Official MEDIA REACTION thread

What are all the pundits saying in the aftermath of the Fitzgerald Press Conference? Watch TV, Scour the Internet, Post Media reactions here.

:thumbsup:

went back to classical music.

sinking and rising threads.

He told Matthews you know it's coming!

the phone rang and I missed it.

Baha!

:shrug:

Fucker Carlson - describes him perfectly!

How predictable.

Time to throw him overboard.

Talk about the stating the obvious.

of a good thing, that is truthful reporting. He was cut off. Am I the only one that noticed this, and is concerned about it?

Saying that was the most impressive news conference he's ever heard... He said the Pres and the Administration is in trouble...

Gergen says it's not over...because of the sand kicke din their face...wow...

Gergen's read is that "We haven't yet found the truth but we will continue to pursue it." Who is Official A?

pick any one. :7

My first thought was Rove. Responding to your "how far will Fitz go?" thought from the last thread (Skinner locked the thread before I could reply), I think Fitzgerald will go the distance on figuring out why Plame was outed. Didn't you find that baseball analogy quite telling? I rather expect to see that clip on Countdown in the near future as it was an important soundbite and it mentioned baseball. ;-)

re: baseball. I'm sure Keith will use it. :D

It's just -- I was watching very carefully -- at times Fitz seemed to be really talking about "wrapping up" a lot. Sigh.

I guess I just have a case of the "uncertainties."

It's a nice first step but I WANT TO KNOW IT ALL NOW!!!!!!! :D

about a new grand jury, he danced a little sidestep. I'm thinking he's thinking it's pretty likely he'll need a new grand jury but he didn't want to announce that at today's press conference since all he had to protect him was a podium. Maybe if there had been a shark cage available...

missed most of the press conference.
Thanks

the umpire would have to determine if:
- he intentionally hit the batter in the head,
- slipped and hit him by accident, or
- intended to hit the batter, but not in the head.

He said that he needs to know all of this before he knows whether to suspend the pitcher or just chalk it up to a bad pitch.

He said the differences between these scenarios are subtle and yet very material. He said that to determine the pitchers intentions, you need as much cooperation from everyone as possible. You would want to know if the pitcher had a running feud with the batter, if he was bad mouthing the batter in the dugout, etc. He said when people don't cooperate with the investigation, it is very difficult to determine if it was intentional. But - if it was intentional, you don't want to let it go unpunished. If it was an accident, you don't want to punish unnecessarily. You need cooperation to do the right thing.

He also said the umpire might have sand in his eyes - but I didn't get that part.

was referring to the Umpire having sand kicked in his eyes, therefore couldn't really get a "clear view" of what happened. Take a minute and think about it.....the prosecuter is the "umpire" the sand in his eyes was the "obstruction of justice". Make sense now?

Fucktard.

www.peteashdown.org

to Ash with Pete Ashdown....

of Fizgerald. Some saying it's a witch hunt to get *.

http://www.presstitutes.com/

I'll post additional examples of post-presser media travesties as they arise.

minimizing like a battered wife!

I can appreciate Patrick Fitzgerald's by-the-book, just-the-facts approach to this press conference. But the thought occurs -- what would it be like to have this guy as a dad?

Scooter. On June 12. 2003. You told mom. That the dinner plates. Had been washed. That the gravy stain. Easily removed. Remained. Owing to. A mechanical defect. In the washing machine. However. Subsequent sources. Have told this kitchen. That these plates. Said to have been washed. Were found on the shelf. Three days prior. And while witnesses. Can attest. That you were seen. Doing dishes. On June 12. Others have testified. That on your last turn. On June 8. Though you cleared the dishes. But that the washer. Was not run. This alleges. That you did not. Run The washer. But rather. Placed the plates. On the shelf. And then watched. According To Jim. Furthermore. Your mother reminds me. That on June 8. She served a meal. That included gravy. Specifically an au jus. It was a French Dip. I enjoyed it with some pringles. And a Coors. The Coors was lukewarm. The French Dip. Was tasty. I remember enjoying the gravy. And sloshing it on my plate. Creating a stain. I'd like to thank. The entire family. My wife. Your brothers and sisters. For helping with this investigation. I would have liked. To have it done. By the time. Without a Trace came on. I like Without a Trace. It's okay. I TiVoed it. These are serious charges. I look forward to finding the truth. Now play ball.

http://www.wonkette.com/

talked about wrapping up.

