Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Theory : Leopold's source is a member of the Grand Jury

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
rpgamerd00d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 09:48 AM
Original message
Theory : Leopold's source is a member of the Grand Jury
Edited on Tue Jun-13-06 10:16 AM by rpgamerd00d
I think the original leak about the Rove Indictment came from someone (or a few someones) in the Grand Jury.

They are the only ones who *could* leak the info, and who *would* leak the info (because they aren't for the defense or prosecution, so don't care about strategy).

This is an unfounded guess. Take it with a grain of salt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. No. It was a letter from Fitzgerald. Game over. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpgamerd00d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I don't think you read the actual post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gidney N Cloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Are you confusing Luskin with Leopold?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosco T. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Show me the letter.. 'till someone does, Rove is still 'on the hook'..
don't buy the bullshit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. OK, I get the point. but I doubt a lawyer (Luskin) would lie about
a physical fact such as a letter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosco T. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. You "Doubt a Lawyer would LIE"????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
6. I dont think so.
That juror would be taking a big risk in getting kicked off the jury. Fitzgerald don't play that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-13-06 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
8. A Small Website Is The Only One?
Sorry...nice try on that one.

The only person who appeared to have any credible information about this case was Lawrence O'Donnell who came out and said what he claimed most of "inside the beltway" knew...and that was Rove was Cooper's source. Several days later it came out that Rove had waived his confidentiality for Cooper and this solved that part of the puzzle...and obviously enough for Fitzgerald...despite additional investigating...to find enough evidence to put forth an indictment. There's nothing more, nothing less

I don't know who was Leopold's source, nor do I care. He was wrong, wrong, wrong. No one...not an O'Donnell...backed up his claim. Other than starting flame wars on DU (or should I start calling this place Appologists Underground?) I saw NO other website either investigate Leopold's story or even give it any play. Leopold claimed he'd divulge his sources...never did. Time to bury this entire non-story as the "facts on the ground" now prove this story never had any merit.

I'm glad there were no leaks...what a pleasant change from the trial by leaks that Starr used to try to force Clinton to resign by embarassment.

I doubt is was a grand juror as those people's names are just as guarded by Fitzgerald as any evidence and a leak of that sort would have led to either an immediate dismissal of that juror or other action. None that we know of occured.

Time to face reality. Truthout's lost a lot of credibility here and those who attempt to continue to defend them look as silly as the wingnuts who still say Iraq/911...wanting to believe despite the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC