" Libby jury heads into seventh day of deliberations"
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/01/cia.leak.ap/index.html?eref=rss_politics
I swear if that guy walks, justice is dead in America.
2007-03-01 02:47:53 · 10 answers · asked by BeachBum 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Probably a neo-con plant on the jury to hold things up. I don't think there was any doubt he was/is a liar, he is a repuglican after all.
2007-03-01 11:39:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
What do you mean, "justice is dead" if he walks?
If a jury declines to convict him, then he's free to go.
But the whole case is built upon memories of conversations. Even the prosecutor, Fitz-whatever, has never charged anybody for the alleged crime of outing a covert agent, because that really wasn't the case.
I'm just trying to figure out why Libby didn't use the Hillary line, "I don't recall", which she used with much success in all her scandal and corruption investigation testimony.
2007-03-01 11:01:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
There is a lot of evidence for the jury to review. It is a fairly complex case. Seven days or more is not unusual. It is also a sign that the jury is split at this point.
2007-03-01 10:52:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
There may be a conservative in the mix, and justice contrary to your assertion will be alive, because Armitage leaked the name not Libby and that issue was what the Fitzhole was supposed to investigate, but then again you are a liberal.
2007-03-01 11:50:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
You're entitled to your opinion, but neither of us was in the courtroom.
The jury is doing its work and being careful, I hope.
If he lied to investigators, he should be found guilty. Even though the underlying conduct being investigated - relevling Plame's identity, job, etc. - was not a crime. (No one was charged with that.) Same as the Clinton case, where he accepted a plea bargain to avoid prosecution.
Consistent application of the law is more important than politics. I hope you agree.
2007-03-01 11:12:47 · answer #5 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well now,,,,here what I think,,,,They are trying to figure out how to keep Cheney from being put on trial and the lawyers are making deals right and left. And, no matter the outcome of the trial...the real loud mouth wasn't on trial. Libby is taking the rap for Tricky Dicky. No doubt in my mind.
2007-03-01 10:57:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
You know how trials go, long. Justice happens randomly. Look at OJ Simpson, hell, look at Michael Jackson. At least Scott Peterson got what he deserved.
2007-03-01 11:04:15 · answer #7 · answered by Daniel 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, the case is wafer thin. Otherwise it would have been put to rest by now. Better luck in 08.
2007-03-01 10:56:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not guilty comes immediately to mind.
There was no case to start with.
2007-03-01 10:52:22 · answer #9 · answered by thegubmint 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
They can't find any evidence to convict him.
2007-03-01 10:58:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