Reply #15: You realize that if it is Matthews about whom Libby complained, that then [View All]

[Wordie]

in a weird way, we have him to thank for Fitz's indictment of Libby.

My reasoning? If there had been no comment by Matthews, then there would have been no call to Russert by Libby, and therefore, Libby would not have lied about the call, and Russert would not have been able to say that Libby lied, so who knows, maybe Fitz would not have been able to indict! I read someplace that Fitz saw the contradiction between the Libby version of the conversation and the Russert version as quite damning of Libby.

Matthews makes me crazy sometimes, because he says things that, for instance, sound like the RW talking points. But then, at other times his questions of the RW are so hard-hitting, that I just have to forgive him.

We really shouldn't expect, I suppose, for any of these guys to take a definite side. I am confident that when the really hard questions are asked of people on BOTH sides, that our guys will come out ahead, in the end. So, that's what I want to see.