Libby Thread

A little bit of Libby coverage - here are Matt Apuzzo and Pete Yost of the AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An FBI agent acknowledged Monday that some of her testimony could not be backed up by notes, an admission that attorneys for former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby seized on in an effort to undercut perjury and obstruction charges.

Agent Deborah Bond testified last week that, in his FBI interview Libby adamantly denied discussing a CIA operative's identity with White House spokesman Ari Fleischer. Under cross-examination Monday, however, Bond conceded that FBI notes contain no record of such a denial. Rather, they say he may have discussed it but couldn't recall.

"Adamantly might not be the perfect word," Bond said.

"Swopa" has taken over for Marcy Wheeler in providing the FDL "Not a transcript" transcript.  Here is Bond 6 and 7, and our favorite non-verbatim quote from Agent Bond - "I'm not denying it, I just don't recall it."

And here is Swopa 1 on the Libby Grand Jury Tapes.  But when will the sampling and mix taopes appear on YouTube?  If I were an excitable conspiracist I would seize on this, as Fitzgerald ("F") and Libby ("L") discuss what might have been disclosed to Walter Pincus prior to his June 12, 2003 article:

F: VP thought it was intereresting enough to tell you [about Wilson's wife being at the CIA], and you were interested enough to write it down… did you think it might elucidate Pincus?

L: wasn't a talking point Cheney gave me, and those seemed sufficient

F: Did you feel prohibited from mentioning it to Pincus?

L: No.

Ahh!  In June, Libby did not mention the wife because it was not in the talking points Cheney gave him.  Yet in July, Libby did discuss the wife with Cooper and Miller, even though she was not mentioned in the talking points prepared by Cathie Martin or in the statement dictated by Cheney.

Did Libby think his boss' talking points were no longer sufficient?  Or did Cheney give a double-secret authorization to mention Ms. Plame?  Go long tinfoil!

And Jeralyn Merritt goes through prosecution and defense briefs on Libby's possible motive to lie to the investigators (a surprisingly subtle question, actually, to which I hope to return.)

WHY I'M YAWNING:  TRex, posting at firedoglake, unwittingly delivers a "how dreams die" pre-epitaph to the Plame investigation:

Why It Matters (Plame edition)

...

In the Antarctic, when scientists want to study the air, water, and weather of ancient times, they drill down into the ice and take a core sample, which provides them with a perfect cross-section of each epoch.  The Libby case is like an ice core sample of the Bush Administration's incestuous, manipulative, and deeply disingenuous relationship to the media and how they played the press like a concert violin in the run up to the catastrophic set of errors that is the War in Iraq.

We may or may not ever see Karl Rove in leg-irons and an orange jumpsuit, although that would be a delightful cherry on the cake, but what we are learning through testimony about the catty, back-stabbing world inhabited by our major media pundits is not only highly entertaining, but it should serve as a valuable lesson to reporters, writers, and editors who may ever be tempted to let their desire for access cloud their judgement in the future.

We needed a Special Counsel to conduct a two year investigation in order to demonstrate that Administration officials leak to favored reporters and that reporter's notes can look like spaghetti?

I'm an educated man and I could have spoken intelligently to the habits of White House officials and the press which covers them long before this Administration even took office.  Now, are these really the questions Special Counsel Fitzgerald was called here to answer?  Judy Miller's shopping bags and Matt Cooper's notes?  Please tell me that he has something more.  Please tell me that the prosecutor has not pinned his hopes to a phone log.

Ahh, well.  A quick trip down memory lane should revive memories of the real spirit of Fitzmas - little cherubs smiling as Fitzgerald indicted twenty-two members of BushCo, Rove in chains, Cheney in chains - those were happier, headier days.

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

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:
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?