Friday, June 29, 2007

A Rare Reprise.

Amid last minute packing for a three week trip to Croatia, I made a little time to scan the blogs for a final survey of the world I'm leaving. I thought it would remind me of how much I enjoy getting away from the U.S. political scene, but surprisingly I found this article, which made me more hopeful than anything else.

Combined with the video Left-Over posted below, I can actually start to envision the generation of my own 17 and 18 year old sons finally deciding to take back their future from the current mob of rich white males who have repeatedly tried to use the threat of terrorism to take it from them.

It won't be easy, as the levers of power are still turned against them, but time carries a power of its own (and how much time will it take to outlast the Dick Cheneys of the world anyway!)

All of which leads me back to a piece I wrote a little over a year ago, during my last trip to the small island in Croatia that will be my home for the next three weeks. I think it is very much related to the task ahead for the generation of my boys.

In that spirit, I'd like to re-post it here:

Building a Wall For the Future
(Originally posted 5/18/2006)

With an unexpected opportunity to blog off the clock while staying at a friend's house in Rijeka, Croatia, I've suddenly realized that the two main sources of inspiration for most of my posts here at Left-Over – a frequent rekindling of anger over the course that George Bush and his cronies have taken my country, and the consistently hilarious stupidity of the many lies offered by his defenders – just don't exist for me here!

I'm sure I could muster more anger and/or derisive laughter about the state of affairs in Croatian politics if I understood them better, and I don't want to be overly idealistic, but what I see here – at least in the small town life of the residents of Losinj – is a simple appreciation for hard work, and for the sometimes hidden, long-term benefits that go completely unvalued in American life.

For lack of time, and the building aggravation of using a keyboard that has letters scrambled like a game of musical keys, I will limit this post to a description of one example.

Every day of the last week, I have walked along a cobblestone path that leads to the house where I am staying at least three or four times. For the first few days, I kept noticing a man who was engaged in the task of building a stone wall. Working alone, he would mix a small batch of mortar, and carefully select each stone, probably weighing about 75-125 lbs each, to fit in the wall like a puzzle. Each time I passed, the span of wall about 20 feet long looked nearly identical to the last time, but after a couple of days it seemed about a foot higher.

After watching him for about 5 days, I finally asked the man how long he had been working on the wall. In broken English (fortunately, I've found that nearly everyone speaks at least "a leetle," which soundly beats my Croatian), he explained that he had been working on the wall for three weeks, "but only for about 4 hours per day." In 95 degree heat and no shade, I initially thought this to be a foolish endeavor, particularly since the island is loaded with trees, and one could build a wooden fence of similar length in about a half a day.

But then I tried to consider the long-term benefits of the rock wall. First of all, the island is also full of rocks, and they are essentially free – with a minimal need for processing. Further, moving the rocks into a wall frees up valuable soil for growing food. Wood, on the other hand, would have to be shipped to the island by boat or milled from the existing trees on the island, robbing it of its natural beauty. And the rock wall will be there for hundreds of years with little, if any, need to maintain it.

The rock wall just means that this guy has to invest a month in the hot sun stacking rocks – for benefits that will not be immediate, and are intended to be shared by future generations. But the rock wall will preserve, and even improve, the natural environment in which it is built.

Think about that for a minute: Investing for future generations in a way that preserves and improves the natural environment!

And the funny thing is, from what I've also seen while I've been here, this guy building the rock wall probably still had a state-of-the-art cell phone, a satellite dish on his house, and a new car with five or six cup holders!

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

My Heroes Too!

On Tuesday fifty top high school students stood up to President Bush. Countdown has the story:

Sunday, June 24, 2007

I, Lobbyist

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

After reading this short note a while back regarding efforts By Karl Rove, Andy Card and Laura Bush to start developing “the Bush legacy plan,” I’ve come up with an idea for some new legislation. Consequently, I am currently looking for members of either the House or the Senate who are willing to sponsor my bill.

I don’t have a lot of money to pour into campaign coffers in exchange for this support, and I’m not willing to take anyone golfing in Scotland, or let anyone live on my boat. But my proposal does have a catchy name and the potential to build a lot of good will among most of the voting public for anyone in Congress who chooses to take it up!

I call it The Presidential “Incomplete Grade” Initiative, and it would make illegal any effort to raise funds for, or conduct activities related to, “legacy polishing” for an outgoing or ex-president, as long as any war declared by that president continues!

This would mean there could be no planning for an architecturally striking presidential library (such as the Clinton Library shown above), built as a monument to the president’s term in office, as long as a war that he (or she) started is unresolved.

It would mean there could be no “think tank” churning out position papers touting the benefits of the president’s policies, as long as soldiers are dying in the aftermath of those policies, and without the ability to determine the final benefit attached to those deaths.

It would mean there could be no vetting of friendly biographers, or ghost writers who could simulate the deeply contemplative thoughts of a wizened veteran of the most powerful job in the free world, as long as the final, most important, lessons of the presidency remain in doubt.

Such a law would be similar to preventing a student from sending out resumes listing an educational degree that was not received, because the student was given an incomplete grade in a critical class required for graduation.

It would be similar to preventing a corporation from sending out a prospectus that reports actual earnings based on projections that will not be realized until some time in the indefinite future.

It would (perhaps more than anything else) be similar to preventing a child from getting his allowance before he completes his homework or does his chores.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Richard Cohen: A Columnist with the Lights Off (and Nobody Home!)

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

It amazes me to think that WAPO’s Richard Cohen will be collecting a paycheck for his latest contribution to the “Free Scooter” movement, which included this gem:
(Scooter's lying) is not an entirely trivial matter since government officials should not lie to grand juries, but neither should they be called to account for practicing the dark art of politics. As with sex or real estate, it is often best to keep the lights off.
While Glenn Greenwald takes Cohen apart over the implications of this line as a metaphor for the attitude of the DC press, and Christie Hardin Smith takes Cohen apart over the implications of this line as a metaphor for Cohen’s attitude toward the rule of law, I’d like to offer a simpler reminder of how stupid this man is.

Richard Cohen is the same man who thought his days as an elementary school class clown made him qualified to tell us that Stephen Colbert is not funny!

Clearly, as with sex or real estate, when it comes to generating ideas for his columns, Richard Cohen finds it best to keep the lights off!

[I think the image above is one of the only known lighted shots of Cohen with his real estate agent!]

Monday, June 18, 2007

The One and Only (Current Republican) Savior!

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

With their three leading candidates seriously flawed, someone has to step in to fill the void of desperate hope for republicans somehow imagining that they can follow-up the disastrous Bush administration by keeping the White House in 2008 - to stave off sinking into corruption-filled oblivion for the next decade or two.

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

McCain’s flaw is summed up by this picture, although there are plenty of corruption-and cover-up-related details to back it up

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Giuliani’s flaw is summed up by this quote from his reaction after 9/11, although there are plenty of sleazy, dickhead-related details to back it up!

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Romney is, well, a buffoon, who is virtually sure to choke on his own foot well before the general election, and probably the republican primary – if not the next time he opens his mouth!

Unfortunately for republicans, that leaves the as-yet-undeclared Fred Thompson as the latest great (rich) white (male) hope to follow in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan and keep the White House in conservative hands.

Hunter recently offered this humorous explanation for why Thompson even has a chance in a current American culture that seems to glorify celebrity over everything else:
He is Reaganesque, even, if Reagan had been less of a 50's-era leading man type and more of a tenderized, slightly doughy, puzzlingly lumpy ex-football player turned midpriced motivational speaker.

I'm not sure whether Thompson ever played second fiddle to a dull-eyed and vaguely unwilling thespian chimp, however. But if both Ronald Reagan and Dick Cheney could do it, I'm sure Fred could if the situation ever came up.
And ex-republican-savior, George “Macaca” Allen, described what some supporters consider to be Thompson's greatest strength:
Thompson . . . is "the best voice in America," Allen, a Virginia Republican, told a lecture series audience yesterday.
He likened Thompson's voice to that of a "modern-day Rex Allen," drawing a reference to a now-deceased cowboy actor.
It must be pretty sad for an actual moderate, traditional, fiscal conservative to realize that their party’s chances of any sort of influence during the next presidential term have been reduced - by the incompetence and corruption of the Bush administration, and the pathetic crop of potential candidates - to such strategies as convincing Thompson to actually run, and hoping to coerce someone like James Earl Jones to be his running mate!

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Libby is Going to Jail!!???

MSNBC is reporting that Judge Walton has ruled that Scooter Libby must begin serving his sentence.

OK George - the pardon ball is now in your court. Your approval rating is at 29%. I think a Pardon will put you in the teens.

And now we may find out who Libby's wife wants to f--k!

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

I Have a Dream! No, Seriously; It Goes Like This . . .

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

The subconscious mind works in mysterious ways, but sometimes the mysteries are a little easier to discern than others.

Left-Over and I are planning to attend the Yearly Kos Convention in Chicago later this summer. It should be an exciting and eventful weekend, but not as exciting and eventful as the dream I had last night.

In my dream, I am at the convention, sitting in a balcony seat for a Q&A session with an unknown speaker. Surprisingly, as the mystery speaker walks out on the stage, I realize that it is none other than George W. Bush. He has a number of security guards with him as he strides out to the center of the stage and sits in a chair.

For some reason, the stage is not in a convention center, but rather some sort of performing arts venue. I can’t see the very front of the stage from my seat in the balcony, but I can see five chairs in the center for Bush and his four security guards. There is nothing else on the stage but a plain backdrop that slopes upward, at first gradually, but increasing to near vertical at the very back.

It is eerily quiet, as I look around at the audience, waiting for someone to ask a question. No one speaks. I am also waiting for a chorus of booing, like during the presentation of Andy Card’s honorary degree, but it doesn’t come. There is no question to be heard, but Bush starts answering one anyway. He starts to talk, but I can’t hear what he is saying because his voice is quickly overpowered by music that is coming from the house sound system.

Bush stands up and his security crew suddenly scampers off of the stage dragging all of the chairs. Bush begins to shuffle his feet, slowly at first, but then speeding up into a tap dancing rhythm. Before long, Bush is bounding around the stage like Fred Astaire. A partner appears from stage left, and they begin to swirl and dip to the music.

The audience seems too stunned to do anything other than stare, slack jawed. I want them to boo his dancing, but they don’t. He’s not bad, but I want to yell something that will show him how much he is reviled! How could he be so bold as to come to a liberal bloggers’ convention, and not be treated with disdain?

I think of a “clever” line that will undoubtedly break the ice and turn loose a torrent of boos and catcalls. I yell out that he’s “not on Dancing With the Stars, so he can just get off the stage!” I’m quite proud of myself for being the first to challenge him. But suddenly, my call doesn’t make sense because he is no longer dancing.

He has jumped on a bicycle and is riding it around the stage! It’s a trick bike with pegs on the back wheel, so he can jump and spin as he turns. He rides up the ramp at the back of the stage and then zooms back down to the front where he briefly leaves my field of vision. I strain my neck to see what he’s going to do, as he circles the stage a couple of times. Suddenly, as he reaches the part of the stage that is hidden from my view, I hear a loud crash. The crowd, who had been completely silent other than my own yell earlier, bursts into loud applause.

I jump from my seat and run to the front of the balcony to see George W. Bush sprawled on the stage, his bike a mangled scrap of metal lying next to him. His security guards are running to his side as several audience members point and shout “His hand is broken, His hand is broken!”

I feel a sense of intense joy and contentment wash over me as the crowd is filled with lively discussion about what they have just witnessed. Finally, some “karma” has come home to roost!

As I get up and begin to walk out of the venue, a big smile on my face and a bounce in my gait, I start to overhear some conversations that snap me out of my good mood.

According to the voices, media reports are beginning to circulate that because Bush is known to be an expert rider, the only possible reason for the crash is that Bush was drugged, apparently by attendees at a liberal bloggers’ convention. All over the country, people are beginning to question the motives of bloggers, whose lack of patriotism led them to poison our incredibly talented President!”

And suddenly, my thoughts crystallize on what I understand to be the real story behind the President’s drugged bicycle crash. While the crowd around me buzzes with questions and perplexed conversation, I know exactly what happened behind the scenes, unrecorded by any form of evidence or proof. It is all part of a grand master plan to undermine the convention and build sympathy and support for the President!

I wake in a cold sweat, yelling out the same words that I have considered many times before: “Damn You, Karl Rove!”

Monday, June 11, 2007

Bush's Albania/Bulgaria One Two Punch

In case you missed our eloquent Commander-in-Chief today. Here are his two proudest comandering moments:

#2 Albania

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Yesterday you called for a deadline for U.N. action on Kosovo. When would you like that deadline set? And are you at all concerned that taking that type of a stance is going to further inflame U.S. relations with Russia? And is there any chance that you're going to sign on to the Russian missile defense proposal?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thanks. A couple of points on that. First of all, I don't think I called for a deadline. I thought I said, time -- I did? What exactly did I say? I said, "deadline"? Okay, yes, then I meant what I said. (Laughter.) The question is whether or not there is going to be endless dialogue on a subject that we have made up our mind about. We believe Kosovo ought to be independent.

#1 Bulgaria

Q Mr. President, I want to take you back to domestic issues again. You say the no-confidence vote has no bearing as to whether Alberto Gonzales remains as Attorney General. How can he continue to be effective? And it seems like you're not listening to Congress when it comes to Gonzales, but you are listening to Congress when it comes to Peter Pace.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes, it's an interesting comment about Congress, isn't it, that, on the one hand, they say that a good general shouldn't be reconfirmed, and on the other hand, they say that my Attorney General shouldn't stay. And I find it interesting. I guess it reflects the political atmosphere of Washington. And they can try to have their votes of no confidence, but it's not going to determine -- make the determination who serves in my government.

Sometimes It's Not About Politics!

This is my first good chance to try blogging from my new Treo, so here goes: This shot of the Chicago skyline is taken across Diversey Harbor about half a mile from my son's apartment. I'm here for the whole week - part business and part fun.

Saturday, June 09, 2007

Mitt Romney’s (Likable) Twin?

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

This piece from Matt Taibbi at Rolling Stone completely nails the characterization of Rudy Giuliani that I think has led me to develop such a strong dislike for him. Although there isn’t a physical resemblance, Giuliani has mastered George W. Bush’s ability to appeal to the stupid, macho bully portion of the electorate, while giving the impression that he genuinely feels that the sun rises and sets from his own ass!

I find myself with a similar dislike for Mitt Romney, and I’ve been struggling to pinpoint the exact reason. From his choice to run early campaign ads on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, to his ridiculous boasts about “hunting varmints,” to his bumbling descriptions of his then-15-year-old wife as “hot,” to just about every foot-in-mouth comment he’s made during the debates, Romney has reminded me of someone familiar. Someone particularly annoying! But I haven’t been able to put my finger on who it is.

And then it hit me:

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Mitt Romney is Sam Malone, but without the benefit of an endearingly clever script writer, and a cast of lovable misfits like Norm Peterson and Cliff Clavin for entertainment value. And, of course, without actually being the likable Ted Danson, playing a role.

This, unfortunately for him, leaves Mitt Romney as nothing but an “empty suit” . . . who thinks he’s charming the pants off of the very people who find him to be an idiot!

Friday, June 08, 2007

Bush On Global Warming!

This would be even funnier if it weren't so close to reality.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

What Kind of Parent IS Scooter Libby?

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Throughout the 160 support letters [large PDF warning] sent to the court on Scooter Libby’s behalf, one of the recurring themes was Libby’s exceptional parenting instincts, and his ability to connect with children in general. There were numerous references to Scooter’s children, and their need to have their father at home with them, instead of serving a prison sentence typical of the crimes for which he was convicted.

Mary Matalin and James Carville offered a description of how their children always asked about the beloved “Mr. Scooter,” and offered the following glowing (though slightly inane) characterization:
One of my many enduring and endearing memories of Scooter is of his universal love of families.
There were other examples:
“This is one reason I’m asking you to be lenient in your sentencing – this is a good father . . . any more hardship on the family would leave an undeserving permanent mark on the family and most of all the children.” (Emily Ashman)

“Now more than ever, at this critical time in his children’s lives, they need their father to provide the kind of support, love and guidance that they have always relied on. They need him home.” (Donna Doll)

"I personally have some grave concerns for his children in the event that he is sentenced to any length of time in prison as his two children are quite dependent on him at a most important time in their life.” (Jose Fuentes)
As a focal point for the current P.R. campaign for a Libby pardon, these comments are quite valuable, and I think it’s no coincidence that the first statement from the White House, after hearing of Libby’s 2 ½ year sentence, was focused on Libby’s family, and not on Libby himself.
"The president said he felt terrible for the family, especially for his wife and kids" (Dana Perino)
Bush is in a bind regarding a Libby pardon, and his way out of that bind is to attribute the need for a pardon to Libby’s kids! I think that’s why so many supporters were enlisted chose to focus on his undying love for his (and everyone else’s) children - despite a defense in court based on being so preoccupied with doing the work of six mere mortals that he could barely remember to zip his pants in the morning!

