Tim Russert - The Basement Tapes

The little-publicized joint program between JustOneMinute and the NSA bears fruit - this *may* be the tape the defense hopes to introduce to impeach Tim Russert's claim, on the witness stand last week, that he had no idea that a typical grand jury appearance was made without an attorney present.  Tim Russert is with Larry King in 1998, discussing developments in the Monica debacle:

RUSSERT: It's been suggested by no less than the former governor of New York the other night, that now that the president has decided that he's going to testify before the grand jury, why do it in the Oval Office and why insist that his lawyer be there.?

Go into the grand jury without a lawyer, like every other American citizen, go ahead, ask me any question you want and I'll give you an honest answer.

I do love this guy - compare that with his own situation, where his lawyers negotiated a deal with Fitzgerald so that Russert could give a deposition at the NBC office with his attorneys present (see BACKGROUND, below).

And on my current theme - would Russert mislead investigators a bit so that they did not grill him as to whether he had a live source in the Plame case - Russert said this in 1998:

KING: And do you stand by your guy if he is subsequently charged with something and they subpoena you?

RUSSERT: I would have to go to prison to protect his name.

Well - if you would go to prison to protect a source, would you mislead investigators a bit to make sure they don't get the idea that you have a source?  That has to beat sitting in jail.

As to whether the defense ought to haul Russert back to make this point about the grand jury - it is not major, but they may decide the jury ought to see a specific example of either Russert telling a minor lie on the stand, or having a terrible memory problem.  I say go for it, but I am hardly Russert's biggest fan just now.

BACKGROUND:  Here is Swopa's not-a-transcript of Wells asking Russert about his accomodation with Fitzgerald:

W: (displays letter dated July 27, 2004)  Have you ever seen this letter?

T: Don't believe so, could I read it?

W: (reads it)  "This will confirm the understandings pursuant to which we intend to resolve the subpoena issued to your client, Tim Russert…" (etc.)  You understand that an arrangement had been worked out where you would not have to appear before the grand jury?

T: I had not seen this letter.  I knew I would be under oath.

W: Grand jury would not be able to assess your demeanor, ask you questions

T: Correct

...

W: (reads more of letter, saying testimony would be with lawyers in room) You know that in a grand jury, lawyers are not in the room?

T: Didn't know that

W: You are an attorney?

T: Non-practicing…. the most important thing is –

Right.

Comments

[paladin2]

I hope they get him back on the stsnd!

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Sorry to do this, but ... test?

[BarbaraS]

The man's a fool. He counted on the public's two week attention span but evidently didn't realize in the blogosphere nothing dies completely.

[jwest]

There was a time when Thread Herders took pride in their profession.

I guess those days are long gone.

[Jane]

WEll I want Russert back on the stand, but I have no idea if that is a wise move jury-wise.

[Jane]

Just as an aside, Professor Kim

http://professorkim.blogspot.com/
has a link to a PBS piece involving the media and the libby trial. I'm in the middle of reading it, and it's pretty good. I tried to link it but type pad got mad.

They are truly a bunch of wimps.

[Sue]

What we did get was Cheney proxy John Hannah, who spent the morning telling us what a Very Important Man Scooter Libby is, and how very busy he was fighting Al Quaeda single handedly the week of July 8 and how he had a charming habit of forgetting things that Hannah would tell him.

What a bunch of tools those gals at the swamp are. They poo-poo the importance of Libby's job as COS to the VP and in converse waste bandwidth spreading the notion that Val single handedly was saving us from Iran's nuclear weapons. And the crowd roars.

[sylvia]

Now, see, I didn't realize Russert was an attorney. I thought he had done a masterful job of parsing and sticking to his story in his testimony, and thought he should be an attorney. Turns out he is.

[hit and run]

Tom quoting swopa:
W: (reads more of letter, saying testimony would be with lawyers in room) You know that in a grand jury, lawyers are not in the room?

T: Didn't know that

Uh oh.

