Powered by TypePad

« In Which I Quibble Vociferously | Main | And So This Is Fitzmas... »

March 06, 2007



Arrowhead--your comment at 10:08 was the most perceptive on this thread so far. Yes, Bush was incredibly naieve to require the level of cooperation w/ Fitz's witchhunt that he did. Will he ever learn that sometimes it's not smart to "turn one's cheek." His father made a similar mistake during the 1992 campaign when in response to badgering from the MSM, he promised that he would not conduct a "negative campaign" (so he unilaterally disarmed--and lost as a result).

TM--is there anyway that you can remove some of the idiot cockroaches (e.g. shaman, Larry Johnson, etc.) on this site? They kinda spoil the ambience.

Rick Ballard


This is the biggest victory for the Copperheads since Ned Lamont beat Joe Lieberman. They need to expend some venom to show their joy.



"The jury system has been outgunned by the antics of lawyers who are allowed by their brethren the judges to run gun shot over justice. No other profession can waste more time or money ruining the lives of so many...

This verdict just proves what a farce the system has become."

I'm afraid you have hit upon the terrible problem facing this country. Without faith in the justice system, law and order will have a difficult time prevailing.



...That so many can't see this verdict as a revelation about the truth regarding this administration is ample proof of that hypothesis...

Guilty verdict->truth of the administration...Joe and Val's lies go unchallenged

It must be nice, maybe I'll take the blue pill tonight-it is some much easier


Jake - but not the one

Rich, you've been on the blue pill for a long time. Take the red one for a change. Life on the edge, with your eyes wide open, may not be fun, but it is way more real.




I don't know if you're still following this, but Batson has (largely) been extended to "protected classes" in general. That is, no exlusions based on race, sex, gender.

Political party and economic status are not protected classes; hence a party may exercise a peremptory challenge at will based on those classifications.

There are on-going attempts to expand the categories, and off the top of my head I cannot recall whether every circuit disallows discrimination for every protected class. But it's a good general starting point.


And RoyF, if you don't want to buy any bs, don't read it.

Best start with anything written by the Bush admin, however. :)

Jake if you will clearly mark your post at the top I will gladly scroll by the BS.

And in case you missed it in my previous post, its you I consider full of bull shit. Not President Bush and his Administration.

As I ststed above I listen and/or read everything the Administration puts forth.


Judge Napolitano (sp?) on Fox stated that there it was not likely the verdict would be overturned on appeal. When more statements from lawyers and judges come out, I'll be happy to point you to them.

Well if Judge Napolitano on Fox said it, it should be codified. But I'm a little puzzled since you said lots of lawyers and Judges share his opinion - but they haven't come out yet? Are they all in the closet?

Are you all even reading what I'm writing?

Sometimes my eyes glaze over when I hear dumb stuff repeated. I guess I'll just have to wait for all the lawyers to show up. Are they the same ones who told you there are no grounds for appeal?



I believe that would be "Reality Based" no...?

I believe there are enough of those present today (on the Red pill)...



from a juror:: we supposed the trial was about, or had been initially about, which was who leaked Plame’s identity.

And the jury was not supposed to speculate on this point, and sylvia, bless her heart:
Guilty of leaking, motive for lieing: beat this drum over and over again



Although the criminal trial has ended, the legal wrangling is far from over. In a lawsuit filed July 13, Plame and Wilson accused Libby, Cheney and presidential adviser Karl Rove of violating their rights to free speech, privacy and equal protection by conspiring to reveal Plame's identity. The suit has essentially been on hold while the criminal trial played out, and it may go away if the three defendants win their argument that, as government officials, they are immune from getting sued. Cheney, as a sitting vice president, has the best chance of getting full immunity, but the other two, as behind-the-scenes guys, may have a trickier case to make. If the lawsuit goes forward, the process of legal discovery may allow each side to demand piles of information from the other. That prospect should keep Plame and Wilson in the public eye for quite a while longer.

Jake - but not the one

BY Jake - just so Roy can skip over and not have to think even so much as to post a response.

Not that his responses actually indicate much thinking.

Deagle, if you believe the Tom Magurie cohort to be on the red pill, you are more than color blind.

Reality is what hit Libby today.

Reality is Bush hovering at 30% - and dropping.

Reality is Walter Reed and the neglect of the wounded.

Reality is a quagmire in Iraq that didn't have to be.

Reality is nuclear weapons in N Korea that didn't have to be.

When you mix power and incompetence, this is the reality we all get.