I have the feeling her household pulls in big bucks between her job as a media pundit and husband Alan Greenspan. She probably loves BushCo's tax policies that benefit the rich.

Hey, Andrea, get with it, not everyone has your income and appreciates the tax cuts you and the likes of Exxon Mobil get. ($12 billion in tax cuts to oil companies this year!)

IMPEACH the CRIMINAL BUSHCORP

Why did he do this? if he did. This is weird behavior. Implies there is something bigger going on here.

is being smeared or that Scooter is involved in something truly nefarious? The lying doesn't really surprise me, but I used to know someone who was a pathological liar. This is tame, compared to some of his shit. You have to understand the mindset: they live in the moment, and don't think people will remember what they've said or check up on their stories. Sometimes, even they don't remember what they've said.

Are the offical PF threads relocated? I can't find them and would like to bookmark them to read later.

Look for the yellow box that says "QUICK LINKS"

possession and similar types of events as only being types of things charged against Rs. Think that lady might have been Harriet Miers at her new job.

I think he's going to squeeze him.

Let it be so. Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease.

He says:

- Nobody has been charged with the original crime.
- Looks like Fitz doesn't think the crime was committed.
- Fitz ruled out "the path to war" investigation.
- Fitz seems to be wrapping things up.

from a paper right in front of him...where's Jon Stewart to tape all this...let's see who else says this??

he sounded like a guy who'd run out of time with his grand jury and made the indictments he thought were rock-solid. He clearly said that he was not done and on more than one occasion ducked a timeline for when he would be done. Yeah, it's all finished. :eyes:

:eyes: He wants more answers from Fitz.

war.

:crazy:

it should have been a GOOD forgery. ;-)

29 Bln vs 558bln

before the GJ won't go ballistic for * & Cheney on Fitzgerald to try to destroy him before they get tripped up further. Russert sounds like he got pounded a bit by Fitzgerald earlier today. Did he comeback on the teevee or did he just leave for a late lunch?

this is how the congress has failed us. it's the job of congress to determine if we were misled into war. they haven't done that.

YES INDEEDY!

Eye of Scruntiny before the friggin' war, if you ask me..

Do you really think there will be more? I'm afraid to hope. At least, I want to know where that forged Italian memo came from.

grand jury "open", whatever that means, and although he declined to definitively say that he was empaneling a new one, he indicated that's not an unusual step for lengthy cases. I got the impression he's trying to downplay the significance of a new grand jury, and who can blame him, given how obsessed the media's been with his movements in the past few days. ("Fitz gets a shoeshine!") He also talked, more than once, about needing to understand not just what happened, but why. Figuring out why Plame was outed has probably led him in all sort of interesting directions.

But he also said that it wasn't his job to investigate why the country went to war. That that was the job of Congress.

And we know those guys in there aren't going to appoint a committee like the Watergate Committee......

I think he'll probably go as far as Brewster Jennings, but unearthing every plot and scheme of the PNAC isn't his brief. How much of the WHIG he's going to unravel is an interesting question.

I'm remembering when the DSM came up. The hearing had to be held in the basement because the repukes wouldn't let them have a room, then no repukes would show up. On top of that, it got very little coverage by corporate media.

The Dems in congress have been trying to get this info out there. It's taking something like this for the talking heads to quit ignoring what we already knew.

The political resolution needs to occur individually and outside of the legal process. Means it's time for the citizens to punish the legislators--both sides of the aisle. Not many of them have demonstrated a learning curve on this issue.

party before country.

I am really starting to think that we should just get rid of polical parties altogether. (not that it'll happen.)

He'll be made to answer all the questions that Fitz asks about EVERYTHING. -- Pat Buchanan.

wouldn't THAT be nice.

compared to what I thought it was gonna be last Monday or Tuesday."

indicted. By definition that is NOT a good day. Buchanan must have gotten into the mushrooms again.

Who do you think will take the ultimate fall? Libby looks pretty depressed lately.

j/k

Tryin' to make it look like he's doing his job and demanding accountability. Too late. He's already used weasel words. Now he's trying to be Clinton and do his job. Short. Whew! And he's gone.

