Richard Armitage admited to outing her unintentionally. A confession is usually considered sufficient evidence.
Novak said his primary source was Richard Armitage. Rove was a secondary source, and it only came from an "Oh, you heard that, too," reply to Novak when asked about Plame. Rove admitted this as well during the investigation. Again, if the leak was a crime, there was plenty of evidence to charge someone.
Okay, lets say that after his investigation, he decides that leak isn't a crime. Does that mean that lying to him under oath in his investigation isn't a crime?
Libby perjured himself to cover up the LEAKING in an investigation of a potential crime - LEAKING Bill perjured himself to cover up a BJ in an investigation of a potential crime - WW
Assuming this is true - and I don't believe that - it would be an example of what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The new environment that Starr created said it was OK to do that sort of thing. I do think the two cases are different, but I also think that in the pre-Starr environment, that Libby's violation wouldn't have been prosecuted by the old boy's network. So if you think Libby got railroaded, the blame in large part rests with Starr and his masters.
No where have I said that what Libby did wasn't a crime. It was, and he deserved what he got. All I am saying is that in both of these cases you had special prosecutors that had enough enough early on in their investigations to justify ending the investigations with a "nothing to see here, move long" type of statement. Instead, both of these prosecutors dragged their investigations out to try and find something they could stick on someone, and both cases resulted in major trials at taxpayer expense that should have been unecessary.
Maybe, if the half-drunk, chain-humping 18-21 year olds going there knew or cared about any adult their besides a head coach or that semester's profs. They coulda had Simon Legree or James Earl Ray runnin' U
Maybe, if the half-drunk, chain-humping 18-21 year olds going there knew or cared about any adult their besides a head coach or that semester's profs. They coulda had Simon Legree or James Earl Ray runnin' U of H when I was there, as long as I landed a job with a five-figure salary and a 2 or 3 in front of it.
Starr went from investigating WW to investigating a BJ Fitzgerald went from investigating a LEAK to investigating a LEAK
Starr went from investigating WW to investigating perjury. Fitzgerald went from investigatin a leak to investigating perjury.
I heard that Ken Starr's first action as president of Baylor was to ban students from making love while standing up. He didn't want anyone to think he allowed dancing. <rimshot>
Excellent! You agree with me that both prosecuters went from investing a specific criminal matter to investigating perjury. We are making progress!
let me rephrase it Starr went from investigating WW to investigating a BJ then charging perjury as regards to the BJ Fitzgerald went from investigating a LEAK to investigating the LEAK then charging perjury as regards to the LEAK
So do you agree that when he found out there was no criminal aspect to the leak (which he did early on) he should have packed up his investigation and went home?
dude, it still is not comparison to whitewater and you are playing semantics. ken starr brought charges in an investigation that had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with what he started out investigating. fitzgerald brought charges directly related to his original investigation. do you disagree with that?
Ken Starr is a really nice guy to hang around with, I enjoyed the time I had with him. I think he brought a lot to Pepperdine's School of Law. I am sure that he will do very well for Baylor and I wish him all the best.
Am I the only one dumbstruck by the notion of somebody being dissatisfied in Malibu, California and relocating to Waco, Texas? No offense to Waco or Baylor, but it is simply not as scenic, temperate or posh as Malibu.
