Why is it every time Fitzgerald says “hi” I have food in my mouth?

here’s a theory

he’s a shy single guy, and you’re an attractive single woman

obviously you don’t understand how the shy guys always screw up their approaches toward attractive single women

that’s why the prom queen always ends up dating the capitan of the football team (Cuz the smart guys from the chess club always make their moves at the wrong time)

it’s a karma thing

(ducking and running)

it’s just a theory

Mason @ 243

Here’s my take on the jury’s question. The issue isn’t whether Libby lied to Cooper; the issue is whether Libby lied to the FBI.

The outcome of this count necessarily depends on the FBI agent’s testimony regarding what Libby said about his conversation with Cooper. Did Libby lie to the FBI when he told the agent that he told Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but that he (i.e., Libby) did not know if this was true (i.e., that Mrs. Wilson worked for the CIA). The jury should find him guilty on this count, if they decide that he lied to the FBI about what he said to Cooper. They should acquit, if they decide that he truthfully recounted what he said to Cooper even if he lied to Cooper.

Cooper disputed Libby’s recollection of their conversation. Don’t forget what Cooper disputed: He disputed what the FBI said Libby told them about the conversation. If the jury believes Cooper told the truth about what Libby told him and the jury believes that the FBI agent told the truth about what Libby said about that conversation, then the jury should convict Libby on Count III.

Make sense, or did I mess it up even more?

There’s a bit more to this. Libby also asserted to the FBI that not only did he say the above to Cooper [Statemade made], but that this conversation supported his position that AT THE TIME he did not “recall” that Wilson’s wife was a CIA employee [content of statement itself].

So he was not only lying about what he [said] to Cooper…he was also lying to the FBI about his knowledge at the time [content].

Thus the juries question
Page 74 of the jury instructions, “Count three of the indictment alleges that Mr. Libby falsely told the FBI on October 14 or November 26, 2003, that during a conversation with M. Cooper of Time Magazine on July 12, 2003, Mr. Libby told Mr. Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but that Mr. Libby did not know of this was true. (i.e., is the charge that the statement was made or about theh content of the statement itself)

I think Libby is screwed any way one parses this.

Option 1- If Libby MADE the statement then he is lying to THE FBI about his belief at the TIME he spoke to Cooper that he did not recall Cheney telling him about Valerie Wilson working at the FBI. This is the conclusion whether or not he made the statement to Cooper. He was, in this parsing, only using the conversation with Cooper to support his assertion about “forgetting”. If he didn’t forget…then he lied to the FBI by not saying that he lied to Cooper. Libby was using the Cooper conversation as factual support to his assertion that he “forgot”. This doesn’t require believing Cooper at all.

Option 2) Libby fabricated the details of the conversation with Cooper out of thin air. Again, this would support the assertion that he “forgot”. But if the jurors believe Cooper, then Libby lied to the FBI about the content of the conversation.

Either way, Libby seems to be screwed IF the jurors have already resolved that Libby didn’t “forget” the Cheney conversation.

I’m satisfied as long as Libby’s screwed, blued, and tatooed!!!!!!!!

Here’s my take on the jury’s question. The issue isn’t whether Libby lied to Cooper; the issue is whether Libby lied to the FBI.

The outcome of this count necessarily depends on the FBI agent’s testimony regarding what Libby said about his conversation with Cooper. Did Libby lie to the FBI when he told the agent that he told Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but that he (i.e., Libby) did not know if this was true (i.e., that Mrs. Wilson worked for the CIA). The jury should find him guilty on this count, if they decide that he lied to the FBI about what he said to Cooper. They should acquit, if they decide that he truthfully recounted what he said to Cooper even if he lied to Cooper.

Cooper disputed Libby’s recollection of their conversation. Don’t forget what Cooper disputed: He disputed what the FBI said Libby told them about the conversation. If the jury believes Cooper told the truth about what Libby told him and the jury believes that the FBI agent told the truth about what Libby said about that conversation, then the jury should convict Libby on Count III.

Make sense, or did I mess it up even more?

