Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A hunch about Libby and Miller

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
kstewart33 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:12 PM
Original message
A hunch about Libby and Miller
If Libby really had given her a release, Miller would have testified without going to jail. Certainly she would have confirmed with Libby that she had a personal release before she went to jail, IF INDEED SHE HAD ONE.

Libby would have given her the release to prevent her from going to jail, if he was willing to do so.

My hunch--she did not have a personal release. Libby gave her one only after she told him she was going to talk. Fitzgerald had the option to keep her jail for many, many months, and she knew it. She'd had enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
back2basics909 Donating Member (438 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. Or..
.. as she has been visited by half the neo-cons in jail, they are happy they have their story stright.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I'd love to see her visitor records
But Dick the Stick probably has them sealed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
back2basics909 Donating Member (438 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. We know several Neo-cons visisted her..
.. including Bolton.

They have a very tight story and they are happy. That's what this means.

And if they have not been carefull with DeLay or Frist, we have a huge set back. HUGE. And it looks, on the surface, that neither is a home run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lancdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Fitz would never have cut a deal with her
unless he knew what she was going to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:47 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. Yeah that gets my vote
And that is why no one is going to get fired or indicted over this.

I hate to say it, but they control everything, there's no way they're letting this happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. That makes some sense. If she told him "I'm going to rat you
out whether you release me or not." What did he have to lose? Also explains the long delay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
back2basics909 Donating Member (438 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. And Bolton et al..
.. just visited for a chat about the prison system and it's problems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. I don't think that Bolton, et al, could be sure enough of privacy to
say anything about getting their stories straight. I think they were there taking the temperature of her feet about stonewalling Fitzgerald.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
back2basics909 Donating Member (438 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Of course they could..
.. man come on now. These are the most corrupt people in a long time. You think a sympathetic guard wouldn't take 50K to shut up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. Or a hundred thousand from a publisher to tell all? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Could be something to what your saying. Or perhaps
Bolton went to scare Judy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. He scares me and I've never seen the guy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
6. Libby, along with all the White house staff signed a blanket
release. However, the journalists said it was gotten under duress and didn't honor those blanket releases.

The grand jury is set to disband towards the end of October. Fitzgerald and the judge had talked about the possibitly of criminal contemp charges. If she was still sitting there after the expected indictment(s) had been issued, she might have risked a couple of years in jail if they went for criminal contempt charges.

Why the wait? The white house is scarred shitless about what indictment the grand jury may issue and was buying all the time they could.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RSchewe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. It sounds to me like she knew something Fitzgerald needed to know
and he was able to find that out without her. It is just another speculation but she has possibly been put in the position where she has to testify or face further problems. That is the sense I get.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. You can always count on things not being as they first appear
at least, not with ChimpCo in power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mandyky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. I still wanna know why John Bolton visited Miller
in jail. All these people are corrupt - Dean's "culture of corrruption" when it comes to the GOP is almost an understatement...

Keep the heat on them, Chairmen Dean!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #10
23. yes, and why "limited" interview. what else was left out n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
11. Or... Libby does what Cheney wants...
What does Cheney want? Is Bush beginning to be a problem that Rove can't fix?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
15. I have two guesses. 1) The source expects a pardon. 2) Judge Roberts
I mean it's probably a coincidence that Judy Miller was given the go-ahead by her source on the same day Roberts was confirmed.

But could it be that the source knows that a supreme court led by Roberts would let him off the hook?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-05 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Wouldn't that theory require that something about the case involve a
Constitutional question? Hard to conceive of a situation where the SCcould let someone off the hook in the normal coutrse of events.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 06:38 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. It was also hard to conceive how the court could decide the 2000 election
I don't know if or how the Supreme Court would or could get involved in a treason case. But I imagine that if it's a high-ranking Bush official, they'd be more likely to get involved-- if they can.

And what if they claim that speaking to the media about Valerie Plame is a 1st Amendment Freedom of Speech issue?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
21. This is a good guess on Huffington: David Corn weighs in.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-corn/miller-a-martyr-for-a-mis_b_8144.html

Great David Corn article: It makes more sense than anything else I've read. It sounds most plausible.

Enjoy

"For anyone following the matter, it's impossible not to guess about what's going on and what Fitzgerald will do. His grand jury expires at the end of October. He could impanel a new one and keep investigating. But all indications suggest he's close to done. One person who recently had contact with Fitzgerald and his attorneys says that they seem confident about whatever it is they are pursuing. The Miller matter was something of a sideshow that at times drew more attention than the central issue. Now that Miller has decided to follow the course of the other reporters, perhaps Fitzgerald will be ready to end his inquiry and render decisions about indictment. Throughout Washington, those who have closely observed this investigation express different hunches about whether there will be indictments, about whom will be indicted if there are indictments, about what laws will be invoked if there are indictments. There have been no leaks making one guess more probable than another. Those who care are all waiting for Fitzgerald."

...And I really hate waiting!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. "There have been no leaks" That usually means it's B**
I guess I'm not supposed to repy to myself, but, that line makes me think this will be historic: No leaks? Gotta be Pres or VP. Gotta be. Otherwise, someone would have leaked something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC