|
Banned
|
IMO, if the observer from slate.com , who's description closely matches what the blogger, "emptywheel" observed in the third quote box, is correct, and you add the citations in my two preivous posts, linked here:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...rs#post2117020
the preceding link contains:
Quote:
http://www.slate.com/id/2129097/
Liar or Fool?What's left of Scooter Libby's reputation.
By John Dickerson
<h3>Posted Monday, Oct. 31, 2005, at 11:02 AM ET</h3>
When Democratic wise man Clark Clifford was accused of acting as a front for the corrupt Pakistani bank BCCI, he admitted, "I have a choice of either seeming stupid or venal."....
.....Scooter Libby is in the same fix: His reputation is now a witness against him. Libby is known for his precision and intellect. I, like many of the reporters who now must cover his trial, remember the micrometer he used to measure our questions and assumptions. So it's hard to buy his lawyer's suggestion that Libby's misstatements to the FBI and grand jury were due to a shaky memory made shakier by "the hectic rush of issues and events at a busy time for our government." Yes, he worked 14-hour days handling tricky and disparate issues. But this isn't a matter of forgetting what you had for lunch. How Libby learned Plame's identity was a central question of a 22-month investigation. He had time to think this through.
Before Libby gets a chance to defend himself in court, he must suffer through speculation about the seemingly more plausible rationale for his actions: that he knew he should not have spoken about Plame and that to cover up having done so, he fashioned a fictitious narrative. .......
.........More astonishingly, we learn from the Fitzgerald indictment that Ari Fleischer knew about Plame and didn't tell anyone at all. He walked reporters, including me, up to the fact, suggesting they look into who sent Wilson, but never used her name or talked about her position. Why not? It certainly would have been helpful for him at the time. His colleagues were savaging him at the time for bungling the response to Wilson's July 6 New York Times opinion piece. They blamed him for not sufficiently refuting the article. By leaking the Plame information, Fleischer could have discredited Wilson, muddied the story, and won back the affection of his complaining colleagues.
Fleischer and Rove each discussed Plame with Scooter. A tantalizing fact still hidden in Fitzgerald's briefcase is whether Libby in those conversations with Fleischer and Rove discussed disclosing Plame's identity.....
|
<b>....and now we know that Ari Fleischer admitted leaking Plame's name to NBC's David Gregory, and at least one other reporter....and then went for an immunity deal and will trade away Scooter to pay for it.....</b>
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...rs#post2116486
...it is now my contention that this is over. Libby and his lawyers should be working to obtain a plea deal for him, BEFORE Ari Fleischer testifies.
I predict that won't happen and Libby will be convicted of perjury, based largely on Fleischer's testimony:
Quote:
http://www.slate.com/id/2158157/entry/2158330/
Dispatches From the Scooter Libby Trial
from: Seth Stevenson
What I Didn't Learn at the Urinal
Updated Thursday, Jan. 25, 2007, at 9:50 PM ET
........4:46 p.m.: The jury—and Martin—has been dismissed for the day. It's time for a highly entertaining lawyer slap fight. It turns out Ari Fleischer will be the next witness, once court resumes Monday. (Damn, just missed him!) The defense team wants to note—for the jury's benefit—that Fleischer demanded immunity before he would agree to testify, because this might cast Fleischer's testimony in a different light.
And here Fitzgerald makes a nice little chess move: Fine, he says, we can acknowledge that Fleischer sought immunity. As long as we explain why. Turns out Fleischer saw a story in the Washington Post suggesting that anyone who revealed Valerie Plame's identity might be subject to the death penalty. And he freaked. Of course, if Fleischer was this worked up about it during the time period in question, that suggests Libby would have been, too. (Which again undermines the notion that Libby had much bigger fish to fry.)
Cue 20 minutes of lawyers whining about each other's conduct. Finally, the judge tells them to cool it. "This is why I quit practicing," he says. "Other lawyers kept accusing me of doing things I hadn't done."...
|
Quote:
http://spbiloxi.blogspot.com/2007/01...thie_7055.html
....Update 9:
Footnote: Zeidenberg is the assistant attorney on the prosecution side. And J is Jeffress.
["host" inserts: Jeffress is Libby's co-defense counsel....]
Lawyers juggling papers. Maybe they're taking Cathie's notes?
J: What is the issue regarding Mr. Fleischer cannot represent what Fleischer what he will say. Fleischer got immunity. Alerted this morning that Zeidenberg intends to ask Fleischer why he got immunity, he'd say he read that outing a CIA spy could be a crime. Completely improper to mention it.
<b>J: they want to put in 1X2X6 article. Jeffress contends the claims in the article was totally untrue.
Zeidenberg: Fleischer's going to testify that he did seek immunity and he would not talk to the gov’t before he obtained it and he'll explain why he wanted immunity the reason he wanted it the evening of 9/28 he found the story online which indicated a criminal investigation into possible disclosure of covert agent he knew he had conveyed info to reporters that was previously conveyed to him by Libby. He realized your heart goes in your throat.</b> The following day obtained legal counsel beg and discussing with attorneys. We're not introducing this article for the truth of the matter. Mr. Wells showed an article to Ms. Martin that she had never seen, he put and read a lot of it. Court said it could be relevant for state of mind.
Walton; the article will suggest other criminal behavior that could have resulted. If the defense would forgo the fact taht he got immunity, it sees the govt should have some opportunity about why it was sought. Otherwise if the defense brings it out the implication may be that he was willing to talk but it may have a negative impact on his credibility. It would be unfair for the defense to bring it up.
Zeidenberg: Defense already opened, said he has an immunity agreement. Jeffress has said he'll bring it up, at the end they'll argue about immunized witnesses. This exhibit would be relevant not only in connection with this, the gist of this is also encompassed in a October 12 article which Libby underlined and he was specifically questioned about the allegation that two WH officials Libby acknowledged he had the article, it was two days before he testified, it's admissible independently of Fleischer. The FBI agent will testify they were investigating the 1X2X6 allegation, the FBI just like Libby had a copy, the FBI would have been remiss not to be seeking if there's anything behind the allegation. The article is not being offered for the truth. Ari did not believe for a second that he telephoned a reporter…
Walton: [interrupts] Why can't he testify he read an article
Zeidenberg: the article is only relevant
Walton: why not let Ari testify that he read an article. Because of concern about whether it was.
Zeidenberg: if it said that it was a misdemeanor that would be one thing. You could tell them it's not relevant to the person's mindset.
Walton if Libby has an article it reveals he had concerns he may have committed a crime. Even if the article is wrong as it relates to Libby and he's got it underlined, maybe he had a motive to lie. However in reference to Mr. Flesicher. Unless there's some vigorous attack on Ari. He had concerns about Ari.
Zeidenberg: The critical part of the article as far as Fleischer is concerned. Maybe we can negotiate a satisfactory amont of evidence read the very beginning of the article and he knew that some Admin officials has passed this on and this was a possible violation of Federal law.
Walton: My concern is that the jury not get the impression that Mr Libby had committed a crime when he read it.
Z: He's in a situation that he spoke to reporters and the subject matter may have related to a covert agent.
Walton trying to find a way for Ari to express why he had a concern, but that didn't want to prejudice Libby.
Jeffress: I would like to point out this is not something someone reads an article Fleischer is represented by Williams and Connelly.....
|
Last edited by host; 01-27-2007 at 01:23 PM..
|