M. Simon

American Thinker says the informed comment here.

I'm a prime example of the mis-informed.


M. Simon


Not all folks dislike Bush for the same reason.

Peresonally, I hate him because he hasn't nuked Iran.

I'm hoping he will wise up soon.

M. Simon


Saint Carter made the nuke deal with the Norks under Clinton.

The man deserves a peace prize not denigration.

Barney Frank


I thought about amending my answer after I posted it but didn't know if you even read the original.

I was going to add that I was vaguely aware that race had been a sticky issue in peremptory challenges but had never heard of political affiliation being such a case. I did not know gender was held to be the same as race.

In any case considering the limited number of challenges one is allowed it seems to me it would take a pretty useless attorney to be caught doing it.


"they can then proudly point out, that the Bush Administration will go down in history as being equally corrupt as the Clinton Administration....!!"


When history records the final tally, the Bush Crew will make the Nixon and Reagan criminals
seem more like Mr Rogers Neighborhood.


Right jake(bnto)...

Life on the edge, with your eyes wide open, may not be fun, but it is way more real...

Who's taking the blue pill

A wilderness of mirrors...jake(bnto), you can't even see who your enemies are



Sorry. "exclusions" "race, sex, and religion." Please don't read that as including gender identification.

I'll go look up the cases. For some reason I recall this coming up in a recent Scotus session.



You tend to take all that is going wrong today and blame it on the Administration. Of course some of your complaints go back several administrations...so I take it either you don't follow politics or are a bit one-sided.

TM along with most of the commenters discussed this trial factually. Wish I could say the same regarding other sites.



...Reality is what hit Libby today.

Reality is Bush hovering at 30% - and dropping.

Reality is Walter Reed and the neglect of the wounded.

Reality is a quagmire in Iraq that didn't have to be.

Reality is nuclear weapons in N Korea that didn't have to be.

al-Qeada+AQ Khan+Supernote

You'll be able to go back to sleep in Jan 2009 with Hillary's 100 hours to Utopia agenda...bread, land, peace...


Sara (Squiggler)

Reality is Bush hovering at 30% - and dropping.

Reality is Walter Reed and the neglect of the wounded.

Reality is a quagmire in Iraq that didn't have to be.

Reality is nuclear weapons in N Korea that didn't have to be.


Who cares what Bush's poll numbers are, he isn't running for office.

No one has claimed "neglect" of the wounded, it is neglect of building maintenance. The wounded are not complaining about the level of care, even as they complain about some of the bureaucratic snafus caused by years of stupid regulations and the withholding of funds. And let's not forget the lefties spitting in the face of a wounded soldier or sending them disgusting Christmas cards. Who trusts a lefty to give a shit about our soldiers?

There is no quagmire in Iraq and saying so will never make it so. Ask those serving there. Ask the Iraqis. Get your news from reliable sources instead of MSNBC.

Blame Clinton for N. Korea's nukes.


...When I see RichatUF say he distances himself from her comments, then compares my comments to the "thought police," it does lead me to wonder how much he really cares...

Or ask, I don't, but I understand the game


Sissy Willis

Trackbacks aren't working. Here's my post:

"Incoherent with glee"


Lady Sara

I myself did 14 years in the military dropping out to take care of my disabled mother when my father passed withing a week of my EAOS when I would probably have reenlisted if the situation wasn't as it was presented to me. I have no regrets, I feel I did the responsible thing.

Even with that situation occurring, I manage to progress to my own financial independence and thus not have to rely on the VA system. I had endured a couple of reactions with them in my buildup to my independence and I am pleased I was able to give myself that separation of need.

The VA system and military medical in general were cut and reduced in the era of the "peace dividend". That left the system ill prepared to cope with the number of clients they have to deal with now, especially because we have gotten better by leaps and bounds of people surviving battle field wounds, but requiring potentially long term treatment afterwards. In essence we are a victim of our own success. It has caused issues, now hopefully with all the notice it will be properly compensated for.

Military care has been a victim of negative momentum. It is a shame it took coming to this to to prompt action. From here we will have to see how things progress for correction. Even with the coverage, we see it noted that this is building 18 in the hospital complex. Do we know if this is the only substandard quarters or are we being led to believe with little basis we should project it onto all other facilities there with no additional data and have we been given any contextual background. My skeptic nature says probably no.


the air went out of the fever swamps breathless stories as soon as it was revealed that the non partisan gunslinger in Novak's case who revealed the so called covert identity of Plame was not Libby, not CHeney, not Bush, not Rove, but Armitage. This was known from day one, yet the prosecutor still went forward on a fishing expedition.
For all the lefties, considering all the smoke and mirrors and conspiracy theories were disproved when the leaker was revealed, how are you viewing this trial as anytying other than a witchhunt?

