home
The Worst Argument for Libby's Acquittal | 20 comments (20 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

jim, being intentionally obtuse yet again? (none / 0) (#13)
by cpinva on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 06:47:29 AM EST
op/ed's aren't "news", they are opinion. surely you can distinguish. it was clearly directed towards the jury. whether or not they will strictly abide by the judge's instructions remains to be seen.

tom, the "facts" in ms. toensings op/ed are demonstrably not. they have been disproved, by the actual evidence, time and again. ms. plame's status with the cia, as noted by jeralyn, is irrelevant (although the cia itself has stated she was in a covert position at the time), with respect to the current trial. in fact, most of the issues she cites are irrelevant, with respect to the trial. they are relevant only with respect to the credibility of the current administration.

they are basically republican "talking points", distributed for the sole purpose of attempting to confuse the masses. apparently, it worked on the editors at the post.

cpinva (none / 0) (#14)
by jimakaPPJ on Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 09:09:28 AM EST
I don't care if they are news pieces, opinion pieces or cooking recipies. What they are is not the point.

As to whether or not they are factual, I will say that the facts are that Fitzgerald should have dropped the investigation as soon as he knew that that Armitage was the leaker, and that there was no underlying crime. I think that was just as he came on board.

The issue is that because you disagree with those who defend Libby you want to silence the press.

Just as I can say to the Repubs that they should be happy they couldn't change the rules about the fillibuster, I tell you that you should be happy that you can not silence the free press.

[ Parent ]

The Worst Argument for Libby's Acquittal | 20 comments (20 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft