<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Another Libby Verdict Thread</title>
	<atom:link href="http://informedspeculation.com/2007/03/06/another-libby-verdict-thread/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://informedspeculation.com/2007/03/06/another-libby-verdict-thread/</link>
	<description>Refunds Cheerfully Given To All Who Disagree</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:53:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: john morrissey</title>
		<link>http://informedspeculation.com/2007/03/06/another-libby-verdict-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-254733</link>
		<dc:creator>john morrissey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 22:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://decision08.net/2007/03/06/another-libby-verdict-thread/#comment-254733</guid>
		<description>1. Not surprised by the verdict. I thought his attys and basic strategy were poor,i.e. &quot;scapegoat comment&quot;.2.Not putting Libby on stand  big mistake. If he has nothing to hide, etc, most jurors will conclude he would appear if he was innocent.I know they are not supposed to hold it against him but they do.His attys, like most of them are convinced only they are smart enough to face a jury.3.Fitxgerald lied at his big press conference when he said that Libby was the first leak. Fitz knew at the time that Armitrage was the leaker.Why did Libbys attys not try to put Fitz on stand?Overall,this persecution by overzealous prosecutors a rising prob, Martha Stewart,Arthur Andersen,the current Brocade case .These guys are Media darlings and they all think they are Sam Waterston on L&amp;O.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Not surprised by the verdict. I thought his attys and basic strategy were poor,i.e. &#8220;scapegoat comment&#8221;.2.Not putting Libby on stand  big mistake. If he has nothing to hide, etc, most jurors will conclude he would appear if he was innocent.I know they are not supposed to hold it against him but they do.His attys, like most of them are convinced only they are smart enough to face a jury.3.Fitxgerald lied at his big press conference when he said that Libby was the first leak. Fitz knew at the time that Armitrage was the leaker.Why did Libbys attys not try to put Fitz on stand?Overall,this persecution by overzealous prosecutors a rising prob, Martha Stewart,Arthur Andersen,the current Brocade case .These guys are Media darlings and they all think they are Sam Waterston on L&amp;O.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joust The Facts</title>
		<link>http://informedspeculation.com/2007/03/06/another-libby-verdict-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-254126</link>
		<dc:creator>Joust The Facts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 01:03:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://decision08.net/2007/03/06/another-libby-verdict-thread/#comment-254126</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;The Scooter Libby Top Six&lt;/strong&gt;

Here, without further ado, are the top five things VP Cheney&#039;s former right hand man, Scooter Libby, was not convicted of: Lying about Iraq and it&#039;s WMD, specifically, the desire to buy uranium from Niger. (It was, in fact, Joe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>The Scooter Libby Top Six</strong></p>
<p>Here, without further ado, are the top five things VP Cheney&#8217;s former right hand man, Scooter Libby, was not convicted of: Lying about Iraq and it&#8217;s WMD, specifically, the desire to buy uranium from Niger. (It was, in fact, Joe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

