Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Telephone Line | Main | You Fish, I'll Hold The Rod »

May 16, 2006

Comments

clarice

PUK,as goddess of TAC I order you all to post this story on every lefty loony site--the ones that have been screaming since 2001 that Bush is trying to reshape American into a theocracy..

MayBee

Come on, ts. She was Ted Olsen's wife. Don't you see????

Sue

Top,

The last time I asked one of them what about the people on the plane, I was informed they are being kept in an underground bunker. I'm sure not everyone who believes the conspiracy believes that, but one is enough for me.

topsecretk9

oh, just read... the plane was shot down so that they could haul in some other super secret expensive land-hovering? type bomb to simulate an airplane hitting the pentagon.

Hmm...well it had just taken off and Olsen called her husband and described the situation to him...so I guess ...you know what? nevermind.

MayBee

What's the point of shooting down a plane and then blowing up the pentagon?
Couldn't they just have blown up the Pentagon and called it a truck bomb?

Sue

Come on Maybee...work with them...a conspiracy needs something that involves...a conspiracy. ::grin::

PeterUK

There is nothing you can do or say to convince these people,easier just to chain them together ans set them to work digging the ditch between you and Mexico.

maryrose

Dems have to get religion- The exit polls for 2004 showed most of their support came from people who don't go to church very often. Kerry lost the catholic vote because he was waffling on abortion and shopping around for communion. Dean wants to tap into the religious constituencies because he sees the election difference comes down to that group.

clarice

A couple of years ago a book claiming the Pentagon crash was a ruse by the Administration was the top selling "non-fiction" book in France. I'm not kidding.
Today a professor has a piece in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer claims all of 9/11 was an "inside job" and not an attack. He is a member of a group of professors convinced this is so.
I'm not kidding.

MayBee

LOL! I'm sorry, I got carried away.

I love a conspiracy because lack of evidence strengthens the conspiracy. And then evidence to the contrary also strenghtens the conspiracy (the disinformation portion!).
It's bullet-proof.

Lesley

Clarice: quick question (hope it doesn't sound too moronic) -

It would seem to me that Rove's attorney's are paying close attention to the various filings and motions of Mr. Libby's attorney's, of Fitzgerald's team, and the judge's rulings and comments.

Could Fitzgerald be delaying indicting Karl Rove, taking a wait and see attitude, to ascertain where all the big case/little case issues are going to fall out before acting on Rove?

Is this kind of legal strategy ever used?

clarice

I don't know. The only strategic value I can see for Fitz to not close the investigation of Rove is to keep from disclosing stuff that is still before the gj. I can't imagine there's any reasonable hope of more information coming in.

maryrose

making these claims about the Pentagon not being hit is an insult to all the people who lost their lives and to those injured-I read a book about one burn victim-I used to love listening to Barbara Olsen. These people pushing this fantasy should be ashamed of themselves.

Chants

TSK9,

RE: Barbara Olson.

Exactly. She was in on it, as MayBee noted so adriotly.

clarice

Yes, it is maryrose. And utterly demented.

boris

God I miss Barbara Olson.

Dwilkers

Seixon has a good post wherein he establishes some interesting links that contribute to the idea that Larry J and Munchausen Joe may be 2 of Leopold's sources.

For some reason I get an error message when attempting to post over there, but here's what I can't figure out about that. Assuming someone that knows something about this, IE someone in Fitz' or Luskin's offices wanted to leak this, why would they leak to Johnson? I can barely see Wilson, if someone bought into his schtick in the SP's office and told him what was up because they thought he rated an update.

But if you were trying to get a leak out why would you leak to those guys instead of a media type? What they don't have Andrea's phone number or something? You have to figure Washington reporters have been mining those offices for leakers.

It doesn't feel right to me.

GnuCarSmell

I examined the pic's of the Pentagon blowing up. I really couldn't make out a plane, but I think I saw a grainy image of Karl Rove standing on a grassy knoll holding a RPG launcher. Or, it could have been Curly ...

