Powered by TypePad

« Global Warning Solved! (But Don't Hold Your Breath Waiting To See This Implemented) | Main | Jury Watch - Home For The Weekend »

March 02, 2007



Looks like Marcy et al are getting a bit high on their 15 minutes of fame - who wouldn't?


Now why would EW hope that the person in the jury deliberations she assumes is setting the narrative be more like Hamsher than like Tom?

Tom Maguire

Now why would EW hope that the person in the jury deliberations she assumes is setting the narrative be more like Hamsher than like Tom?

I think it is time we all admit that Tom is insane.

Oh, wait...


The movie needs a little “creative license” taken just to increase the box office.

Maybe Val could be played by Whitney Houston. Scooter and Cheney could wear white hoods while hatching their plot against her.

It might not be historically accurate, but it would convey the true sentiment of film.


Jack Black as Karl Rove

Alec Baldwin as Fitz

Barbra Streisand furious when she is refused the role of Valerie

And for Joe Wilson...Brad Pitt or Sean Penn?

hit and run

Oh boy, can't wait to see the scene from Plameses 3rd or 4th date...

Patrick R. Sullivan

If Walter is correct about the MIT economist, this methodical deliberation might be his/her fault. The evidence is being tortured until it confesses.

Unfortunately for the FDLers, the confession will be, 'not guilty', if that's what's happening in the jury room. And Fitz's disingenuous and emotional close won't work.


Oh for pete's sakes...I going to go throw up now.


And Fitz's disingenuous and emotional close won't work.

We have misunderstood, mischaracterized, and misquoted Fitz. Or so they tell me over at the swamp.


Hollywood casting call:

Valerie Plame - Courtney Love
Joe Wilson - Jim Belushi


Only two people could do justice to the parts,Elizabeth Taylor and Roddy MacDowell.


Doea anyone actually KNOW anything about the jury deliberations? (Other than that they are taking an enormously long time?)

It seems to me that in the absence of information people fill in the void with their hopes or their fears.

I still think that if this was a BDS infected jury there would have been a verdict by now -- guilty of course. The longer the slow and painstaking process takes the better for the defendant. If you think about anything long enough and hard enough, doubts begin to arise. Whether those doubts are "reasonable" is in the eye of the beholder of course but a long process pretty much precludes unanimous metaphysical certainty.

Tom Maguire

And Fitz's disingenuous and emotional close won't work.

Under "Bitter Recriminations" (i.e., if we get acquitals), that close ranks up with playing the full Libby tapes, including the waterboarding.

*Either* the jury gets swept along with the moment and convicts Libby, or that close sets BS detectors flashing - when the judge is telling you to disregard the prosecutor, just what impact does that have?

A week later, it does not look like the jury was swept away. So maybe they are wondering, why did the prosecutor tell us about all those people who died at the end - if that was for real, why not introduce it as evidence? Or, if it was not real, why is he BSing, and what else did he BS us about?

Oh, well. Maybe that is just wishful thinking.


PUK--I wish you and H & R and Soylent were doing the script..Hmmm..that gives me an idea.......*finger to lip*


If it's "wishful thinking" TM, two of us are angaged in it. Put another way, does a dishonest, emotional appeal full of b.s. lose it's impact on the bedpost over weeks?


Who gets to play Tom? I am trying to remember what he looked like in the brief appearance I saw on CNN.


**Engaged***Sorry too many threads of interest today.

Other Tom

See the thing about Mars getting warmer too? Think Martians are selling any of those offsets? Could be an interplanetary market...

Ralph L.

Sue, How Rude! Just name the sexiest actor you can think of.

Ralph L.

"Does your BS lose its flavor, on the bedposts overnight?" Euuh, I'll stick to gum.


The swamp quotes Schanberg in the Observer. Interesting because it's paradigmatic of liberal logic in general:

Whether or not Mr. Fitzgerald gets a conviction, he has established a trial record that will establish the administration’s guilt. Sprinkled throughout are the names of most of the neoconservatives who had been planning the current Iraq War ever since the 1991 Gulf War ended with Saddam Hussein still in power.

Ah hah. The Administration had neoconservatives planning the war ever since 1991. Therefore they are guilty. Of being neoconservatives above all elese.

