HereSince1628
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 01:59 PM
Original message |
Assuming Fitz did get indictments, shouldn't we expect a lawyer |
|
to pop up giving an interview in order to put his/her defendent's spin on the story before the prosecutor gets a chancve?
Isn't PR conventional wisdom to get out in front of the story to control its spin?
Is this story just to big to spin?
|
jsamuel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:00 PM
Response to Original message |
1. they've been spinning it for 2 years already |
ayeshahaqqiqa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:01 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I think the lawyers are still negotiating |
|
at least some of them are. So of course they aren't going to do anything to make Fitzgerald mad. And the others-well, they know there's an indictment, but they probably aren't sure just what Fitz knows yet (especially if he's negotiating with others), and they are forced to wait to know what to say.
|
tridim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:01 PM
Response to Original message |
3. All the "leaks" we've heard so far are most likely from BushCo lawyers |
|
That's why we should all be very careful believing everything we hear.
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:01 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Yes, they like to get out in front of a story, but in this case, |
|
Fitz is being so good a being leakproof, they don't know what story to get in front of!
I'm sure they've been playing "what if" scenarios behind closed doors, and have a lot of options ready, but I don't think you're going to see them out first. They just don't know enough to do that.
|
Shakespeare
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:02 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Where do you think all those "leaks" are coming from? n/t |
HereSince1628
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. Yes, but none has acknowledged recieving an indictment |
|
wouldn't they want to try to take control of the meaning of the indictment?
|
Shakespeare
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. Not if they're working on a plea deal. n/t |
Fridays Child
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:05 PM
Response to Original message |
7. If the indictments are sealed, they can't do that. |
|
Which would make an excellent argument for sealing the indictments, by the way.
|
HereSince1628
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. SO the indicted don't get told that they are indicted? |
longship
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-05 02:17 PM
Response to Original message |
10. They can't play their hands. |
|
Make no mistake; Fitz is playing poker here. He's misdirecting. He's leading them down false paths. He's not telling them anything he doesn't have to. His hand is well hidden. They don't know whether to raise, call, or fold. I don't think bluffing Fitz will work too well.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 11th 2024, 07:50 AM
Response to Original message |