Dwilkers

Yeah Barbara Olsen was a cool lady. Nice looking, highly intelligent, always smiling, well spoken. I miss her too.

Specter

The folks at TruthOut are in a tizzy. Now it that Rove planted the evidence with Jason's sources to take the heat off Bush's speech last night. Man, Rove really is brilliant. Must've been those "Comey-Fitzgerald" mind rays.

Specter

And they think that KOS is pro-Bush

Lurker

"Any more news about how and when McCarthy got hired back and any progress on NSA leak?
I think Clarice said some info coming the latter part of May.
I agree with Kate- no do overs or take backs for Andrea Mitchell. If she misspoke then Libby was misunderstood. There we are even!"

Ya think CIA will hire McCarthy back?

And what will happen end of May?

I agree that there cannot be any take backs...just like Massaoui.

Mark my words...1) a friend of mine was driving by the Pentagon, while waiting for the red light to change, he watched that plane heading into the Pentagon to promote his website. Took him about 32 hours to get home. Couldn't fly home, of course. Had to take the bus home...in a roundabout way. And he's campaigning for the vice chair of the Texas Republican Party.

And, 2) one of my brother's ex-roommate works at the Pentagon. Yes, he saw the plane...among other things, too.

No conspiracy.

maryrose

Lurker:
my question about McCarthy is how did she get hired in 2004?
As for the NSA leak story we are waiting for Rocky to be exposed as a leaker some info due in May.
According to AP on Yahoo Walton doesn't see need foe defense to get some of Mitchell's notes supposedly of a conversation with Libby.
Story says Walton seems to think WH was DETERMINED to fight back against Wilson article. Since when is that a crime?

JM Hanes

Lurker

McCarthy left the CIA, worked at a lefty think tank, and was then rehired somewhat after the Fitzgerald investigation revved up. maryrose was referring to a previous rehiring, not a future one.

Lurker

Why would an entire floor be locked down, btw, just for an indictment, btw? None of it made sense.

"A couple of years ago a book claiming the Pentagon crash was a ruse by the Administration was the top selling "non-fiction" book in France. I'm not kidding.
Today a professor has a piece in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer claims all of 9/11 was an "inside job" and not an attack. He is a member of a group of professors convinced this is so.
I'm not kidding."

Yeah, there are a few videos available at yahoo that cover conspiracy ideas. Once I came across the part about the Pentagon, I stopped watching the videos because I knew of two people that actually saw the plane hitting the Pentagon and witnessed the aftermath of the hit.

Mister Snitch!

It's SHEMP, not SHEP. Gee, he gets no respect as it is, at least his name should be spelled right. Poor guy lived in the shadow of Curley, which was, of course, a considerable shadow.

As a previous poster notes of this URL: "Now-thats-a-tit". Nyuck. But don't blame Mr. Maguire, who clearly is just a victim of circumstance.

richard mcenroe

"BTW...does anyone know if Rove has SS detail and to what degree?"

Secret Service, no.

Ringwraiths.

Specter

lol...ringwraiths or elves?

Lurker

Ahhh....I hadn't seen anything online explaining the rehiring of McCarthy and by whom.

"According to AP on Yahoo Walton doesn't see need foe defense to get some of Mitchell's notes supposedly of a conversation with Libby.
Story says Walton seems to think WH was DETERMINED to fight back against Wilson article. Since when is that a crime?"

No, it's not a crime. That sounds rather biased on the judge's part. Don't the Libby need it to build the defense argument? And wouldn't this be a grounds for an appeal?

We should get the other side of the story.

maryrose

mistersnitch
I always liked Shemp, who in real life did not relish doing all those different episodes and filled in when Curly or Curly Joe weren't able to.

