6/13/2006

9 Responses to “Shocker: Jason Leopold Wrong”

1. […] Update: Patterico has the best one-liner I've seen yet:  I guess Jason Leopold was not only “too far out in front of the news-cycle,” but was also reporting news occurring in an alternate universe consisting of his own fantasies. […]

   Reality and Sanity » Blog Archive » No Fitzmas (52f6b9) — 6/13/2006 @ 7:54 pm

   
   

2. This one is too much fun — almost like shooting fish in a barrel. I don’t imagine that Leoplod will have his credibility on left-wing blogs curtailad. Being on the (far) left means never having to say you’re sorry, at least where the Bush Administration is concerned.

   JVW (d667c9) — 6/13/2006 @ 10:17 pm

   
   

3. Leoplod. Heh. I’d like to think that wasn’t a typo.

   Patterico (50c3cd) — 6/13/2006 @ 10:35 pm

   
   

4. Patterico,

   Did you wait the request 24 hours, excuse me, 24 “business hours” before posting this? After all, we wouldn’t want you to get too far ahead of the story! 😉

   I love how some democrats are spinning this. “Just because he hasn’t been indited doesn’t mean he hasn’t broken the law” So much for innocent until proven guilty!

   I don’t know if I posted this before, but here’s something I wrote to celebrate another Fitzmas Special:

   And So This Is Fitzmas
   by Ray

   And so this is Fitzmas.
   Yet what do we hear?
   Rove won’t be indicted.
   The Bushbot’s end is not near!

   This is not a Merry Fitzmas!
   There is nothing to cheer!
   The Bushbots still rule us!
   It’s the sum of our fear!

   There’ll be no indictment.
   That’s just what Fitz said.
   There is no more Justice!
   All our Liberty’s dead!

   This is not a Merry Fitzmas!
   There is nothing to cheer!
   The Bushbots still rule us!
   It’s the sum of our fear!

   Despite of our theories.
   Despite all that we say.
   Fitzgerald didn’t listen.
   He let the rat get away!

   This is not a Merry Fitzmas!
   There is nothing to cheer!
   The Bushbots still rule us!
   It’s the sum of our fear!

   Merry Fitzmas Everyone!

   Disclaimer: The above song is a parody, so please do not sue me!

   Ray (be81f9) — 6/14/2006 @ 1:05 pm

   
   

5. […] You’ve just got to read the comments; while some of the Truthout readers have accepted the fact that Mr Leoplod’s story was just flat wrong, the holdouts are still there, questioning the story since it came from Mr Rove’s attorney — as though, if he lied, such a lie would not have been almost immediately exposed. […]

   Common Sense Political Thought » Blog Archive » Oh, I can’t wait for this! (819604) — 6/14/2006 @ 4:49 pm

   
   

6. Rove wasn’t indicted so that he could testify against Libby and Dick. ‘Can’t have a witness with a tarnished image, now can we?

   Am I just dreaming? Maybe.

   But maybe not:

   Robert Luskin, Rove’s attorney, said it was too soon to know whether Rove would take the stand at Libby’s trial, which is scheduled to begin in January.

   In court filings, Libby’s lawyers have predicted Rove will be “a key witness at trial,” an assertion Fitzgerald has dismissed as a ploy “to put the conduct of others on trial.”
   http://www.commercialappeal.com/mca/politics/article/0,1426,MCA_1496_4772574,00.html

   Rove could be Fitzgerald’s star witness.

   Psyberian (dd13d6) — 6/14/2006 @ 6:08 pm

   
   

7. Psy, you are suggesting that Mr Fitzgerald let the supposedly bigger fish get away so he’d be able to reel in the littler one. Would that make any sense if Mr Fitzgerald actually had anything on Mr Rove?

   Mr Libby was indicted, basically, for (allegedly) lying to legitimate investigators about something that wasn’t illegal. If he really did that, he was stupid, but it does not necessarily follow that everyone else had to lie about it.

   Dana (9f37aa) — 6/14/2006 @ 7:08 pm

   
   

8. Is Rove a bigger fish than the Vice President Dana?

   Fitzgerald is so secretive that he may have big surprises for us. You’re assuming that Libby’s false testimony is all that Fitzgerald has on anyone. You may well be right, but I’m not convinced of that.

   Psyberian (dd13d6) — 6/15/2006 @ 5:24 am

   
   

9. The only one indited so far has been Libby. Everything else is just speculation.

   After a multi-year, multi-million dollar investigation, the only thing we have to show so far is a single indictment for a charge that wasn’t even the reason for the investigation.

   Just like in the Clinton investigation, the “Special Prosecutor” has shown to be a waste of time and money. When will Congress finally put the “Special Prosecutor” baby to bed once and for all?

   Ray (be81f9) — 6/15/2006 @ 1:03 pm