. . . of what it will look like. This is off another board where there are a few wingnuts. I tried to clean off the spittle, but couldn't get it all off:
An understanding of the phrase "perjury technicality," spoken off the cuff and clearly not couched in adequate language to fully explain it is this:
That either Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, and others, reporters, etc. in an effort to recollect how they came to know what I know firsthand virtually was known or available to be known in D. C., to anyone who wanted to know, to wit, that the Flame had been undercover CIA, under light cover, to be more accurat, was of such little importance or consequence that it went under their radar of how they first knew it.
No doubt they attempted to remember, unlike both Clintons on their nefarious affairs, who claimed lack of recollection 100s of times, and these forthcoming Republican administrative likely first remembered one source of their information, then later another memory surfaced of another source, with times of hearing this same information not only vague because the information seemed so inconsequential, even boring, but also such worthless information that they did not attempt to keep the sources or detailed information in their minds at the time, so no doubt their various and vague memories could be judged to be conflicting in a sham attempt to justify this insignificant matter's waste of our time and funds, which the flame's CIA boss has also apprised the facts of her cover to be, because it was so commonly known of?, he gave her status no merited attention, to the point of not recollecting if she was under real cover, now or ever.
So. indeed Kay's phrasing may not be adequate for all to understand that one can be indicted as Delay was, by a prosecutor who dismissed grand juries who would not indict a ham sandwich, as their propensity is to, And a perjury technicality may be brought if statements seem too vague,eliciting an obstructionj of justice charge, no doubt due to insufficient or what may appear to be conflicting statements, because they were given at different times when enhanced surfacing memory more accurately pinpointed the time, place and source of these trivial events when Flame was referred to, to get at the true source of who sent her husband, clearly not Cheney, as the truely lying husband touted, also more importantly lying about yellowcake.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(379 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