JM Hanes

Lock-downs? Leopold's probably just gotten his story mixed up with http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/>Madsen's:

May 13, 2006 -- Yesterday afternoon, WMR was staked out at the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington awaiting any developments in the CIA leak case. A little after noon, a large motorcade consisting of black and one green SUV, several police cars and police motorcycles sped into the street behind the courthouse. Two SUVs split from the motorcade and quickly dashed into the underground parking garage. Several personal security officers were spotted on guard in the annex of the courthouse where the CIA leak case grand jury was meeting. Although there is no final confirmation that the motorcade was that of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, there is every indication that he spent approximately a little under 30 minutes in the courthouse.

That would be 30 buisness minutes, I'm sure.

Sue

Wow. What was Gonzales doing at the CIA leak case? Actually overseeing it? As he is supposed to do?

clarice

You know, that is what I thought when I read that..Good news! C

JM Hanes

Who knows? Madsen's reading is considerably less benign:

Last October, Gonzales made a similar trip in an identical motorcade to the courthouse on a Friday to hear the decision of the grand jury investigating Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. The Attorney General's appearance at the grand jury is a formality and there is an opportunity for him to pose questions to the jury. After last October's visit to the grand jury, Gonzales informed the White House that Libby was to be indicted. One week later, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald delivered a five count indictment against Libby.

clarice

Right! That's the only reason the AG goes to the Courthouse.

paul

Has anyone noticed the web article title from Instalink?

It comes out,

"Now THAT'S A Title"-sans 'le'.

paul

(In the lower adress bar that appears...)

Gary Maxwell

All Souls Unitarian Church

Next they will meet at at a Hopi Indian teepee and then of course the wigan coven and perhaps for old time sake a buddhist temple or two...

gimme that old time religion, gimme that...

Sue

Hmmm...if he has only been once before, right before indictments were handed down, it could mean something...and then again...it could mean nothing. I vote for something. If true, that is. And only 1 visit before. Gotta get my caveats in here...

Lurker

Which CIA leak case? The Libby / Plame / Rove deal or the McCarthy "Queen Bee" and her worker bees deal? Or both?

MayBee

Well, it could be that Rove is about to be indicted. Who knows?

Here's my question: how wrong can Jason Leopold be, and still be right? How much leeway will he be given simply because his story was what some wanted to hear?
Can an indictment come on this Friday?
Can there have been no 15 hour meeting last Friday?
Does it matter if Fitzgerald was in Chicago?

I see Jeralyn Merrit very quiet on this as more and more 24-hour blocks tick off the clock. But what is the minimum requirement for Leopold to be redeemed, and at what point will his supporters say this is just all wrong?

My guess? He will always have been fake but accurate. Because addicts need enablers (and enablers need addicts!), and you can be addicted to lying in the bright spotlight.

JM Hanes

If you run a "Gonzalez" sighting around town a couple of times, and through a couple of lefty filters, all it needs is some judicious filling in of blanks & a little recylcled fluff here & there to turn into Leopold's story.

Lurker

"Last October, Gonzales made a similar trip in an identical motorcade to the courthouse on a Friday to hear the decision of the grand jury investigating Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. The Attorney General's appearance at the grand jury is a formality and there is an opportunity for him to pose questions to the jury. After last October's visit to the grand jury, Gonzales informed the White House that Libby was to be indicted. One week later, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald delivered a five count indictment against Libby."

How long was last October's visit? The decision could still go either way.

This sounds far more plausible than Jason's two reports - 15 hours, 24 actual versus business hours, lock-down, etc.

If the decision was made to indict Rove, then we may be looking at this Friday or the 24th as per TM's prediction.

clarice

Yes, I heard he was getting a super special warrant to put Jason on a super secret plane to a super secret prison somewhere where he will be fed "truthiness" until he spills the beans.

topsecretk9

Clarice
What is the deal with a sealed indictment vs. regular and why would it be sealed, and how does it work with the rules and you know what I am getting at...this is the longest dang sealed indictment and Fitz is being awfully accommodating to this alleged criminal.

