N o lib minded when the Wapo juror published a journal at Hufpo, but now that one has spoken out, just hope there isnt a full moon soon, they'll all be howling at it.

It sounds like this juror didn't appreciate Patrick Fitzgerald putting her in the situation where she had to judge Libby for something so unrelated to the crime being investigated.

Yeah, how dare a prosecutor charged with upholding our laws actually prosecute someone for violating one of those laws! I mean, lying to an investigator should be illegal, but only if they're not investigating anything! But when they are investigating something, then lying to them should be perfectly legal and without consequences. Hear, hear, Kim!

I also agree that we should poll jurors after they convict someone to find out if they really meant it. And if jurors unanimously convict someone of a felony, and then feel bad about it afterwards, why, we should just throw out the verdict! Or if we can't, then we should rely on the power of the executive to take care of that for us. After all, the feelings of the jury after the trial are more important than the facts of the case and the original conviction.

Blow it out your rear Brian...Fitzgerald did not produce a damn thing.

You and all the other trolls keep holding Joe Wilson up high too...you deserve that scumbag.

If Libby lied then he is guilty. My question is what were the jurors told and/or shown that is different than what came out in news reports? If Russert couldn't remember pertinent facts that he testified about then why do we hold Libby to a higher standard? Why wasn't Russert on trial too? The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. I saw no evidence that would persuade anyone BEYOND a reasonable doubt.

It seems to me the jurors convicted Rove using Libby as the stand-in. It is obvious to me from several of their statements that they felt like Libby was to be the fall guy so they obliged since they couldn't convict Rove.

My second question is why did Fitz even proceed with the investigation once he knew Plame didn't fit the particulars of being a covert agent? Just because what you do is "Classified" doesn't make you "Covert".

I am not being a hypocrite on this either. I never liked Clinton, but to keep asking him questions until they could find some question, any question, to get him to lie was a misuse of the powers of the prosecutor.

I tend to agree with Brian re: holding jurors to their verdicts. The American legal system should abide by the rule of "no take backs."

But, something certainly ain't terribly kosher with this whole thing. The minute I saw Denis Collins (with 1 "n," thanks Denis) speaking to the media I called "rat." I even think I did it on wizbang - so, do I get props for being first?

Anyway .. having said all of that, if there was something wrong with the jury, then we should let the legal system play it out. It's up to Libby's attorney to make the case for further action (though, I'd recommend Scoots get a new lawyer. Letting a known, published critic of the administration on the jury was a stupid gamble to take).

If the system tells Libby to go screw himself, we need to accept the ruling. And, subsequently, the fall out when the pardon comes down.

The pardon should come immediately. This was an miscarriage of justice and prosecutorial misconduct. A political trial with a political outcome prosecuted by a political hack.

ah...what the jurors made clear...was that they truly believed "Scooter" was taking the fall for "Shooter"...They have expressed concern and surprise that Cheney(Shooter) and Rove were not held responsible...
I personally believe that Libby was convicted because he fell on the sword for Cheney..

This verdict (and maybe the whole trial) is so going to get spanked in appeal.

Bush and Cheney were not on trial. However, it seems Libby was convicted by proxy.

This flies in the face of our justice system. How can Libby possible construct a defense for the conduct of Bush, Cheney & Rove. He can only mount a defense for himself.

"This flies in the face of our justice system. How can Libby possible construct a defense for the conduct of Bush, Cheney & Rove. He can only mount a defense for himself."

Yes, it's particularly hard to construct a defense of the conduct of others, when there was *no illegal conduct in the first place*.

Brett

Here is a different take. I do not think Libby lied, despite his conviction.

I think he should have lied. It was his duty to lie. The federal government has become an offensive, vile and dishonest power which must be defied and misled.

It's time for civil disobedience.

Political scandals are always overblown. You usually wind up with a special prosecutor going after peripheral figures for minutae with people going to jail largely because of politcal affiliations. At the end of their terms, presidents usually pardon these people with little fanfare from the media. There is nothing less interesting than yesterday's scandal.

Although I am somewhat of a Republican partisan, I have to admit that Whitewater was also way overblown.

You will see the same thing occur with the next president.

Interesting Kim -

Yesterday you implied that the jury was "hopelessly confused," "tainted," that they had a possible "financial interest" in a guilty verdict and that they "didn't understand" two of the counts.

