Powered by TypePad

« A Quick Memory Test | Main | Libby Thread - Friday Afternoon [OK, Thursday] »

February 14, 2007

Comments

ARC: Brian

Rick --

I mentioned the t-shirt deal in the previous trial i talked about, today in a comment about H&R wearing black. There's no way this jury got its idea from our discussions.

It doesn't mean anything in deliberations. To me its just a bad omen based on my previous (limited) trial experience as an observer. Nothing more.

It could actually mean good news for Libby, in that now the jurors when they do the first vote and find out they don't agree are going to get really pissed at each other. Here they are thinking they are family, how could they not see the trial in exactly the same way? "But But we wore the tshirt together!"

In the case I observed, it was just a civil trial so they didn't need a unanimous verdict (and didn't get one anyway).

-- Brian

Sara (Squiggler

Clarice, can you give any insight on Cline?

Rocco

Well I don't know how many girls you've dated
Man but you ain't lived til you've had your tires rotated

By a red headed woman
A red headed woman
It takes a red headed woman
To get a dirty job done

Red Headed Woman
Bruce Springsteen

centralcal

One place where I can see Russert suffering from his less than stellar personal ethics is behind the scenes. TV punditry like TV news is deadly cut-throat and competitive. The producers behind the scenes are the ones who really control who comes on and what is talked about. You can bet your sweet bippy that producers for ABC, CBS, CNN, FoxNews Sunday shows, will try to find a way to stab ol'Little Russ in the back any chance they can - especially when trying to book guests.

clarice

Sara, I can't. I recall he was young, handsome and very soft spoken--very cool cucumber.

Extraneus

Good one, Rocco.

hit and run

By the way on the NRO corner mention. I'm sure that the Corner is the bigest site there....but their Media Blog has been spreading the JOM love for a few days now.

Sara (Squiggler


Bush Calls Claims of Manufactured Evidence "Prepos...

He also mocked NBC's David Gregory, who (probably under orders from Chris Matthews) had just asked him if he was trying to gin up a pretext for war with Iran:

This is funny, checkit out.

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: STEVE

RE: FITZ'S POSSIBLE REBUTTAL

With Clarice having a bet going that Fitz is "known to pull stunts."

If his "stunts" look anything like his presser. I hope he has his overcoat on. Cause even this jury will run him out of town.

If they're celebrating Valentine's Day, today, either they're like Los Angeles people dress up for Halloween.) Or, they're really into superficial stuff. And, are quite relaxed. I don't think that spells conviction. If anything, they've seen it all. And, they want to move on.

Can one stunt on Fitz' rebuttal be that he wears a red tee-shirt with a heart on it? He's an available batchlor. (Joan Rivers once remarked when women get desperate enough, you can prop a dead guy up against the wall. And, she'll "accept" the date.)

On Rebuttal? I think Fitz has his own PRESSER worries, right now.

centralcal

H & R: Yes, Steven Spruill (sp?) does a great job on that blog. Very little gets by him..

Ralph L.

CentralCal, don't you think they do that now? But now they can feel righteous about it.

Semanticleo

Assuming the worst about the T-Shirt, a hung jury is Libby's Waterloo.

The next judge won't be bamboozled into allowing the security sensitive material into the record, without FIRST putting Libby and Cheney (as assumed) on the stand.

oh, and if you think Fitz won't try again....
think again.

ARC: Brian

oh, and if you think Fitz won't try again....
think again.

Give it up. Fitz is going home win or lose. There is no Sealed v. Sealed case coming up. There's no going after Rove, there's no going after Big Dog, etc.

If they get a hung jury, Fitz isn't going to try this case again.

Semanticleo

we shall see. we shall see.

Jane

The next judge won't be bamboozled

There won't be a "next Judge". There is no way, on this planet, this case gets tried again.

ARC: Brian

Just like we'll see about 22 indictments?

Charlie (Colorado)

oh, and if you think Fitz won't try again....
think again.

Considering your ongoing record, Leo, I find this very reassuring.