MayBee

30 business minutes.
Well, I could believe Gonzales was meeting with Fitz's grand jury at the courthouse if we knew that Fitzgerald was not in Chicago, as Rove's spokesman seemed to to think he was.

MayBee

oops. Meant to be laughing at JMH's "30 business minutes". hilarious!

topsecretk9

Do you think Fitz spent Friday in Chicago negotiating THIS which was released Monday?


And I just found a goody i did not know. (something tells me I am the only one that did not know though)

clarice

I'm no expert on gj proceedings. My understanding is that indictments are sealed to keep the gj findings secret until the defendant is arrested or appears voluntarily before the jude.

Sue

If Leopold's story turns out to be anything but accurate, it is Rove's fault. Planted false information to discredit him. Ala Dan Rather. They are already in spin mode over there. Specter is trying to keep them honest but honest isn't what they are looking for.

clarice

Yes, ts.

Sue

Top,

You are amazing. You come up with some of the sweetest little gems.

topsecretk9

Clarice

I meant to begin that question with a "Gee"

Sue

Didn't the NYTs have a story on the (Libby) indictments the night before?

Lurker

And how do we know which cases GJ are listening to on Wednesdays and Fridays?

Gonzales could be visiting the courthouse for another case?

Who knows?

So Fitz was in Chicago last Friday, foshure?

Does Gonzales have any control over Fitz at all?

topsecretk9

Well Sue

I win some and lose some...my 2nd "goody" i found turn out to be a dud -- turns out it was as if i had read it for the first time.

MayBee

ts- what's the goody you didn't know? I'm certain I don't know it either.

Bill in AZ

heh heh - TS - saw your post above wondering how lefty's reconcile all of the people from the planes still hiding in bunkers or whatever... you gotta spend more time on lefty sites, it will all make sense. Just for grins sometime, mention "chemtrails". Watch the howling moonbattery take on a life of its own. Then ask "er... why does the guvmint want to kill us all with chemtrails". Just something to do someday when you're bored... :)

Lurker

Seixon has some interesting posts on the same topic at his site.

topsecretk9

now call me crazy but this got underway yesterday too...seems like a weird use of 15 hours of time Friday with your office starting this on monday...

City Hall watches hiring trial
By Gary Washburn and Mickey Ciokajlo
Tribune staff reporters
Published May 16, 2006, 8:38 PM CDT

In U.S. District Court, prosecutors portray former mayoral aide Robert Sorich as a corrupt cog in a patronage-fueled political machine. But a few blocks away at City Hall, veteran politicians see a meddling federal government that is overstepping its bounds.

Aldermen complain that local government is being stifled by the criminal case over city hiring, coupled with a court-appointed monitor who oversees hiring and promotions to ensure that political connections play no role.

"Everybody is scared [of] everybody," said Ald. Carrie Austin (34th). "People feel they can't talk to you, they shouldn't talk to you, and if they talk to you, they are in trouble.

While aldermen complained, the first prosecution witness in the trial of four former city officials testified that Mayor Richard Daley's Office of Intergovernmental Affairs was deeply involved in hiring that was supposed to be protected from politics.

Mary Jo Falcon, who for 11 years oversaw personnel matters in two city departments, testified that Sorich, the mayor's former patronage chief in Intergovernmental Affairs, or other aides would secretly instruct her which applicants should be hired.

Some of Austin's colleagues believe that U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald is trying to paint violations of the federal Shakman decree as something more serious than they are. The civil decree, named for the Chicago attorney who filed it, prohibits political considerations in hiring and firing for most city jobs.

Link


but the italicized does raise a familiar theme.

JM Hanes

I began rooting around looking for any other reports which might establish if Fitzgerald was there in person for the Hollinger signing, & got sidetracked by this Nov '05 piece by http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/patrick-fitzgerald-and-th_b_9203.html>Jane Hamsher piece. I thought the Perle/Hollinger connection was interesting. This isn't the only time Hollinger has been involved in some high profile legal wrangling.

clarice

Yes it does, ts.