Did you all know that this was what Fitz set out to prove?


Good point, Theo.


Joe Wilson - Jackie Gleason
Valerie Plame - The lady who played Mary, women of Scots w/ the white make-up


Joe Wilson -- Will Farrell playing it as inthe Producers: Franz Liebkind-like.


John Paul Stevens can play Joe.


Were I casting this movie:

Tea Leone plays Valerie
Her husband David Duchovny plays Joe Wilson

The part of Dick Cheney will be played by cellos and basses - sort of like the shark's theme from 'Jaws' - only scarier, because he's Dick Cheney:

Cool facts about Dick Cheney


That would be Glenda Jackson whom I believe is dead.

Ralph L.

BStickerist, at the last State Opening of Brit. parliament, the band played Darth Vader's leitmotif for the arrival of Tony Blair.

Ralph L.

So's Jackie Gleason. That's the point.
Sorry about Glenda.


I think Chris Matthews should borrow one of Olberman's hairpieces for the role of Joe Wilson and Andrea Mitchell should play Val.

Could you find any others who would put as much heart into the performance?

I wish to thank all who contribute to this blog for providing so much wit, humor, and insight throughout this trial, I've been addicted to all of it.

hit and run

sbw - I like Will Farrell as Joe!

I was thinking Michael Richards...but now...

I'm stuck on Val.

Molly Shannon (as in Mary Katherine Gallagher)?


Ralph L.


Jeff Z

Not very imaginitive casting...How about:

Joe Wilson: Jon Lovitz
Valerie Plame: Darryl Hannah
Nick Kristof: Jason Alexander
Judith Miller: Jennifer Coolidge
Walter Pincus: David Spade
Bob Fitgerald: Michael Richards
Bob Woodward: Steve Martin
Richard Armitrage: Refrigerator Perry
Robert Novak: Dan Ackroyd
Andrea Mitchell: Sean Young
David Korn: MacCaulay Culkin
Karl Rove: Bill Murray
Scooter Libby: Larry David
Judge Walton: Eugene Levy

It's a start, anyway.


HEH! And who will play TM, wiseguy?


Tom Hanks maybe/


Glenda Jackson whom I believe is dead.

Glenda Jackson isn't dead. She's a British Labour MP, anti-war.

Besides you mean Vanessa Redgrave.

Glenda Jackson played Elizabeth in both the mini-series and movie, not Mary.

hit and run

Fitzgerald - Michael Richard....there! That's it. Perfect casting.

I would pay good money to see a Michael Richards performance of the rebuttal....

"Madness! Madness!"

Jeff Z. grrrreat job...though, I might favor Larry David as Joe, just to spite the important hair. But I'm petty.

Greta Van Sustern

Forget whose gonna play Joe and Val. Who's gonna play me?? Angelina Jolie, perhaps?

Patrick R. Sullivan

Here's an intriguing subplot:

'This weekend those [cable news] channels gave thorough coverage to one of the great mysteries of our time: Who is the father of the late Anna Nicole Smith’s baby? The issue may ultimately have to be settled by the Florida supreme court. (The child does not yet appear to have implants.)

'But we can’t rule out the possibility that the same man is the father of Mary Cheney’s baby. Everything seems to point to Scooter Libby, unless he’s being made the fall guy again. The vice president has called Libby “one of the finest individuals I have ever known.” That’s a fall guy, all right. Most people don’t call their friends “individuals.” When the Cheneys need something done, they turn to Scooter.'


The flickering candle light glinted on the the fine crystal of their champagne flutes,they looked into each others eyes with longing.Tentatively he placed a hand on her smooth silk clad thigh,she ran her fingers through the golden mane of hair fluttering her long luxurious lashes.
Suddenly his hand encountered some thing hard and cold,"I'm terribly sorry my Dear I had no idea you had a prosthetic".

The magic was broken abruptly by a three round burst of 7.62 rounds ripping through the polished wood floor to whine around the concrete garage below.
"Don't be so silly Darling", she trilled,"I'm covert"...."Sorry I was so excited I forgot to put the safety on"

COld ham


Speaking of Olberman...Does anyone know when he is gonna quit wearing that fake nose/eyeglass/mustache get-up on the air????

Patrick R. Sullivan

'Valerie Plame: Darryl Hannah'

I caught Darryl debating Ann Coulter a few nights ago over Global Warming. Ann kept asking her where she thinks those solar panels on her house come from (i.e. a factory running on fossil fuels).

Charlie (Colorado)

does a dishonest, emotional appeal full of b.s. lose it's impact on the bedpost over weeks?

... or its flavor overnight?

Carol Herman


All I saw was the DRUDGE knows how to feed the beast! He's not talking about Libby's trial at all. But he throws a bone to Warner Bros.

A load of BS. Since by the time any movie comes out, this jury will have either discovered, when they come out fully dressed on Monday, that the audience DISAPPEARED.

Or? They'll become BUTTS of jokes. Like in "how did they arrive at that conclusion?"

There's enough holes in this case for WELLS to RACE to the DC CIRCUIT. Not actually "far away on Pluto," if you get my drift.

And, once he gets the paperwork TO the APPEALS "people" ... you'll be in for another ride. Sort of like discovering your old man bought a bottle of Viagra.

The only way interest really cancels out is if this jury acquits.

If there's gonna be a movie? It won't see lines as long as movies had in the past.

As to Tom Hanks "opening anything" ... all you'll see is BOMB. Just like Jennifer Anison. So, maybe, she can play plame?

Whose gonna play wife #2?

As to my habits, where I listen to DRUDGE every Sunday night, trying not to miss a beat; I heard last Sunday, while the "most forgettable Oscar's in 72 years played out; that ALL the movies, now, done by hollyweird is done for the FOREIGN OFFICE. Where the films garner more cash than here.

AH HA! Said I. So Chirac gets to pluck at American movie profits! No wonder there is so little cash left over for the rest of the industry.

If you think, by the way, that I am wrong? Go ahead. Call your broker. Buy some Warner Brothers stock.

Meanwhile? George Soros just plunked down a few million on Halliburton. Which tells me we've turned a corner in Iraq. And, soon enough, the BUILDING and the re-building of Iraq BEGINS. Call your broker. Not quite getting in on the ground floor. But the stock's not near it's high's this year, either.

Hey. In the movie, whose gonna play Clarice? What hollywood dame has big enough boobs?


I've got it! I've got it! er, rather my SO got it!

Valery Plame = Jane Fonda
Fitz = Al Gore

Not Ron Jeremy

Since the working title is Fair Game. Can the porno ripoff be Fairly Gamey?

hit and run

John Heder to play David Shuster?



Stop, I f'ing wet my pants

Charlie (Colorado)

Hey. In the movie, whose gonna play Clarice? What hollywood dame has big enough boobs?

There are plenty of really immense boobs in Hollywood.

Tim Robbins, for example.


Britney shave her head because she lost the part of Valerie Plame to David Spade.

Carol Herman


Ah, thank you, Tom McGuire, for posting that innanity about how strings, attached to ideas, are not balloons. And, what transverses as business brainstorming these days.

Sort'a like, before the Wright Brothers actually got a hang about flying, idiots would put on wings and drop like rocks, off of high places.

The saddest note that never appeared? The jurors didn't ask a question, at all, about reasonable doubt. Perhaps, they've never held any?

Ralph L.

Patrick, I'm sure there's a good rhyme about Mary's ... part and Scooter, but I already did that with Russert last week, so someone else can try this one.


Obviously Clarice has a good point. Emotional appeals (whether Fitz' or Wells') lose "flavor" over time. The jury is clearly caught up in the details of the facts here and has not been swept away by emotions. However, there is a minor yet perhaps potent residual effect of such appeals. In the end, the jury will still recall that (1) this case is about freedom or detention for a flesh and blood human being and (2) if he lied there were important consequences (at least according to Fitz).


Well we could get Al Gore and Tipper on the treadmill with CO2 converters and if they slim down enough-

Al as Joe

Tipper as Val.

Really Al wouldn't have to lose much plus he already has an Oscar.


Liberal dream casting:

Julia Roberts as Valerie

Alex Baldwin as Joe -

the guy who plays the wizard who transmogrifies into a rat in HP for Scooter.


Joe will insist on Richard Gere.

WA Moore


There was some discussion in the thread last night about what the jury might be doing that was consuming all of the time while maintaining excellent juror rapport. Speculation included the "facilitated" meeting process. First, let's admit this is simply a suspicion that COULD explain what's going on. There are other possible explanations. TM has also posted some information and thoughts this morning on the topic. I believe it unlikely the jury is using relationship diagrams which require more training, settling instead for more traditional "brainstorm and prioritize" techniques.

The process and its techniques became popular in large business organizations in the early 1990's and spread like wildfire to medium size businesses, governmental organizations, and non-profit organizations. The backgrounds of the jurors indicate that several would likely have been exposed. I was a mid-level manager in a large business, so in-depth training was required.

The ultimate goal of the process is "consensus" resulting from all options and facts being brainstormed with all group members having input with no person's input being criticized no matter how ridiculous or off topic. I define "consensus" using these techniques as every group member accepting and actively supporting the ultimate decision of the group BECAUSE they had input equal to every other group member.

In the work world the techniques are used to prioritize and resolve departmental work-related issues (usually in quality circles or six sigma groups) AS WELL AS in running meetings (to assure the input of everyone). Experience demonstrates the techniques are superb at building group rapport. Indeed, without strong external guidance (from more senior managers), rapport and consensus tend to become the primary unstated goals of the group.

What are the likely implications when a jury adopts the facilitated group techniques? I'm not aware of any history, but would expect the following:

1. The jury is likely to establish strong internal rapport.
2. The jury is likely to get bogged down in the process (brainstorming and prioritizing) to the point of losing track of time and their responsibilities.
3. The jury is not likely to hang. That is, they will agree by "consensus" (majority opinion) on their outcome on each charge. Every juror will support the majority decision.
4. The jeopardy that the defendant is facing will become secondary to the importance of rapport and the demands of the process.

Under this scenario, it is unlikely that any charges have been resolved or even that a vote has been taken at this point.

I must repeat: There are other explanations for what this jury is doing. However, the rapport of the jury, the use of 2 pads of easel paper, and the length of time taken with what should be an easy decision (since all witnesses had faulty memory) indicates the possibility that the jury is spending time dealing with their internal process rather than their responsibility as jurors.



Tim Robbins as Fitz-that would be perfect.

Janine Garofalo as EW.

Carol Herman


I think SONY actually bought this project. And, they've made other mistakes, too. Does the market place notice?


By the by. How will the movie find an audience? The boobs in hollyweird see everything for free. And, what has word-of-mouth done for those fools, lately?

While DRUDGE said on Sunday, next year's host will be SEINFELD. He did, it seems, an audition in Sunday's DISASTER. Don't tell anybody. It flunked the best. But will SEINFELD resurrect the label? Can he hold a candle to Johnny Carson? REALLY? I never knew.


roanoke: I am liking all of your casting choices. Janine as EW is brilliant.

Gary Maxwell

Dont you think Christopher Walken is the perfect Joe Truthteller Wilson? Ya gotta leave a little slime behind when you exit a room, no one does it like Walken


H&R: I'm stuck on Val.

Didn't know you cared.

No, wait. Who will play Val is easy. Think of her self-infatuation. Think of her flicking her beautiful blonde tresses. Think of her steely will pushing the Joe onward and upward. Think of... Miss Piggy.

Rick Ballard

WA Moore,

Thanks for that comment. I think it highly possible that the scenario is as you suggest. I doubt that it will be successful if it is being applied because synthesis is usually vital to consensus and that just isn't possible. The problem I see from that approach is that it can become a swap meet. That wouldn't be a good outocme.


(Joe Wilson wakes Walter Pincus from a sound sleep with incessant barking)

Pincus - What is it boy? Are you lost? Do you want to play?
(more barking)
Is it trouble? Is it an accident? Is someone drowning? Did someone “out” your wife?

Wilson - (Loud barking)

Pincus - An outing! Gosh! We’ve got to warn everyone! I’ve heard about ex-ambassadors like you! You’re gonna be famous! You’re gonna get your picture taken and they’ll put it in the paper!


Clarice: And who will play TM

The disembodied voice of Charlie on Charlie's Angels -- the late John Forsythe.

Gary Maxwell

There are plenty of really immense boobs in Hollywood.

Tim Robbins, for example.

Bring the curtain down the show is over! Funny line of the week.


I really have to throw out my old civics book. Linda Sanchez, head of the House judiciary committee has sent out a flurry of subpoenas to the Administration demanding answers for the removal of several US Attorneys, claiming this is a significant issue because the Judiciary Branch should be free of Executive branch interference.

Maybe my civics book isn't wrong. Maybe Sanchez is just bone stupid.



They both seem to have the same streak...

WA Moore-

So in essence the jury's rapport with each other takes priority over justice.

Then whoever decided to do the "facilitating" might be myopic.

Hopefully that isn't what is going on, and they are keeping their eye on the longterm goal of justice.


Okay, since things are slow today, I will add my guess as to why the jury is taking so long. (And it is only a guess; I do not know and I do not think anyone does.)

The members of this jury know that this is the most important -- and most examined -- thing they will ever do in their lives. When they die their service on this jury will be in the first or second sentence of whatever obit gets written. They ENJOY the attention and the power. And they very much want to reach not merely a consensus on guilt or innocence but on a detailed view of this case that they can later explain and defend (at length) to the media and then bore their acquaintances with for decades to come.

The fact that they are not sequestered and can take afternoons off when convenient means that the process is not so onerous that concluding it is a priority (as it is with most juries, who neither care that deeply about the outcome or have any incentive to prolong the experience).

So the process rolls on, either towards eventual consensus or deadlock.

Just my guess.


The process can be misused and the facilitator can be dishonest and manipulative, Still--if done right it is a good way to keep the invisible pink unicorn out of the deliberations if it's done right.(And that unicorn has tried to make an appearance in every group decision I've ever been involved with.)Something in group dynamics eschews the rational.


Clarice: I read that about Sanchez at the Politico. She has also subpoenaed 4 of the fired US-A's (I think they said).

Ralph L.

No, Clarice, it's just that everyone has at least one loony idea that he's dying to show off.

Gary Maxwell

Sanchez is now head of the House Judiciary committee? There are dimmer bulbs in the House but you would have to search awhile.

Does she know that Clinton fired every single US Attorney upon his taking office? Probably not. No matter, the media will act like that is different.


Valerie Plame - Demi Moore
Joe Wilson - Sandy Berger


The longer the slow and painstaking process takes the better for the defendant

I dunno Theo ,

I keep thinking they are trying to prove Fitz' case for him.

WA Moore

roanoke -

I put "facilitate" in quotes for a reason. In the process I describe the leader/jury foreman and facilitator are different people by definition. The facilitator should be a professionally trained non-group member. But some groups want to self-facilitate. Self facilitated groups are almost always not successful due to getting bogged down in process.

If this is what they are doing, I expect no hung counts.

Ralph L.

Conyers is HJC chairman. Equally dim. Sanchez must be a subcommittee chairman.

hit and run

Happy Trails everyone.

Time to go celebrate Texas in that special H&R way.

[ed. -- beer or liquor?]
Liquor? Why...I hardly even know her.


Ah, thanks..I'd better correct my blog on it.


I would love to see some statistics: How many jurys deliberate every year? How long does it take to reach a verdict? Base it on easy, medium, & hard? etc.


Perhaps from now on voir dire will include the question "have you been trained or had experience as a group facilitator?"

If the answer is "yes" that prospective jurer will be automatically struck as one that could inadvertently lead the group astray, causing the jurors to lose sight of their duty by focusing on process instead. :D

I suggest that jurors be sequestered and fed bland food during the entire time. Salt-free, sugar-free, fat-free - in the interests of health, of course.

Other Tom

I am savoring that quote from Sidney Shamberg so much that I want to cite it again:

"Whether or not Mr. Fitzgerald gets a conviction, he has established a trial record that will establish the administration’s guilt. Sprinkled throughout are the names of most of the neoconservatives who had been planning the current Iraq War ever since the 1991 Gulf War ended with Saddam Hussein still in power."

Study it. Fitz has established a trial record that will establish guilt. How did he do this? By sprinkling the names of the neocons throughout the record. Wow. I'd say that's establishing the administration's guilt the easy way, if you asked me. Fitz could have saved us a lot of time by just having somebody read off a list of names, and everybody could go home.

Was there evidence adduced at the trial concerning the planning of the Iraq war since 1991? No, there wasn't, you say? In Sidney World, that doesn't matter. They were planning this war back then, and their names are scattered throughout the trial record. That oughta do it.

Ralph L.

"Self facilitated groups are almost always not successful due to getting bogged down in process"
If that's the case than I *would* expect hung counts. And buxom countesses.


WA Moore-

Let me go out on a limb-and say in advance that I am not married to this idea-I'd love for someone to give me a hundred reasons as to why I am wrong....

Something about the jury foreperson or inner machinations of the jury smellls....

I smell a power struggle and I'm not exactly liking it.

The notes to the Judge-perhaps they don't realize that it is the Judge that sees them but even if they were to the bailiff there is a quality to them that is sloppy and shows a lack of concern as to how easily they can be deciphered.

I know this is a petty observation but it's been bugging me.

The handwriting is sloppy and hurried, there are cross outs and arrow inserts and the person writing can't be bothered to rewrite them.

How's that for overanalyzing it...

I know.


I botched this joke yesterday, but here goes;

"Plame House"

starring Patrick Swayze as Joe "Dalton" Wilson IV.

Hey, he's got the hair for the part.

Tom Maguire

Who gets to play Tom?

I see myself as an off-screen presence. So far off-screen, in fact, that no one hears of me.

But maybe I can be the narrator doing voice-overs.


A note of irony - I am sitting here staring at a summons to jury duty. :D Waiting for the social worker from the hospice company to give me a letter getting me off the list.

As soon as I get excused from one, they send me another. My city must be running short. :D

The other ironic note is, that usually, no one wants me on their jury because I spent 20+ years as an insurance agent. So I go and sit, answer questions, but never get picked to sit for a trial.


From the Politico's "The Crypt" blog:

"The House Judiciary Committee, as expected, has issued subpoenas for four of eight former U.S. Attorneys who were ousted in recent months by the Justice Department under questionable circumstances. The four ex-prosecutors are expected to testify as a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing next week chaired by Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) The Senate Judiciary Committee has invited them to testify as well, and will issue subpoenas if they resist. McClatchy Newspapers is reporting that Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.) tried to get one of the fied USAs to indict a local Democratic official in New Mexico before Election Day. The two lawmakers declined to comment."

Senate Judiciary wants in on the action too.

Ralph L.

OT, it is enough that their names were mentioned in a criminal trial. That's all the ammo they need.

Tom Maguire

I am blanking on a name, but the 3rd Rock From the Sun guy - ah ha, John Lithgow - is a natural for Joe.


Dang it h & r-

You are leaving?

liquor... Gad-LOL!

I was hoping you'd come up with a dang title for the Plame/ Wilson extravaganza....


Old Yellowcake

or Looking for Mr. Good Hair



John Lithgow?

Joe would never allow that.

His hair-it's tragic...


You can spend hours laying out a progression of facts with geometric logic, documenting each piece of information along the way, but if you have a group of 11 people there will be one in the bunch who will defy any attempt at reason.

Foreman - “She’s an expert in her field and has no reason to lie.”

Juror - “Did you see her skirt? That tramp couldn’t tell the truth if she wanted to.”


OT--here's your proof--let me lay it out for you (Amazingly only Shamberg caught it)



How about

Liars, Liars, Pants on Fire.

Ralph L.

Too bad Michael Landon is dead. Someone described him as having hair like a salad.

Ralph L.

"Liars, Liars, Pant on Fires & Lakes"


So do we have any updates on the jury, other than the fact that they are about to retire for the weekend?


Dick Cheney - Frank Oz (voice of Miss Piggy)

Libby - Steve Martin

Fitz - Martin Short

Wells - Tom Hanks

Val Flame - Hayden Panettiere

Joe Wilson - Danny DeVito

Ray McGovern - Steven Spielberg


Nothing, Jane. We're working on getting you a cameo appearance in the Wilson/Plame bodice ripper as a birthday present, though.

The comments to this entry are closed.