After all, when were you last correct about anything?

james

Via NRO;

"A man on the jury, who is a retired school teacher originally from North Carolina, then read a statement to the court. The man said the jury wanted to "thank the clerks, marshals, and judge for all of the accomodations made" for the jury during this trial. The juror then said the entire jury understands their responsibilities in this case and that their "unanimity may now go no further." "But on behalf of the jury," said this man, "we want to wish everybody a Happy Valentine's day."

To say this moment was awkward would be an understatement. All of the attorneys, and the judge, appeared on the edge of their seats. At the conclusion of the juror's statement, the attorneys nervously and politely clapped…"

I'd guess a hung jury is the best Libby can hope for. Given the DC jury there are bound to be at least a few BDS people on it who would vote guilty regardless of the facts.

centralcal

RalphL: Yes, I do think they do that now. (sometimes in trying to be brief I end up not being clear - ha ha). I just think that now they have a little extra dagger of innuendo to pull out of their bags of tricks. And don't anybody kid themselves - Mr. MTP is a really, really big target for his competitors who want to TAKE HIS PLACE.

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: CENTRICAL

Since I saw Apuzzo's article up at FREE REPUBLIC, I saw that he was reporting that Walton said "Wells deceived him about Libby, and Cheney testifying."

Are you saying there's now a correction to this article? Or are you saying Walton will learn that the journalists go their merry way, after they "mis-heard" but reported something anyway?

I'll go back to FREE REPUBLIC to find out. Thanks.

ghostcat

I can't get no confirmation.

Ralph L.

Brit Hume announces the cancellation of the Global Warming Committee hearing due to snow, and just escapes laughing.

ARC: Brian

My feare is that the next place this case will be talked about is the House Judiciary committee....

Pjoy

Walton: [to Levine, Russert's lawyer] Did you ever impart to Russert that the government would waive the FBI thing.

Levine: At the time this happened, we and Fitz were adversaries, we were filing a motion to quash. I called him to say, are you going to raise the argument that any communication Russert had with FBI constituted a waiver. He said no, and I said, okay, I'm not going to brief on it. That has nothing to do with the negotiations we had later.

Am I mistaken or did he not answer the question

Sue

I think you're dreaming, Leo. Fitz is through, unless it is a conviction and he has to handle the appeal. Otherwise, he's outta here!

Semanticleo

"After all, when were you last correct about anything?"

November '06

clarice

james, I find reading anything into those entrails is preposterous,and to suggest we should rely on Shuster's account of anything even the mood in the room..............

Rick Ballard

Brian,

I've worked on ad hoc committees with too many progs. I'm very (perhaps overly) suspicious of anything with the faintest scent of manipulation of small group dynamics.

BTW - I appreciate your interest in adult stem cell research. I'm sure it overlaps into other areas so perhaps you could flag similiar posts?

kate

I get the sense Fitz will be glad to get back to Chicago. He was very smart not to indict Rove with only Cooper as the witness.

clarice

No s__t,kate.

Other Tom

Fitz doesn't need any more testimony to indict Rove--he already indicted him last May 13, remember?

Ralph L.

Barnes mentions a Weekly Standard article and Hume interjects, "nice plug."

Returning to my idee fixe, I wonder if the juror put the second "m" in accommodation?

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: CLEO

Sorry, I don't see WaterLoo for Libby.

On the other hand? At Waterloo "the man of genius (napoleon) lost. And, the man of calculus (who drew everything out on paper, first), WELLINGTON, won.

So, WaterLoo to you may be a different thing than it was to Victor Hugo. Or for that matter, ahead, for Libby.

Napoleon lost because he had no exit strategy.

Seems to me Wells rested as fast as he saw exiting wasn't gonna get any better than what he could get now.

Appeals?

I always thought they validated a judges' right to "discretion." As long as we're not talking something like bribes. No proof of that here.

I have no idea what an Appellate brief looks like. Or how you "mark up" 6th stuff. Yes, from the Constitution. A log, yet. Not ESP.

I'd love our higher courts to knock some common sense back into our system. But I'm still reluctant to spend my own money to find out.

