Posted on 02/20/2007 6:22:45 AM PST by Bahbah
The Bottom Line By Christy Hardin Smith @ 5:00 am
Summations in the Libby trial will begin today, and hopefully conclude, although you can never be sure of that in a trial that has defense counsel asking for four hours and having that whittled down to three by the presiding judge. (And with pending motions from both sides requesting additional time for arguments that were filed over the weekend, I'm thinking we are not likely to finish today.) This morning, Jane, Pach, and I will be sitting in the courtroom to watch the closings, and Emptywheel will be manning the keyboard to give you the liveblogging of the proceedings along with us.
More at the link: http://firedoglake.com/
bumping the thread, thanks
SUMMATION CONTINUES RE MOTIVE
11:00
Want to talk about motive.
Wells told you, people don't lie for the heck of it. That's absolutely true. Is it conceivable that all 9 witnesses would make the same mistake in their memory.
Let's look at Libby's motive to lie, bc Wells told you there was no motive to lie. Think about what he was facing when he went to testify October 14. He knew investigation into unauthorized leaks. Knew he had talked to Miller, Cooper, and Fleischer. He knows those facts.
What else do we know he knows. [Oct 12 WaPo article] Newspaper article take from his files.
[reading and commenting from article] FBI Agents have begin by investigating events the month before the leak. Asking about events going back to early June. Investigators investigating how Plame's name got linked to Wilson and how it made way around govt. Govt officials had been trying for more than a month that Wilson's mission not as important. Time magazine, some govt officials have noted that Wilson's wife. That article would tell any intelligent perso, no question he is intelligent, that the FBI was looking for him. They were trying to find out who was scurrying around to find out about Wilson. That was Libby.
[Now goes to 10/04 article, with the B&J front, reading from article again] B&J leak. Talks about damange inadvertant disclosure of front company could form. Remember testimony of Schmall, CIA briefer. he told them disclosure is a serious business. People can get harrassed, people can get arrested, people can get killed. Addington testified that Libby asked him how you would know if someone was covert. Remember Addington's answer: You wouldn't know. Look at nondiclosure agreement.
[reading from it] UNauthorized disclosure of classified information can cause damage or irreperable injury to US. I understand that if I am uncertain, I am required to confirm that info is unclassified before I diclose it. I've been advised that any breach = termination of security clearance. He knows that, you can't even be negligent.
Recall what WH spokespman said, [video of Scottie] No one wants to get to bottom of matter more than pres, if someone leaked classified info, president wants to know, if someone leaked classified info, they will no longer be part of administration. Looking at that, no question that, at a minimum, he's going to be fired. Libby went to VP, said he wanted to be cleared the way Rove had been cleared.
[exhibit saying he wanted ot be cleared] He wanted to be cleared–and he got one. [shows Scottie tape] Those individuals have assured me they were not involved.
He has had WH stake its credibility on it, if they find out he was involved, he would have to retract that. Now the FBI comes. It appears that this woman was a covert agent. He can tell the truth and take his chances. Or he can lie. And L&G, he took the second choice. He made up a story that he thought would cover it. He knew he had a note learning of it from CIA. That's an official source. He had to come up with a way to account for that note, I forgot and learned anew for the first time. Russert told me that all the reporters knew it, and all I did was pass on gossip.
Thanks, Bah ;) Lot of wordz - can't wait for Wells and crew.
Ping
Cboldt, huh???
WOW
PROSECUTION FINISHES, RECESS, DEFENSE UP NEXT
11:11
That is the story he told the FBI
L&G, this is a case about lying, Not conspiracy, No WH conspiracy, no NBC conspiracy; Libby not here because of bad conduct of others. He's here because of his own decision. He decided to lie to the GJ. When you consider all the evidence, the govt has established that the defendant lied to the FBI, lied to GJ, obstructed justice.
Thank you.
10 minutes recess–I'll start the Wells thread.
11:13
Yup, CBoldt.
There is some interesting stuff over at JOM. Can't post it all.
Sorry I was late this morning...phone calls..ugh.
Plus, I have to leave in about 30 minutes, because I have lunch at school with kaybugs...will be gone for about 1 1/2 hours!!
I am so sorry...this schedule and mine hasn't worked out well.
I did post Howlin's ping list, at least I didn't mess THAT up!
DEFENSE COMMENCES
Folks are pretty impressed here–Jeralyn definitely impressed, though she'd remind you that there are two sides to every pancake. Now we'll get to see the other pancake.
Walton: Govt took a little less than 1 hour 18 minutes.
Fitz, I think we took more time than you think we took, but I think we have more than you think we have left.
