Latest Libby Material

Jason Leopold at Truthout breaks the latest on the vast White House conspiracy to cover up the outing of Valerie Plame.  John Hannah of the Office of the Vice President reprises the star turn he took briefly last fall.

I found this bit of the Leopold effort to be strangely unsatisfying:

Rove was questioned by FBI investigators at least five times between   October 2003 and February 2004. Libby was questioned by investigators at   least twice during that time, according to attorneys familiar with Rove and Libby's interviews with investigators.

Well - I am not an "attorney familiar with Rove and Libby's interviews", but I am familiar with the court filings in which Libby's team was offered the intelligence briefings for the five days around each of his periods of testimony.  From the record, that suggested two rounds of FBI questioning and two sessions with the grand jury for Libby.  Five sessions with the FBI for Rove seems high, by comparison, although it may be that Lt. Columbo was on the case.

Jeralyn Merritt offers much better conspiracy coverage than I can muster.  Her key, and very plausible, point - *IF* Hannah's testimony was such a big deal, it is likely that Stephen Hadley (not Richard Armitage) was a source for Novak.  [Left unexplained - per the Feb 24 court hearing, both the judge and Special Counsel Fitzgerald seemed to be bending over backwards to conceal the identity of "Official One", who appears to have been Novak's source.   The judge's view was that, since Official One did not face charges, his privacy should be respected.  Laudable, but... if Mr. Leopold's Big Story is that Hannah cooperated and Hadley was fingered, but now Hadley is in the clear, well, so what?  Where is the Big Conspiracy?  And it's worth keeping in mind that Hadley was promoted to Condi's old job as National Security Advisor in Jan 2005, when the presence or absence of a legal cloud should have been clear.]

The NY Sun covers the latest defense filing which argued that Fitzgerald's appointment was unconstitutionally broad.  Amongst the Major Media, that filing was covered by Pete Yost of the AP, and James Taranto of the WSJ, but if the Times or WaPo covered it, I missed it.  Perhaps the MSM has lost interest but the Department of Justice seems to be taking the defense arguments very seriously.

MORE: Gold for Pacer fans from Jeralyn Merritt:

The media has reported on some of the subpoenas Lewis "Scooter" Libby has issued to reporters and news agencies. Here's a list of those who are fighting them, and the federal docket numbers of the cases...

CASE #: 1:06-mc-00123-RBW:  NBC NEWS & AFFILIATES
CASE #: 1:06-mc-00124-RBW:  MATTHEW COOPER
CASE #: 1:06-mc-00125-RBW:  JUDITH A. MILLER
CASE #: 1:06-mc-00126-RBW:  ANDREA MITCHELL
CASE #: 1:06-mc-00127-RBW:  TIM RUSSERT
CASE #: 1:06-mc-00128-RBW:  TIME, INCORPORATED
CASE #: 1:06-mc-00129-RBW:  NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY

Per Ms. Merritt, the news organizations are currently responding with what I presume is a routine request for more time.  However, a regular commenter here (Sue? [Or JM Hanes!]) pointed out that the MSM may pick up the "Fitzgerald's appointment was unconstitutional" theme in fighting these subpoenas.  In that event the confluence and effluence of the high-priced legal talent should be extraordinary.

 

Comments

[Neo]

If Fitz knew who the leaker was from the start, exactly what was he "fishing" for with the grand jury ?

[Tom Bowler]

MSM may pick up the "Fitzgerald's appointment was unconstitutional" theme in fighting these subpoenas.

Won't that be fun! The mainstream press has been swinging back and forth on whether Plame was covert or not, whether there was a crime or not, all based on whether there were subpoenas or not. And all the while they pretend they're "disinterested observers" faithfully reporting the news. What a hoot! And what fun if they pick up this argument as well. To good to be true, I think, but whether they take up that argument or not, I'm betting the judge will rescue the press by dismissing the charges against Libby.

[anonymous]

Sure killed alot. Spain was pretty cool.

[Geek, Esq.]

I'm sure Leopold will be accurate on one of these reports some day--though he does have a remarkable ability to guess wrongly.