Now you want a pardon based on what one juror's opinion is? Ballsy.

In response to Brett,

that may be true, but by the jurors above comment, its not what they believe. Also the appeals court will also not claim to know of Bush or Cheney's guilt or innocence because it hasn't been put before a proper court.

Gore's former counsel last night was saying this should never have gone to a grand jury once Patrick Fitzgerald found out 3 months earlier that Armitage was the leaker. He said this was a purely political prosecution.

And he's not a rightwinger.

A sham. Pure and simple. Pardon the guy.

Hey, did you know Libby was Marc Rich's lawyer? Maybe Bush can pardon Libby, and one of his lawyers can get busted for something and the next president can pardon him!

Ahh, Washington. What a wonderful town.

I love how "Dingy Harry" wants Bush to "Promise" not to Pardon Libby.

Going to be a Whizbang week. Now we have the Dhimmi's wanting (demanding)to bring the Gitmo prisoners to the United States and try them in the civilian court system. Hey Moron (D Va), how many billions of dollars of our money are you willing to come up with to keep these murdering savages from slaughtering out families. Funny that he suggest a brig in Va to house a lot of the murderers. Didn't he swear to protect the people of the United States which included Virginia the last time I looked at a map, but did not include protecting murdering terrorists. Just how much assistance are the dhimmi's willing to provide to the terrorists? They've provided enough to be personally responsible for 75% of the dead Americans in Iraq already. There seems to be no end to the stupidity elected to the leadership party of congress in Nov 06.

"This is very interesting. It sounds like this juror didn't appreciate Patrick Fitzgerald putting her in the situation where she had to judge Libby for something so unrelated to the crime being investigated."

No -- this juror realizes there are bigger fish to fry than Libby, and is frustrated because Cheney is getting off scott-free - so far.

I think Cheney will end up taking a fall over this.

I think Cheney will end up taking a fall over this.
Posted by: Lee at March 8, 2007 12:34 AM

A surprising admission.

I mean, that you think.

Question did you read the entire transcript or did you obviously and purposefully ignore this section that lays to waste your theory she believe there's bigger fish to fry?

Matthews: "what did you make of the prosecutor's closing summation where he said 'the Vice-President is under a cloud'?"

Redington: "Rhetoric."

Matthews:"God, you're tough. You're great. Rhetoric. God I like the way you separate the wheat from the chaff. You've decided on the wheat, and the wheat is a conviction, but you cry for this guy."

Redington: "It was awful."

Lee you're not up to your normal level of obfuscation, not feeling well?

Lee, well according to you guys Karl Rove should have been indicted several months ago. So that about sums up the worth of what you "think."

Thanks for trying to play the game. Now run along, the grownups are talking.

P.S. Did anyone see the SWEEEEEEET editorial at the WaPo today? They're basically reminding everyone (like they did a few months ago) that this case had no substance and that Joe Wilson is STILL a liar.

Just fun to see the lefties still kissing that liar's ass.

Okay I know this is my third post in a row, but I just have to laugh. Just read over at newsbusters.org how Tim Russert said on the Today show how this would resonate with americans in a big way.

Also Schieffer called it a big win for democrats and called it "Christmas in February."

Well, Tim, I hate to tell you but I imagine most people have already forgotten it, or are bored with it, and Mr. Schieffer, dear, it's MARCH, not February.

I love how liberals use what they think and project it onto what they think all americans are thinking. When in reality they don't have a clue.

Bwahahahahahahha......tooo tooo toooo funny.

"Lee, well according to you guys Karl Rove should have been indicted several months ago. So that about sums up the worth of what you "think.""

Naw, you're talking out of your ass again, Jo. I've always said Cheney is the one that'll take the fall for this. You watch -- he's going to get hit on this one, hit hard.

If "you guys" were smart you'd get Cheney out of the way now, and let Bush put Guiliani in as VP.

But that won't happen.... you'll pound your chests like good little monkeys and vow to drag this out and fight to the bitter end over this -- and not only lose the White House but lose more House and Senate seats in the process.

Or rather than Guiliani - give the VP position to this clown instead.