Lurker

Did anyone see TM's update regarding Pincus?

"Pincus believes that the Bush administration acted obnoxiously when it leaked Valerie Plame’s identity, but he has never been convinced by the argument that the leaks violated the law. “I don’t think it was a crime,” he says. “I think it got turned into a crime by the press, by Joe” — Wilson — “by the Democrats. The New York Times kept running editorials saying that it’s got to be investigated — never thinking that it was going to turn around and bite them.” The entire Plame investigation, he says, has been a distraction from a more fundamental conversation about how the White House handled evidence before the war."

Not sure what TM's point is here...

clarice

JMH--Just more demonizing. It's my understanding that Perle's been cleared of any criminal wrongdoing. All the directors are I think in jeopardy in the civil suit..

Lurker

"But a few blocks away at City Hall, veteran politicians see a meddling federal government that is overstepping its bounds."

Meddling federal government...meaning Fitz?

The title: "City Hall watches hiring trial"

When?

JM Hanes

Hadn't noticed the update, Lurker. Thanks.

Just wait till the left hears about this! Plamegate -- the whole kit and kaboodle -- was all a Rovian boondoggle designed to derail more serious investigation into the use of pre-war intelligence! It's all suddenly making sense!

topsecretk9

Daley trial started yeasterday.

Lurker

You are welcome, JMH. Thought this was obvious all along?

Daley trial started yesterday? Then this doesn't prove that Fitz was in Chicago.

Syl

If fitz does indict Karl, he can continue to hold back stuff from Libby's team?

clarice

That's more complicated-- I think anything Libby wants and is entitled to get otherwise that would be discoverable by Rove should I think be turned over to Libby.The excuse now is that giving it up at this point may jeopardize the secrecy of those proceedings and and the work of the gj itself.

Syl

Daley trial started yesterday? Then this doesn't prove that Fitz was in Chicago.

It's possible fitz wanted to get the Karl thing out of the way before this trial begins. Is there a trial schedule anywhere? Like will Fitz be free on the 19th or the 24th for a presser in D.C.?

Or maybe fitz is indicting UGO. :)

Fat chance of that.

I don't trust Karl--not in the way lefties don't trust him--i don't trust him not to pull the wool over our eyes too sometimes. Disinformation is disinformation and everyone gets smothered with it equally.

On the other hand the GJ for Libby was dedicated to the Plame case. This one is not and we have no idea what other cases they're involved in.

Syl

clarice

If Karl is indicted then perhaps the gj's work is over for the Plame case and fitz should become more amenable to Libby's team. They'll be pouring over the indictment with a fine-toothed come whatever.

If there's an indictment.

topsecretk9

Then this doesn't prove that Fitz was in Chicago.


Not necessarily. But it makes a 15hour marathon on Friday at Luskins office less likely and weird. To me anyway.

clarice

I'm sorry. I don't understand what you are saying, Syl.
The judge has signaled that some discovery Libby wants--like the Rove statements--will not be resolved until that gj has concluded.

topsecretk9

15hour marathon on Friday at Luskins office less likely and weird. To me anyway.

Coupled with a Hollinger negotiation too.

JM Hanes

Sorich trial also wrapped up last week, I think, although cases starting up & ending may not necessarily mean much. The lead atty assigned to the case, as in Sorich, is the one doing the actual arguing in court.

clarice

WaPo report on today's hearing is in:
"Walton indicated that he accepted NBC's argument that it had no relevant materials.

Libby lawyer William Jeffress said that "for better or worse, the press is right in the middle" of the trial. But Walton expressed skepticism about the defense requests, noting that the court "has to be cautious" about releasing information related to journalists' sources.

Walton said he wanted to see some of the disputed materials to decide for himself whether they were germane. He also said he is likely to retain some of it until the trial and make it available to Libby only if it conflicts with courtroom testimony.