The courts are going to steer way, way, way clear of that constitutional argument. That the DOJ takes it deadly seriously doesn't mean it's plausible--the DOJ takes everything deadly seriously.

[clarice]

Guess you didn't hit the link, Geek. LOL

[Geek, Esq.]

Guess you didn't hit the link, Geek. LOL

Pwn3d.

[TM]

It's been April 1 for a while here, and I don't know why.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

The Fitz perp walk photo might evoke some 'nervpus' laughter at the office of the Special Counsel, since now their revised raison d'etre officially puts them under the supervision of the DoJ.

I mean, if it's a crime to mislead government officials, how about all those misleading statements they've made in the course of this investigation.

[Other Tom]

"The courts are going to steer way, way, way clear of that constitutional argument." I'd be surprised if the trial court granted the motion to dismiss, but just wait till the D.C. Circuit gets ahold of it.

[Gary Maxwell]

Since when are courts allowed to ignor as in "steer clear" of the Constitution? Now if you think that the Constitutional case made by the defense is weak, say so. But steer clear does not seem to be an option. Should be very clear to a shyster who uses the appelation ESQUIRE.

[Sue]

Guess you didn't hit the link, Geek. LOL

It's been April 1 for a while here, and I don't know why.

????? What am I missing ?????

[Gary Maxwell]

The photo shopped photo Sue.

[Sue]

I don't see a photo. I guess I need you to walk me to the door and point to the direction I need to take. ::grin::

[Other Tom]

Courts aren't allowed to "steer clear" of the Constitution, but they have to decide the question of what the Constitution requires in a given case. In general, the District Courts are a little more reluctant than the Courts of Appeal to make a drastic ruling on the basis of Constitutional issues that have not been definitively settled. I think the defense has the better argument in this case, but that doesn't mean a typical District Court judge is likely to agree.

[Patton]

I don't think they Lamestream Media will attack Fitz...he's played ball with them for the most part.

But I do think Libby should take Fitz/Comey seriously when he claims he has always understood that he was supervised and followed guidelines under DOJ.
They should file an official complaint against him and request that DOJ withdraw his presser statements un-related to the indictment.

[Sue]

Nevermind. I found it.

[mariner]

I noticed a slight tremor in my hands as I clicked to this site.

But I'm better now, thanks.

;)

[clarice]

Patton, Libby indicates in this filing that had the normal direction and supervision rules been in place, he could have gone to Fitz' superior and sought redress for those statements, but there is no one above Fitz to deal with.

OTOH there is nothing to stop any citizen from filing a complaint to the Office of Professional responsibility at DOJ and see what they'd do.
It would be amusing if they responded that by the terms of the appointment they lacked jurisdiction to deal with the matter, wouldn't it?

[JM Hanes]

TM

"However, a regular commenter here (Sue?) ...."

Don't know about Sue, but I brought up that ironic possibility here

[Patton]

Clarice,

I was going to suggest Libby's lawyers ask Fitz who the supervisor is that was informed/approved his press conference so they can forward him/her a copy of the complaint.

[Sue]

It wasn't me. I just didn't remember who it was so I was waiting for him/her to show themselves.

[clarice]

I remember you saying that JMH and I recall my saying I'd end my latest with that thought. It is due to be posted tomorrow..and I thank you in advance for the idea. In my view one cannot overdue irony when discussing this matter.

[clarice]

*overDO*

[Gary Maxwell]

OT but the Wash Times this morning is reporting that Intl ANSWER was behind the massive student protests, replete with Mexican flags, of last week. Just for the record, my spider senses were tingling and I told yall that it felt like a porvacateurs were involved. There is no group better at baiting that this Stalinist bunch of scum. Where is AB? JayDee whomever to tell us how commies are so yesterday???

[azredneck]

Hannah was promoted the same day that Libby was indicted? What's up with that? WH did not know he was cooperating, per Leopold.

[jerry]

TM, I think the Times and Post both ran Yost's article on their websites (I don't get the actual papers).

[larwyn]

Same song different verse.
GatewayPundit's post of transcript Delay on FNC:

Delay:"In the End We'll Give Earle a Good Texas Whooping!"