Which leads me to the question that everyone should be asking right about now:

What kind of parent IS Scooter Libby?

Or, more specifically:

What kind of parent would risk denying his children the presence of a father during their formative years, while serving prison time to protect someone like Dick Cheney?

I suspect that Scooter didn’t think the risk was so great at the beginning of the whole Plame affair. But nevertheless, at some point, Scooter had to make a decision: Do I do what is best for my children and come clean, or do I follow the recommendation of these people, who are offering to pay the monetary cost of sticking to my phony story?

Libby, the parent, had to ask himself: Who is more important to me - my growing children, who have their entire futures ahead of them; or Dick Cheney, who has led a full (albeit evil and deceitful) life, and whose heart is already ticking on borrowed time?

Libby’s choices, when faced with questions like these, say as much or more about the kind of parent he is, than any comments offered by those lobbying for Libby’s freedom with talk of his “universal love of puppies families!”

Also at ePluribus Media.

Monday, June 04, 2007

Pondering the Mysteries of the Libby Case! (Part 3)

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

In Part 1, I described four unexplained mysteries that remain from the Libby trial. In Part 2, I offered some speculation on the first two of them. Here’s how I think they may fit with the other two:

Dan Froomkin had a great roundup many weeks ago that included analysis of a possible deal behind the decision of Libby’s attorneys to pack it in after only a feeble effort at getting their client acquitted. His speculation was that Bush had already promised Libby a pardon, so there was no reason to risk revealing more details of the conspiracy to attack Wilson by outing Plame, or of having to sink deeper in lies to conceal those details.

This would explain why a supposedly brilliant, and extremely high priced, legal defense team closed up shop after using Hannah as a poor surrogate for the testimony they had promised from both Libby and Cheney. At that point, it was all over but the crying (by Ted Wells, I mean!)

Surprising no one, the jury returned a guilty verdict on 4 of the 5 counts. With the odds stacked against a successful appeal, a (promised?) pardon now seemed like the only way out for Libby. But this administration is littered with broken promises . . . .

So what of the F-bomb from Libby’s wife? Who was she proposing to f**k?

With little opportunity to do anything to the jury (short of starting a nuclear war in the world they inhabit!), it seems unlikely that they were the target of her wrath. The prosecutors might be frustrated by a successful appeal, but they were just doing their jobs. A setback like having to go through a new trial, would hardly be considered a “f**king” to them. Prosecutors get paid for their work either way, and a new trial would actually give them an opportunity to bring out even more details of the underlying conspiracy!

To me, it sounds like the wife’s emotions probably only caused her to raise her voice at the end of a conversation that was overheard by reporters. I can easily imagine her saying something like “If they don’t pardon him, we’re going to f**k them!” In this case, “they” being Rove, Bush, Cheney, et al. as they were all still the ones being protected by Libby’s predicament.

This clearly makes the most sense, because Libby was now essentially down to only one last chance at a “get out of jail free” card, after being the only one to “put his neck in the meatgrinder!” If Bush doesn’t come through with a pardon, as purportedly promised to quash the politically dangerous spillover from a vigorous defense, then Libby could f**k them all by spilling his guts!

And Libby’s wife wanted “them” to know it!

Sunday, June 03, 2007

Pondering the Mysteries of the Libby Case! (Part 2)

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

In Part 1, I described four unexplained mysteries that remain from the Libby trial. While we don’t know the answers to these questions, here‘s my speculation:

I’ve suggested several times in the past that Libby set himself up as a lightning rod. Fitzgerald showed during the trial how Libby’s cover story about learning of Valerie Plame from Tim Russert would serve to break the chain of information from an official source (Cheney) to Libby and others, thus taking it out of the realm of an IIPA violation.

My view is that Libby was chosen, or volunteered, because someone had to be the one to lie in order to break the chain. At the time, I suspect there was little concern that the reporters, particularly Russert, would end up talking about their sources and conversations, so it seemed like a safe and effective cover story that would protect Cheney, Rove and everyone else involved.

Once Fitzgerald’s investigation had picked apart the cover story, and as he was preparing to indict Libby - and probably Rove - I suspect that Rove went to Fitzgerald and offered an explanation that left Libby as the only person to be indicted.