Other Tom

Cleo darling, Fitz won't be permitted to try it again, even if he wants to. You heard it first here, sweetie.

lurker

Anyone have link to Steve Spruiell's article about this case?

ghostcat

Rick -

12 is a small group ... the cut-off point by several definitions. And there will be dynamics ... some members will be passive, some will be influential, one or more will try to control. The sun will rise in the East.

centralcal

lurker, I have no clue how to do linky-thingies. S.S. has the media blog at National Review Online.

clarice

They had down time yesterday. I bet they stepped out for fresh air, saw a street vender, someone got the idea--but even 2 didn't go along.

steve

Maybe the defense should have played Kurosawa's Rashomon for the jury. Dramatically set up the memory defense and get on their good side by entertaining them! The jury would be mad at Fitz just for objecting to it being played.

kate

Upthread someone mentioned that at FireDogLake there was something question about an AP article and the judge saying the media will sort it out. I went to FDL and got confused wading through all the leftist nonsense.

Anyone know what was this about?

centralcal

Well at least the shirts were RED, not BLUE! Yeah, I know Valentine's Day, not a political statement!

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: ARC: BRIAN

Are you kidding? The HOUSE judiciary committee? WHo's there? Who chairs?

Why do you think they're the next stop for this trial? What could they glean that won't be common knowledge?

Can pelosi just drive around in her little bumper car?

I can't see why congress-critters would touch something so volatile? Their ratings are lower than the president's? And, doesn't congress have enough troubles, already?

Charlie (Colorado)

Augh.

Links:

Figure out your URL. Its in the bar up top of the browser. like http://www.example.com. Copy that to your clipboard. (Click until it's highlighted. Press CNTL-C on a Windows machine to copy to clipboard.)

Type in <a href="

Press CNTL-V to paste the URL in at that point.

Type ">link</a>

And you're done. So, for example,

<a href="http://yargb.blogspot.com">this thing</a>

becomes

this thing.

centralcal

Kate: cut/paste from transcript at fdl:

"Walton: I assume these are based on AP article entitled Judge: Libby misleads Judge. I did not intend to suggest there had been intentional misleading on that matter. It was indicated by Cline that there was a qualification. I assume based on what you're saying now, that it was not an indication. I accept that as an accurate statement. To extent that changes can be made in newspaper articles that have already been out.

Wells: Thank you."

kate

This is a hoot. A post at The Corner is stating the David Shuster was the guy who had Rove indicted under seal. Of course, it was JL, but Shuster and JL shared many of the same sources and were equally convinced of a Rove indictment.

Not a good day, MSNBC, when you trial reporter is confused with Jason.

Ralph L.

http://media.nationalreview.com/

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: ARC: BRIAN (again)

There are only 13 jurors. Only one alternate. Because one juror needed to be relieved to return to work. (I'd bet this too would go into Wells' calculations. The longer this goes on, how many jurors can you afford to lose, here?)

As to the red shirt. I read that it was the old-grey-haired lady who refused to wear the tee. And, I'd bet she's never worn a tee. Not even to bed! Goes with how people used to dress. (That wonderful poster who stopped by, when we were talking trapeze/mu-mu/shifts, and clothes that came down the pike after the 1940's; really don't like to wear today's fashions. Not even for a statement to the judge. Nothing wrong with that.

centralcal

Charlie (Colorado): Thanks for the lesson. I printed it out and will try it later. (much later, in case I screw up, don't want everyone mad at me.) grin.

kate

jane/clarice/centralcal: thanks for your upthread answers to my questions.

Now we wait for AP to correct its story. Actually, the headlines are often very bad, are they written by different folk?

Charlie: thanks for that info on links. I was wondering how to do that. I'll have to link to something to see if it works for me. Mine never have that nice linky thing going.

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: CENTRALCAL

Relax. There is no "everybody" in a roomful of mad people. Not even in a nut house.

And, if nothing else about the "confusion" from Apuzzo's article; by the time Closing Arguments roll around, I think it is the judge's head that swells from being hit by media 1x2x6 kakamamie stories.

