Sure I watched the 60 Min. piece (think I already said so) even tho there was no link to it in the diary - just to HuffPoo. And it's a start, but not the end. No harm in patiently following the trail of this story before concluding that the allegations of VRWC vendetta are true, right?

I don't disagree with your campaign contrib/political appointment point, but claiming that "everybody does it" is a total nonstarter in criminal prosecutions. If that were remotely a valid defense, people like Martha Stewart and Scooter Libby would never have been tried and convicted.

If you think witnesses don't rehearse their stories before testifying, you frankly have a naive view of the US justice system. The use of a script, while stupid on the part of the prosecution, isn't unusual either, and doesn't prove the statements in the script are untrue. I think that under the Federal Rules of Evidence and common law, the script should have been given to the defense for cross-exam/ridicule of the witness's credibility; whether that's a good basis for an appeal is another issue. I'd give that a try if I were the defense, certainly.

I've engaged everything the diarist cited as proof of his conclusion (not suspicion, conclusion) that the results of the criminal case were fixed. It's in the nature of 60 Minutes and similar shows that there's not a lot to follow up on; they don't give links to the record, and make no attempt whatsoever to present both sides of a story in any even-handed way because that wouldn't be sensational. But like I said, I'm suspicious of the whole multiple prosecution angle, and I'mm following up whatever leads that I can find out there in Websville. You might want to do the same before buying into a 60 Min story as the last word on the subject.