If Rove had claimed that he learned of Valerie Plame from Libby, and that Libby had said (to Rove) that he learned it from Russert, this would effectively make Libby the bottleneck for the flow of information, and cut off Rove from culpability. The only person who could refute Rove’s story was Libby himself, and Libby had to stick to his story in order to save himself. This would also make Rove a meaningless witness for the prosecution while remaining a dangerous one for the defense, and thus leave him out of the trial entirely.

It would also have left Libby all alone on an island. Since he was the one who was selected (or volunteered) to lie to the Grand Jury, he was effectively sacrificed to protect Rove and others. Now he was facing five felony counts, and he wanted everyone to know that the big guns would turn out to support him, or else!

This would explain why his attorneys telegraphed an argument based on revealing how Libby was made into the “fall guy” and with authoritative testimony from the Vice President to back him up.

However, with all of the ammunition Fitzgerald had at his disposal – beyond just what he needed to make the perjury and obstruction cases against Libby – there was no way that Cheney could actually testify without having to lie himself. That’s likely why he made himself scarce, planning a trip out of the country during the period when he would supposedly have to testify. Clearly, Cheney wasn’t interested in taking a personal risk to support his former Chief of Staff.

More to come in Part 3.

Saturday, June 02, 2007

I’ve Been Nice to People My Whole Life. Can I Commit Some Felonies Now?

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

I’ve just finished reading the Libby Defense Team’s glowing depiction of Saint Scooter, in which they try to argue that he should get absolutely no prison time. What a nice guy – not just your average, ordinary nice guy, but 160 support letters and 33 pages of nice guy! Of course, they could have saved me the trouble of such a long read by including the following brief summary:
He was a good student who was active in a local church and a boy scout. He was awarded a college scholarship and excelled in law school, becoming an honor student who was well liked by all of his professors. He volunteered his time doing public service, while also working hard to develop a successful professional career, even though it took time away from his devoted partner who loved him deeply.

He was extremely charismatic and personable, and many people naturally gravitated to him, and genuinely found him to be a nice, warm, generous guy. Many were shocked at his arrest, but even after his conviction, hundreds of fans and admirers continued to write letters of support.
Oh wait, that’s not Scooter Libby. That was Ted Bundy!

Sure, the analogy is a bit tortured, but keep in mind that I haven’t even mentioned Scooter’s apparent preoccupation with such things as children “coupling” with bears that have been aroused with a stick!

I’m guessing that none of the 160 support letters mention it either!

Friday, June 01, 2007

Pondering the Mysteries of the Libby Case! (Part 1)

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

With the Scooter Libby sentencing hearing scheduled for next week, I thought I’d ponder a few lingering aspects of the Libby case that remain unresolved and seem somehow connected. The following is pure speculation, but if you are looking for a plausible theory to explain some of the remaining mysteries about the case, this may (or may not) be one of them.

I should also note that this was mostly written several months ago, and then moved to the back burner as other issues heated up. After re-reading it and making a few minor edits, I still think it holds up pretty well. Because of the length I’m going to chop it into several easier to digest segments. First, here are the unexplained aspects that I’m going to speculate about:

Why wasn’t Rove indicted? This has been a mystery since he was singled out as “Official A” in the Libby indictment. We know Rove was a serious target, but we don’t know what Rove told Fitzgerald at the last minute that caused Fitz to reconsider charging him at the same time he charged Libby. Even one of the jurors said the jury was asking the question, “Where’s Rove?”

Why did Libby’s attorneys’ suggest he was “sacrificed” to protect Rove? Inexplicably, this was a prominent part of the opening statement, but almost no evidence was presented to back it up. There was only a handwritten memo from Dick Cheney suggesting that Libby was asked “to put his neck in the meat grinder over the incompetence of others.”

Why did the defense place their hope for acquittal on the lame testimony of John Hannah? After spending close to a year setting up a defense based on Libby’s testimony regarding a faulty memory, and foreshadowing powerful testimony by Dick Cheney to support that defense, neither Libby nor Cheney took the stand, and Hannah was a complete disaster!

What’s with the post verdict F-bomb from Libby’s wife? According to courtroom observers, shortly after the verdict was read, Libby’s wife was heard angrily stating something that ended with an emphatic “We’re gonna f**k em!” No one was able to determine which “they” she was referring to.

Wild speculation to follow in Part 2.