patricia92243
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 08:28 AM
Original message |
Poll question: Will Rove/Libby be indicted? Don't answer what you just WANT or |
|
HOPE will happen but what you think will ACTUALLY be the outcome.
Personally, I think they are guilty of some type of monkey business, but there doesn't seem to be enough EVIDENCE to nail them.
I think they will walk.
|
orpupilofnature57
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 08:34 AM
Response to Original message |
1. OO, Some Nambie Pampbie slap on the wrist to appease common decency. |
|
Edited on Sun Oct-16-05 08:36 AM by orpupilofnature57
Shrub has run things like Caligula so far, especially when it comes to his " Brain "
|
POAS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 08:37 AM
Response to Original message |
|
the other is singing like a bird. Guess who!
The singer may still be indicted but on trivial charges or else be named an un-indicted co-conspirator.
|
patricia92243
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Believe it or not - I don't know. Rove to sing???? n/t |
POAS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. That is my assessment.. |
|
based on four "voluntary" appearances before the grand jury.
|
HereSince1628
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 08:47 AM
Response to Original message |
4. The only thing I think, is that the decision is up to the GJ and Fitz |
|
Edited on Sun Oct-16-05 08:49 AM by HereSince1628
As fas as I can tell is we have self-serving statements from folks who've told or had told accounts of their testimony before the GJ.
Rove and Miller reappeared, apparently to clarify/correct testimony. That sort of behavior would be consistent with trying to avoid an obstruction or perjury charge. But it doesn't mean the prosecutor will seek those charges.
The reappearances could also be because they have struck a deal with the prosecutor. But only they would know that.
|
No Exit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 08:55 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Not sure about Rove, but looking at what is public in the Libby |
|
end of the scandal--Libby is definitely exposed. Perjury. And it's clear from Fitzgerald's questioning of Miller, concerning Libby's non-waiver "waiver" and his obvious signals (through his lawyer) to her, that Fitzgerald has an incipient case against Libby for obstruction of justice.
Remember, the braying jackasses/liars, Miller and Novak, are not the only reporters who know stuff about Rove and Libby. Some of those other reporters may actually tell the truth.
|
snippy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 09:06 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Each will be indicted on three or four counts, possibly more. |
|
At least two of the counts against each will involve what the Court of Appeals referred to as "the plot against Wilson." These counts will involve the leaking of classified information and conspiracy to leak classified information. The leak of Plame's identity may be a part of these counts or may be a separate additional count. If it is a separate additional count, there probably will be an additional count of conspiracy relating to this.
The other one or two counts against each will involve one or more counts of perjury, lying to federal investigators, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
I also think it is likely that there will be indictments of other people on similar counts and possibly one or more unindicted co-conspirators.
|
Rowdyboy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 09:44 AM
Response to Original message |
8. Libby indicted, Rove un-indicted co-conspiritor.... |
Clarkie1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-05 10:36 AM
Response to Original message |
9. I believe there is clear and compelling evidence, so yes. n/t |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 18th 2024, 08:53 AM
Response to Original message |