Put excerpts on "Libby's Side" thread.

[TM]

TM, I think the Times and Post both ran Yost's article on their websites.

Good point - I know the Post did, but I think the Times did not. I sort of want to see some original reporting muscle applied here - when the first filings arrived the WaPo got one quote from a Con Law prof who had not even read them, and they have more or less dropped it since then.

[clarice]

AT Tomorrow!

[maryrose]

Can't wait for the article clarice. Get the truth out there!

[clarice]

Thanks, maryrose. At least it will provide more detail than anything else..like the ESP and supervision by newspaper reading arguments.

[topsecretk9]

I sort of want to see some original reporting muscle applied here -

Yeah, and it really wouldn't require all that much muscle for the NYT's CO to tell who, other than Tenet and Ari, do the subpoenas on notes cover (the 6 others)...since we will learn eventually. What's the snag?

[Rick Ballard]

TS,

Especially given that you reported it here, hot off the PACER site, last week.

Maybe their nuancer broke down. That or the subtleizer jammed again.

[clarice]

I think it's a long time pattern:Sensationalize the investigation and indictment and when things start falling apart fuggetaboutit..

I think maybe the NYT's reader might also like to learn what's happening with Hatfill now that he's suing them for the crack reporting by Kristof..and won't it be fun to see how they wrestle with naming their sources inside the FBI or pay big bucks ?

I wonder how many of those sources (in the counterterrorism dept of the FBI I imagine) were also leaking to the NYT about Libby?There goes that suspicious mind of mine again..*thwack*

[jerry]

The Times does have an AP article from the week before on the same subject:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 23 - Lawyers for Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide asked a federal judge on Thursday to dismiss his indictment, saying the special prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case lacked the authority to bring the charges.

etc....

[maryrose]

I am going to sit back grab my popcorn and my diet coke and watch this baby unravel.

[larwyn]

"It's been April 1 for a while here, and I don't know why."..TM
TM,
Check out Taranto today - it is a BEST OF THE BEST, confirming that world seems stuck on APRIL 1st!

It is so crazy out there he ends today with:
You know, we used to like "South Park" a lot, but lately it just doesn't seem bizarre enough to be realistic.

They should have posted this at Kos:
Help Wanted
"Eckerd College Seeks Writer of Hateful Graffiti"--headline, St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times, April 4

And this is what has Atrios crazy:
Delay has already won the 2006 nomination, so that according to the Post, "under Texas law he must either die, be convicted of a felony, or move out of his district to be removed from the November ballot." He plans to vote with his feet and move to Virginia rather than commit suicide or plead guilty.

His coverage of McKenney is too good to try to cut/paste - read it all.

[Patton]

Don't hold your breadth waiting for the Lamestream media to break any news on this.

Just look what happened to Judith Miller when she dared to suggest that Wilson wasn't telling the whole truth to the NYT.

[Whitehall]

Getting Libby's indictment thrown out of court on the basis of DOJ mishandling has great appeal to the MSM and the left.

They will still be able to blame Bush and claim it was a setup all along and proves the Bushies incompetance to boot.

Lack of closure will fuel conspiracy theorists for years plus it will but to rest MSM complicity.

[maryrose]

MCKinney is going down;they are going to issue a warrant for her arrest I think.

[topsecretk9]

Pretty much official...Fitz doesn't know about EPIC, Arab Institute Bio and so on...The FBI doesn't know of this crazy little thing Al Gore invented called the "internets"

[vnjagvet]

Question for lawyers, e.g. Clarice, JMH, Geek, Esq., et al:

How can the lawyers for the subjects of the referenced subpoenas not join Libby's arguments questioning Fitz's authority in this investigation without committing malpractice?

[clarice]

ts--Isn't that article something. I'm surprised they aren't using quill pens.
When I read in this case that they still relied on handwritten notes of interrogations, I couldn't believe it. By now they should be videotaping them. How can an agent pay attention to the interrogation and take accurate notes at the same time?
vnjagvet, I know if I were representing one of those subpoenaed reporters, I'd argue that for the reasons set forth in Libby's motion to dismiss I challenge the responsibility to comply with the subpoena.

