Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (103457)	7/19/2007 1:37:39 PM
From: Steve Dietrich	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 173976

Your dishonesty continues to astound. You know there are two parts to the law we're talking about. 1. The person has to be covert 2.the leaker has to know the person was covert at the time of the leak. Fitzgerald has said in court that he believed Plame was covert but he did not know if the leakers knew it at the time of the leak. Fitzgerald believed 1. to be true but did not know if 2. was true. He said so in his filing and in his press conference. So for you to continuously argue "if Plame was indeed covert and Fitz thought he could prove it...he would have filed charges..." is a lie. You know it's a lie. You know the law is more complicated than that and you know what Fitzgerald's filings say. Yet you continue to say what you know is not true. That makes you a person without credibility. SD