There’s a bit more to this. Libby also asserted to the FBI that not only did he say the above to Cooper [Statemade made], but that this conversation supported his position that AT THE TIME he did not “recall” that Wilson’s wife was a CIA employee [content of statement itself].

So he was not only lying about what he [said] to Cooper…he was also lying to the FBI about his knowledge at the time [content].

Thus the juries question
Page 74 of the jury instructions, “Count three of the indictment alleges that Mr. Libby falsely told the FBI on October 14 or November 26, 2003, that during a conversation with M. Cooper of Time Magazine on July 12, 2003, Mr. Libby told Mr. Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but that Mr. Libby did not know of this was true. (i.e., is the charge that the statement was made or about theh content of the statement itself)

I think Libby is screwed any way one parses this.

Option 1- If Libby MADE the statement then he is lying to THE FBI about his belief at the TIME he spoke to Cooper that he did not recall Cheney telling him about Valerie Wilson working at the FBI. This is the conclusion whether or not he made the statement to Cooper. He was, in this parsing, only using the conversation with Cooper to support his assertion about “forgetting”. If he didn’t forget…then he lied to the FBI by not saying that he lied to Cooper. Libby was using the Cooper conversation as factual support to his assertion that he “forgot”. This doesn’t require believing Cooper at all.

Option 2) Libby fabricated the details of the conversation with Cooper out of thin air. Again, this would support the assertion that he “forgot”. But if the jurors believe Cooper, then Libby lied to the FBI about the content of the conversation.

Either way, Libby seems to be screwed IF the jurors have already resolved that Libby didn’t “forget” the Cheney conversation.

What would you expect a ‘fair’ sentence to be?

Everyone talks about the maximum as though it is a mandatory sentence. But seeing how we have a man in his 50s who has been not only law abiding his whole life, but a public servant to boot… what would the judge do in that case?

Sort of like, Aldrich Ames…or Robert Hanssen…or Jonathan Pollard?

He could get anything from five years each count running consecutively (not likely) to a suspended sentence and a fine? Martha Stewart got a 1000 years, Bill Clinton got to stay on as President.

I don’t recall that Bill Clinton obstructed justice or perjured himself in a National Security investigation about the exposure of a classified CIA officer involved in Covert Operations.

I also don’t recall that Clinton lied about something that would have been criminal for him to reveal given his Security Clearance training.

And I don’t think Clinton’s lies about a blow job served to conceal from the Prosecutor whether or not a Conspiracy to leak that CIA Officer’s identity occurred.

And BTW Clinton was NEVER Criminally Charged…in fact it’s doubtful that any President would be for even far more severe acts. That’s the nature of the position. One can impeach the President…but only when they leave office can they be criminally charged. Note that after the impeachment imbroglio that Ken Starr never even bothered. The whole issue was becase the charge was undertaken for political reasons…not for criminal ones.

In this case, leaking an Intelligence agents identity…has repercussions that affect the capability of agents and sources that go well beyond that of lying about a BJ.

Btw… the average prison stay for someone found guilty of perjury is 3.2 years.

And few relate to issues of National Security on this scale.

BTW The lie that related to Russert bordered on the Crime of “Misprision of Felony” …which essentially entails lying to “frame” an innocent person (Russert) for the crimes that you or another were actually complicit in.

Is there any doubt, really, that Libby leaked classified information about an officer in the CPD of the CIA to reporters? That, at the very least, he was utterly negligent with that information, and in violation of any reasonable standard expected for persons holding a Security Clearance?
And if he is convicted of these charges…he lied about those acts to the FBI and the Grand Jury.

That., to me, is on the order of Jonathan Pollard giving “military secrets” over to our “allies”…the Israelis. Libby should be happy that he’s not (yet) facing even more severe charges. but if he’s convicted of perjury and obstruction here, one can expect that he may have additional charges that will be issued.

Alison @ 219

Biodun @ 195

But Fitz has a girlfriend. From WashPo:

In the high-profile Chicago job, he still works killer hours and he chairs the attorney general’s advisory panel on terrorism. And while he will not publicly discuss details of love, politics or religion, others say his social life has improved, along with his apartment. “It’s a really nice place. My wife walked in and said, ‘I know Pat’s got a girlfriend,’ ” says Comey. “Fitz wouldn’t know eggshell from burnt orange, but he’s got a life.”

