justiceischeap
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:13 PM
Original message |
I doubt Scooter goes to trial: My Theory |
|
If Scooter goes to trial, then people like Cheney can and probably would be called to testify. I'd imagine that he and his former boss and Cheney's boss do not want him on the stand, under oath (though apparently he doesn't understand that concept), answering any kind of questions related to this.
If anyone in the WH inner circle were called to testify and were involved in this, they'd either have to plead the fifth (not good for 2006-08), claim executive priviledge or be forthright (like that would happen). I just can't see anyone involved in this being willing to sit on a stand and have to answer tough questions. Pleading the fifth or claiming executive priviledge doesn't look good to the masses, sheeple don't like secrets when it comes to trials, they sure love their court tv, it's legal gossip.
Just my two cents on this.
|
rzemanfl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:18 PM
Response to Original message |
1. If Fitzgerald is smart, that would mean Libby would have to plead |
|
guilty to all five counts. As John Dean said, "let's see how much heat this firewall can take."
|
cynatnite
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Either plead guilty or go to trial... |
|
where all his buddies will have to testify in open court.
Scooter pleads guilty and it's off to jail. If bush pardons him, it'll be hell in 2006 and 2008 for the repukes. Lot's of fodder.
If he doesn't, then it's to trial. And I don't think we'd have to wait until after midterms for that to start.
:bounce: I'm loving it!
|
dflprincess
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
or cut a deal by singing.
|
madeline_con
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:22 PM
Response to Original message |
2. "... claim executive priviledge ..." |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-29-05 09:23 PM by madeline_con
"... sheeple don't like secrets when it comes to trials ..."
Given the current atmosphere ie homeland security and secret gulags where "terror threats" are routinely tortured, I think they'll be able to cite "national security" and actually get away with it! :mad:
EDIT: site and cite are 2 different words. :eyes:
|
justiceischeap
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. The only problem with that |
|
Is how can they justify that after having already outted the CIA officer? If that indeed happened, I could see a prosecutor's reply being, "Well, Mr. Libby didn't seem too concerned about national security when discussing Mrs. Wilson, a covert CIA agent, with a handful of journalists."
|
madeline_con
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
It's been said by Rush and other fat ugly pundits that she wasn't anything more than a desk jockey.
The jury may fall for that sort of defense. (?)
|
OldLeftieLawyer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:27 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Two words to keep in mind: |
justiceischeap
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. If a presidential pardon was given |
|
pre-trial, couldn't that be considered obstruction of justice?
|
OldLeftieLawyer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
Look up "Richard Nixon." You'll learn a lot.
The answer to your question is "no," but if you read about Nixon, you'll see why.
|
rzemanfl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
13. Shouldn't the question be asked now of *, "If Libby is convicted |
|
do you intend to/have you already issued him a pardon?"
|
OldLeftieLawyer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
16. Wouldn't that be a great question? |
|
"No, Mr. President," Dan Rather said, when Nixon gave him attitude about running for something, "are you?"
The days of reporters asking anything of any substance, and getting a coherent, let alone honest, answer, are over - at least for now.
JFK used to answer questions extemporaneously, and he did it in perfect paragraphs.
This cocksucker can't even get a Who song lyric right.
|
cynatnite
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. And if he does it before the 2006 elections... |
|
It'll cost them, IMO.
The only time I see him pardoning Libby is on his way out of office and by that time there will be a trial with the key players going under oath.
The only way to keep a lid on this is for Libby to plead guilty with no bargaining at all. That'll be costly as well, IMO.
|
OldLeftieLawyer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
12. Read the Bush family history |
|
The males, when they're lame duck Presidents, don't give a fuck about anything but saving their own asses.
Read about Christmas Eve, 1992, and what Poppy Fuckface did on that day.
|
cynatnite
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
14. Do you think Libby can put off a trial for that long? |
|
If bush waits until he's on his way out of office as his daddy did, it seems to me a trial would happen before then. I can't see the criminal process taking so long, but I'm not lawyer.
|
OldLeftieLawyer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
Fuckface can pardon him tonight, if he wants to. And there's nothing anyone can do about it.
A lame duck is a lame duck, and this arrogant little asswipe thinks he's fucking indomitable. And why shouldn't he? Until the Miers withdrawal (which, I'm sure, he's convinced is someone else's fault), the little prick has gotten away with everything he's tried, so why wouldn't he think he could pardon anyone he wants and not pay any penalty?
It's not like he's running any more, and if you think he gives a rat's ass about anyone else running in '06, you're smoking something that I think you should share with OldLeftie.
|
cynatnite
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
19. I was operating on the assumption bush cared about his party... |
Marr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 09:50 PM
Response to Original message |
10. I'm expecting Libby's lawyer to delay the trial as long as possible, and |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-29-05 09:53 PM by Marr
once the delays are up, he pleads guilty and simply waits for the end of Bush's term and the pardon that will surely come with it.
At least, I think that's the plan. But even if it is, he'd have to realize that he could be in prison for the rest of his life if Bush were impeached. And impeachment is a distinct possibility if the Republicans lose Congress in 2006.
|
rzemanfl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
15. I think the pardon is already signed and in Libbys lawyer's safe |
caligirl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-29-05 11:20 PM
Response to Original message |
18. Don't think I totally agree here. Immediately after Fitz's press confer. |
|
the WH and RNC came out with strong statements of support for Libby. I interpret that to mean Bush supprts him as long as Libby protects them. As in Libby can't recall information he had no problem recalling before this. Libby is only getting their support if he doesn't reveal all he knows. I don't think Fitz will put up with 'I suddenly don't recall'. No plea bargain there.
But a guilty plea by Libby without a reduced sentence would mean the WH fix is in. Libby goes to jail. The WH cannot let this go to trial. Libby won't get any leniancy from Fitz unless Libby talks.
Libby is caught and gets srewed at both ends. Whats the price of his freedom.
|
radfringe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-30-05 03:55 AM
Response to Original message |
|
--- Will Libby "flip" or won't he? I doubt he will "flip" unless more serious charges are leveled against him. At the moment he's the fall-guy-of-the-month and this is just fine and dandy with the bushies. There's probably some deal in the future for him via the bushies, i.e. 'you take the blame and we'll take care of you'
---- Will he go to trial or won't he? Timing is everything in the political portion of the game. Repugs are already distancing themselves from bush*, they know voters are pissed at them and bush*. with the 2006 mid-terms next year - "Scooter's" lawyers will have to decide whether or not to press for a quick trial or seek delays.
A quick trial may get this mess over and done in a short time, leaving sufficient time for repugs to spin their damage control before 2006 mid-terms heat up.
If the lawyers decide on delay tactics - can they delay it past the 2006 mid-terms, thus avoiding further tainting the repugs?
Predictions: look for Scooter to make a book deal, land a cushy lobbiest job and most likely be pardoned. Meanwhile over 2000 men and women have died and thousands wounded and we still don't know the real reason for invading Iraq.
|
Jim__
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-30-05 07:41 AM
Response to Original message |
21. How can Libby avoid trial? |
|
Plead guilty to all 5 counts? If he doesn't offer up some info, Fitz can ask the judge for a harsh sentence - probably 8 to 10 years. That's an awful lot of loyalty. Libby's not going to do that.
Cut a deal? That means he has to talk. He's not going to blow any smoke up Fitz's ass. If he talks, he's going to tell the truth.
Die before trial? I don't see him committing suicide over this and any murder's going to shine the light where the admin doesn't want it shined.
Libby's between a rock and a hard place; and he has plenty of time to think about his situation. My bet, eventually, Libby rolls.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 01:15 AM
Response to Original message |