Russert comes back with... "Well, shucks, Mr. Fitzgerald is a lawyer, wouldn't he be in the room?"

I suppose it is easy enough to believe that Wells would not have left it that open, and that swopa simply was trying to keep up as best as possible and missed a more focused question.

[Sue]

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm>Totally off topic but the hearing on global warming has been canceled because of an ice storm ::grin::

[Byron]

Slightly OT, but after listening to Nina Totenberg's report this a.m. on NPR, I can only say that if Libby is acquitted, NPR listeners are going to be deeply shocked, and suspicions about dark dealing are likely to be rampant. Her entire account of the defense seemed to be merely that Cheney and Libby would not testify, with no inkling about the possible meaning of that move, and with the listener left free to draw the conclusion that the defense was simply throwing in the towel. Given the way the trial has been characterized by Totenberg's reports to this point, that would be the listener's most reasonable inference. I see the stage set for much liberal outrage.

[windansea]

Mr. Fitzgerald complained that the defense had engaged in a “bait and switch” tactic by keeping Mr. Libby off the stand after repeatedly suggesting that he would testify.

call the waaaaaahmbulance

TM....the 5,000,000 hit man...now if you only had a dollar for each hit you could be a parsing lying big shot newsman like Tim

[Other Tom]

Are we sure Walton will allow Wells to impeach with that tape? The issue is arguably so collateral that it wouldn't surprise me if he kept it out, given his track record thus far.

I could swear, by the way, that I saw an episode of Law & Order in which a witness was testifying before a grand jury with his attorney present. I called it to my mean wife's attention, saying that must be the way they do it in New York, but I've never heard of it anywhere else, and certainly not in federal practice. Anybody know anything?

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

I think we should take note of the fifth anniversary of l'affaire Niger.

After all, it was the first step on the road to fame and fortune for them.

But dont you change one hair for me
Not if you care for me
Stay little valentine stay
Each day is valentines day

All the way to the bank.

[Sue]

Tom,

I keep getting an error when I hit the comments or permalink on your Jeralyn Merritt thread.

[Seixon]

RUSSERT-1998: "Go into the grand jury without a lawyer, like every other American citizen, go ahead, ask me any question you want and I'll give you an honest answer."

WELLS: "You know that in a grand jury, lawyers are not in the room?"

RUSSERT-2007: "Didn't know that"

Ouch! I guess he... FORGOT!

[Jane]

Are we sure Walton will allow Wells to impeach with that tape? The issue is arguably so collateral that it wouldn't surprise me if he kept it out, given his track record thus far.

If this boils down to a "he said, he said" regarding the Libby/Russert conversation, credibility is everything, it seems.

Walton was softening on the issue yesterday it seemed. Who knows where he will go today.

[Christopher Fotos]

Slightly OT, but after listening to Nina Totenberg's report this a.m. on NPR, I can only say that if Libby is acquitted, NPR listeners are going to be deeply shocked, and suspicions about dark dealing are likely to be rampant. Her entire account of the defense seemed to be merely that Cheney and Libby would not testify, with no inkling about the possible meaning of that move, and with the listener left free to draw the conclusion that the defense was simply throwing in the towel.

That's not far different from how he Washington Post's coverage looks to me, with quotes likes this:

"It's a pretty tepid defense that's been mounted, and I wouldn't even say mounted," [professor Carl] Tobias said. "There was all this information to suggest the defense was going to put on more of a defense than we saw."

Libby's attorneys did not publicly explain why they decided that the two men should not testify.

[Christopher Fotos]

Are we sure Walton will allow Wells to impeach with that tape?

We certainly shouldn't be. My read of Jeralyn's non-transcript has Walton sounding about as receptive to admitting it as he was about admitting Andrea Mitchell.

[hit and run]

windandsea:
Mr. Fitzgerald complained that the defense had engaged in a “bait and switch” tactic by keeping Mr. Libby off the stand after repeatedly suggesting that he would testify.

Yeah, as if an investigation of the illegal outing of a CIA operative turned into an investigation to elicit perjury wasn't the ultimate bait and switch.

[windansea]

exactly H&R

the lefties and their pals in the MSM are furious that they won't get their Colonel Jessop moment leading to Chimpeachment.

Bwaaaaa haaaa haaaa

[windansea]

and Fitlzle is left to polish his tiny little lump of coal and will go home to some moldy pizza

[hit and run]

jwest:
There was a time when Thread Herders took pride in their profession.

I guess those days are long gone.

There was only ONE Thread Herder.

But he wanted the ideals of thread herding to live on beyond himself - that others would take individual responsibility for themselves and not rely upon him or anyone else to do it for them.

Please don't let Thread Herder's death be in vain.

::grin::

[hit and run]

Now I must take leave, as my daughter has invited me to a Valentines Day lunch at her preschool.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

And, ya know what? During Sweeps Week, if CNN honchos realize it; they've got a blockbuster tape no one can stop them from running.

Give it time that there are TAPES Larry King has where Russert (talking about Bill Clinton's legal troubles), goes out of his way to say "he's a laywer. Clinton should have gone into the grand jury room without a lawyer, AS IS THE RULE. And, not been interviewed in the Oval Office.)

Yes, Russert is mealy mouthed. But what comes off is that he talks out of both sides of his mouth. His reputation, when this is over, will smell worse than Dan RaTHer's did. Dan Rather? Went too far back to the 1970's to vouch for typewriters THAT WEREN'T THERE.

This time? Russert's involved with the Clinton/Monica scandal. Who has let go of that one from their memory banks. Where Russert claims more than a dozen encounters for Monica, in something his catholocism wouldn't let him do. Believe that if you want. But what caught my eye, here, is that he said "more than a dozen." When the truth is it was only SIX. (Deep six, ahead, for Russert!) TOO. My guess. SInce it won't be up to the DC jurors. The majority of them don't watch MTP. If at best? Only occasionally.

If the Larry King Tape gets through the ether. (Will not IMUS pick it up? Limbaugh?) Will not Larry King's ratings ZOOM? These are business questions. And, Russert is still on the "hot seat."

[clarice]

They found some law professor to say this was a tepid defense????????????????Heh,,only the media itself is as funny as the loons in academia.

[Sue]

Now I must take leave, as my daughter has invited me to a Valentines Day lunch at her preschool.

Awwwww....do you have any idea how sweet that sounds? ::grin::

[kate]

Clearly the WAPO gals were not happy with the defense, no Cheny, no Libby. They might try something new and show how this trial shows what a bunch of biased fools the media are and site as an example Pincus' front page story on Feith, where essentially he tried to pass off a DNC press release as original reporting.

[Carol Herman]

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Ah, Clarice that line stands out. It covers so much more than just this case! Wow. From "tepid law professor ... to only the media itself is as funny as the loons in academia."

They should force academics to NAME THEIR INSTUTION. Bedlam, ya know, was a corruption of the word BETHLEHEM.

Was the "tepid professor" from Duke? There's no pride in Fitz, either. No matter who credentialed him;

AH. And, the reference to BASEMENT TAPES. If I am not mistaken, TM, that's BOB DYLAN. And, for years he was reclusive. SO people talked about tapes he did in a house in WOODSTOCK. WOODSTOCK. More than just a place where a famous rock concert was held.

Nah. Memories don't improve with time.

But some events, get stuck. So some things that happened in the past become history, not in terms of being forgotten. But some events live on. Basement tapes, indeed.

[Gary Maxwell]

Yeah but this is the great and powerful Tim Russert, and he has a important job and much responisbility. Contrast that with the slacker work done at the White House with simple things like National Security, and you can surely see that there is no hyprocricy here.

[birdseye]

WAPO: "It's a pretty tepid defense that's been mounted, and I wouldn't even say mounted," [professor Carl] Tobias said. "There was all this information to suggest the defense was going to put on more of a defense than we saw."

I usually do not pay any attention to what MSM reports but in this case I am inclined to agree. May be due to the breaks applied by Walton time and time again. But I don't see a spirited defense - overly confident Wells? Not a squeak about Ekenrode after all the excitement about the missing notes. I fear for Libby.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Great http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/tags/plameoutcome.html#4 from the Frontline show:

[Q] And the press itself, in its handling of the Valerie Plame story, there seemed to be this typical, almost pack mentality once the story broke, that the White House looked like they had leaked classified information. ... Did the press really get lost in the middle of this?

[A] Yeah. I think the press was rather misguided in the way they covered this. You know, the press sometimes are like a bunch of sparrows, and when one flies off the telephone line, then all the rest follow in a pack.

[Tom Maguire]

I tried to link it but type pad got mad.

They are truly a bunch of wimps.

I have been having a nightmare with Typepad lately, too.

Oh, wait...

[roanoke]

The Basement Tapes?

Would that be the bootleg version?

I really love that Bob Dylan-can't get into much of the rest of it-but The Basement Tapes are a classic.

[roanoke]

Jane-

Are you talking about this article at PBS-

Deciding Whether to Testify in the Plame Case?

I'll try to link it for you-

Link to PBS article

[clarice]

I told you before, most great trial work sails over the heads of observers ntot immersed in the case--But the Prof knows better, The defense counsel is not looking for that rare Perry Mason moment--He is looking for a series of Prosecution witness inconsistencies and admissions which he will weave into his presentation to present at closing a coherent, believable, even compelling narrative for acquittal.

Perhaps professor Tobin has all his info on this case from PBS, perhaps he is a professor of commercial law, perhaps they caught him as he was coming out of a coma..In any event, he's wrong .

[Jane]

Roanoke,

That's part of the whole Newswar series. So yeah, sort of. And thank you.

[roanoke]

Jane-

It looks really interesting -I'm off to go read it.

Thanks for pointing it out-and now I see those other sections.

[Ralph L.]

Patrick R. Sullivan, who actually admitted that? Besides Evelyn Waugh. Don't make me link to the PBS site.

[W]

'Nina Totenberg's report this a.m. on NPR.'

NPR is biased. It has alot to do with Chayes in Afghanistan, the planning and execution of the war, PC, and a Mercy Corps(Authority) employee. Joe is x PC and Plame may have affected the x employee.

[mike in houston]

Prof. Tobias, U. of Richmond. Only comment from student on Rate Your Professor:

"Professor Tobias and his little dog Maggie. He may not be the most effective professor but he is extremely intelligent and one of the nicest professors you will ever have. His dog is also really sweet, that alone should earn him a good ranking. "

LOL

[Ralph L.]

Mike, I guess she got an A.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

'Patrick R. Sullivan, who actually admitted that? Besides Evelyn Waugh. Don't make me link to the PBS site.'

George Washington professor Mark Feldstein. Points taken off for his not knowing the proper 'collective' is a host of sparrows.

[brassband]

1. I think the Russert ("no lawyer in the GJ") tape is collateral, and I don't think the Judge will let them call him back to use it. What difference does it make to Libby's guilt or innocence whether Russert knew he'd been made a special deal about testifying in his attorney's office?

2. What the defense is building here is a pretty compelling argument that an awful lot of these witnesses were confused or mistaken when asked about where they heard about Plame/Wilson . . . the jury saw a lot of memory problems on the witness stand . . . were they all lying, or did they have a lapse of memory? And if it was just a memory problem, why accuse Libby of lying?

3. Libby's not testifying could hurt him on this point. Whatever instruction the judge gives about not drawing negative inferences from the defendant's failure to testify, isn't the jury going to wish it had heard an explanation from Libby on the stand?

4. The real question here, in my opinion, is whether the jury can be made to see that this is much ado about very little, that it was a huge waste of time by Fitzgerald and that it makes no sense to convict someone for what Libby is alleged to have done, where there was no underlying crime to cover up.

5. I'm curious to hear from anyone who has been in the courtroom -- how is the jury reacting to Fitzgerald? Does he seem to be getting a lot of credibility? How do they react to the defense team?

[Ralph L.]

Thanks, Patrick, never heard of him, or a host, either. But "bunch of sparrows" sounds like slang, which is so very vulgar.
At least he isn't a moonbat professor.

[clarice]

ALERT--Cboldt has three new filings--First 2 on Russert..

The exhibits are the 8/6/98 Larry King Live;the 7/26/98 Today Show, the 5/12/97 Today Show and the 7/28/98 Today Show

Libby argues that these statement directl contradict TR, Esq' statements that he didn't know you couldn't have a lawyer in the gj.

The argument is (a) a witness may be impeached by extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent stmt after he has been x examined;(b)Under the fed rules (613(b)) the govt can recall TR Esq to the stand to explain his prior inconsistent stmts (c) Even if TR Esq can't be recalled the defense shld be allowed to introduce this stuff because his testimony surprised the defense and is highly relevant and not collateral.

There's another filing as well about the dropping of the JM July 12 statement from the obstruction count instrustions at Cbldt--haven't read it yet.

[Sue]

What difference does it make to Libby's guilt or innocence whether Russert knew he'd been made a special deal about testifying in his attorney's office?

Then why did Russert not answer truthfully? If it made no difference?

[clarice]

BIAS__and it shows part of the agreement was that he only had to testfy about LIBBY--

Here are the exhibits to that motion:

A-Letter from Fitz to Lee Levine dated to 7/27/04 about the deal
B (says Intentionally left blank)
C.7/28/98 Today show
D 8/6/98 Larry King live
E 7/26/98 Today
F 5/12/97 Today

[Ralph L.]

98 was the year of Monica. What happened in May 97? 10 years ago. Gak!
Gingrich in trouble?

[hit and run]

Ralph, with a quick google, I found:

This

Trying to tie things together to make sense out of it though.

(which oddly enough makes me remember where I was that evening - actually 5/11/97)

Or maybe this is closer? (notice that's Arianna writing....)

[Ralph L.]

My, how the Huff has changed. Talk about deluded states of mind. Surprising she keeps that online. Maybe to show how she's "grown."

Wonder what Timmy said about McDougal?

[clarice]

Ralph, I think May 12/97 was Whitewater/McDougal/Starr

[hit and run]

Clarice!!!! I would like the record to reflect that this is the first time (and likely the last) that I beat you to a post.

OK, so you probably were able to pull it from your steel trap and I had to use google and you probably were over on other threads fighting for justice or whatever -- but, I have to take victories, however small and insignificant, whenever I can take them.

Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah......

With love,
hit and run

[clarice]

You did, the race goes to the swiftest, h & r --you get the laurels..

[Ralph L.]

Thank you both.

[Ralph L.]

I should have known. It's always all about the Clintons, and they like it that way.

[Ralph L.]

Thank you both.

[hit and run]

You did, the race goes to the swiftest, h & r --you get the laurels..

Posted by: clarice | February 14, 2007 at 12:04 PM

Printed off, framed, and hanging in my office.

[maryrose]

H&R:
How was the Valentine's Day luncheon?

[hit and run]

So cute. I got there early and the kids were doing a little dancing/exercise to a music tape. My daughter beamed when she saw me and had fun with the dancing. It really was just a table set up by a few moms. I was the only dad there, except one other who showed up at the end. My daughter ended up giving me about half her goldfish and her entire rice crispy treat.

There is nothing more humbling than the unbridled love of your children.

[clarice]

That treat sounds more delicious than caviar, h & R.

[clarice]

That treat sounds more delicious than caviar, h & R.

[hit and run]

Infinitely more.

It is the greatest thing, in the world...

...except for a nice MLT - mutton, lettuce and tomato sandwich, where the mutton is nice and lean and the tomato is ripe...mmm...they're so perky, I love that.