Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Agent Bond | Main | Why Might Judy Miller Lie Misremember? »

February 05, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e200d835163d4269e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Libby Thread:

Comments

clarice

Glad you're back and JOM is up and running again. It's not easy dispensing so much valium over such great distances in such a short time. WHEW

clarice

From Jeralyn--the 20 pp of Libby's gj testimony which Fitz filed earlier:
http://www.talkleft.com/LibbyTrial/ftizmay24exhib.pdf>GJ

cathyf

As I posted on the other thread:

For future reference -- when Ranger's post did the time-travel thing, a Typepad crash was inevitable within a couple of hours. This one was on the short side.

Somebody mentioned a backup site for DT-suffering plameaholics. We should remember that the next time we get a time-travelling comment we need to start our emergency promulgation of the backup site info. Because after typepad crashes it's too late to give everybody the link!

Rick Ballard

Cathyf,

CharlieCO set one up at Flares. If it happens again I'll pop one up quickly there.

From Lance,

Fitzgerald asked Libby if he told Pincus about Wilson’s wife. ” I don’t recall, I dont think I did”
Fitzgerald really pressed this, over and over:
“Can you rule it out?”

Libby was teetering on a high-wire here. He stated over and over that he doesn’t recall saying that. He paused finally for a long time, and put an end to the thread of questioning by sayin that ruling things out is ‘odd phrasing’ to him, that he didn’t recall saying it, and that was that.

Overall, Libby answers everything carefully and qualifies everything based on his recollection or his notes. His testimony seems to be taken from Perjury Insulation 101, and it seems frankly more interesting to guess at Fitzgerald’s motives than to listen to Libby’s answers.


Wile E. Fitzgerald's motives? He's just following the instructions on assembling the Acme Perjury Trap.

Eight hours of that crap and I'll guarantee that anyone reading this would be suffering from such a sense of fatigue that they would find their utterances from hour four onward incomprehensible if they read them afterwards.

centralcal

posted this at other thread just before you all migrated:

I am busy at work today, can't follow along with you, but I thought this was VERY interesting from the MBA blogger, relating the playback of Libby's GJ testimony:

"Fitzgerald asked Libby if he told Pincus about Wilson’s wife.
” I don’t recall, I dont think I did”

Fitzgerald really pressed this, over and over:
“Can you rule it out?”

Libby was teetering on a high-wire here. He stated over and over that he doesn’t recall saying that. He paused finally for a long time, and put an end to the thread of questioning by sayin that ruling things out is ‘odd phrasing’ to him, that he didn’t recall saying it, and that was that.

Overall, Libby answers everything carefully and qualifies everything based on his recollection or his notes. His testimony seems to be taken from Perjury Insulation 101, and it seems frankly more interesting to guess at Fitzgerald’s motives than to listen to Libby’s answers."

Hope to catch up tonite on everything I missed today. But I thought that last paragraph (by the MBA blogger) above says a lot!

Dan S

I'm reading the transcripts and I can't help but compare to Bond's cross.

So far, at least, Libby is coming across as trying to be helpful and accurate as possible.

That's a contrast to Bond. Considering Libby is far more at risk than Bond is, it's interesting.

Ranger

"Fitzgerald asked Libby if he told Pincus about Wilson’s wife.
” I don’t recall, I dont think I did”

Hmmm... I guess it would have been nice if Fitz had known that Armitage told Woodward and Woodward told Pincus about a year before he found out. All that interest in "who told Pincus." Must have been nagging at Fitz that he couldn't get Libby for that one too.

danking70

I'm surprised no one has had any comments on Corn's latest.

clarice

Macranger takes on Corn and his fantasy .

In a way if Libby sounds so careful on the tape, it may obviate the need for his live testimony...and in contrast to all the other witnesses.

Danking, do we know for certain that Armitage told Pincus?

clarice

Oops. meant to address that last quiestion to ranger........

hit and run

I'm suing typepad for mental distress. That was cruel and unusual and forced me to actually get some work done.


windansea

Wile E. Fitzgerald's motives? He's just following the instructions on assembling the Acme Perjury Trap.

I'm starting to think there may be a bit of Marc Rich pardon payback here.

Ranger

I thought we knew that Woodward told Pincus, which is indirectly Armitage telling Pincus. Of course Pincus claims that he never heard what Woodward told him (must have been one of those 30 seconds in the midst of lots of other info conversations that seem to be all Plame rated at the time).

Dan S

Hmm, why are there 20 copies of the same exhibits in that PDF, I wonder? Were there supposed to be others?

windansea

do we know for certain that Armitage told Pincus?

Woodward says he did...Pincus "does not recall"

topsecretk9

Overall, Libby answers everything carefully and qualifies everything based on his recollection or his notes. His testimony seems to be taken from Perjury Insulation 101, and it seems frankly more interesting to guess at Fitzgerald’s motives than to listen to Libby’s answers.

Ohhh...I hate it when lawyer keep pressing when they don't get the answer they want...

I remember the depo when the lawyer was asking who i thought was supposed to do work to do deck and garage in accordance to the real estate contract...the contract said pest "REPORT" of "HOUSE" to be supplied to buyer and IF CHECKED - box detached garage box detached deck (none where checked - and notice "report")

I said I don't know I just know I wasn't obligated...after asking me the same question about 10 times and so many lawyers objecting - asked and answered - I finally pointed to this in the contract

He stared at it red faced for about 5 minutes before speaking - he hadn't even read it.

clarice

Well, we have more than that on Pincus. I recall he made a short appearance--actually answering written depositions re his source and has publicly said he did not regard it as a deliberate leak in revenge.

Patton

I would hope some eyes have been opened today at FDL, and perhaps, wisdom will descend on that crowd and they will begin to grasp just how the CIA could have believed Iraq had WMD, the same as the FDLs all believed Bush was pure evil and just had to have a grand conspiracy orchestrated to out Plame.

Anyone who actually works in government knows, on its best day, it isn't compentent enough to pull off a conspiracy.

Dan S

Patton,

It's an article of faith. Reason is not admitted into the discussion, unfortunately.

cathyf

You know, what really sucks is that we have a case here that really needs a special prosecutor, and we'll never see one. Investigating Fitzgerald for perjury and obstruction of justice is the classic case requiring a respected SP from completely outside the federal system.

Well, I suppose that nothing that has happened to Libby or anyone else in this case approaches the poor suckers in the Nacarico case:

Wednesday, April 7th, 1999
Rolando Cruz and Prosecutorial Misconduct

Opening statements began yesterday in the trial of three former Illinois prosecutors and four sheriff's deputies charged with railroading an innocent man and sending him to death row for 10 years. Rolando Cruz was accused of killing a 10-year old girl in 1983, but despite evidence that another man might have been the killer, prosecutors pressed on with the case against Cruz. He was freed as the result of a campaign by religious leaders, law school deans and journalists who were convinced that he was innocent.

The DuPage County prosecutors and the sheriff's deputies are charged with misconduct in the case, including conspiracy to obstruct justice and conspiracy to commit official misconduct. Juries twice convicted Cruz of killing Jeanine Nicarico, who was abducted from her home in a Chicago suburb.

Then, during Cruz's third trial in 1995, a supervisor in the sheriff's department recanted his previous testimony and cast doubt on a cornerstone of the prosecution - that Cruz had revealed incriminating details to detectives in a 1983 statement describing a "vision" or "dream" he had about the crime. According to the police, in his recounting of the "vision," Cruz had revealed details about the murder that were not known to the public. Prosecutors had used that as proof that he had committed the murder. However, Cruz has always denied telling police about the dream.

The Cruz case has spotlighted the issue of prosecutorial misconduct. A recent series published by the Chicago Tribune revealed that in the past 36 years, 381 homicide convictions have been reversed because prosecutors knowingly withheld evidence that pointed to the person's innocence. Last month, Cooke County in the state of Illinois settled a lawsuit filed by four men who spent almost two decades on death row for a crime they did not commit.

Alcibiades

Patton, judging by the comments at FDL, nothing could be further from their minds. Dan S. is right about Plame being a faith-based initiative on their part.

Alcibiades

Patton, judging by the comments at FDL, nothing could be further from their minds. Dan S. is right about Plame being a faith-based initiative on their part.

clarice

cathyf--there is still my complaint to DOJ's OPR though I've no idea what if anything they are doing with it--perhaps waiting for the trial to be completed.

Charlie (Colorado)

I'm starting to think there may be a bit of Marc Rich pardon payback here.

Huh?

Rick Ballard

The prosecution has now wrapped up evidence for counts 1 and 3 haven't they? 5 will be complete as soon as the gj tape is played and I doubt that Libby strayed far from what he might? appears to? have said to Agent Bond &c.

I don't think Cooper and Bond met the count 3 charge threshold. I wonder if Judge Walton feels the same.

Neo

OK. I read the GJ stuff.

Fitz is a horse's ass. What an asshole.

This is all he has to show for millions of dollars and diverting FBI resources.

Fitz should be ashamed of himself to take a man to trial over this tripe.

Fitz, you're a little man. It's not that you're short. You're...little, in the mind and in the heart. You tried to make a man little whose boots you couldn't touch if you stood on tiptoe on top of the highest mountain in the world. And as it turned out...you're even littler than you were before.

hit and run

Charlie? Is that you?

Are you free?

FREEDOM!

Rick Ballard

Libby represented Rich with Fitz on t'other side.

Charlie (Colorado)

... btw, I'm posting from work, which has always worked. I'll try from home when I get to *go* home.

hit and run

Now, where's Syl?

Charlie (Colorado)

Charlie? Is that you?

Are you free?

Honey, I may be easy, but I'm never free.

clarice

How strong are the Fleischer allegations?
Libby apparently said he had no recollection of such a conversation. Dickerson disputes them, and Gregory has said nada.

And since someone read the critical portions of the INR on the plane in Fleischer's hearing right after his conversation with Libby and just before he said whatever he said to reporters, isn't it possible he confused who said what..that is Libby may have simply told him Wilson wasn't sent by the VP but to keep it hush hush because they were coordinating a response and he heard the CIA/wife's i.d. and job/and sent elsewhere and mixed up who said what.

hit and run

Honey, I may be easy, but I'm never free.

Oh, I'd pay big bucks. Big. I got $10 on me right now.

hit and run

sorry for the itals got a little er excited there

azaghal

I'm reading the transcripts and I can't help but compare to Bond's cross.

So far, at least, Libby is coming across as trying to be helpful and accurate as possible.

That's a contrast to Bond. Considering Libby is far more at risk than Bond is, it's interesting.


What's so interesting? That "Libby is far more at risk than Bond is"?

owl

FOX just had a GOOD segment on Bond.

Rick Ballard

Clarice,

If defense calls Bartlett I imagine that we'll hear that Wilson (and possibly his wife) were discussed at the senior staff meeting or directly by Bartlett in his other meeting with Fleischer in the morning of the 7th.

Charlie (Colorado)

azaghal, I thnk the point is that Libby is clearerr, more well-informed, and more helpful, even though he's the one who was at risk of the hoosegow.

(Firefox spellcheck knowns "hoosegow". Who'da thunk it?)

Neo

I'm waiting for the jury to ask Judge Walton if they can sanction Fittz for wasting their time.

hit and run

Neo - yeah, how about a juror question..."When's Fitzgerald gonna take the stand? That's the person we need to hear from."

clarice

Rick, I think you're right.

hit and run

...under oath.

clarice

Fox emphasized the portion of Bond's testimony where she concedes she mis-testified when she said Libby told her Rove told Novak--In fact, Libby said Novak told Rove.

azaghal

From the Maine guy's summary of Libby before the GJ:

Fitzgerald is extremely confident

Shall we try counting the reasons why Fitz should be confident?

1. He is the "functional equivalent of the Attorney General," and so is expressly answerable to no one at DoJ.

2. As such he can exempt himself from DoJ guidelines that he finds irksome.

3. He has his target under oath before the GJ.

4. The target thinks this investigation is to uncover a substantive crime.

5. The target thinks he is innocent and has nothing to fear from the truth.

6. The target has been told by the President of the United States that he must not assert his rights under the Constitution of the United States.

7. Fitz knows that the FBI can be relied upon to write up their interviews in a prejudicial manner.

8. Fitz knows the target can't see those interviews until he's indicted.

9. Fitz knows the GJ will hear testimony from the FBI that the target won't hear and so won't be able to respond to.

10. Fitz knows he's after process violations and is simply trying to get Libby to say something that can be twisted when Fitz speaks to the GJ--without the target present to rebut.

Yeah, I'd say he has reason to be "extremely confident."

Pofarmer

Now, Fitzgerald has successfully demonstrated that government officials leak to and attempt to manipulate the press.

Unfortunately, none of the, ya know, leakers, seem to have been charged with anything.

hit and run

Rick/Clarice/Others - how likely that Bartlett's potential testimony is unknown? To Wells? To Fitzgerald? Is it likely that they know what his recollection is and what he would, in fact, testify to when on the stand?

clarice

Yes, azaghal--Unfortunately when people know all the tricks and use them "creatively", the process is abused. I probably have to steal your comments again.


Brilliant, again.

BYT NPR just called--when they couldn't reach me the other day they used Byron York. (Same thing happened with CSpan.) I'm glad but I've saved everyone's suggestions for another day.

Rick Ballard

The probability that it is unknown to both sides is nil. Fitz didn't call him so we can mark his testimony as either not helpful or of negative value to the prosecution. Wells won't call him unless he knows the answer to every question asked.

What Fitz doesn't know is if Bartlett may have undergone a bout of "upon reflection", which, given Greniers reconstructed memory, will be very hard for him to argue against.

I don't recall a "when did you first hear of Wilson's wife's involvement" question from Fitz to Fleischer and I know that Wells never would have asked, not even if Bartlett had already been interviewed.

hit and run

Now, Fitzgerald has successfully demonstrated that government officials leak to and attempt to manipulate the press.

And that former government officials, like say former ambassadors, create grandiose tales of behesting and debunking for the purpose of fame and appointments in future administrations. Manipulate the press? Not necessary, say "Bush Lied" and you and the press are BFF.

MayBee

How interesting is it that Powell said "everybody knows" at a meeting just 1 or 2 days before Armitage has the revelation that he might have talked about it to Novak?

hit and run

BYT NPR just called--when they couldn't reach me the other day they used Byron York.

Gosh, I hope this isn't taken as a comparison to Joe - but Byron has some pretty important hair going for him.

Patton

This Bond girl is a piece of work.


Question: Now your note that says Robber pulls gun and shot cop in head. What exactly did that mean?

Bond: Ohh, yeah, that's not quite accurate. I meant to say is Robber ate a ham sandwhich.

Dan S

Aza...

Sorry,had to take a break for food.

No, it's interesting that Bond comes across as so defensive and... well, surly, when she has little at risk compared to Libby. SHE isn't a focus of an investigation.

Other Tom

Love the jury question about Bond's notes. Reading the tea leaves in such questions is one of the great dark sciences. While the 7-hour sleepfest is progressing, I have a can-you-top-this story on that subject.

Civil case; my corporate client is the defendant. Jury retires to deliberate. They will first determine whether the client is liable, then, if so, how much. After less than an hour, out comes a question for the judge: "Would you send us a calculator?" No tea-leaf reading required on that occasions, although the CEO still didn't get it. (A few hours later he did.)

Sue

Maybee,

The Situation Room that was discussed is in the White House, if I read it correctly. For some reason, I thought they were referring to CNN.

Dan S

Clarice,

Byron probably saw the suggestions too :P

windansea

Breaking news from MSNBC:

Reuters: Senate votes against debating troop ‘surge’ resolution

danking70

Well what do you know. The Republicans stuck together.

about time.

Rick Ballard

Dan S,

I would wager a very reasonable sum that Eckenrode was supposed to be the one tetifying. Armfield (the other agent) wasn't at the Oct. 14 meeting so Fitz was left with Bond. She obviously cannot be prepped (some people just don't understand how much demeanor counts). It's that or Fitz is getting some payback from Eckenrode. I don't think Eckenrode left with a smile on his face.

Dan S

Rick,

That might explain some of it. I just don't get how she couldn't do a far more professional job. There's anger there driving her responses, it's just not clear who the anger is spawned by. It's made her look bad, though, more so than anyone.

cathyf

I'm curious about a possible defense tactic in this sort of case. Could Team Libby call to the stand someone as an expert, probably a retired FBI agent, who had experience in leak investigations? There are sort of obvious things that you do in any leak investigation -- for example, you track down all of the people who were in possession of the information before it became public. You track down the various versions of the information. (Classified information is shared on a need-to-know basis, and people with different jobs need to know different things, so different subsets of the knowledge develop.) You track the various timelines. The you compare to what exactly got leaked on what timeline to narrow down your suspect list. So that's the obvious stuff, then there is whatever non-obvious stuff the expert can explain.

After the expert testifies, then you nail the investigation on the fact that they didn't do any of these things. Nobody cared about all the CIA, DoS and DIA "little people" who knew about Plame and her behesting her husband, and who they might have gossiped to. (I still maintain that Miller's source was either Plame herself, or a colleague of Plame, and that this source was also a source for her 2001 book Germs. And so Miller perjured herself to protect this Plame-or-Plame-colleague source and Fitzgerald suborned perjury.) The investigators in this case also seemed oblivious to the variations in the official version. Fleisher has Libby spouting a detailed paraphrase of the INR, with all of the snottiness in the exact INR places, but Fitzgerald could find no other person who claimed to have given Libby exposure to the INR.

Is this the sort of line of questioning that would be effective for the defense? Or is it a sideline to Libby? (Although probably central to the perjury and obstruction trial where Fitzgerald is the defendent...)

kate

Enkenrode is an interesting player in this. He seemed to want to testify in this case even after his retirement. I'm wondering if his running his mouth to associates who then yapped to JL did him harm.

Who wants the leaky FBI guy testifying in a leak case.

What a circus.

roanoke

danking70
Well what do you know. The Republicans stuck together.

Looks like Coleman and Collins crossed over and voted with the Democrats.

McCain and Martinez didn't vote.

windansea

I'm starting to think there may be a bit of Marc Rich pardon payback here.

Huh?

Libby was a highly paid lawyer for a big firm and won a Clinton pardon for Mr Rich...Fitz & DOJ lost WSJ had a recent editorial about this....Hi Jeff :)

clarice

I doubt it, cathyf. For one practical reason (to avoid the more complicated issue of the expert witness rules). Experts have to be noticed far in advance of the trial and the other side given some time to review his work.
I expect that this doesn't necessarily require expert testimony , and in it's case--say on examination of Armitage and Gregory and Russert, the defense will bring out how little scrutiny was given these key witnesses.

topsecretk9

--From the Maine guy's summary of Libby before the GJ:

Fitzgerald is extremely confident--

Isn't that interesting? Especially when the MaineReport characterized Fitz' in some instance today...the FBI notes being public I think ...as nervous sounding.

azaghal

Rick, if you Google Eckenrode the buzz on the internet seems to be that under some sort of pressure--maybe someone else here knows more. There was link from the Inquirer that I couldn't follow. As was discussed earlier, he apparently blabbed to the press about how many indictments there would be, etc. I.e., he leaked. Under those circumstances, I suspect he would have been dead meat on cross, so Fitz didn't want him.

As for trial prep, Eckenrode retired some time ago. Fitz has known for some time that Bond was his FBI witness. The fact that she had to have been trial prepped--that is fact, all government witnesses are trial prepped (and that was the meaning of Well's comment)--and the results that we have seen, should tell you something about his case.

MayBee

Sue- I just think the timing is interesting. Armitage was about to have a revelation that he was the one that told Novak, so Powell states at a meeting that everybody knew! Either he thought everybody knew, or he was laying some groundwork for Armitage-- so what if he told Novak? Everybody knew!

PeterUK

Clarice,
This is probably too much to get on a T shirt,but it would be useful in court,curtesy our Ollie.

"It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your
contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and
enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell
your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have
no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience
for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den
of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the
whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone!
So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!

Send a copy to Congress.

Sue

So far, my original theory has remained intact. Fitzgerald was trying to flip Libby to get to Cheney. His questions reflect that. His bringing this nonsense case reflects that. I would almost bet you H&R's $10 that Fitzgerald never expected it to go to trial.

roanoke

MayBee-

Well someone here had the theory that Powell was Miller's unknown, erh, unremembered source.

owl

Clarice comment on Bond thread.....

Odd, in the Weekly Standard piece I wrote, I said that very thing:That that ridiculous article sourced to a "high administration official"(who it turns out was actually Adam Levine,Fleischer's briefcase carrier and Matthews' former producer) was the template for Fitz' investigation
.

Sold. Now someone tie one of the agents back to this group...because the only way I could ever give Fitz the benefit of doubt before the Libby indictment was perhaps media throwing sand to the FBI. But no way to explain 85 days in jail for someone that didn't write a word of the script.

Sue

Maybee,

I agree. And it makes even more sense that he said that during a meeting at the WH. Not at CNN. Confusion reigns in this masterpiece of a comedy. It may turn out that the press is the only one hurt by all of this. Wouldn't that be a kicker in their behinds!

clarice

PUK, I'm rather large busted but even for me that Tshirt would be way too large.

hit and run

Sue, speaking of bets. I didn't see your cuter QB before the Super Bowl.

I can wrangle up more $ if you want to bet more. Heck, I bet if I went and cleaned out my bank account right now, I could double that amount!

roanoke

Sue-

H&R's ten is already promised to Charlie(Colorado) and that was offered only after Charlie called H&R honey.(not that there's anything wrong with that...)

Sue

Shut up, H&R. Every freakin' team I rooted for went belly-up. Dallas. Nada. New Orleans. Nada. San Diego. Nada. Chicago. Nada. Nada, nada, nada. At least I didn't bet on any of them. ::grin::

hit and run

PUK, I'm rather large busted but even for me that Tshirt would be way too large.

I have toyed with a t-shirt idea...

---
Libby = Ham Sandwich?
Not Kosher

Rick Ballard

Azaghal,

At the time of the Libby interview - Eckenrode would have been the one in the room most likely to testify.

I would be surprised if FBI agents didn't spend a fair amount of time in training on how to give testimony. I would also be surprised if Fitz hadn't done his best in prep over the weekend.

I wouldn't even be surprised to learn that Agent Bond thought this case was the biggest pile of crap she had ever seen and decided that it was a railroad she wasn't going to ride on.

And I won't be a bit surprised if Fitz leaves government service within six months of the end of the trial - win or lose.

Dan S

Peter,


North? :P

Reading that makes me wonder how many people actually "get" the references. More on the right would. I was amazed when back in college at how few even literature grad students got Biblical references, or even recognised them.

topsecretk9

--I expect that this doesn't necessarily require expert testimony , and in it's case-

I don't think so...I think the jury question and then her SNOTTY ANSWER AGAIN - Tate wasn't being interviewed - sort illustrated it on it's own.

I think the jury - any jury - hearing a law enforcement officer's excuse for not noting a lawyer's declaration (Attention Civil Rights advocates!!!!!) was a personal slight and professional blight leaves a bad taste.

clarice

Apuzzo details how in the GJ Fitz zeroed in on Cheney and was--as I always said--focused on establishing a conspiracy to leak with Cheney pulling the strings.

He ends by saying the only other time the govt played a gj tape to the jury in DC was when it tried to convict Marion "Bitch set me up" Barry .(Didn't work there as you recall.)

topsecretk9

Clarice

Was Tate allowed to take notes during the FBI interviews?

A little compare and contrast would be nifty.

cathyf

Good idea about the T-shirt, PUK, but this one fits on the shirt a little better.

Jane

Could you guys tell me the name of the "maine guy's" blog. The link is at my computer at work and I can't remember it. (And if it is "The Maine Guy", I'll be mighty embarrassed.)

clarice

ts--I suppose he might have, but his job while there was to listen carefully to be certain his client didn't accidentally misspeak.

roanoke

Jane

mainewebreport.com

azaghal

Thanks Sara--that's totally disgusting.

It's clear as day that Fitz's political masters concocted this SC appointment by taking advantage of the publicity surrounding the Novak article--ginned up by the likes of David Corn. What they had in view by the time the SC was appointed (remember, by that time Armitage's responsibility had been known for months) was to use it as an excuse to try to target the WH. Fitz would never have had the nerve to try to pull this off on his own without powerful backers.

topsecretk9

--Posted by: MayBee | February 05, 2007 at 04:05 PM--

And isn't it interesting that Fitz, at a pretrial hearing, insisted this Powell "everyone knew" was to Wilson ONLY - and IIRC he added it was at a time that everyone was trying to figure out who the envoy was as the envoy was still anon - the september part threw me for a loop - I thought this situation room comment was right BEFORE the op-ed.

hit and run

Sue, didn't mean to open a wound...I am a lifelong Dallas fan. Hey, I grew up living a few doors down from Gene Stallings (went to school with his daughter) and down the street from Dan Reeves (my brother once got stuck on his roof and had to jump down into Dan's arms)

As for the $10, Charlie disappeared. It's up for grabs.

Jane

Thanks Roanoke

And I won't be a bit surprised if Fitz leaves government service within six months of the end of the trial - win or lose.

Sadly I bet it will be to run for office. The kos kids will rejoice.

topsecretk9

Powell "everyone knew" was ABOUT Wilson ONLY

topsecretk9

Here is the tranny from that:

02 MR. JEFFRESS: Your Honor, there is one thing that I

03 neglected to mention and again this is subject to filings that

04 have been made under seal but there is, in fact, a transcript

05 of a tape recording that involves official one.

06 And I remind you, Your Honor, that's exactly who

07 we're talking about. In the particular transcript there is,

08 and the government filed something else yesterday, there is a

09 factual dispute as to what is said or what is meant by a

10 portion of the transcript wherein it appears the official

11 saying, "everyone knows it," referring to the wife's employment

12 at the CIA.

13 We have not heard that tape. We did to hear that

14 tape. If, in fact, as the transcript suggests that one

15 official said, "Everyone knows it," who did he mean by

16 "everyone knows it."

17 It's vitally important to us, Your Honor, number one,

18 to investigate what other reporters knew and may have mentioned

19 it. And number two, to confront Mr. Russert with what other

20 reporters knew it.

21 And remember there is another ABC reporter, Andrea


22 Mitchell, who once publicly stated the identity of Ambassador

23 Wilson's wife, the fact that she worked for the CIA was well

24 known to reporters who were covering the intelligence

25 community.

00034

01 There are many, many leads to this, Your Honor, but

02 without key information such as the identity of this person,

03 the defense simply cannot fully understand it.

04 THE COURT: Let me ask government counsel. Is there

05 anything in that transcript or tape recording whereby this

06 government official number one says something to the effect

07 that everybody in the media corps knows about this?

08 MR. FITZGERALD: Your Honor, now that we have sort of

09 burned what was sealed, my understanding of that conversation,

10 there are people talking over each other, my understanding is

11 that was a reference that everyone knows it, that Mr. Wilson is

12 the unnamed ambassador.

13 THE COURT: Right.

14 MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Wilson didn't reveal himself as

15 the unnamed ambassador until July 6. This was prior to that

16 time. We turned it over in an abundance of caution but I don't

17 believe that says it, and frankly there is a very limited

18 number of reporters that we found out who had known it. I

19 can't represent we know every reporter because we took

20 seriously the attorney general guidelines. But any reporter we

21 knew about we give over. If the point is to find out the

22 extent of knowledge of the reporters, we can't do more than

23 tell them every reporter we know about.

windansea

Jeralyn has a good post on Libby's Grand Jury testimony that shows how Fitz plans to prove his case.

Other Tom

Cromwell, about to lay waste to the Parliament--right?

hit and run

Did anyone else seen Andy McCarthy's post on the Corner today (we discussed him some over the weekend)?

He was responding to Derb who had responded to Andy's article about the border guards who were convicted.

Anyway, not to get into the detail, but Andy was definitely very testy about how everyone seems to be anti-prosecutor these days.

The post was directly about the border guard case, but if I picked up on it right, it seemed he feels the heat about the Fitz stuff as well.

But I'm reading between the lines, and that's always iffy.

Charlie (Colorado)

As for the $10, Charlie disappeared. It's up for grabs.

Sheesh, take a few minutes for the day job ....

Terrye

man, I read you guys and your comments about the Libby trial and I feel like I walked into the middle of a movie.

Who is the good guy?

Will Libby be convicted on any of these counts?

Glad to hear about the vote by the way.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon





Traffic

Wilson/Plame