How do we know Fitz is straight, girls? He is extremely private, has no known associations with women, and his apartment is so nice that Comey’s wife sees it as evidence of a girlfriend?

Well, maybe, but I know a lot of girlfriends that have Y chromosomes.

So don’t count your chickens. Just sayin’.

Think like a jury. How many explanations can you come up with for the facts?

Randall Samborn has gone on the record saying Fitz is a “confirmed bachelor.”

Make of that what you will, but in certain circles that means gay.

In other circles it means that he knows his career isn’t one that allows for the social necessities to court a gal. Guys like this would have been married off in the days of “arranged marriages”.

It’s well known he’s a workaholic, so my bet would be this one.

And in some circles it would mean that he was a bit of a playboy, either not wanting to burden himself with one woman, or alternatively..not wanting one woman to have to deal with infidelity. I doubt that Fitz is the “playa” type, though.

The term “confirmed bachelor” has a lot of meanings…with different subtexts.

Biodun @ 195

But Fitz has a girlfriend. From WashPo:

In the high-profile Chicago job, he still works killer hours and he chairs the attorney general’s advisory panel on terrorism. And while he will not publicly discuss details of love, politics or religion, others say his social life has improved, along with his apartment. “It’s a really nice place. My wife walked in and said, ‘I know Pat’s got a girlfriend,’ ” says Comey. “Fitz wouldn’t know eggshell from burnt orange, but he’s got a life.”

How do we know Fitz is straight, girls? He is extremely private, has no known associations with women, and his apartment is so nice that Comey’s wife sees it as evidence of a girlfriend?

Well, maybe, but I know a lot of girlfriends that have Y chromosomes.

So don’t count your chickens. Just sayin’.

Think like a jury. How many explanations can you come up with for the facts?

I heard that Fitz once left food in a stove for several days without recalling that he had cooked it. I tend to think that he’s not an obsessive neatnik.

Biodun @ 195

But Fitz has a girlfriend. From WashPo:

In the high-profile Chicago job, he still works killer hours and he chairs the attorney general’s advisory panel on terrorism. And while he will not publicly discuss details of love, politics or religion, others say his social life has improved, along with his apartment. “It’s a really nice place. My wife walked in and said, ‘I know Pat’s got a girlfriend,’ ” says Comey. “Fitz wouldn’t know eggshell from burnt orange, but he’s got a life.”

How do we know Fitz is straight, girls? He is extremely private, has no known associations with women, and his apartment is so nice that Comey’s wife sees it as evidence of a girlfriend?

Well, maybe, but I know a lot of girlfriends that have Y chromosomes.

So don’t count your chickens. Just sayin’.

Think like a jury. How many explanations can you come up with for the facts?

How ’bout:

–He hired a designer to do it for him, and he hires a cleaning service when he’s having a party.
–He’s moving up in the political world, and personal appearance (including your home environment) is important.
–He’s a geek, not a nerd. (Geeks being nerds who have social skills. Geeks are why I identify as “sapiosexual”. Yum.)

educatedplaintiff @ 247

Mason @ 246

spiderpaws @ 241:

You’re absolutely right. I forgot that Mercury was retrograde. The jury question is a perfect example of what happens when Mercury is retrograde. Trials should be banned when its retrograde, don’t you think?

Rx not an issue here – trial started when merc was direct

Anyway, in judicial astrology — for a verdict — you would look to the position of Jupiter (justice) or the ruler of the 9th house. Things don’t necessarily go wrong more with ME rx, its just that everyone notices it more because it has become so cool to talk about ME rx.

imo libby’s chart is whats most important – then fitzgeralds, but i dont feel comfortable posting on this. just gives the wignuts more ammunition to consider those of us who have an interest in this to be superficial or unintelligent.

but i will say that during a 5 yr lawsuit – my law team respected my input on this matter.

maybe we shall meet in gabbly someday where we can discuss this further.

best ~