And I'd hit on the fn in the Miller brief as being misleading and the admission that in Feb 2004 the SP,before he subpoenaed my client, he knew the source of the leak.

[Jake - but not the one]

Patton, Judy wouldn't know the whole truth if it bit her on the ..., well, you know where. She is so thoroughly discredited by her own words that I'm surprised the defense even bothered with her. I think it smacks of how desperate they must be.

Then again, she may not actually lie under oath, like, you know, Scooter is alleged to have done.

Jake

[jerry]

How many guilty pleas will it take for the JOM crowd to deny they've ever known Mrs Cheney, Bush, DeLay, Lay, Libby, Rove, and numerous other cowering Republicans in Congress?

[clarice]

"the defense bothered with her"? I'm missing something. It was the prosecution that subpoenaed here and threw her in jail for 85 days until she agreed to testify..

[kim]

I know little of the saga of Judy, but she seems to me to be a victim of the quadrad of an insane boss, bad legal advice, stupid and unsupervised prosecution, and professional envy.

It grieves me much to say that if Fitz's appointment was not unconstitutional, it is extraconstitutional, and must be arrested and put to death. This is a necessity even though stopping the proceedings now seems like a miscarriage of justice. How to proceed for most effective resolution?
====================================

[Rick Ballard]

Kim,

I would quibble with 'bad leagal advice' - unless Bennet does not do as VNJ suggests and join TeamLibby's arguments. In which case the remedy would be a filing for legal malpractice.

TeamLibby did a blank piece of paper analysis that was simply excellent, Miller could ask for her money back - if Pinch would let her.

[clarice]

Presser:
"QUESTION: I think you, kind of, answered this but I assume that you have no plans and don't even think you'd be allowed to issue a final report of any sort.

FITZGERALD: You're correct. But let me explain that.

I think what people may be confused about is that reports used to be issued by independent counsels. And one of the complaints about the independent counsel statute was that an ordinary citizen, when investigated, they're charged with a crime or they're not; they're not charged with a crime, people don't talk about it.

Because of the interest in making sure that -- well, there's an interest in independent counsels to making sure those investigations were done thoroughly but then people ended up issuing reports for people not charged. And one of the criticisms leveled was that you should not issue reports about people who are not charged with a crime.

That statute lapsed. I'm not an independent counsel, and I do not have the authority to write a report, and, frankly, I don't think I should have that authority. I think we should conduct this like any other criminal investigation: charge someone or be quiet.

QUESTION: Isn't it kind of true that Mr. Comey's letter to you makes you in essence almost a de facto attorney general and you can abide or not abide by the CFRs or the regulations as to whether or not to write -- to write a report or not to write a report?

And the follow-up is, every special counsel prior to you has in fact written a report and turned it over to Congress, and they've gotten around the grand jury issue as well.

FITZGERALD: Let me say this. I think any prior special counsel may have been special counsel appointed to -- certain regulations for people outside the Department of Justice, which I do not fit into. I'm not an independent counsel. I may be unique in this sense. I can tell you, I'm very comfortable, very clear that I do not have that authority.

And the extent that I was given sort of the acting attorney general hat for this case, it's the acting attorney general, but the attorney general can't violate the law. And the law on grand jury secrecy is the law.

So I may have a lot of power for this one case in the acting attorney general hat, but I followed the Code of Federal Regulations in this case, and I certainly would follow the law. "

[Rick Ballard]

Clarice,

Quick, get a bill in. And don't forget my cut.

"It was laing there in plain sight - what's your excuse?"

"I had my eyes on the stars, Your Honor, and never saw it."

[Rick Ballard]

"Who ya gonna believe, Your Honor - me or my damned affidavit?"

[clarice]

Really, if Fitz could take back one day in his life and redo, that presser was it. Hubris breeds ate...

[clarice]

About that cut, Rick--was our agreement like in writing?

[Brandon]

Handwritten notes: I've heard somewhere (don't remember where) that the FBI doesn't use recording devices precisely because they don't want the subjects of their interviews to be able to review a verbatim transcript, looking for alternative interpretations of what was said. They want the jury to be left to decide who they're going to believe: The slimy perp in the dock who is only trying to escape the righteous sword of justice, or the sterling, square-jawed, patriotic Federal agent who is only doing his duty.

[clarice]

Absolutely. I would not tolerate this. Have you ever seen these people? Do you suppose they have the capacity to ask an unambiguous question? Do you suppose they have the ability to take down what you said verbatim? Or, do they write down what they think they asked and what they think you answered? LOL

[topsecretk9]

How many guilty pleas will it take for the JOM crowd to deny they've ever known Mrs Cheney, Bush, DeLay, Lay, Libby, Rove, and numerous other cowering Republicans in Congress?

Not sure it really even makes sense to begin with, but what in the crap is the point?

Culture of corruption my friend in in the tax payers office supply expense paying for scientologists to bless a new building.

[topsecretk9]

atton, Judy wouldn't know the whole truth if it bit her on the ..., well, you know where. She is so thoroughly discredited by her own words that I'm surprised the defense even bothered with her. I think it smacks of how desperate they must be.

Jakey is sorta living proof this whole thing for the left has never been about Plame but really their anti-Semitic anti-neocon desire to drive a stake thru, isn't it?

[clarice]

And displacement.It's Bush's fault the pizza party is over. If Gore were the president there would be ni terrorism, no 9/11, no silicon valley bust, no hurricanes, the climate would be perfect..

[topsecretk9]

Never really thought of this before but how soon did the daggers in the elitist media socio circuit come out against Judy Miller?

Hmm, an aspect we've never fleshed out before...especially with ABC's Mike Green comment about Albrieght having "JEW SHAME" so how many anti-semite pro-arabs in the press were pissed at Judy way before Novak printed?

Judging by the venom on Huff po and all her baby blogs (FDL) on the left for Judy I say the pretty high...

Huh. I think this has something to do with it...better hope Judy doesn't actually get to the stand.

[topsecretk9]

especially considering how lousy they've treated her

[Rick Ballard]

Clarice,

I have a universal agreement executed as Keeper of the Golden Books. It was issued immediately after Your Serenity's delegation of authority and responsibility. A matter of public record, as I recall.

TAC records are maintained at a location selected pursuant to the appointment and may be viewed only with the permission of the KGB. Petitions for review of any TAC documentation are subject to filing deadlines as determined by the KGB and said deadlines are announced only in response to petitions being filed.

It's really a rather simple system.

[topsecretk9]

Rick
I want in

and continuing my thought

the thing that pisses me off is Wilson's "stake thru the heart" rhetoric is about as close to Nazism as you can get and I am not sure why so many leftist embrace it.

[Rick Ballard]

"I am not sure why so many leftist embrace it."

Kissin' cousins. They'd be so intermarried that you couldn't tell them apart if Adolph hadn't made his run at Uncle Joe's hometown.

[topsecretk9]

Jeff

If you are out there-- the one question I'd ask Wilson

"When you say we need to drive a stake through the heart of every Neo-Con until they are dead, what is you definition of Neo-Con and how does that differ from "cleansing", please?"

[clarice]

Ah, yes, the Golden Book. How could I have forgotten*sigh*

You can't imagine how much vicious hate mail we used to get when I first started writing about this case.

There are a lot of people in some kind of anti-neo con cult. A few hundred years ago, they'd be burning people like Libby at the stake for witchcraft.

[topsecretk9]

Clarice

funny you should say that.

Just watched the "Odessa File" the other night and I was so surprised by the initial plot of the movie (missiles aimed for Israel with Bubonic plague and/or other bio) and the cult of "hatred" support.

[topsecretk9]

Some things never change is what I kept thinking...a

[clarice]

Really, the attacks are so irrational; the investment in the pilloring of these people so great, there is a Medieval quality about it. How else do you explain that people like Leopold peddle a new lie about them every week that never materializes and their readers adore them and cannot wait for the next installment.

[topsecretk9]

Clarice

I just resent the lefty blogs so cavalierly calling republicans racists at a drop of the hat, while the espouse such hateful and really insightful rhetoric as "drive a stake thru the heart"

And then pee their pants when - one person- Ann Coulter opens her mouth.