The Democrats are losers again. They would like for us to forget that they intended on getting Rove and Cheney , Ha they failed !! LOSERS ! Scoot along down the road dirtbags. Another failed attempt to "Clintonize" President Bush. Heeeaaawwwww!

But that won't happen.... you'll pound your chests like good little monkeys and vow to drag this out and fight to the bitter end over this -- and not only lose the White House but lose more House and Senate seats in the process.

So says the guy who is still trying to keep the Libby case alive even though it's over and no further charges are to be made. ("But, but, but, Cheney....blah blah blah)....

Bwahahahahahahah......too funny.

Lee you lose again.

While Jo says "SWEEEEEEET & Bwahahahahahahha......tooo tooo toooo funny." Rob says "Heeeaaawwwww!".

We haven't see the nutcakes this happy since just before Foley hit the fan.

Must mean more bad news is right around the corner.

tick... tick... tick... tick...

But Rob you are so wrong! Tim Russert said this verdict will have a huge impact on the american people!!

Lol.

Speaking of bad news, I see that some new polls show Rudy Guiliani easily beating Obama & Hillary for POTUS.

Oh, I'm sorry, Lee, I should have clarified that. I meant bad news for YOU. lol.

So much for that democrat momentum. :)

But what about Cheney??? Cheney must go down! Cheney Cheney Cheney!!! We must destroy Cheney!! I will not sleep till Cheney is destroyed!!!

Argghhhhghghghgghhgghghghghghghghghghghghgh

HELP ME! My brain is meeeeeeeelting...............

There seems ample grounds for appeal. For instance, Fitzgerald mentioned Plame's "covert" status during his final argument, which was not in evidence - in truth, he fought pre-trial to prevent any evidence on that from coming in, and won.

Then you have Collins producing an work of over 7000 words within a day of the verdict? How could he do that without having worked on it DURING the deliberations? Read the thing at Huffington - it's too polished to have been written completely AFTER the verdict, especially in lieu of the time he spent giving media interviews.

I seem to remember at least two of the OJ jurors were dismissed for working on books during the trial. That was a state case, but don't federal cases have similar rules? It certainly goes to impartiality.

Bush will only pardon Libby if his appeals fail, unless his bail is not continued. I don't think Bush will let him go to jail over this, and he should not.

Remember, Sandy Berger not only lied but stole and destroyed classified documents, and did not a day in jail.

Lee

"You watch -- he's going to get hit on this one, hit hard."

by who Lee?

Another "special" prosecutor?

Congressional "investigation? (yea, right. Go ahead give Joementum another reason to jump the Dem Party. Don't think so. "Try it punk!")

The American public? Sorry he's not up for re-election and as evidenced by the left continued yammering about polls he can sink any lower.

A "hit" by one of the Sopranos? Ah... don't think so.

Bush? Outside shot, but not very likely given the above.

His own heart/blood clot? Very possible. (Huffin Puff get your digital eraser ready, the true nature of the vast majority of your posters will leak out again.)

So Lee, just where will this "hit" come from?

And BTW Lee. What about the prosecutor's closing summation where he said 'the Vice-President is under a cloud'?

No response to your previous and original hypothesis getting tossed in the shitcan?

Pardoning Libby would be like letting a Mafia boss, responsible for murder and robbery, go free because he was only convicted of tax evasion and well, "everybody cheats on their taxes."

At any rate, Bush will pardon Libby because he doesn't have anything to lose by doing so -- not even the teeny-tiny-ist shred of dignity.

If you are called to serve on a jury, study up on jury nullification. If you don't want to be selected as a juror, there's no need to lie or act weird, just ask the prosecutor about jury nullification when you are questioned and you'll be dropped like a hot potato. If you want to serve on a jury keep your mouth shut about jury nullification. The Libby trial would have been the perfect place for the jury to practice jury nullification by simply judging the law itself as unjust in this case.

"So Lee, just where will this "hit" come from?

The civil suit, and the public opinion groundswell against the administration that arises out of proceedings and testimony.

"No response to your previous and original hypothesis getting tossed in the shitcan?"

No - I'm too busy - what with my brain meeeeelting and all.

"Remember, Sandy Berger not only lied but stole and destroyed classified documents, and did not a day in jail."

Scooter Pie lied and obstructed justice to protect the VP from an investigation, and he will do time.

Jury nullification isn't necessary here.