Headsup.

Per analyst on MSNBC.

"Mr. President, are you embarrassed by these charges?" :rofl:

Sure sounded like him.

around him today, Tweety. It was more like the stench of corruption and fear.

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/10/maybe_libby_can.html

The charges against Libby with respect to Russert are gruesome - if Russert is to be believed (and Fitzgerald believed him), Libby simply invented a conversation in which Russert passed to Libby info about Wilson's wife. I can't imagine what Libby could have been thinking, and I wish I had been a bit more trusting of Tim's bizarre denial.

The discrepancy between Libby and Cooper is not cavernous, but it is not good.

The Judy Miller story seems to be strangely incomplete - the June 23 conversation, which came as a late disclosure, is not mentioned here.

Finally, Libby's general story - he learned about Plame from reporters - was daft. Libby had multiple conversations with government officials (State, CIA, the VP, Ari Fleischer) involving Plame. Did he think they would *all* forget when they talked to investigators? If I weren't reading his testimony, I would not believe he had gone down this road.

A small part of Libby's problem, I'll bet, is that his misleading testimony, especially about Russert, forced Fitzgerald to waste a lot of time pursuing subpoenas against reporters.

I will also guess that Rove was caught in Libby's tailwind - Libby's story was so phony that problems with Rove's story probably took on a more sinister tone than if they had ocurred in isolation.

on the original grand jury.

Sort of like the old "four corner stall" in college hoops.

Mark something I can't remember now, dammit, don't get old-that she said was the Undersecretary of State that is the unnamed Undersecretary named in the docs that came out today. Does anyone remember the name she mentioned? Did I dream this? And if anyone does remember, what is known about him?

Ha, I have the same problem remembering all the rat's names these days...I learned long ago NOT to turn on the tube without paper and pencil to record what I've heard, in order to google it later and find out more.

The guy is a former Ambassador, here's a link with much of his official info:

http://www.cohengroup.net/team-mg.html

I'm gonna get me some paper and a pencil. And thanks for the link.

and the investigation is in mop up mode. But I just didn't get that from the Fitzgerald press conference. He basically wasn't giving any time frame and wasn't saying squawk in regard to Rove.

Am I missing something?

:shrug:

want to get their butts hauled out in public like Russert did today. This is going to slap them six ways to Sunday too.

mopping up)

Two answers:

Near the start of the Q & A:

NO, he can't answer the question about what "DANGER has been done to us all" at this time.

then:

"The obstruction is shielding us from the truth"

As finally as that reporter near the end brought up conspiracy, that Libby wasn't charged, but....... he quickly avoided that one....that was the word I had been waiting to hear from a reporter....and boy, was Fitz quick off that one....

It just seems to me that he has a huge pile of stuff on his plate and he's going to be digging deep...

;)

Coming off the press conference, he immediately said: "Tom Hanks WILL have to play him in the movie."

I immediately thought: "WTF? What news analyst thinks like that? And what was that emphasis on the word WILL?" Like he'd been thinking about it. Then I realized he was giving a shout out to DU. He's been here reading our posts.

HI GEORGE!!!!

And that Libby didn't "go to the extent that Martha Stewart did" giving false statements to the FBI - suggesting that what she did was worse than what Libby did.

:eyes:

on Lou Dobbs that Fitz was seriously considering indicting Rove (Gergen got this straight from Rove's lawyer) but Rove gave Fitz new info "at the "last minute" and now Fitz is trying to decide what to do with it.

Gergen will be on MSNBC's Hardball at 7:30 p.m. EST, CNN's Larry King Live, 9 p.m. EST and CNN's Newsnight with Aaron Brown, 10 p.m. EST.

analysis, Who Is Patrick Fitz coming up, also conjecture about ROVE NEXT.

Fitzgerald is very cool under pressure. Love his baseball story.

:shrug:

I turned on MSM news for the first time since the war started, and it was very difficult to listen to some of the pundits and reporters. Too much spin and too little followup.

out" something like that. The man at the NY Daily News said it on Hardball talking about the pResident.