Um oK, but plenty on the right cringe and say so loudly when she takes things too far...but the left holds hands at the camp fire when Wilson stands before, at the head of the podium an suggests everyone drive a stake thru - CODE neo-cons hearts?

WTF is that?

And so I think that is why there was BEFORE Novak, been so much ire at Judy...they ( the elite liberal agenda journo) been mad at Judy, mad at her BEFORE Novak cuz she got "Jew Shame"

[clarice]

It will be interesting to see if the media adopts this position on the appointment, and if they do, what the reportage on the case will look like then, won't it?

[MJW]

In case anyone reads the TalkLeft comments, and wonders if adding "Mr." to Hadley's name would make it fit the redactions, two points:

In the second and third paragraph 43 redactions, appending "Mr." changes "Hadley" from too short to too long. (I believe the first redaction does have "Mr," added.)

In the paragraph 39 redaction, which names two sources, one of whom is Rove, "Mr. Hadley and Mr. Rove" is wildly too long, while "Mr. Hadley and Rove" is too long, and a highly unlikey phrasing.

[Patton]

Jake says:
""Patton, Judy wouldn't know the whole truth if it bit her on the ..""

Good thing Fitz is relying on her memory then huh??

Judy was 'ASTONISHED' to learn that she had talked to Libby in June....so Team Libby can point out during her testimony how it is plausible to entirely forget a conversation....and you don't get indicted for it.

QUESTION: So, Ms. Miller, you entirely forgot this conversation when testifying to Mr. Fitz, similar to Mr Libby also forgetting a conversation (on the most important issue in the world) and yet you haven't been charged? How is that possible?

DOESN'T MILLER COMPLETELY FORGETTING A CONVERSATION KIND OF DESTROYING FITZ CONTENTION THAT THIS WAS JUST TOO IMPORTANT TO NOT REMEMBER??

[kim]

It is comforting to see that Libby's team seems to have a strong sense of the absurdities, because they are tying Fitz up with his own rope.
=================================

[clarice]

My article is now online,http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5389

[Specter]

jerry,

you mean like Harry Reid and Rocky?

[kim]

C. Tied up in knots. It is apparent why the April Foolishness is rampant and profligate around here; we've had the example of a prototypical April Fooler to inform our Valerie epic. The fun is out of him, though; he's been driven mad by isolation. It's an irony imposed on him by the strange power conferred on him by the idiotboy Comey.

But what is this 'baseball'?
====================

[Ranger]

Ok, I have a question for the legal types. If a federal prosecutor makes a knowingly false statement in a press conference, does that open the prosecutor up to legal jepardy in a civil case?

Specificly, if Fitz said that Libby was "the first government official to disclose that information" when he in fact knew that UGO had disclosed that information before Libby, what are Libby's legal options?

[clarice]

Hard questions, Ranger. As to the false statements in the presser, they would certainly be part of any motion arguing that the Prosecutor had tried to poison the jury pool.(It is hard to win a civil suit against a prosecutor .I'll try to find some cases and show you the standards.) At a minimum, any of the overstatements there for which the prosecutor cannot supply evidence will be hammered on here by Libby who will try to get a pre-trial order from the judge forbidding the prosecution from raising those issues at all.

When you strip from the case, the first to tell,"classified" and harm to national security, what's left? Some conversations in which the participants had minor variations in recollections.

[clarice]

Some years ago the SCOTUS held prosecutors should be immune from civil liability. Here is a discussion of the case. http://www.publicintegrity.org/pm/default.aspx?act=sidebarsb&aid=36 The website discusses the range of prosecutorial misconduct and the remedies, if any, courts have imposed for it.

[Specter]

Of course the caveat being that as long as the prosecutor stays within the prosecutorial role and does not step into the active investigator role.

[clarice]

Yes.I wonder if that would cover the respresentations Fitz made to obtain an order compelling the reporters to testify?

[kim]

Hey, Fitz, know any good lawyers?
=====================

[Specter]

LOL kim....hopefully he knows someone better than he is....