Comments on: The Question, Part Two http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/ Firedoglake weblog Thu, 26 Nov 2009 14:29:13 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: MEG http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-529890 MEG Thu, 01 Mar 2007 01:10:36 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-529890 <p>That <em>[“big cheezy smile that looks pasted on, something artificial producing that smile, let me tell you”] </em>is the effect of Hydrocodone. Libby has been on it since the beginning of the trial. Hydrocodone is a pain killer commonly prescribed after surgeries to help overcome “discomfort”. Has anyone observed Libby’s eating habits? Is he eating like a bird or not eating at all? Hydrocodone kills the appetite and Libby looks to be shrinking a bit. I suspect he has a doctor’s prescription so it’s all legal, but if the jury takes weeks, Libby may just vanish due to lack of food. Or he could vanish due to dual citizenship with the USA and Israel, spending the rest of his life in Israel that has flimsy extradition rights with the USA. </p> <p>Libby is a definite FLIGHT RISK!</p> That [“big cheezy smile that looks pasted on, something artificial producing that smile, let me tell you”] is the effect of Hydrocodone. Libby has been on it since the beginning of the trial. Hydrocodone is a pain killer commonly prescribed after surgeries to help overcome “discomfort”. Has anyone observed Libby’s eating habits? Is he eating like a bird or not eating at all? Hydrocodone kills the appetite and Libby looks to be shrinking a bit. I suspect he has a doctor’s prescription so it’s all legal, but if the jury takes weeks, Libby may just vanish due to lack of food. Or he could vanish due to dual citizenship with the USA and Israel, spending the rest of his life in Israel that has flimsy extradition rights with the USA.

Libby is a definite FLIGHT RISK!

]]> By: Mary http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528648 Mary Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:20:35 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528648 <p>angie - way EPU’d - no, I hadn’t seen it (I hardly “do” WaPo anymore), but thanks - is an eeyore kind of way thanks.</p> <p>I love the concept that Rivkin spouts that if CIA agents acted with the “consent of government” in the form of - oh, I guess, you know, the Rulers, like the heads of Intel or heads of State, they are “immune from prosecution.” ROFLMAO</p> <p>Yeah - right Rivkin. That is why Germans who were acting with the authority of head of state Hitler couldn’t be tried, why Pinochet pals who disappeared people couldn’t be tried. Jeez freakin louise, “government” includes the laws of the land and international laws. If a country doesn’t give its head of state or head of intel the right to have people disappeared an abused and tortured, they freakin well can not “delegate” that authority to CIA agents and make them immune from prosecution.</p> <p>Not only that, but any nation that takes seriously its obligations under the anti-torture conventions (unlike the United States of American under a Rivkinesque DOJ) specifically eschews the ability to give any immunity and any sanctuary to anyone engaging in torture and/or conspiracy to torture. </p> <p>Is there some unique form of air or water pollution in the beltway that disintegrates independent analytic capacity?</p> angie – way EPU’d – no, I hadn’t seen it (I hardly “do” WaPo anymore), but thanks – is an eeyore kind of way thanks.

I love the concept that Rivkin spouts that if CIA agents acted with the “consent of government” in the form of – oh, I guess, you know, the Rulers, like the heads of Intel or heads of State, they are “immune from prosecution.” ROFLMAO

Yeah – right Rivkin. That is why Germans who were acting with the authority of head of state Hitler couldn’t be tried, why Pinochet pals who disappeared people couldn’t be tried. Jeez freakin louise, “government” includes the laws of the land and international laws. If a country doesn’t give its head of state or head of intel the right to have people disappeared an abused and tortured, they freakin well can not “delegate” that authority to CIA agents and make them immune from prosecution.

Not only that, but any nation that takes seriously its obligations under the anti-torture conventions (unlike the United States of American under a Rivkinesque DOJ) specifically eschews the ability to give any immunity and any sanctuary to anyone engaging in torture and/or conspiracy to torture.

Is there some unique form of air or water pollution in the beltway that disintegrates independent analytic capacity?

]]> By: abeincicero http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528452 abeincicero Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:22:01 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528452 <p><a href="#comment-528362"><em>Gromit @ 173 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p>Are all of Libby’s lawyers on the clock while sitting around during deliberations? Not sure I’d want to pay for all 11. I’ve only got two hands to hold and I’m not letting them hold anything else no matter how much I’m paying.</p></blockquote> <p>You bet. Plus they are charging “In Court Time” which is big bucks. Remember, clients lose, the lawyers still get paid!!</p> Gromit @ 173

Are all of Libby’s lawyers on the clock while sitting around during deliberations? Not sure I’d want to pay for all 11. I’ve only got two hands to hold and I’m not letting them hold anything else no matter how much I’m paying.

You bet. Plus they are charging “In Court Time” which is big bucks. Remember, clients lose, the lawyers still get paid!!

