The story implicitly accused the career prosecutors who handled the case of complicity in the alleged conspiracy, but the real focus of CBS’s account was Karl Rove. The network’s star witness was a small-time Alabama lawyer named Jill Simpson, who claimed she was a life-long Republican, but had stepped forward to tell what she knew about events in 2001 and 2002.
You fools, you cannot take on The Rove and survive…
The alleged conversation described by Ms. Simpson has been denied by all of the alleged participants except Ms. Simpson. Indeed, even Mr. Siegelman states that Ms. Simpson’s affidavit is false as it relates to him. Moreover, according to Ms. Simpson, she met with Mr. Siegelman and his co-defendant Richard Scrushy for several months before signing the statement at their urging. She also claims to have provided legal advice to them. She contends she drafted but did not sign a motion filed by Mr. Scrushy seekung to have the federal judge removed from the case.
All of which is sheer madness. There are only two alternatives: either Ms. Simpson is a liar (or perhaps insane), or else every other person with knowledge of her allegations, including a former Alabama Supreme Court Justice and Don Siegelman himself, is lying. Yet CBS offered Ms. Simpson as a credible witness without disclosing these basic facts.
I’ll take A: Lying assed psyco-bitches with reality conectivity issues for 10 please Mathew.
So the question now is will CBS call in Harry Stamper for some good ol time deep core drilling or will you fold like the house of cards you are right now to minise the fallout?
What would be the worst [cough] Dan Rather [/gough] option?
Here’s a thought, maybe the prick was guilty. Just saying.