A Jury of His Peers?

Rush just mentioned on his show that one of the jurors in the Libby trial is a member of MoveOn.org, something that tells me that Scooter Libby wasn’t tried before a jury of his peers. This Washington Post article provides more information that Libby didn’t stand a chance in this trial:

The 11 jurors who convicted Libby on all but one count were, in several respects, atypical of the District’s population. In a city that is heavily Democratic and where attention to politics runs high, the jurors were a largely apolitical group. Under careful questioning during jury selection, Libby’s attorneys weeded out members of the large initial jury panel who said they held strong negative views of the Bush administration, and even ones who said they followed news and politics closely.

The statement that says that this was “a largely apolitical group” is pure Barbra Streisand. This jury was philosophically opposed to Scooter Libby before they were ever seated. In fact, Rush said that he had an instant message conversation with someone that said this MoveOn.org person was seated because the defense had used its allotment of preemptory challenges by that point.

This Washington Post article is further proof of the fight that conservatives face. The Agenda Media’s agents don’t care about the truth. If they did, they could find it. Their entire purpose is to help the left accumulate as much institutional power by whatever means necessary. Some of this accumulated institutional power sits in the CIA. The CIA knew that Scooter Libby didn’t violate the IIPA or the Espionage Act. They still chose to send a referral to the Justice Department. If they knew that the IIPA didn’t apply, why did they send the referral?

Another bastion of liberalism is the judicial system. This judge is a perfect example of liberalism run amok. Here’s what Clarice Feldman said in her brilliant article:

Shall I blame the judge who let the prosecution get away with introducing into evidence prejudicial news accounts of limited relevance or probative value while denying the defense an opportunity to fully make its case? Who allowed the prosecutor to make scandalous charges in his rebuttal, the last thing the jury would hear, with no evidence on the record for them?

Based on this transgression, I’d say that Reggie Walton isn’t worthy of his position of power. Frankly, if tilting things this far in the prosecution’s case is normal, then it’s safe to say that the Judiciary isn’t about justice. It’s about helping liberals win victories they couldn’t otherwise win.

Here’s another telling section of the Washington Post’s article:

“We’re not saying that we didn’t think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of,” said the juror, Denis Collins. “But it seemed like he was…the fall guy.” Collins, an author and ex-Washington Post reporter, was the only one of the seven women and four men on the jury to provide an inside glimpse into the method and thought process that the panel used to find Cheney’s former top aide guilty of four felony counts.

This is Fitzgerald’s idea of a trial of Libby’s peers? Please. Collins is a close friend of both Bob Woodward and Tim Russert, two of the key prosecution witnesses. If that’s Fitzgerald’s idea of justice, then he needs to be run from the legal profession.

Let’s also affix blame to others for their role in this miscarriage of justice. Colin Powell and Richard Armitage should be publicly humiliated for their roles in this injustice. Will the Agenda Media excoriate them? I’ll believe that the day I spot pigs flying in V formation over my home. It’s obvious to anyone with a brain that the Libby trial was Powell’s and Armitage’s revenge on the Bush administration for going to war with Iraq.

Let’s also excoriate Tim Russert. Today, Russert said that he didn’t take pleasure in Libby’s conviction. Yet he’s on record as saying that Libby’s indictment was like Christmas come early. Mr. Russert, you’re a liar. You’re typical of the vermin that inhabit the Agenda Media. Conservatives everywhere should boycott the sponsors of Meet the Press until Mr. Russert is forced off the air.

It’s time that conservatives got off their backsides and got busy with the business of cleaning out the cesspool we call Washington. The Libby trial is a perfect illustration of the filth contained inside the nation’s capitol. It’s time we told elected Republicans that they’d better stop caring what the filth peddlers inside the Beltway thought about them. It’s time we told them that they’d better make it their life’s mission to securing justice.

Only then will the phrase “a jury of his peers” mean anything.

TechnoratiTechnorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

3 Responses to “A Jury of His Peers?”

  1. fires » A Jury of His Peers? Says:

    [...] Original post by Gary Gross [...]

  2. A Jury of His Peers? at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source. Says:

    [...] Original post by Gary Gross and software by Elliott Back [...]

  3. Bob Smith Says:

    If Collins is a friend of two prosecution witnesses, why wasn’t he thrown off the jury? As I recall, you have an unlimited number of “for cause” challenges.

Leave a Reply