Comments on: ComPost Saved By Froomkin — Again

By: Sandy

Sandy — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 06:24:40 +0000

radlib1 — You’re welcome! I’m so glad you found Robert Parry…and consortiumnews.com…as helpful and informative as I have. He’s really excellent, and I, too, learned some things I hadn’t realized before. Though I did know Armitage was one of the original PNAC signers and a neo-con …not just the inept “gossip” he has been made out to be.

What a story this is! If some novelist wrote it, who would believe it?

My heart goes out to the Wilsons…having to live it.

By: Maggie Rheinstein

Maggie Rheinstein — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 05:19:49 +0000

I wrote a letter to the Wash Post which – surprisingly – was not published asking why it is that Fred Hiatt opinion of perjury changes with administrations. Or is it because perjury and obstruction of justice in a act of revenge against a critic of the President’s conduct in war is – obviously – trivial compared to the private acts of two consenting adults?

By: Mickey

Mickey — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 05:15:07 +0000

In the game of chess, pawns are the least powerful pieces of the board, but their position in front of the big pieces make them the dominant forces to reckon with during the early and early middle game.

I think we are well into the middle game now. The major pieces are out in the open - exposed. Libby’s fate is immaterial to the outcome of the game. It’s time to focus on ~~Cheney~~ the Queen, either capturing ~~him~~ her or rendering ~~him~~ her ineffective.

By: Evan

Evan — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:07:53 +0000

Maybe a pardon now wouldn’t be such a bad thing.

If Scooter was going to flip, he surely would have by now. He’s probably planning to stay out of jail pending appeals until December 2008, when a pardon would be politically easier for W. So what’s his incentive to cooperate with investigators now? None that I can see.

Except by conservatives, a pardon now would not be viewed as a merciful act for poor Scooter - Bush is known to lack that quality. A pardon would be more generally interpreted as a reward to Libby for having lied to protect Bush and Cheney from investigation and prosecution.

An early pardon for Libby would be compared to Nixon’s Saturday Night Massacre, the firing of special prosecutor Archibald Cox (except don’t expect the AG to resign this time!). Both events would be examples of the most blatant abuse of Presidential powers, for the self-serving purpose of obstruction of justice.

I think a pardon now would set off a firestorm, which might help some more Congressional Dems, and possibly a few Repugs, to grow spines. A thorough and aggressive investigation by Congressional committee could be the outcome.

Testimony would be required. Efforts by a lying and intentionally forgetful witness to obstruct a Congressional investigation could result in indefinite incarceration, which may not be subject to pardon. Libby might then have greater incentive to help see that truth is served.

IMHO, the canary is unlikely to sing unless he is certain he will be confined to the cage.

By: *ilbo

*ilbo — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:00:30 +0000

Hi Jane, Sorry ’bout the ‘Trojans.’ My ‘Ducks’ played a near perfect game.

By: No Blood for Hubris

No Blood for Hubris — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 03:53:26 +0000

Analogies:

A. Elizabeth Loftus: legitimate research on memory

B. Toddler-whipping advocate James Dobson: good parenting.

C. George W. Bush: good government.

Which analogy is incorrect?

(Answer–none).

By: Tom

Tom — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 03:51:41 +0000

Just stopped by to say thanks for your good work during Libby Trial. Lets hope the other shoe drops..

By: Mickey

Mickey — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 03:43:54 +0000

Loftus was a person who made her name on an ideology, not on science. She had an ax to grind about the “false memory syndrome,” and joined the people who took a legitimate scientific question into another almost “cult-like” realm. I’m sorry that she wasn’t allowed to testify too, though not for the reason that they suggest in the Wall Street Journal. I would have loved to see her taken apart piece by piece by the likes of Patrick Fitzgerald. She’s the kind of person that has made a mockery of “expert” testimony by people in the mental health field. She’s been an agent of harm in her own right and Fitz is just the guy to show that to the world. She’s lucky he took her out early and spared her a public humiliation of the third kind – on-stage and live-blogged…

By: Jukesgrrl

Jukesgrrl — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 03:30:21 +0000

Re: the “Poor Scooter” meme — In order for the Irvster to be pardoned under these arguments, he has to be seen as memory-addled, ineffective, and holding an office of little relevance to the nation’s business. Wonder how it feels for someone with his ego to be portrayed THAT way? I guess it’s still better than the pokey.

And re: Froomkin — He actually reads the messages left on the Post Website, so show him some love sometime.

By: klyde

klyde — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 01:53:31 +0000

I’ve called it PRAVDA on Potomac for quite a while now