It's nice to have opinions different than most. Let me tell ya! It keeps my spirit free.

hit and run

lurker, here is the Media Blog at NRO...much more than Libby there....so....

This was his latest JOM love post on that blog specifically (about Russert).

centralcal

linky-thingy test

hit and run

Charlie:
Press CNTL-C on a Windows machine to copy to clipboard


Heh, the CNTL key on our laptop has come off probably 389 times. I wear that thing out. My wife keeps snapping it back into place, but I've found it still works even without the key on there.

hit and run

centralcal, you pass the test. You should receive your certificate of completion in the mail in the next 4-6 weeks.

centralcal

H & R: sheesh! it was way faster to type "I don't know how to do linky-thingies" than it was to create the linky thingy. Better not send a certificate. I don't think I will be putting it into practice again anytime soon.

michael scanlon

“I dunno about the rest of you, but I was feeling more bullish yesterday…Maybe I'll perk up a bit more after the closing, but at this point, it seems like a let down, and too close to call except maybe in a direction I don't want to go into.
Clarice, I certainly hope someone like your husband is on the jury.”

As one who is convinced that Libby deliberately lied under oath to the grand jury -- and, BTW, do we all at least agree that lying under oath even when no one is harmed is still a serious crime? Reading some of these posts I sometimes wonder if we can get consensus on that -- I must say I have noticed dwindling optimism about Libby’s walking free. In previous threads so many of you were so sure. What happened to the bullish feelings? The defense not impressive enough? Libby afraid to face the music having its effect?

As for Clarice’s husband, I believe he is un-reasonable for at least the second time in his life when he says the jury will believe Libby over Russert. I don’t think they will. But then again it’s Valentine's Day and it is difficult sometimes to make a husband come to a reasonable conclusion about an issue when his wife’s happiness depends on his NOT coming to a reasonable conclusion.

JF

Regarding the transcript of Larry King's show with Tim Russert that was posted earlier, Tim was asked about Mike Barnicle possibly losing his job at the Boston Globe for plagerizing jokes from a George Carlin book. It was very telling that Tim didn't think this was a very big deal in the scheme of things. It certainly showed where his moral compass is with regards to lying.

ghostcat

Many of us wanted Russert's head on Wells's platter.

hit and run

centralcal:
I don't think I will be putting it into practice again anytime soon.


It gets easier with practice.

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: MICHAEL SCANION

Not only will the jury believe Libby over Russert; Russert's believe-ability factor will pit him against Dan RaTHer. Even in that contest RaTHer has better hair. And, Russert loses because of his cheeks.

BIGGER QUESTION: What is Alan Greenspan telling his wife? Should she retire already? Or should she wait around NBC for Russert's job to fall into her lap?

Attached to Russert's job is ALSO Broder's soft cushions. Previously only warmed by Jim Lehrer.

Russert has certainly made more enemies than friends.

And, a long time ago, (Sun Tsu) said, you don't go to bed at night with more enemies than you had when you woke up in the morning.

Larry King Live understood that lesson, well. Russert's always been a blow-hard, however. (And, there's a difference between what Monica meant, and blow hards. One contains elements of sexual pleasure. The other, at best only fear.)

I'm just waiting for the Internet to come upon a way to provide quick "graphics" about Russert's hypocracy. And, then? Whom NBC decides has to go under the bus. Hopefully, they may be thinking, someone who doesn't write as well as Mary Mapes.

Sara (Squiggler


The Astonishing 'Stipulation'

JM Hanes

Jane:

"It will be interesting to see who in the media is willing to air the story of [Russert's] lie about lawyers in the GJ. Does he wield power beyond NBC?"

Hmmm. From a July 14, 2003 AP article:

Candidates for president must negotiate the "Russert primary"

Before Iowa, before New Hampshire, the people who want President Bush's job have to get past Tim Russert. The moderator of NBC's "Meet the Press" has made the top-rated Sunday talk show an integral part of the political process, particularly now during the presidential campaign prelims when candidates are...

