[eDebate] fuckface dictator planning war to block impeachment
Sat Jun 3 09:00:44 CDT 2006
anything that karl rove is heavily invested in which is obviously no longer
enron but i am sure you can figure it out. by the way i made no prediction
in the post you replied. simply quoted a former CIA analyst prediction.
mcgovern can probably tell you what stock he thinks cheney and bush will
make money on if the attacks happen. probably not American Airlines,
United Airlines since those are fait d'accompli. maybe southwest airlines
this time crashing into the crawford complex.
truthout.org is sticking w NOT the prediction but the FACT that karl rove
has already been indicted b/c they have 3 sources inside the fitz camp to
confirm. so i would sell all your stock in the republican party b/c it is
already fucked and buy white collar prison stock since they are going to
have to build new facilities to include half of the current honkey house.
challenge you to find a statement from rove or his attorneys requesting that
these lies be removed from publication on the internet cuz there is none.
The Continued Interest in the Rove Indictment Story
By Marc Ash,
Fri Jun 2nd, 2006 at 02:55:06 PM EDT :: Fitzgerald Investigation
We are still getting a high volume of email inquiries on our Rove indictment
story from May 13, 2006. We greatly appreciate your interest, and are well
aware of the right of all Americans to know what is happening here.
So again, for the record: We stand by the story. TO's staff is treating this
story as our highest priority and will be following up with additional
information as it becomes available.
Clearly the question is: "If Karl Rove has been indicted, why has there been
no official announcement?" Right now we have only general indicators as to
why an announcement might not be made when an indictment has been returned.
And even though these indicators do exist, we need to more clearly
understand exactly what is happening in this case before we can report on
This a unique situation, and frankly a stressful one. We would like to thank
all of those who have offered their support during the course of this
ordeal. We fully intend to press on.
Marc Ash, Executive Director - t r u t h o u t
director at truthout.org
hey, FACTLESS prediction accuser, i got some inside info on the slow release
of the rove indictment. hahaha scooter libby is getting his ass kicked in
front of the judge by fitzgerald regarding evidence requests for his
defense...that's on top of the rove turning state's evidence claim already
mentioned. sorry republicanos your boyz are going to jail. torture is
Scooter Libby & The Barber of Seville
Posted by H2O Man in General Discussion
Sat Jun 03rd 2006, 08:31 AM
June 2, 2006 was not a good day for Scooter Libby and his legal team. Just
as people following the case will remember Scooter using crutches when he
was indicted on October 28, 2005, yesterday may be remembered as the day
Judge Walton knocked the crutches out from under his case. The Judge filed
three documents that are worth taking a closer look at.
The first is Document 112, which is Judge Walton's Order, which outlines the
Court's answer to Team Libby's Third Motion to Compel Discovery. This motion
had led to Mr. Fitzgerald's Response and Team Libby's Reply, which allowed
the public to have a far greater appreciation for the amount of evidence
that the prosecutor has about the OVP/WHIG attempts to "discredit"
Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
On May 5, the Court heard argument from both sides on the disputed issues.
Team Libby had presented ten separate areas of information they argued were
essential for his defense. Their goal is to make the case into a debate
about the war in Iraq, and to argue about the president's state of the union
address with his infamous "16 words," and about Wilson's trip to Niger.
But the judge isn't allowing that to happen. "Rather," Judge Walton writes,
"the only question the jury will be asked to resolve in this matter will be
whether the defendant intentionally lied when he testified before the grand
jury and spoke with FBI agents about statements he purportedly made to the
three reporters concerning Ms. Wilson's employment. The prosecution of this
action, therefore, involves a discrete cast of characters and events, and
this Court will not permit it to become a forum for debating theaccuracy of
Ambassador Wilson's statements, the propriety of the Iraq war or related
matters leading up to the war, as those events are not the basis for the
charged offenses. At best, these events have merely an abstract relationship
to the charged offenses."
Judge Walton explains in a footnote that this "reality is not altered"
because Mr. Fitzgerald will introduce various news reports on the Wilson
trip as evidence. He notes that Mr. Fitzgerald will not be introducing the
full articles, that the Court "suspects it would not permit" the prosecution
to introduce full articles if it attempted to, and that the truth of the
articles is not at issue. Judge Walton defines the limited purposes that
such evidence will be allowed to be introduced for. None of those purposes
can be viewed as helping Team Libby.
Those limited purposes translate into seven of Team Libby's requests being
fully denied. "For several reasons, and contrary to the defendant's position
otherwise, the bulk of the documents which may be responsive to these
requests are simply not material to the preparation of the defendant's
defense," Judge Walton noted. Rather, they were attempts to dillute the
prosecution's case by introducing evidence "without regard for whether the
defendant or any likely witnesses even reviewed or ever knew about these
And even in the case of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that
Scooter and other likely witnesses were aware of, Judge Walton correctly
ruled that it is not at issue, because Mr. Fitzgerald is not claiming that
it was "improperly" disclosed by Libby.
