ncteechur
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-06-05 10:59 PM
Original message |
| The other question is ..... |
|
No matter who the actual leaker was.. who else knew?
Cheney?
Scooter?
Hughes?
Bush?
Rove?
Andy Card?
Gannon?
Whoever has known is now guilty of obstruction of justice. It is IMPOSSIBLE that no one in the west wing knows who the leaker is. It is abso-f**ching-lutely impossible. There is the leak and there is the subsequent cover-up. That may be the scandal--the coverup--more than the actual leak.
|
| Virginian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-06-05 11:01 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. And then there is the second source. |
|
One leaked and the other confirmed. There were two White House sources.
|
| nadinbrzezinski
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-06-05 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 2. and in case yuou wonder there is only one |
|
crime in teh US code that rquires two sources, TREASON....
Should make you think what fitz is after.
|
| Geoff R. Casavant
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-06-05 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Treason is also the only crime defined in the Constitution, and it is limited to levying war against the US or giving aid and comfort to its enemies. So a literal treason indictment seems farfetched, but there are lots of other crimes out there that were created to get around the constitutional limitations on actual treason.
|
| phiddle
(749 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-06-05 11:07 PM
Response to Original message |
| 3. Toss in conspiracy charges for good measure |
| Wabbajack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jul-07-05 01:42 AM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts)     |
Thu Apr 18th 2024, 03:27 AM
Response to Original message |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
