cinnamonape: “And we can also then ask…if it’s “over” then why hasn’t Fitz excused his second Grand Jury?”

A GJ is impanelled to hear evidence in whatever cases are being investigated during the period of its empanelling, not generally for specific cases.

So Fitz hasn’t excused the second GJ because they aren’t there for the Libby case only, but for other ongoing investigations and prosecutors as well.

I’m curious about this…because I thought that Fitz empanelled the second GJ to deal specifically with the issues relating to his charge in the Washington DC District?

Are you saying that this Grand Jury also has to deal with OTHER CASES brought before it by Prosecutors dealing with everything from Internet Spam and Contractor Embezzlement of Federal Contracts…to Organized Crime and Terrorism? That they have to hear testimony on all of those cases? And keep them straight when there are breaks and intervening testimony in other cases?

For two years?

How much are these people getting paid?

LandOfTheFree @ 22

I’m watching “Late Edition with Wolfie”, and he has Vilsack on. Wolfie just showed a clip of Linsday Graham saying “it is not in the US best interest to have a Shia/Sunni bloodbath in Iraq”.

Um, why didn’t you mention that in 2002 or 2003, Senator Graham? Don’t pretend that you didn’t realize this could have been a very likely outcome from Georgie’s War.

The wingnuts endlessly trot out arguments that it will be a disaster if we leave, and every one of them is a much better argument that we should never have gone in the first place.

So, perhaps it’s the war cheerleaders (with their constantly “evolving” theories as to why it was wise to overthrow a sovereign government) who are the intellectually dishonest ones, huh?

No, I must be mistaken. It’s those of us who use facts, reason, historical precidents, and common sense to form opinions.

About Vilsack’s TDS appearance: I must not have been watching closely enough to hear him say that he thinks the Iraqis are not grateful enough for what we’ve done to, ahem, FOR them. I’m repulsed by that argument, which I’ve heard from many-a-neocon, including The Unilateral Decider and his sidekick, DeadEye Cheney. Whenever I discuss the Iraqi quagmire with people who claim the Iraqis who are fighting us are all “terrorists”, I give them this theoretical scenario:

Imagine your modest country was invaded by one of the most powerful militaries in the world. They quickly overthrow your goverment, dismantle the military and fire or arrest the police. Rather than focusing on protecting the people, the occupiers instead let the cities and villages fall into anarchy, focusing their attention on taking control of your country’s riches. Would you just sit back and watch? Wouldn’t you be somewhat upset and concerned for your safety and future?

The occupiers arrest and detain thousands of people, putting some in local prisons to suffer torture and humiliation. Some of your neighbors disappear, and you find out they’ve been sent halfway across the world. Many disappear without a trace.

Wouldn’t you get a gun and try to protect yourself and your family? Wouldn’t you feel somewhat compelled to try and fight for your freedom, to fight for your country, to fight for your survival?

Personally, I have no idea what I would do. It is such an incredible scenario, I can’t imagine it happening to me, in my country, in my city.

I can imagine, however, that if these things happened to me, I would not be “grateful” to the occupiers. I would not feel free to express my anger and my fears, because I wouldn’t be in a democracy, would I? I would be living in fear of the occupying force that is controlling my country and my freedom. That, my friends, is what we’ve brought to Iraq.

How dare anyone say the Iraqis should be grateful.

A GJ is impanelled to hear evidence in whatever cases are being investigated during the period of its empanelling, not generally for specific cases.

So Fitz hasn’t excused the second GJ because they aren’t there for the Libby case only, but for other ongoing investigations and prosecutors as well.

They did not invite us in, did not ask for our help, preferred the devil they knew, had no way to oust Saddam just as we cannot/will not oust Bush until his deadly term is over.

Much harm has been done to our country because of the neocons’ perversion, but more horrors have occured in Iraq to their country and their innocent civilians. Why can’t we say it often, and again and again?

As for presidential candidates, this country’s survival depends on getting it right and the election should be entered into with all the seriousness and soul-searching each of us can muster. It’s tempting to throw out witticisms about the candidates, but over time that can prove disastrous. My hope is we can elect someone who will uphold the Constitution while satisfying most of us we have the right person in the Oval Office.

You got it, and indeed I’ve been logged in. I’ll keep working on the list until you get back. Odd, but tribal and Native American-related issues have been on my mind strongly for a few days now so I’m all ears.

People like me are “intellectually dishonest”. What does this mean?

WASHINGTON – The top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee sought to weaken support for a resolution opposing President Bush’s Iraq war strategy, saying Sunday that supporters are intellectually dishonest.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..co/us_iraq

If I gave you a thoughtful and educated answer, you wouldn’t be able to believe my opinion, would you? After all, I would also be intellectually dishonest – so I’d apparently be lying.

;)

Re Vanna @34 : “Here’s what the conclusion will be: Libby will indeed be convicted. Everyone will let out the huge breath they’ve been holding and realize the balloon is now out of air. It’s over.”

Your take is one of several possibilities. If no other indictments occur in the wake of a Libby conviction, I think what you imagine is more probable….Now if an indictment of another person(s) is announced, or there are superceding indictments for Libby piggy-backed on a conviction in this trial, I think we’re looking at an entirely different playing field. There will be a more concerted effort by the public to ‘get it’ and, with a Libby conviction locked down, the spotlight will be on bad actors in the WH and not on a would be ‘renegade prosecutor’.

Based on what has yet to be completed, an awful lot can still happen
.

And we can also then ask…if it’s “over” then why hasn’t Fitz excused his second Grand Jury?

Why waste their time?

Susan in Iowa @ 29

LandOfTheFree @
22

I’m watching “Late Edition with Wolfie”, and he has Vilsack on. Wolfie just showed a clip of Linsday Graham saying “it is not in the US best interest to have a Shia/Sunni bloodbath in Iraq”.

BTW, am I the only one who cannot see Tom Vilsack without expecting the Aflac duck to pop up out of the corner of the TV screen? Damn you, Jon Stewart! :)

That was in response to Vilsack saying Congress should cut off funding. At least he understands what the real lever is, unlike Joe “nonbinding resolution” Biden. Vilsack sometimes has an “eat-your-spinach” kind of charisma, but he’s a bright, able guy.

You know, I feel like I’d catch a bunch of crap from my Dem friends (the very few I have) for saying this out loud, but I am very turned off by these Dems who keep blaming the Iraqis, which is exactly what Vilsack did on The Daily Show. If they’ve got some good ideas for the war, thank you, thank you very much, but shut yer trap about how ungrateful and uncooperative these poor people are, these people who asked for none of this.

I don’t know how much of that I can overlook, because it turns my stomach. But I know if I am to be a good little Dem and take my medicine, I must behave and let it pass because no one seems to be criticizing them for this.

Au contraire. I brought this up in an online chat a couple of months ago and people almost skewered me for it. Oddly enough, if I am talking about it in person, the discussion is quite amicable.

The first question I have to ask, once people actually allow themselves to listen, is this:

Who, in their right frigging mind, would want another nation to come in and bomb the bejeepus out of them? More to the point, who would expect those same people to be GRATEFUL for it? Yet, we are expected to swallow it hook, line and sinker?

Talk about lack of reality.