Does bizarre behavior at the NY Times mean Rove-Libbey off the hook?
The New York Times sudden change in their treatment of Judith Miller from darling to under review is very bizarre. Mix that with the 'catty' snipes from Maureen Dawd against Miller and you sense the Grey Lady is sensing that in spite of all the hyped up story of Miller going to jail, etc. nothing will come of it as far as indictments against Rove and Libbey. Could this sudden turn simply be a temper tantrum? We will see. The best thing about this whole case is that it must end this week. The term of the Grand Jury Fitzgerald is working with expires Friday. However it goes, maybe the news media will be able to cease passing speculation for journalism for a little while.
posted by All_I_Can_Stands @ 8:45 AM
2 Comments:
At 2:13 PM,
Anonymous said…
"The edifice of American jurisprudence rests on the foundation of the due process of law. The mortar in that foundation is the oath. Every day, thousands of citizens in thousands of courtrooms across America are sworn in as jurors, as grand jurors, as witnesses, as defendants. On those oaths rest the due process of law upon which all of our other rights are based. The oath is how we defend ourselves against those who would subvert our system by breaking our laws. There are Americans in jail today because they violated that oath...To say otherwise would be to severely lower the moral and legal standards of accountability that are imposed on ordinary citizens every day. The same standard should be imposed on our leaders."
- Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX)
At 2:55 PM,
All_I_Can_Stands said…
I am a firm supporter punishment for testifying falsely under oath so I would agree with that statement. If Fitzgerald indicts Rove or Libby for perjuring themself during the process of testifying in the leak probe and he is able to prove it they should be punished. Good quote.
Post a Comment
<< Home