"Mr. Libby has informed me that he is resigning to fight the charges brought against him. I have accepted his decision with deep regret ... In our system of government an accused person is presumed innocent until a contrary finding is made by a jury after an opportunity to answer the charges and a full airing of the facts. Mr. Libby is entitled to that opportunity."
-- Vice President Dick Cheney

GITMO???

Saying Plame wasn't covert, that Joe Wilson's NY Times piece wasn't credible, that Libby essentially didn't commit a crime (I think he was trying to say that talking to reporters isn't a crime, but failed to mention that he got indicted for lying to a grand jury, not for talking to reporters), that this is a witch-hunt...all the talking points.

I don't know if Snow counts as a pundit, or if Bill Maher's show counts as media, but here it is anyway. Maybe someone else here saw it and can add some more to this. :shrug:

This ranks 10th as CNN's most popular story???
WTF?
Is that real?
Is American dumb as a bush or whaaaaat?

And when I turned on Tucker, at about 40 minutes in, one of the stories coming up on the list was "Scooter". The Big Giant Head thinks this will all go away by Monday because no one cares who Libby is, or what he did.

O-tay.

Cheney didn't authorize the Niger investigation, Plame recommended her husband as part of CIA attempt to discredit administration, the Senate Intelligence report on the Wilson findings states they were not credible, Wilson spoke to media, Wilson found evidence to support the purchase of uranium, but said it was not true because the document was a forgery, a fact not known until later, etc... I've heard this from Stoned Blow (T.Snow) on Maher and then some boob named Cliff May on CNN. Here is my simple question: Why was it even necessary to involve Wilson's wife? May stated that there is nothing illegal about smearing a political foe. What about to cover up the truth about the lies told to start an unjust war?

also compiled discussion threads and, when it becomes available next Monday, the show transcript:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5214707&mesg_id=5214707
thread title: ***VIDEOS of O'Donnell and John Dean on Olbermann/Countdown 10/28***

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5216210
Thread title: LA Times: EIGHT News articles plus TWO op/eds on the Fitz case! 10/29

Four-paragraph excerpts are given from the two op/eds and from one of the eight related news stories; titles and links are given for the other seven news stories. Taken together, it's a fairly thorough analysis of the case, an assertion of its importance (as is the fact that TEN ARTICLES related to the Fitz investigation appeared in one issue), and a condemnation of the US media for falling for the lies of the Bush Administration in the rush into the Iraq war.

around him. Disconnected from reality does not even begin to describe how idiotic he appears to the world.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051028-1.html

On the morning of September the 11, 2001, we saw the destruction that terrorists intend for this nation. We know they want to strike again. And our nation has made a clear choice: We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. And we will not tire and we will not rest until the war on terror is won. (Applause.)

In the four years since September the 11th, the evil that reached our shores has reappeared on other days, in other places -- in Mombasa and Casablanca and Riyadh and Jakarta and Istanbul and Madrid, in Beslan and Taba and Netanya and Baghdad, and elsewhere. In the past few months, we have seen a new terror offensive with attacks on London, and Sharm el-Sheikh, and a deadly bombing in Bali once again.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Mr. President, war is terror.

AUDIENCE: Booo!

Most of page one:

Cheney aide indicted

Libby resigns over perjury charges in CIA leak case;
Rove probe goes on

News analysis: Behind crisis, key advisers' tactics

Rove directed this disaster, and it is Bush's fault for letting him.
Comparisons made to Iran Contra.

Also: Indictments put focus on neoconservatives

Today's Globe contains at least seven articles plus one op-ed.
(Boston Globe: Free reg. required)

:applause:

Meanwhile, the Boston Herald buried the indictment
in a story focused on Andrew Card: House of Card is falling down...

:rofl:

EDIT: additional information

The Independent has a couple of good articles today. The first is front page and accurately describes the saga thus far.



The second article puts the indictment in a larger frame, suggesting that at least some MSM journalists "get it".

THe Wall Street Journal PBS show was in complete denial last night and made a mockery of themselves as they kept spinning and spinning
never even mentioned the indictment of Libby for the first 15 minutes - made Meier's and Rove look like good things and then tried the "he is a good man who forgot" routine about Libby - anyone who looks to the Journal for rational analysis and news needs their head examined!!!

"The WSJ Editorial Board" is one of the shows Tomlinson forced PBS to start running when he was in charge of CPB and ranting about "liberal bias".