Much of yesterday's hearing concerned the notebooks of former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who spoke three times with Libby about Wilson's work in June and July 2003 and made repeated reference in her notes to Plame. Miller has said she also discussed Plame with other officials but could not recall their names. But she did not write an article about the matter.

The Times has provided Libby a redacted copy of the notebooks, but Jeffress argued that Libby needed to see other names and phone numbers in Miller's notebooks to determine who else she spoke with about Plame and if her memory about all the related conversations was confused.

Jeffress also said that to counter the suggestion that Libby was heavily focused on the Wilson-Plame link, he plans to call six journalists to testify at the trial, each of whom will report that during their conversations with Libby about Wilson in 2003, he never mentioned Plame's name.

Jeffress said the defense also planned to seek Wilson's testimony at the trial about his report for the CIA and to bring up subsequent comments by Wilson to reporters that Jeffress said were untruthful. But Walton responded that the charges concerned Libby's statements and that Wilson's credibility is not "at issue here."

Walton

topsecretk9

Also...this happened on Wednesday of last week...

Associated Press
Published May 12, 2006, 5:18 AM CDT

HIGHWOOD, Ill. -- Federal prosecutors have increased the amount that they allege a former suburban Chicago bank employee stole from customers -- from nearly $360,000 to about $3.3 million.

Estela Ramos, 46, of Highland Park was charged in December with embezzling $358,925 from customers, most of whom are Mexican immigrants who speak little English.

Prosecutors say the amount is actually closer to nine times that much. A spokesman for U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald declined to comment on the new amount Thursday.

The charges issued Wednesday allege that Ramos took the money from February 1999 to November 2005. She was a 27-year employee of the U.S. Bank branch in Highwood until she was fired Nov. 11, 2005.

link

I going with sick cat.

Lesley

Thank you for answering my question, Clarice. I've never participated in a Grand Jury, however, I cannot understand what has taken a Grand Jury so long to indict Mr. Rove if that, in fact, will be the outcome.

MayBee

But Walton responded that the charges concerned Libby's statements and that Wilson's credibility is not "at issue here."
---

I'm not sure I buy that. Walton and Fitzgerald say that only things Libby has seen or heard can go to his state of mind. But that isn't true- what you believe can also go to your state of mind.
So if I think someone is an incredibly huge liar, and I act in a certain way based on what I read or see about them, the fact that I find them to be a liar has influenced me.
So isn't it important, to some degree, for me to be able to vindicate myself by showing the person I suspect of lying is, in fact, a liar?

If I think my neighbor has a video camera and is taping me, and I start looking in his windows to see if I can see the camera, doesn't it matter if he really does have a camera? Am I as guilty of being a peeping Tom if he has the camera or not? It seems it could at least be a mitigating, motivating factor. Either I'm inordinately paranoid or I've found a big creep.

I've had a lot of sugar. Maybe that doesn't make sense.

clarice

USA Today:
"The judge also indicated the defense will be limited in attacking Wilson, if Libby calls him as a witness at trial as his lawyers vow they will. Walton said it is irrelevant whether Wilson was right or wrong in his criticism of the administration.

What matters is that Libby and the White House were determined to respond to Wilson‘s accusations, Walton said.Wilson

clarice

Reuters "U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton said at the end of the three-hour hearing that he expected to rule on the issue by the end of next week. He decided to review privately some of the materials to determine if they might be relevant."Order">http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-05-16T224831Z_01_N16564472_RTRUKOC_0_US-BUSH-LEAK.xml&archived=False">Order

Syl

clarice

I'm sorry. I don't understand what you are saying, Syl.