Walton Hour 50 minutes.
Fitz Hour 25 left, is that right?
Walton We'll go until 12:30, then we'll pick up at 1:30, I'll ask everyone to be ready before to get started.
Now we wait for jury. We've got a slightly different view. We can see prosecution and defense table (we got the defense table instead of witness). And we get a bit of angular view of Well's stand. Here comes the jury.
Get ready for showtime, folks!
Wells up.
Walton, members of proscution, members of jury. I was sitting listening to prosecution listen to what I said, after a few minutes I said, maybe I was drunk, it sure sounded like I said a lot of things I could no deliver on. Prosecution said, there were a very few words. I heard that true. Prosecution said Wells said that but then he played you GJ, the rest of the conversation. You are going to get instructions exactly what the charges are.
[Wells has a weird tone–it's a higher pitched indignant than before. He's not breathing enough, IMO. I think it's supposed to be false indignation.]
Let's show you what the charge is. Let's just show you if what was charged what I said in my opening. Count 3 alleges that Libby falsely told FBI that Libby falsely told that during conversation with Cooper Mr Libby told Cooper that reporters telling admin that Wilson's wife worked for CIA. But that LIbby did not know if this was true. That's what the charge is.
What Zeidenberg did, is something that I won't characterize, bc I don't want to be personal. He read from Count 5. Count 3 what Libby said went to GJ [meant FBI, now corrected it] in October and November. In GJ they start beating on him, asking the same question TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME, Libby reconstructed, he then says, for the first time, maybe he doesn't have a wife. So he reads you that longer piece and suggests that when I said about a few words, what I said in opening, just what you're going to get.
[Wells is facing jury]
11:30
Well now, precisely which grand jury would that be? Grand jury number 4 or grand jury number 5?
Fitz must be sick of eating ham sandwiches by now...
BTTT
DEFENSE CONTINUES
Then Zeidenberg said I said there was a WH conspiracy. That I had no evidence. In this case, the key quesiton is perjury. THe key question is Libby's state of mind, before he went before FBI. That meat grinder note, that Zeidenberg says I didn't show evidence about. It's one of the most improtant, important pieces of evidence in this case. I'm going to talk about it in detail. He has suggested that I promised putting on a whole case, of evidence about what Andrew Card or Scott McC did, I made no such promise, I said I'd show you a note, introduce a note, show that VP Of this country, wrote a note in his own hand, in old pen, that it was not fair to protect Karl Rove and proetc libby. Ted WElls did not make those owrds up, I did not get into time machine and go into WH and write that note. VP wrote not fair to prorect rove and sacrifice Libby. [Um, Ted, the note says NOTHING about Rove!!! You're lying here!!!]
Libby had to fight to get clear. That note shows his state of mind. He was mad, He thougt he was being left out to dry by himself. It's all in the GJ, it's all in evidence, and I'm going to read some of it to you. He went to COS of Bush, Card, you should clear me too, Andy Card BLEW HIM OFF. Libby went to McC, McC said, nope, I'm not going down a list. Karl Rove, not you.
LIbby did something only an innocent person would do , got to VP, I didn't do anything. Clear suggestion once they cleared Rove, He goes to VP, only an innocent person would do this, VP writes in his own handwriting, It's not right to clear Rove and sacrifice Libby. It was written and it exists. [Damn Wells is setting himself to get REAMED since the note says nothing about Rove.]
I'm going to start the way I intended to start before some of Zeidenberg's personal comments.
I opened to you about a month ago, now that we've had a month of testimony, I submit that nothing has changed from opening statement. Libby innocent, totally innocent, Did not commit perjury, obstruction of justice, did not make false statements. innocent man, wrongly charged. I also told you this was a case about he said she said. Case about different recollections between Libby and some reporters. There is no charge in this indictment about Libby's conversation with Grossman, Fleischer, Martin that's all background evidence. In terms of what you have to decide as jurors, it relates to Libby's conversations with reporters, Set forth in detail in the jury instructions. [breathes] those are the charges.
Something changed in material way. I told you case was about 3 reporters, 3 telephone calls, recollections abotu what took place 3 months previously. Walton DISMISSED charges WRT Ms Miller's July 12 conversation. let me read to you again what will be in Walton's instrutcions. Take verbatim from Walton's instructions. As I told you earlier, one of those allegations that Libby lied about conversation, one has been dismissed. Count one, the obstruction of justice count based solely on allegations that Libby falsely testified to GJ, concerning conversation with two reporters.
So we are making some progress, some progress is being made, 3-3-3 is not 2-2-3 [shows graphic with three crossed of, replaced with two in red ink]
We are now left with conversations with Russert and Cooper. Let me talk about Cooper.
Facts almost undisputable in terms of background. Libby gets up, takes wife and two children, birthday of oldest child, his tenth birthday. Libby family on that Saturday go to Edwards AFB, get on AF2, going to Norfolk to watch commemoration of Reagan, like a holiday, a birthday present to kid, AF2, VP, a great birthday present. Ms Martin told you that Libby didn't have his mind on talking to any reporters. She said, Reporters have been calling, including Cooper, Are we going to talk to them, or not? You don't have to guess about what he said, there are notes.
11:41
I can't even go there and read Firedoglake. Do these lefties really believe this crap, or do they just think there readers are dumb enough to believe it?
Thanks for your work and effort here. I have a lot on my personal plates today, and I will revisit this later today or tomorrow.
They are dumb enough to believe it...they really are.
That IS a pretty nasty site, isn't it???
At least they have a blogger...we just have to filter out their personal asides...
You're very welcome.
It's such a gabfest today, I'm just trying to get it in one place and add some of the better commentary that I can find to make it more understandable.
THE NEXT BATCH IS IN---WELLS CONTINUES
No one would have thought there'd be a criminal case. Those notes don't say anything about Valerie Wilson. The plane lands, Libby goes into small room with Ms Martin, Jenny Mayfield's in the room, they call Matt Cooper, Ms Libby and two children in next room, those kids have been up since 6 in the morning, want to get home and PUT those kids to be. Libby didn't want to be on the calls. He had never talked to Cooper in his life. He gets on phone talks to Cooper. Cooper testified, SCOOTER Libby wasn't running around, trying to leak. Cooper wanted to keep him on phone. Have you heard about the wife. I heard that to. I heard that too,but I don't know if it's even true. And it is about a few words, regardless of what he said. We saw what was in essence a Perry Mason moment when my partner Bill Jeffress, one of the best lawyers in the country. put up on the screen the notes that clearly show I don't even know, and the guy stops, It shows what LIbby said was accurate, what happened. It was clear, that was up there, Cooper said, I can't explain it. Scooter Libby's innocent. He didn't do it. He didn't leak to anyone. He is being charged iwth a conversation with a reporter he never met in his life, trying to get home, in the notes, if you want to be fairminded, the notes support Mr Libby. ANd you're going to charge him for perjury, false statements, Some craziness to this case.
Let me talk abotu Mr RUssert. I'm going to talk a lot about Mr Russert. Russert took the stand and said, it was impossible for me to have asked Libby a conversation on July 11, because I did not know, then, that Mrs. Wilson worked at CIA, so i could not have asked Libby the question. Russert said I didn't read it until July 14, and I said wow.
I then introduced an affadavit, a stipulation, as to what Case Agent Eckenrode, he was the top guy, he was the one who called Tim Russert. It is stipulated as true. The stipulation says the November 24 report states, Russert does not recall stating to Libby anything about wife of former Ambassador Wilson, although he could not rule out possibility. That's what Eckenrode would have testified to. He could not rule out possibility.
Russert was at a loss to remember it. He believes this was a type of conversation that he would or should remember. Russert talks to many people on daily basis, it is difficult to reconstruct one several months ago.
That statement that he could not rule it out is totally contrary to what he told you on witness stand. Those counts rely almost exclusive on Russert's testimony. [This is total BS–there's one charge that relates entirely to Libby's knowledge. Fitz is going to have a field day]
That stipulation in and of itself is reasonable doubt. I don't have to talk about Buffalo news, Russert's affadavit before court, how he was forgetful on stand the morning of indictment [wow, that relates to evidence that was ruled inadmissible] He made a statement that is different from an earlier statemen. This is an impeachment statement. THe mere fact that he made an earlier statement, where the stakes are a man's reputation, a man's life, that's reasonable doubt in and of itself.
Russert says, it was impossible because I didn't know about it until I read it in the newspaper.
I'm going to talk you through this, most important testimony in the whole case. THe govt's timeline is wrong. Came out on AP wire, by 2:00 on July 11, if you lived in teh world of media, you could get access to it, people could call you, talk about it. maybe for those of us who are non-reporters, if you live in Russert's world, it was on AP wire, even though it was embargoed, Reporters could read, talk about it.
Novak testified at trial, that he wrote Mission to Niger before Noon, on July 11, before noon. And that it was edited by 1 PM, ET. COlumn out on AP wire shortly thereafter. Let me read you from testimony.
"In this case, my recollection is that since I had a really busy afternoon, I wanted to finish teh column by noon."
11:52
JOM COMMENT
Wells addresses the Russert didn't read about Plame until July 14 Novak column---and points out the govt timeline is all wrong. Novak column out on newswires on July 11.
I think he's doing a terrific job.
Posted by: Chris | February 20, 2007 at 09:04 AM
NEXT BATCH OF DEFENSE SUMMATION IS IN
Edited by noon, it is given to AP, It's on the wires on July 11.
Are people in newsrooms permitted to read it.
Anybody who subscribes to that column, it becomes general information.
Maybe all taht happened in this case, is that on July 11, Tim Russert read the column, talked to him about the column, only thing is that Russert has misrecollected the date on which he heard about it. Maybe he's confused to think he heard about in the Post on the 14. And he asked Libb ya question. Do you know about Wilson's wife working at CIA. Russert says, all the reporters know. Natural response, if Russert knew it was on the wire. Maybe all that's happened is that Russert has forgotten he heard about it on the 14th. It may be as simple as that. A simple piece of misrecollection. But think about the statement. The statement all the reporters know. By the 11th, it is a true statement. That article is in newsrooms in over 100 media outlets. Russert remembers there is a buzz. He puts the buzz on MOnday. By Friday, at 2PM, all the reporters did know. It was put out on the AP wire.
Let me tell you how we'll proceed. I'm going to speak for an hour. Jeffress is going to speak for an hour. I'll use the time left.
Walton: You actually have 3:15 hours.
Wells Fitzgerald goes last. But I will tell you, and say to you now, there's an extreme disadvantage to Defense, bc you're not able to respond to something that will come up. I don't get to respond, but this is an important trial, and I represent an important person, so I want you to think about how I would respond. I want you to be critical thinkers. If you hear something that is new, I want you think, what would Wells and Jeffress say that is new.
I'm going to talk about some of the jury instructions, bedrock principles of American justice system. Proof beyond reasonable doubt and innocent until proven guilty.
Presumed innocent. Presumed innocent, remains with defendant, unless and until he is proven guilty, beyond reasonable doubt. Burden of proof never shifts during trial. Law does not require defendant to produce any evidence. Let me repeat that. That is why Libby doesn't have to testify, doesn't have to do anything. The sole question is whether govt proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Jurors not to ask the question, is he innocent. What is innocent is proven. We start as a bedrock principle. Innocence is presumed. Sole question is whether you've been given evidence that cloak of innocence has been ripped away. Please follow instructions, don't get it backwards. Sole question for you is whether govt proved he deliberately lied.
In some European countries, they have three boxes, innocent, guilty, not proven.
Other bedrock principle is reasonable doubt. Walton will tell you that govt has burden of proving defendant guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Civil cases, only need to prove that it is more likely than not [hey, then I look forward to the Wilson's case]. Think about how reasonable doubt resonates. If after careful, honest consideration of all the evidence you cannot say you are firmly convinced, then you have reasonable doubt. You are only to check the guilty box if you are convinced of Libby's guilt.
It is an extraordinarily high standard, system sets high, to make sure no one who is innocent is by mistake branded a criminal, a felon, it is to protect people as charged. It is also to make sure you don't have to declare someone guilty unless govt has given you powerful evidence. Our system recognizes we are not judgmental people, system says you as jurors have to take on difficult task of pronouncing another human guilty. You have to be confident that that person is guilty. It's to give you a comfort level. There is a permanence to a guilty verdict. [Unless you're the fall guy for the President and the VP] There are no erasers on the pencils of jurors. There to protect him, but also to protect you, so that a year later, you don't think you made a mistake. They've got meet a very high standard.
Let me talk about Libby's defense. 5 counts. You're going to get a verdict sheet, 5 counts. elements will be discussed.
Count 1 Obstruction, based on Russert and Cooper [geez, at least Ted is predictable in his dishonesty]
Count 2 Tim Russert
Count 3 Cooper
Count 4 Russert
Count 5 Cooper
[In red] Libby had not been charge with leaking classified information.
As I said, wrt the conversations with Russert and Cooper, they're he said she said, there's no recording. Analogizing as if you're laying on beach, you couldn't remember conversation four months later.
Libby didn't get to lay on the beach, he didn't get to see his wife and family. He deals with important issues. No one disputes that he worked long hours or dealt with important issues.
There's a madness, even putting the question, the notion that someone woudl get charged with this.
Same defense to every count, government hasn't established beyond reasonable doubt, they've got to prove intentional lie. They have not proved he acted with criminal intent. Not that you made a mistake, not that you were confused.
12:09
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.