In the end, the Judge ordered the prosecution to produce a limited number of
documents "to the extent it has not already done so" that relate directly to
Scooter's role in the OVP/WHIG "effort to rebut the accuracy of Ambassador
Wilson's" trip and findings, and related documents that are discoverable
Document 113 is Judge Walton's Protective Order, in which he grants Mr.
Fitzgerald's motion to withhold "discrete items of classified information
from the defendant, and to provide to the defense, as substitutes for
several items of classified information, summaries setting forth the
relevant information contained in the classified documents."
A quick review of the types of classification may be helpful here. For those
not familiar, these classifications are pursuant to Executive Order 12958,
as amended by Executive Order 13292. National security information is
classified in three ways: Top Secret; Secret; or Confidential. "Top Secret"
is the designation of information which if improperly disclosed could
reasonably be expected to cause "exceptionally grave damage to the national
security." Next, "Secret" means the information's unauthorized disclosure
could reasonably be expected to cause serious damage to national security.
And "Confidential" designates information which when improperly disclosed
can reasonably be expected to damage our national security.
Judge Walton writes that after careful review of the prosecutor's requests,
"the Court finds the documents and information identified in the
government's Section 4 CIPA filings are extremely sensitive and their
disclosure could cause serious if not grave damage to the national security
of the United States." Thus, he will allow Mr. Fitzgerald to provide
"unclassified substitutions (which) are more than sufficient to address any
obligation the government might have to produce the underlying classified
documents and information to the defense."
This information includes a limited recounting of Valerie Plame's employment
history with the Agency from January 2002 on; a review of "potential damage"
created by the disclosure of her affiliation with the Agency; and the names
of three individuals mentioned in classified documents previously provided
to the defense.
The most significant issue, in my opinion, is that Judge Walton heard Mr.
Fitzgerald's Motion in camera and ex parte, which means in chambers and with
only the prosecutor there to present his side. Team Libby was particularly
upset by the prospect of this being presented ex parte. There are a couple
reasons why. First, Judge Walton is known for having strong beliefs on the
need to keep classified information secret. His stating that the information
Mr. Fitzgerald showed him "could cause serious if not grave damage" to our
country if improperly disclosed indicates he has an appreciation for the
full flavour of the OVP/WHIG operation against the Wilsons.
Further, although the classified information will not be introduced as part
of the case for the jury to consider, Judge Walton now knows what the CIA
knows about the case. It reminds me of when attorneys were preparing my
friend Rubin "Hurricane" Carter's federal appeal, and they wanted to include
what was known as the Caruso File. Leon Friedman, the Hofstra University
professor who co-authored the definitive 5-volume history of the justices of
the US Supreme Court, included the information in his appeal. The federal
judge read the appeal, and then excluded the information from the Caruso
File, because it did not fit the definition of an exhausted claim. However,
Leon knew it was like on a movie, when explosive evidence is introduced, and
the judge orders a jury to ignore it for technical reasons. No juror or
movie viewer forgets that evidence. In Carter's case, Judge Sarokin noted
that not only was he overturning the conviction on procedural grounds, but
that he was aware that Rubin Carter was not only "not guilty," but that he
was innocent. That was because he had read the Caruso File. In Scooter's
case, even though the trial is limited to Libby's lying to the FBI and grand
jury, Judge Walton is now aware of the true nature of the issues involved in
the OVP/WHIG operation to destroy the Wilsons.
Document 114 is Judge Walton's Order to the prosecutor and defense to
"appear for a status conference on June 12, 2006 at 1:30 p.m." They will be
discussing several issues, including the status of discovery; the
possibility that other motions are going to be filed; and if Mr. Fitzgerald
will be "asserting any claims of executive privilege." These three issues
alone make the hearing worth keeping an eye on. But there is something else
that appears far more significant.
Judge Walton wants to discuss if the parties "believe it is necessary to
issue early returnable trial subpoenas to resolve anticipated claims of
testimonial privilege." It is hard not to conclude that Judge Walton is
taking Mr. Fitzgerald's statements regarding the possibility of calling one
Dick Cheney to testify very seriously. The possibility of Mr. Fitzgerald
calling on the vice president is fascinating to consider, and there is a
variety of opinions on how Dick Cheney might respond. Will he attempt to
avoid testifying? Surely he would not want to either be used by Mr.
Fitzgerald to put the screws to the man who is lying to protect him. Nor
would he want to risk lying on the witness stand.
The three documents filed by Judge Walton on June 2 were bad for Scooter
Libby. The June 12 hearing may be worse for Dick Cheney.
>From: "Martin Harris" <mharris02 at drury.edu>
>To: <infracaninophile at hotmail.com>
>CC: <edebate at ndtceda.com>
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] fuckface dictator planning war to block impeachment
>Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 22:30:06 -0500
>Since you seem to be back in the role of making predictions, can you
>suggest some stocks you think are going to do well over the next 2
>months? I have been looking to SELL short some stock and would look
>forward to your suggestions as almost guaranteed wins for me.
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
More information about the Mailman