I think I don't understand what I'm saying either ;) I don't know all the ins and outs of process. Not even enough to pose a coherent question. LOL

Syl

urk

clarice

Well, you're very smart but it's late. Niters.

topsecretk9

hmmm...koskids are very anxious to "spoof" Jason...(ahem - if only they were so jovial about BEN, ahem)but ... his almighty Kosness spoke to Wilson on Saturday too and got a heads up from Wilson (and Wilson's sources - ) about these indictments...Saturday was a busy phone call day for Wilson...he called Larry too. William Pitt (pre-retraction) said he was in contact with (is commiserating with) Wilson and Wilson spot on detective work helped them to eliminate 1 of eleven was it? sources...

Jason, honey...Wilson is U S I N G you and you'd do darn better to stop chasing the dragon.

Rocco

"Timmerman said that after several years at the U.S. Information Agency, Ann Pincus was transferred in the late 1990s to the Office of Research and Media Reaction at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the same office that "lost" a laptop computer loaded with highly classified intelligence documents in April 2000."

Ann Pincus worked for INR and we're supposed to believe her husband Walter didn't know Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

Maybe that laptop is in Valerie's safe too!

http://www.aim.org/publications/media_monitor/2003/08/28.html

topsecretk9

Ann Pincus worked for INR and we're supposed to believe her husband Walter didn't know Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

Ann

PINCUS, ANN T (terry)
WASHINGTON,DC 20008

CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY/DIRECTO

3/26/2003

$1,000

Kerry, John


notice Junior- Andrew the lawyer too

Kate

Like most of you, I have followed the Plame case closely. AG never went to the courthouse, never. Why would he appear before the GJ.

What happens is that Fitz has to let AG know if he is indicting. Fitz is stationed at the DOJ so he would forward paperwork or meet with AG there.

MJW

Goodbye italics?

Patton

Anyone who is still able to do critical thining knows Joe Wilson and valerie Plame are responsible for her 'outing'

She sent him to Niger, she allowed him to go public, he knew her involvement in picking him to go...he knew she was at the meeting and the debrief, she knew she wrote the recommendation.

If their is any integrity at CIA, the after action damage report would find the most fault with Plame and second most with Wilson.

All the rest is political puffery and smoke.

Patton

"""Walton said it is irrelevant whether Wilson was right or wrong in his criticism of the administration.

What matters is that Libby and the White House were determined to respond to Wilson‘s accusations
"""""

This is ludicrous, of course your state of mind is different if you are responding to the truth rather then a bunch of lies.

If you are responding to the thruth and the truth doesn't look good for you, you may want to smear the guy.

If you are responding to a bunch of lies, you probably just want to correct the record and there's no need to smear the guy.

Tom Maguire

The folks at TruthOut are in a tizzy. Now it that Rove planted the evidence with Jason's sources to take the heat off Bush's speech last night.

MUST CREDIT JOM for that spin:

The PowerGuy and PoliPundit provide evidence in support of my own theory - the "Rove Indicted" story was planted to distract attention from this immigration speech.

I was kidding, but who knew?

On the point that Wilson's veracity is jot an issue - if the defense won't be allowed to demonstrate that they reasonably believed Wislon to be lying, or at least, the reports that Cheney sent him and he debunked the forgeries to be woefully inaccurate, does that mean the prosecution cannot introduce the theme that Wilson was being punished?

It does seem like both sides have a story to tell about why Wilson was of interest to the Admin.

PeterUK

Patton.
It is likely that she showed him her copy of the Niger forgeries.

Patton

Since Fitz and the judge are now so intent on covering up everything that led to Libby's so-called lies, let's remeber what Fitz said just a few months ago about how mucvh information you need about Libby (The Pitcher in question) to make a good decision.

""Fitz:
If you saw a baseball game and you saw a pitcher wind up and throw a fastball and hit a batter right smack in the head, and it really, really hurt them, you'd want to know why the pitcher did that. And you'd wonder whether or not the person just reared back and decided, "I've got bad blood with this batter. He hit two home runs off me. I'm just going to hit him in the head as hard as I can."

You also might wonder whether or not the pitcher just let go of the ball or his foot slipped, and he had no idea to throw the ball anywhere near the batter's head. And there's lots of shades of gray in between.

