?

[Other Tom]

He's laughing at this, Cleo dear:

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

[PeterUK]

"That is what I learned"
This question is racist.

[roanoke]

Tom-

Looks like you and Ann are ganging up on Al Gore at Glenn's.

Ya both linked to the same NYT article.

[Sue]

I learned that Fitzgerald did not have the evidence I thought he did. I learned that, contrary to conventional wisdom, Cheney is not as smart as I was led to believe he was. Otherwise, this evil outing would have not fallen apart from day one. I have learned that Rove was denied access to the mind ray machine, otherwise Republicans would have maintained control of Congress in 06 (though what that has to do with the Libby trial is not readily apparent, I just needed to work it in somewhere). I have learned that Bush is not as tough as I thought he was or he would have spit in the eye of the Wilson cabal and called them out on the covert operative who allowed her husband to run around Washington telling magnificent untruths about Bush and his administration.

[Sue]

And if Bush allows the democrats to take out Gonzales (I'm not real fond of him, but it is the principal of the matter) I will be so mad I may join the cabal calling for his impeachment!!!!!!

[Tomf]

I predict that if 69% of the American people stumble across Henry Waxman doing congressional overight they will vomit in front of their television sets.

[Sue]

Bush needs to call for a press conference, announce he is the president (some seem to forget that!), he will fire any prosecutor he wishes and no one in his office will appear before Congress to discuss it. And he needs to do it sooner rather than later. If he would just stop being so gentlemanly, the base might actually fight for him again. Protect your damned administration from partisan, political attacks!

[Ranger]

Well, Cboldt and I are having a little debate over at Beldar's blog.

I posted these two questions that I just formulated and I wonder what other legal minds might think about them as well:

Do you think it is ethical for a prosecutor to argue that the defendant can not be believed when he says he expected reporters to co-operate, when the prosecutor knows for a fact that at least one reporter was doing exactly what Libby claims he expected them to do?

Do you think it is ethical to conceal from the trial judge the fact that a reporter was co-operating by describing that reporter's co-operation incompletely to specifically give the impression that said reporter was not co-operating with the investigation before their deposition/Grand Jury testimony, when, in fact, they were?

These questions relate to Fitz's Nov. 16 filing.

[clarice feldman]

The second question is the easiest for me:"Do you think it is ethical to conceal from the trial judge the fact that a reporter was co-operating by describing that reporter's co-operation incompletely to specifically give the impression that said reporter was not co-operating with the investigation before their deposition/Grand Jury testimony, when, in fact, they were?"

I think as an officer of the Court Fitz had an obligation to point out the falsity to NBC counsel and demand they revise the pleading and if they failed to, to notify the Court. Instead he complicitly allowed that pleading to stand and agreed with NBC counsel that if they agreed to the royal appearance he'd never mention it to the Court.

[Semanticleo]

"Cheney is not as smart as I was led to believe he was. Otherwise, this evil outing would have not fallen apart from day one."

Erlichman and Haldeman were smart as well.

Read 'The Arrogance of Power' by Wm Fulbright.

The stupidity of ego is well documented in history.

[clarice feldman]

As to the first question:"Do you think it is ethical for a prosecutor to argue that the defendant can not be believed when he says he expected reporters to co-operate, when the prosecutor knows for a fact that at least one reporter was doing exactly what Libby claims he expected them to do?"

Anyone who was a lawyer as Libby is knew the claim of privilege was a dubious one in the District of Columbia.
Fitz' argument on this was like his manipulation of the public perception of Miller's refusal--He tried consistently to imply that it was Libby's fault for not making his waiver more explicit...when he knew all along that she was protecting other sources and , indeed, the turning point was when he agreed not to ask her about them. (Of course, he reneged on that in the gj, but I maintain he did that knowing she'd lie and say she could not remember who they were and would thus pin her down. She could not later add much w/o risking perjury charges. How believable is her claim that she sat in jail for 85 days to protect sources whose identities she no longer recalls?)

[Ranger]

Clarice,

You should take another look at Fitz's 16 November filing in light of what we now know. He describe's Russert's coperation as agreeing to testify only after recieving personal assurances from Libby's counsel that his waiver was voluntary. In fact, he uses Russert (at least as I read it) as yet another example of the high hurdles the prosecutor had to cross to get reporter co-operation. That to me seems very dishonest.

[Sue]

The stupidity of ego is well documented in history.

You are a walking (figuratively, of course) testament to that everytime you post here Leo.

[Semanticleo]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070312/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_18

His perspective is pure genius.

[MikeS]

I've learned that the CIA can monumentally, catastrophically screw up, and the press will not rest until they prove some Republican somewhere is responsible.

[clarice feldman]

Ranger, of course that is dishonest. All lawyers are officers of the court who are held to high standards on representations to the Court. Federal prosecutors are held to even higher standards.
Will the OPR have the guts to treat his many ethical failings in this case as it does such failings by less prominent DOJ attorneys?

[Ranger]

Well, I guess I should have prefaced this with the statement that what I learned from the tiral is that Tim Russert talked the the investigators right away. That meant that every time Fitz said Libby's claim that he expected reporters to co-operate was false on its face Fitz was lying. Fitz knew at least one reporter had co-operated, just as Libby expected, from the beginning.

[jsyk]

Clarice - I'm sorry but I don't think the DOJ OPR is going to do anything about Fitzgerald. After Judge Walton called him 'one of the most scrupulous prosecutors I have had before me' - I knew the fix was in.

[Other Tom]

"Read 'The Arrogance of Power' by Wm Fulbright."

Really? You want us to read something by the arch-segregationist J. Wm. Fulbright? Really, Cleo dear, have you no shame? Sorry, but I exclude redneck racist bigots from my reading list. (It's my attempt to keep up with the moral preening on the Left.)

[Other Tom]

Concerning the second question, if I were the judge to whom that material was presented I would be extremely annoyed upon learning the complete story--extremely annoyed. So would every federal judge I've ever known.

[Ranger]

Here is how Fitz's characterized Russert's co-operation with the investigation:

Cooper, Miller and Russert moved to quash the subpoenas issued to them, asserting a purported "reporter's privilege" under the First Amendment and federal common law. While all three reporters ultimately testified, ^1...

1 Russert testified on August 7, 2004, after defendant called and asked Russert to speak with his lawyer, and after the government provided Russert with defendant's waiver.

No mention what so ever of Russert's prior co-operation with investigators. In fact, he is relying on Russert's false pleading to present an argument that Russert in fact resisted co-operating.

[clarice feldman]

Me, too. And yet, Walton then proceeded to keep Mitchell from having to testify based on another proffer and affidavit presented by-ta dum--those very same lawyers.
Go figure.

Most of the federal judges I've been before would have bit off Fitz' head and excoriated the NBC counsel.

[clarice feldman]

My last comment was directed to OT.
Ranger, why not work that up into a letter to OPR?

[JimO]

Hello. Sorry, off subject here but I just thought it disturbing yesterday afternoon on Fox News, that our friend, Sheppard Smith, announced officially that global warming is definite and that there is no doubt that we are heading towards terrible flooding and lost of life all around the world. To me, what a jerk.

[clarice feldman]

Shep has the brains of a turnip. What else is new?

[Ranger]

Clarice, I probably should, but I would have to research the operative legal issues and DoJ regs, and I'm supposed to be writing a dissertation at the moment (which I should get back to). Oh, and I'm not even in the US right now, so it would probably have to wait until I get back to the states later this year.

[clarice feldman]

You don't have to do all that work. Just set out the facts, note that there seems to have been a studied dishonesty in the prosecutions representations in this matter and ask whether this conduct is condoned by the OPR when performed by its employees who are, after all, officers of the Court. It can't take more than one-hald hour because you've already laid out the case.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

I'll forgive Shepard Smith. He actually does the news.

Where I never expected to get pummelled by the Global Warming Army is on ESPN watching "Pardon the Interruption". To close yesterday's show, Tony Kornheiser told everyone to go see "the most important film ever made". He was talking about "An Inconvenient Truth".

Oh brother, the media is in a full court press.

[Neo]

I would suggest that the Republicans response to the Schumer and Waxman investigation by trying to tie down as many of the sympathic loose ends as they can.

First, get the CIA referral released.
Second, get the reporters and other persons of interest not called in the trial to appear.

I would assume by now that there really aren't any downside surprises to be had, so the introduction of new stuff only works to the benefit of the Administration and Libby.

If Waxman and Schumer get burned by their own investigation, they will be more inclined in the future to look before they leap.

[Pofarmer]

I don't get my news from the talking heads on TV, I'm sure not gonna get my science from em.

[Pofarmer]

If Waxman and Schumer get burned by their own investigation, they will be more inclined in the future to look before they leap.

Well Schumer has pretty much won round one, I'm afraid.

[PeterUK]

"The stupidity of ego is well documented in history."

In your case Septic,it is the stupidity of the stupid.

[Rick Ballard]

Off Topic (OT just doesn't work anymore),

Michael Yon has agreed to let Fox News have the privilege of carrying his work.

I was very glad to read that Lt. Col. Erik Kurilla has recovered from his wounds and is now leading the 2nd Ranger Battalion.

[SunnyDay]

What I learned: "officer of the court" means nothing.

[clarice feldman]

That is good news, Rick. I don't always read his stuff as often as I should. It is always first rate coverage.

[obsessed]

Sorry, but I exclude redneck racist bigots from my reading list.

while welcoming them with open arms into your political party

[TMF]

spartvcus

"The stupidity of ego is well documented in history."

I know.

Have you read the "Politics of Truth" by Ambassador Joe Wilson?

Or seen a copy of Vanity Fair lately

Or watched that pompous lying gas bag Chuck Schmuer??

[clarice feldman]

Come now, obsessed, that may work w/ area and gender studies majors at your community college, but we've seen the bigots who painted Liberman in Black face, threw oreos at Michael Steele , paint Condi as Aunt Jemima and Colin Powell as a house slave.

What can be more racist that using these denigrating stereotypes against anyone who doesn't lockstep join the left?

[Barney Frank]

And Robert "white nigger" Byrd was expelled from the Democratic caucas, when exactly?

[TMF]

Whoops I meant the other witless troll on the wrong side of history

[PMII]

Unrelated but:

Killer Meat-Eating Frogs Terrorize San Francisco.................

[cathyf]

Link please PMII ?

[Bill in AZ]

Shep Smith is a twit - but he is absolutely correct about global warming, just 40 years late like most of the libs - oh, and not man made. We're at least 40 years into the current maximum solar cycle that is causing the current global warming, and are probably on the downside of the curve. Instead of all the handwringing, folks should be observing it as an historical event not seen in at least 1500 years, maybe even longer. Here in the Southwest, something - probably extended drought caused by a similar but smaller solar peak 900 years ago - caused some of the native cultures to disappear, move elsewhere. Since we have technology and infrastructure to "smooth over" things like droughts here in the SW, we haven't had to move on - but for someone who depended on surface water for survival, it has all but disappeared in the last 20 years.

In a few more years I'll be looking for the Goracle's new movie on the coming ice age.

[clarice feldman]

At the rate he's plumping up Al Gore's movie on the next ice age will have to be made by someone else.