Its a matter of whether the jury believed a bad memory in this case was a valid defense or not.

"So Lee, just where will this "hit" come from?

The civil suit, and the public opinion groundswell against the administration that arises out of proceedings and testimony.

Civil suit? By Joe Wilson? That proven liar? You really want to hang your hat on that guy?

"Remember, Sandy Berger not only lied but stole and destroyed classified documents, and did not a day in jail."

Scooter Pie lied and obstructed justice to protect the VP from an investigation, and he will do time.

That's it, *ignore* what Sandy Berger did...good job Lee. As with every irrational libtard thought, put the shoe on the other foot and just say it was some Republican stealing those documents in his pants and destroying...don't even TRY to say the MSM and you cockroaches wouldn't go ballistic.

"But Rob you are so wrong! Tim Russert said this verdict will have a huge impact on the american people!!

Lol"

LOL.

LOL.

LOL.

Lee you are so wrong. Cheney and Rove a clear. You and the left just can't get your mind around that. You prayed so long and hard for them to go down, you can't stand the fact that their life is going on. Libby will have a new trial or a pardon. Even if he faces sentencing, he will not get jail time. This is a none story no matter how the left tries to present it. ww

"That's it, *ignore* what Sandy Berger did...good job Lee. As with every irrational libtard thought, put the shoe on the other foot and just say it was some Republican stealing those documents in his pants and destroying...don't even TRY to say the MSM and you cockroaches wouldn't go ballistic."

Yeah, I'll ignore what Sandy Berger did - why shouldn't I -- everyone else is America is ignoring it because it is only relevant to the GOP apologists who are trying to distract people from today's headlines and we all know that they're morons.

Right now everyone is focused on Scooter Pie and the lies for the Veep. Everyone in America is proud of the fact that we have a convicted felon as the VP's right-hand guy.

Wasn't Berger charged with a misdemeanor? Yes. Didn't he plead guilty? Yes. Scooter lied, and lied, and lied some more.

PS: Bush won't pardon Libby, it would be political suicide for the GOP.

Now you'll have to excuse me - my meeeeelting brain is dripping out of my ears.

Quite frankly I've found this Libby business very complicated, and a bit boring. Thankfully, Stephen Colbert explains it to me in this video:
http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2007/03/stephen-colbert-explains-libby-verdict.html

"Yeah, I'll ignore what Sandy Berger did - why shouldn't I -- everyone else is America is ignoring it because it is only relevant to the GOP apologists who are trying to distract people from today's headlines and we all know that they're morons."

You are such a frigging hypocrite lee. You know damned well if Rove was caught stealing classified documents in his socks, you and all the other raving moon-bats would be screaming bloody murder.

Jury nullification isn't necessary here.

Its a matter of whether the jury believed a bad memory in this case was a valid defense or not.

That's one way of practicing jury nullification without formally declaring the law an ass.

"You are such a frigging hypocrite lee. You know damned well if Rove was caught stealing classified documents in his socks, you and all the other raving moon-bats would be screaming bloody murder."

Sure I would - it's current, like the Libby story.

Am I screaming about past Republican transgressions? Like the Iran Contra affair? If I was then your claim of hypocrisy for ingnoring Berger might be valid, and more than just a troll...

As it is you guys who are clearly the hypocrites -- for bringing up Berger and ignoring Ollie North and convicted felon John Poindexter.

Blow it out your rear Brian...Fitzgerald did not produce a damn thing.

As I wipe your frustrated spittle off my arm, I'll point out that Fitzgerald produced a conviction.

To quote Jo, Bwahahahahahahha......

This was an miscarriage of justice and prosecutorial misconduct. A political trial with a political outcome prosecuted by a political hack.

It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham!

No, an out of control, misbehaving jury produced a conviction. Their actions, and Fitz's will cause a retrial if necessary. We may see something very unusual and that is that the appellate court may void the conviction. It is that egregious.
===========================

Poor old "pucker puss" (lee lee) (resident turd polisher) (resident moron) still has "frog march on the brain". LOL. Wonder if old p'p' would like to take a few bets? rib-it rib-it

Hey,

I just wanted to let you know that PardonLibby.org is for sale on eBay. The auction is here:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=003&sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%3AIT&viewitem=&item=130088305011&rd=1&rd=1