You might learn that you wanted to hit the batter in the back and it hit him in the head because he moved. You might want to throw it under his chin, but it ended up hitting him on the head.

And what you'd want to do is have as much information as you could. You'd want to know: What happened in the dugout? Was this guy complaining about the person he threw at? Did he talk to anyone else? What was he thinking? How does he react? All those things you'd want to know. """"

On second thought, let's make sure the jury doesn't hear any of that!!

Lurker

Perhaps Topsecret can find out if Walton contributed anything to Kerry, DNC, etc.?

How does the judge (and/or SP) determine the relevancy of the materials?

Guess Wilson's credibility has nothing to do with perjury but Wilson telling everyone about Plame should have merit to the perjury defense. The subponeas of the written (and taped) materials might be relevant if they show that Libby never mentioned Plame's name; therefore, Libby did not lie to the GJ. Isn't that the part of the defense argument? At least introduce some reasonable doubt that SP was off on the perjury charges....

Wonder what decision Walton will rule next week...

Cecil Turner

On the point that Wilson's veracity is jot an issue - if the defense won't be allowed to demonstrate that they reasonably believed Wislon to be lying, or at least, the reports that Cheney sent him and he debunked the forgeries to be woefully inaccurate, does that mean the prosecution cannot introduce the theme that Wilson was being punished?

Apparently not. The only way I see this thing getting past reasonable doubt in the mind of all 12 jurors is if the context is entirely stripped away (leaving only the parts of conversations that directly dealt with Plame, and removing all conversations where she wasn't discussed), prejudicial material is inserted as evidence (with an inadequate disclaimer), and lower-than-average intellect jurors with a strong liberal bias predominate. Unfortunately for Libby, that's exactly the way things are going.

Syl

All fitz wants introduced is the lie about the origin of the trip because there are only three possible responses to the trip:

1)No response, let it go
2)Respond that the CIA, on its own, sent Wilson
3)Respond that wilson's wife is CIA and was involved in sending him.

If that's all there is to the pushback, (3) sounds like a plausible response.

But there was more. The forgeries and the timing of them and how Wilson did not debunk them. How the report was disseminated or not and to whom and how and when. What it actually contained vs what Wilson said he reported. Explain the 16 words. And show the NIE parts regarding Niger, Africa, uranium.

And none of that was at the Administration's fingertips--it all had to be dug out. They were scrambling to figure out what happened with that one piece of the pre-war stuff.

That's a helluva lot of pushback they had to deal with. A helluva lot of misinformation they had to correct. It was so much more than who generated Wilson's trip that it's a travesty that Walton doesn't seem to see it.

And with all that legitimate pushback, the little detail re wilson's wife was not necessary. It was sufficient to say, along with everything else, that the CIA on its own sent Wilson.

And such a busy time it was for the administration. We were in Iraq dealing with the aftermath of the invasion and hunting for WMD's and trying to figure out what was up with that.

And one of the biggest lies of all: that the administration outed his wife in retaliation for his whistleblowing is so outrageous. But even more outrageous is that Wilson said it and everybody in the MSM and the Democrats without a second thought immediately jumped on his little wagon.

They don't even grant the possibility that IF the administration outed Val, it was inadvertent during a very busy time.

And even today when it's known that there's somebody not from the Whitehouse or OVP who actually was the source for Novak's article, the MSM and the Democrats STILL talk as if the Whitehouse did it--and did it on purpose.

They don't trust Wilson, but the only thing they'll admit (just like fitz) is that Cheney didn't send him. Otherwise they behave as if everything else Wilson spouted was the truth.

What he said was just too good to be false.

Syl

Cecil

That's damn depressing.

But Libby's lawyers see exactly what fitz is doing.

maryrose

I hope Walton does the right thing and allows for the possibility of determining the dishonesty of Joe Wilson. Also that the administration could pushback and not have a punishment motive. They were correcting the record.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame