Another Puilitzer Prize Witness...
Libby Live: David Sanger Fitzgerald: I believe you're the third pulitzer prize winner to testify. Has Judy shared any pulitzers?
DS I believe she has
posted by Patrick J. Fitzgerald at 2/12/2007
Feb 12, 2007
Libby Live: David Sanger Fitzgerald: I believe you're the third pulitzer prize winner to testify. Has Judy shared any pulitzers?
DS I believe she has
About Me
- Name: Patrick J. Fitzgerald
- Location: U.S. Attorney On Assignment - WDC, Illinois, United States
Think Globally Prosecute Locally - I grew up in Flatbush, kept my nose clean, went to law school. Now that I am in Chicago and D.C. I have found that the rampant graft and corruption to be a travesty - a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. ---Favorite quote --- "Conditional love is an oxymoron." - Yours truly
Previous Posts
- "Junkyard" Witness...
- Mixed Grill...
- Team America - Veg-O-matic Of Justice...
- Fight Or Flight..?
- No More Than He Already Is...
- Political Imagery By Stephen Pitt...
- Commence "Guilty On All Counts" Spin...
- The Long Arm Of The Law...
- Pants On Fire...
- I Need A Bromo Seltzer...
9 Comments:
Fitz!!
Quite a looker...
LOL!
When is it going to be Jeff Gannon's turn to testify? All hands on deck.
Thanks for the info...very interesting.
Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening folks!
TGIM! And Lincoln's birthday!
Interesting defense witness today: Sanger, Pincus, and Woodward.
Interresting highlights:
Wells: I strongly disagree with Fitz' characterization of what took place. The obstruction count was based on three false statements. We wanted it clear that on terms of the obstruction that there was nothing wih Grossman and Miller, What the obstruction count was predicated on was that obstruction was based on three-prong statement. I opened on it. The Jury can consider June 23 and July 8 in terms of what Libby knew.
Fitz: I'll briefly respond, The vice in taking language out, as opposed to a count is that you're asking them to rule beforehand. I think the jury could find that the description of July 12 was a lie, but not using the language in the count, the jury can use that evidence against Mr. Libby, they can also use that evidence that when he said the first time he told her on July 12, that that was a lie. This proposed instruction would focus on July 12–and the language in the indictment, even though they were never going to see the indictment–would lead them to focus inappropriately on July 12.
Wells; We're not going to address that conversation. It has been dismissed. The jurors should know that it has been dismissed.
Yup, it is what is expected. Wells is trying to twisted Fitz's charge with obstruction of justice. Me thinks Wells is aiming to have the one count of making false statements dismissed.
And this gotcha moment of Libby as Fitz crossexamines Pincus:
Fitz: Goes to paragraphs starting "CIA's decision." Is it fair to say Libby was a source. I'll read you a line. "The CIA's decision was triggered by an aide."
Fitz: Did Libby tell you it was the VP
WP: He told me it was an aide.
F: That's clear in your mind
WP: Certainly did not.
Nice try Wells of trying to pin Fleischer as the gov't source to Pincus. But, Fleischer discuss with Fleischer after Novak's article.
And Woodward on the stand was a wuss but nevertheless, both Woodward and Sanger were told that Plame was a CIA analyst on WMD. But, neither Woodward, Sanger, and Pincus did not know "Valerie Plame's" covert CIA identity.
Good point SPB here comes that aide story again. Nice that Sanger and Miller share a Pulitzer not Plame. I guess they both needed more money as the prize money didn't last long. Now the jurors have heard just how deep in the cover up Libby really was with the Powell speech, and how smart he is as he helped lie to the United Nations so lying in this case is small beans.
HOW LUCKY FOR THE US MEDIA THAT THIS BOMB SUPPOSEDLY MADE IN IRAN BEARS ENGLISH MARKINGS
Also, Iran gets its weapons, including mortars, from Russia. Russian mortars do NOT use 81MM rounds! They use 82mm.
AND, Modern Iran uses a solar Hijri calendar that is 621 years less than the Western solar calendar, so if this munition were really made in Iran. the date should read 1384 or 1385 (Wikipedia errs in showing it as 1427), rather than 2006! The reason for the uncertainty about those two dates is that the Iranian new year happens in our March. In any event, the numerals should be in Farsi.
whatreallyhappened.com
HOW LUCKY FOR THE US MEDIA THAT THIS BOMB SUPPOSEDLY MADE IN IRAN BEARS ENGLISH MARKINGS
Yeah isn't that something? these old men act like 12 year old boys in thinking they will get away with more hype.
Peter Pace said he can't go along with a hit on Iran. Said it really bothered him so many soldiers mothers were calling him a coward for not standing up to Bush
Rock The Casbah
Post a Comment
<< Home