The Libby sentencing

This case was so full of crap that I doubt the conviction will stand on appeal.

There are many reasons I think that, not the least of which is that the judge didnt allow the operatives covert status to be challenged, saying it was immaterial.. yet Fitz submitted the status as covert to the judge in asking for maximum sentence, and the Judge allowed it.
And at least ONE juror's comment suggested they were not properly instructed as he complained that Cheney did not testify. Which fact is immaterial and moot.

But, no matter that or the mindset of the jury, Libby was found guilty and no matter how you feel about it, it needs to play out.
Here's a take that matches mine on it.

The bottom line is that if you expect everyone to follow the rule of law, everyone has to bend to the law.

* In which Toensing says that, as she wrote the thing, Plame did not qualify as 'covert'. As Morrisey says, that is a non-starter.. Libby was convicted of perjury.

The point that needs to be addressed is the order of testimony considering that the case might have been closed prior to Libby's inadvertent {IMO} perjury.

 

All he has to do is serve until Jan. of 09, and then he'll get a last minute pardon from Bush as he's walking out the door.

 

I think it's going to be overthrown... in fact I'm thinking both the judge and Fitzgerald expect it to be.

If not, I only hope that Dubya reinserts his spine and issues a pardon right after the last appeal is exhausted.

And here's why... the most damning evidence against Libby was in his own notes, which presumably would have been looked at by himself or his staff as they were being handed over.
Now if he knew what his own notes said in them, why the hell would he come up with a different story on the stand?

 

I don't know much about the specifics on this case, but as far as the jury's improper consideration of the fact that Cheney didn't testify, etc., I doubt that alone is grounds for overturning the conviction.

Jury verdicts can, for the most part, only be overturned for improper external influences, like jurors reading the newspaper or a juror being threatened by someone, things like that...they could flip a coin to determine guilt or innocence and their decision would be unimpeachable.

As for the other stuff, though, I have no idea.

 

Blow the whistle on WHAT, don?

That Cheney doesnt like Plame or Wilson?

Your mentality.....