Seriously. Was Armitage working at Bushs's behest to undermine Plame? If not,then other than shaudenfreude and your own hypocricy what exactly are you celebrating?

As for bias of the juries, if they truly were not biased why didnt they ask "Where's Armitage" instead of "where's Rove"? Because clearly as has been proven and revealed for anyone to read, Armitage was the leaker and not Rove, and he wasn't doing it to "out a critic of the war" but just because he was known for spreading juicy gossip.


As for bias of the juries, if they truly were not biased why didnt they ask "Where's Armitage" instead of "where's Rove"?

That's a great point!


"It's not like he lied about something SERIOUS, like a blow-job.

So what, he covered up for Cheney, and helped destroy a CIA operation. BIG DEAL!


Yes, Clinton IS worse, actually: he was the President of the United States who LIED in his tesitimony to a federal prosecutor (about having sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky). He didn't have a faulty memory; it was a case of the chief law enforcement officer of the United States lying on the witness stand. What a great example to every American! It doesn't matter how insignificant YOU think the event was, and it proved how much Clinton thought that he was above the law.

This trial wasn't about a CIA op being destroyed (where the hell did you ever get that erroneous fantasy?), because...

Fitz didn't charge anyone / anything with "outing" a CIA agent, because...

Plame isn't a CIA "agent" or "spy"...she simply works there as an analyst. If she were truly covert, you would have NEVER seen her face or seen her photo spread in Vanity Fair or seen her drive to Langley. Period. Dot.

Fitz, in essence, spent our hard-earned tax dollars to prosecute a man for having a FAULTY memory. Libby couldn't remember if he said "X" on Wednesday or whether he said "X" on Monday.

Fact...Armitage pushed Plame's name around and didn't get as much as a second look from Fitz.

Fact...(repeat after me...) Everyone who works at the CIA is not a spy, especially if you have a bad dye job and pose for Vanity Fair.

Opinion...Journalists are a smarmy lot.

Fact...Libby should have taken ginko biloba.

Fact...Fitz couldn't make a case for his original investigation, so he side-stepped to Plan B...make a mountain out of a mole hill.


Larry Johnson

Obviously you've been too close to the engines and more is impaired than simply your hearing. You did not work at CIA. You have zero experience at the CIA. I, however, trained with Valerie. Every single member of our class was undercover. You can also ask Jim Marcinkowski, Mike Grimaldi, and Brent Cavan. They are no longer with the Agency and can confirm the same fact.

FACT--Valerie was a case officer in the Directorate of Operations. Ty Drumheller, retired DO Chief of the European division can confirm that.

FACT--Although Valerie was not "an analyst", analysts do work undercover. I held a cover position until the day I left the CIA.

Please deal with real facts instead of the wild fantasies of your vivid imagination.

Tom Maguire

From amy:

If you all refuse to get it, that's fine. The fact is that if pardoned Libby no longer has the protection of the Fifth Amendment in relation to the charges he was found guilty of and can be forced to testify about them.

Amy, I am convinced that you are convinced that this is a compelling talking point (and which I have certainly seen elsewhere.)

But honestly - if Congress asks him about the marked-up Cheney op-ed, does a pardon for his testimony about chats with Cooper and Russert really matter? He would be telling brand new lies (or not) if he got onto the Cheney op-ed topic.

But here is a thought - if we all agree that there is no underlying crime for which he might be charged, why would he have a Fifth Amendment issue at all?

"Yes, Cheney and I discussed Plame in the wek of July 7" - not a crime to do that.

"BTW, Cheney told me she was clasiified!". OK, maybe worth lying about. But if Fitzgerald had found anyone to tell him that Cheney had been apprised of her classified status, we would have heard it, and Cheney would have been called. Go Fish.

JM Hanes

Larry Johnson:




I'd take it up with the CIA, Fitz, and State then, not us. Armitage took info from a State Dept memo, told Novak, who asked the CIA who confirmed her employment.

And fitz didn't charge anyone involved in that chain for the leak.


I'd take it up with the CIA, Fitz, and State then, not us. Armitage took info from a State Dept memo, told Novak, who asked the CIA who confirmed her employment.

The comments to this entry are closed.