]]> By: Pink http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528422 Pink Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:08:04 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528422 <p><a href="#comment-528305"><em>Andres Perez @ 138 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p><a href="#comment-528291"><em>Christy Hardin Smith @<br /> 124 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p>Andres at 119 — Um, and you say that based on what, exactly? I’ve had juries out for long periods of time come back with guilty across the board. There is absolutely no way to predict anything about a verdict based solely on length of deliberations. Period.</p></blockquote> <p>By surrounding myself with pessimism I seek to cushion the blow in case the outcome is not what I want.</p></blockquote> <p>“Mistaken optimism is never forgiven, mistaken pessimism is easily forgiven.”</p> <p>Chalmers Johnson, author of “Nemesis, the Last Days of the American Republic”, on “Fresh Air” yesterday.</p> Andres Perez @ 138

Christy Hardin Smith @
124

Andres at 119 — Um, and you say that based on what, exactly? I’ve had juries out for long periods of time come back with guilty across the board. There is absolutely no way to predict anything about a verdict based solely on length of deliberations. Period.

By surrounding myself with pessimism I seek to cushion the blow in case the outcome is not what I want.

“Mistaken optimism is never forgiven, mistaken pessimism is easily forgiven.”

Chalmers Johnson, author of “Nemesis, the Last Days of the American Republic”, on “Fresh Air” yesterday.

]]> By: hesikastor http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528418 hesikastor Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:01:09 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528418 <p><a href="#comment-528307"><em>JGabriel @<br /> 140 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p>Hmm, just noticed that I substituted Russert’s name for Cooper’s in 122 above. </p> <p>Ah, well, I’m kinda used to looking stupid anyway.</p></blockquote> <p>Love it! When I first came aboard, with my very first comment ever, I called Judge Walton “Judge Hardin!” Resolved never to comment again!</p> JGabriel @
140

Hmm, just noticed that I substituted Russert’s name for Cooper’s in 122 above.

Ah, well, I’m kinda used to looking stupid anyway.

Love it! When I first came aboard, with my very first comment ever, I called Judge Walton “Judge Hardin!” Resolved never to comment again!

]]> By: Andres Perez http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528401 Andres Perez Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:55:37 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528401 <p>Count three depends on who the jury believes to be a more believable person: Scooter Libby or Mathew Cooper.</p> <p>And we know that Cooper obviously had no motive to lie.</p> Count three depends on who the jury believes to be a more believable person: Scooter Libby or Mathew Cooper.

And we know that Cooper obviously had no motive to lie.

]]> By: kayhouz http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528395 kayhouz Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:54:18 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528395 <p>on CNN: just tuned in and heard part of their explanation of the jury note: It was a question about the (jury) charge: Are they to address Was Libby lying about the content of a particular note (not sure what note, sorry) or the fact that the note in fact existed. Apparently they answered their own q.</p> on CNN: just tuned in and heard part of their explanation of the jury note: It was a question about the (jury) charge: Are they to address Was Libby lying about the content of a particular note (not sure what note, sorry) or the fact that the note in fact existed. Apparently they answered their own q.

]]> By: Biodun http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528376 Biodun Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:51:05 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528376 <p>FWIW. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-CIA-Leak-Trial.html">From AP</a>:</p> <blockquote><p> Most trial lawyers and reporters believe jurors dress up when they expect to reach a verdict and don casual clothes if they’ve still got lots of work to do. </p></blockquote> <p>Of course, just because AP says so…doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true…</p> FWIW. From AP:

Most trial lawyers and reporters believe jurors dress up when they expect to reach a verdict and don casual clothes if they’ve still got lots of work to do.

Of course, just because AP says so…doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true…

]]> By: BeerkshireHideaway http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528365 BeerkshireHideaway Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:48:51 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528365 <p><a href="#comment-528319"><em>viget @<br /> 151 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p>OT, but this MSNBC story about the “anonymous official” on AF2 is absolutely hilarious.</p> <p><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17379953/">link</a></p></blockquote> <p>Not so OT. I think that the media may be tired fo being manipulated by the Cheney administration. And this trial, and this site, has really helped that trend.</p> <p>On this story, AP and MSNBC have been doing the job usually left for The Daily Show and the Colbert Report — showiing Dick Cheney as the easy self-parody that he is.</p> <p>Cheney obviously expected that the media would cover for him. But this time they didn’t. They aren’t afraid of him anymore. He must be apeshit.</p> viget @
151

OT, but this MSNBC story about the “anonymous official” on AF2 is absolutely hilarious.

link

Not so OT. I think that the media may be tired fo being manipulated by the Cheney administration. And this trial, and this site, has really helped that trend.

On this story, AP and MSNBC have been doing the job usually left for The Daily Show and the Colbert Report — showiing Dick Cheney as the easy self-parody that he is.

Cheney obviously expected that the media would cover for him. But this time they didn’t. They aren’t afraid of him anymore. He must be apeshit.

]]> By: angie http://firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528364 angie Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:48:13 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/28/the-question-part-two/#comment-528364 <p>Hey Mary!</p> <p>Did anyone read the trash by Casey and Rivkin at the Post about extraordinary rendition and the CIA?</p> <p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022701160.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....01160.html</a></p> <p>filth.</p> Hey Mary!

Did anyone read the trash by Casey and Rivkin at the Post about extraordinary rendition and the CIA?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01160.html

filth.

]]>