Martin

Somebody sure seems scared and it ain't Russert:

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Sir, we’ve now learned through sworn testimony that at least three members of your administration, other than Scooter Libby, leaked Valerie Plame’s identity to the media. None of these three is known to be under investigation. Without commenting on the Libby trial, then, can you tell us whether you authorized any of these three to do that, or were they authorized without your permission?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, thanks, Pete. I’m not going to talk about any of it.

Q They’re not under investigation, though?

THE PRESIDENT: Peter, I’m not going to talk about any of it.

Q How about pardons, sir? Many people are asking whether you might pardon –

THE PRESIDENT: Not going to talk about it, Peter.

Jane

Well Matthews is shocked SHOCKED that Cheney is going to let Libby go to jail. He really wanted to find out the truth about the war, but OTOH he appreciates loyalty.

Perhaps that last bit was a signal to Timmy.

PaulL

With the content of the stipulation in, it makes absolutely no difference that Libby's counsel is not allowed to state, "These things were of more importance to Scooter than the name of Joe Wilson's wife." Duh. If the jurors can't figure that out, they're hopeless.

hit and run

Tom:
the proper expression is "Go Cheney yourself".

So, can the use of "Cheney" in this manner only be used as an expletive?

I only ask because it's Valentines.

Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

HEY, PETER, I'm an expert on "fear factor," here. Blow it out your ear.

The President WILL talk about it some day, though. Just like a good poker player. He knows his cards. And, he knows the donks have gone into the casino to see their "reserves" melt away.

Stay tuned. Elections in the future will ride on how the President eventually uses his powers.

BY THE WAY. DRUDGE HAS UP A HEADLINE that the PRESIDENT VETO'ed the Union bill.

Beldar's counting. 15 more to go to achieve his low ball be3t.

Jane

Hopefully before this is done some damage will be done to the "Russert Primary".

Martin,

I saw the press conference. Not a whit of fear in Bush's eyes. Not one.

MayBee

My absolutely favorite part of the Russert transcript was where he said 90% of Americans would support Clinton attacking Iraq.

I can't imagine why they would have, because Bush hadn't begun lying about WMD at that point.

ghostcat

I agree, Jane. He looked totally on his game, even a tad amused.

Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

MAY I CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO ...

GERRY SPENCE. Interesting book. Interesting paragaph, here:

Carr V. State

... "These courts' measured findings include such language as found in Carr V. State. ""Our review of the record supports Carr's (the accused) contention that the prosecuting attorney (Grace) engaged in an extensive pattern of inappropriate and, i some cases, illegal conduct, in the course of the trial.""

OKAY. Naive question. Course would be the "stuff" that led to the charges? If not? Why not?

Did you know there were "boundaries of good conduct for a prosecutor." (Well, I thought there should be something like this STAMPED, and SEERED into the minds of all law students capable of passing a "bar."

A bar. Where you need to be qualified to open the gate, and stand on the ground closer to the judge's desk.

Go figa. FItz missed the boat on this particular "opinion."

Well, the law library is vast. And, in the "vast interior?" Who sez ya gotta obey da rules?

GREENSPAN doesn't know his own leverage?

There are other cases mentioned. From other circuses. Oh. Escuse me. Circuits. So sorry for the mischief my fingers make.

As to what's next UP. I am reminded of a quote made by FDR. When he spoke of the supreme court. He said, "he could take a banana and carve a better spine than the one in "_____." Nope, I ain't gonna reveal da name. Just that most presidents so far, when asked to mention something they regretted. Always poked at the stinkers they nominated for the bench.

In other words? Walton's in good company.

But Libby? If he gets justice, it's gonna depend on the jury. Who at least mostly agreed to wear read tee-shirts.

So, let me also agree: HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY, EVERYBODY.

hit and run

Carol, I am actually one of your biggest admirers. BUT, let me tell you - if your post ever takes up more than can be displayed on my screen without scrolling, then I scroll and don't look back.

I am not a professional comedian, but I play one on JOM -- and when you keep your posts short and pithy, there is no one as pithy as you. When you de-pith your posts, no one is more ignorable than you.

It is out of love that I post this,
hit and run

clarice

"Maybe the defense should have played Kurosawa's Rashomon for the jury"

That's exactly what my husband says.That there are lots of witnesses, lots of different memorie, and that is no normal an occurrence that a famous movie Rashmon was made of it. And then go thru the various stories to show there is reasonable doubt about ANY of them.

Other Tom

Martin, if you think any president in the history of this country would answer such a question while both a grand jury and a jury are still sitting in a related case, you are more immature than I had thought. And that's a statement of truly majestic dimension.

Alcibiades

Hmm, TM.

It looks like you got a Kaus link to your Imus column.

Kaus, however, finds it implausible that anyone would forget Plame, because It was great gossip!

I'm not sure that Kaus has looked carefully at that stipulation yet, however.

Jane

Clarice,

As this all winds down tonite, I want to wish you a wonderful, well-earned vacation.

Will you be back for closings?

Other Tom

Let us not forget that at one point Loony Larry had three, count 'em three, sources for the secret May 13 indictment of Karl Rove. And you can take that to the bank.

Other Tom

Let us not forget that at one point Loony Larry had three, count 'em three, sources for the secret May 13 indictment of Karl Rove. And you can take that to the bank.

Alcibiades

O'Reilly is bashing Gregory and NBC right now.

I tuned in, hoping he would talk about Russert, which he isn't.

But at least he is bashing the left wing media.

clarice

Jane. it looks now like I can't get out until Saturday and will not be back until Tuesday late afternoon. I may miss the closings..but not by much --I do so hope we have good notes or transcript of them somehow.

Jane

Are we at the point where typepad should be paying TM to house his blogs? And if so can we exact some service from them? Is everyone having the same problems with time-outs and verifying posts?

Other Tom

OT: Just heard that there's no jail time for the two reporters in the Bonds grand jury leak case, inasmuch as the source has come forward. I had seen lots of speculation that the source was a lawyer. Interesting to see what happens to him.

MayBee

I really think I'm losing my mind.

I just heard Soledad O'Brien report that there's outrage at Mitt Romney's campaign announcement at the museum of "notorious" anti-Semite, Henry Ford. Have other people never been to Detroit? Half the city is named after the man, another large portion is employed by his decendants.

Every Ford Minivan driving soccer mom is saluting an anti-semite, too. Ridiculous.

Alcibiades

I find I only have to verify my posts when I put in a link. Otherwise, post works fine.

clarice

***of different memorieS, and that is So normal an occurrence that a famous movie Rashmon was made **************

Jane typepad is a problem--Previewing is the worst--forget it until things improve..

Jane

Clarice,

I'm sure there will be transcripts. I hope someone other than EW will be blogging. I'm just about done with my fill of snark!

Jane

I have to verify every post and many two or three times. I'm gonna change my email and see if that works

richard mcenroe

"I happen to think that neither Gregory nor Mitchell are interested in lying and sending Libby to prison just to save Russert's job."

Why on earth wouldn't they? They're journalists and they're on television. They recognize right from wrong about as well as I recognize stray quarks passing by my face...

topsecretkk9

meanwhile...

Congressman, business associate sued over alleged bribes- (Louisiana congressman strikes again).. AP via BatonRougeAdvocate ^ | 2/13/07 | BRETT BARROUQUERE

Posted on 02/13/2007 11:58:10 AM PST by GeorgiaDawg32

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- A former stockholder in a technology company filed suit Tuesday against a Louisiana congressman, his wife and a former business associate claiming they engaged in a scheme to defraud stockholders by using business funds to pay bribes.

The suit alleges that U.S. Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., his wife Andrea G. Jefferson and Vernon Jackson, former chief executive of the telecommunications firm iGate, engaged in an elicit scheme to funnel money to Jefferson, his family and foreign officials. iGate stockholder Daniel C. Cadle of Ohio filed the suit in U.S. District Court in Louisville..

Alcibiades

Ugh, Soledad O'Brien, what an idiot!!

Remember her "journalism" during the Lebanon war this summer.

She thought the real story, i.e. "the CNN approved narrative," there was pointing out to her audience the incompetence of the American navy at getting American refugees out of Lebanon.

Because she had so much fun with that "narrative" during Katrina, she wanted to do a repeat during a real live war.

I'll close by repeating, "what an idiot!"

Sue

What Bush should have said was go ask Fitzgerald why they aren't being investigated. That is what I wanted him to say.

clarice

fdl:

) During MIB on June 14 Libby was presented with info concern

bomb diffused

police arrest indiv

explosions

E African extremist network

Info on possible AQ attack in US

COncern about specific vulnerability to terrorist attack

Proposed ME plan, Israeli military action

Country's security affecting AQ

International org's position concerning country's nuke program

Leader of country enhances position through reform

Iraq's porous borders present security threat

Demonstrations in Iran turn violent

13 I'll turn to in a moment

Israeli offer of cease fire to Palestineans

Memorandum assessing Iranian' pres' view on terrorism

Problems in leadership in PLO

Foreign media analysis concerning Egyptian treatment on Paletinian conflict

Media, opposition of Isreali public to attacks

Info on Egypt process ME peace process

Palestinian groups and Israel

Measure for overcoming challenges in last item

Constraints on Israeli military

Saddam HUssein published on website

Memo in Iraqi WMD

Housing shortage in IRaq

Info on 1920 Mesopotamia and insurgency on moden-day Iraq

POtential effect of improved governance in IRaq

Libby requested several items be returned on 16 June

Libby requested additional info on 7 and 14, both with related to ME.

Turning to terror threat list:

1) Concern over possible suicide info to hujack airplane by AQ linked group

2) Concern about terrorists providing support for business transaction by AQ

3) Potential suicide attacks against US forces in IRaq

4) Potential terrorist attacks against Americans in Karbala by unspecified means

5) Potential attack in Ethiopia

6) Potential attack in Nairobi

7) Potential attack in Kabul Afghanistan and Pakistan [sorry, lost the countiing here]

7) Concern over surveillance in Beirut and attack against embassy vehicles

7b) Unspecified terror attack against unspecified

8) Potential attack in Budapest

8b) Potential attacks in Kabul by unspecified group

9) Video taping in US university

10) Turkish and Pakistani extremists.

Cline If called briefers would also testify that between May 2003 and March 2004 Libby's intell briefings included:

Info concerning terrorist threats including AQ and HEzbollah

Homeland security preparedness

Info on foreign countries getting nukes, including IRan and NK

Monitoring individuals, including AQ Khan

Progress of war on Iraq, specifically incl troop strength and new govt in Iraq

volatile situation in ME

Intense disagreement between Turkey and US when Turkish soldiers taken prisoner

Security issues in Liberia when president deposed in early July 2003

sad

"unanimity may now go no further."

Maybe the juror meant anonimity as opposed to unanimity.

southside

Extremely OT, but a great lesson in personal perception and how we see things or don't. This would make a great case for faulty memory or "I was way too busy to remember that."
mindtrick

Other Tom

Jeez, Martin, please forgive me: Of course we did have one president in our past who would, indeed, be commenting under these circumstances. He'd be launching personal smears against the prosecutor, and directing his underlings to do the same. I just plain forgot.

Other Tom

Jeez, Martin, please forgive me: Of course we did have one president in our past who would, indeed, be commenting under these circumstances. He'd be launching personal smears against the prosecutor, and directing his underlings to do the same. I just plain forgot.

Sue

Jane,

Just be thankful you can post. I am having to post in firefox which is very slow reloading so I read comments using IE and post with firefox. And have to verify. Talk about dedication to the blog! I need a medal! Unless Tom is trying to tell me something. If that is the case...I'm Not Listening!

Clarice,

And the ladies in the swamp made snark about Libby's work load and continue with the narrative that Val was single handedly fighting Iranian nukes. We are doomed since her outing.

Rick Ballard

Sue,

It would be great if they asked Fitz and he answered "If they all rolled over like Tattle Tim it'd be a slam dunk."

clarice

What do you expect, Sue?

Sara (Squiggler

Monitoring individuals, including AQ Khan

There you go.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame