Money says that he gets nailed on at least one.
Posted on 03/01/2007 7:22:18 AM PST by STARWISE
http://www.firedoglake.com/
Victoria’s Secret By emptywheel @ 6:58 am
The jury is starting another day of deliberations. No word yet on a verdict — you'll know as soon as we know. And in the meantime…
Also, yesterday afternoon (3:45) the jury asked for another post-it flip chart pad.
We would like another big Post-it pad. The large one for the easel.
Someone has been in too many business brainstorming sessions, I think. Jokes in the media room about "The Libby Trial, brought to you by Post-It."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And a prosecutor takes a shot at Victoria Toensing for her WaPo article.
``````````````
Remember a few weeks ago, when Jim Marcinkowski challenged Ted Wells to put his punk on the stand –either one of them.
here:
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/13/hey-come-on-put-your-punk-on-the-stand-2/
Well, it seems like Marcinkowski is a little bit irked that Wells didn't do so. Because he really lays the slapdown on Victoria Toensing in this post at No Quarter. He starts by reminding her (and who should have to remind Toensing of this, after her rants about Clinton?) that perjury is a crime.
Second, to allege that there first must be an underlying crime to bring a perjury charge is flat wrong, and every first-year law student knows it. Perjury is itself a crime, period. Under the Grand Jury system, evidence is presented to a panel.
If the panel decides that a crime was committed, then an indictment is issued. If not, the case ends. Either way, the evidence submitted must be the truth. You don’t get to lie to a Grand Jury. That’s pretty simple, unless of course you feel that one should be free to lie and suffer no consequence - hardly an argument that should be advanced by an attorney and officer of the court.
Marcinkowski then explains a few things about spying.
To assert that Valerie was not covert is to assert that the CIA operates public branch offices overseas. Victoria, here’s a news flash for you - there are a lot of people in this world that don’t like the United States in general and the CIA in particular. Anyone in the CIA traveling overseas would be as nuts as your op-ed to reveal that association. CIA officers and offices are placed all over the world. I really don’t recall the CIA crest adorning any office or being listed in any embassy directory. Victoria, the CIA is a spy agency, it is full of spies who spy on objects of interest to the United States. There are no non-covert spies.
To add a gloss of legitimacy, Ms. Toensing erroneously cites the law as requiring the covert agent to have had a “foreign assignment,” then concludes that Valerie was not “stationed” overseas.
Nice try. The law uses neither of these descriptions as a basis for defining the criminal act of disclosing the identity of a covert agent. The law only requires that the agent have served overseas within the preceding five years of his or her disclosure. CIA officers may very well serve overseas by meeting with secret sources in third countries.
The fact that they may be “stationed” or “assigned” to Washington, D.C. does not prohibit them from serving overseas by actually engaging in clandestine operations in other countries and returning thereafter to this country.
Would the purpose of the law designed to protect our agents operating overseas be served by distinguishing between the two scenarios? If so, then Ms. Toensing, who claims to have assisted the Senate Intelligence Committee in drafting the law, did a very lousy job.
And finally, he hits the right note of seriousness about a office of the court making false statements.
Rules of professional conduct for attorneys around the country make numerous references to truth telling both inside and outside the courtroom, e.g. “…an advocate must disclose the existence of perjury….” or, “…a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person…”
That about hits all the right notes, huh?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not necessarily - if it's a hung jury, Fitz can retry and unless it comes out the jury was 10 - 1 for acquittal, he probably will.
I am wearing jeans today, also....
What does that say about me, Jerilyn??
That you're hung up? ROFL!
Ref #35. Is a unanimous jury required in order to acquit?
ROFL...Yeppers, I am hung up.
Whoda thunk this verdict would take so long??
How long after a guilty verdict does an appeal have to be filed?
and
How long after an acquittal does the prosecutor have to
re-file the case?
~~~~~~~~~
Think about this going into the 08 elections -- God help us.
Agreed that it can be retry, but for the time being Libby walks.
Would Fitz retry?
I'm not sure. He got a very favorable ruling on the Andrea Mitchell testimony.
Unless, of course, you're either of the Klintoons...
Lindsey's has random spinal syndrome .. ;)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://corner.nationalreview.com/
The Next Detainee Fight [Ramesh Ponnuru]
Senators Jon Kyl and Lindsey Graham vowed to fight their colleagues Pat Leahy and Arlen Specter over whether captured enemy combatants should be able to go to court to challenge their detentions.
Congress last year deprived the detainees of that privilege (or right, depending on how you look at it), and a divided D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Congress's decision.
Graham says his side has the votes to sustain a filibuster.
03/01 12:40 PM
~~~~~~~~~
Why doesn't Arlen just trade places with Joe Lieberman and get this over with?
If they can not all agree to either of these then the jury is "hung", basically a statement that 'no unanimous decision can be reached'. At that point a retrail can occur, but does not have to.
I think the retrial would happen before the same judge - the only way Mitchell gets called is if Scooter is convicted and they get a better judge at appeal. And Fitz was somewhat suckered this time into believing Libby would testify; he (and the judge) will know better next time.
Besides, look at his rebuttal. This is not about convicting Libby; its about trying to "get" Bush and Cheney. He gets to stand on his soapbox again.
Not sure of the time limits.
Money says that he gets nailed on at least one.
This first sentence and the growling picture of Cheney tell you all you need to know about http://www.firedoglake.com/. Those inclined can read the rest of the scurrilous comments they praise by Sidney Blumenthal.
~~~~~~~~~~
As we wait for the jury to deliberate, I think it is time we all admit that our Vice President — who is at the heart of this trial — is seriously insane. On the heels of the off-his-meds Blitzer bit, he is making himself an international menace of Dr. Strangelovian proportions. Honorary blogger (and FDL Libby trial companion) Sidney Blumenthal:
I would bet the jury has a really hot game of Monopoly in play
I have quite a few things I'd like to personally say to Jerilyn.
wasnt Sidney somebody once?
Hmmmmmmm..and what would ole Sid say about Clinton's performance on Fox News Sunday.
HE was leaning forward in his chair, jabbing his finger at Chris Wallace, and his face was turning red.
All Cheney did with Wolf was refuse to answer some questions...and tell Wolf he was being rude.
Big difference...but, of course Clington is GODDDDDD in Sid's world.
What? You think Cheney is insane? Where did you hide that DNC koolaid to get in the door?
I can understand a unanimous requirement to convict, but I don't see the unanimous requirement to acquit.
A jury of 12 individuals gives a good cross-section of one's peers. You have a right to be secure and not to be deprived of your liberty without due process. One doubter in that group would be a good way of preserving those rights.
On the other hand, if you have a good number of folks on your side, then there clearly is doubt about one's guilt. There is no such thing as a right of the prosecution to be proven wrong before they are wrong.
If we have a jury that is 11-1 in favor of Libby's innocence, then it is definitely reasonable that he is innocent and should be acquitted. (10-1 now that one juror is lost.)
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.