Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

More from Same author, different publisher ...

But Walton noted in his ruling that most of what he ordered Libby to receive probably won't be revealed to a jury. Any classified evidence that Libby wants to use must be approved by the judge after a secret vetting process established by Congress to ensure protection of government secrets. ...

Libby's lawyers originally wanted nearly a year of the President's Daily Brief, a summary of some of the government's most sensitive intelligence gathered on threats to the United States.

The lawyers want to use the briefings as the cornerstone of Libby's defense: to show that the former top White House aide had more important matters on his mind and could have easily forgotten or remembered incorrectly "snippets" of conversations he had about CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald opposed giving Libby any of the briefings and accused the defense of trying to derail the case by "greymail," a process where former government officials have forced dismissals of their cases because they threatened to reveal the nation's secrets at their trials.

"Neither party has it exactly right," Walton wrote.

Libby needs to know the gist of the intelligence briefings to put on a "preoccupation defense," the judge said. But, he said, the former White House aide should be able to refresh his memory by reviewing generalized versions of the intelligence briefings.

"It is inconceivable that the defendant's memory of matters of significance to him have totally vanished," Walton wrote.

The judge also rejected Fitzgerald's arguments that the intelligence briefings belong to the vice president's office and the CIA, two agencies that were not part of the investigation.

Walton said "there can be little doubt" that when Fitzgerald has asked either agency for help in his probe, there has been "a rather free flow" of information.

"These entities have contributed significantly to the investigation and without their contribution it is unlikely that the indictment in this case could have been secured," the judge wrote.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/3715415.html


10 posted on 03/10/2006 3:03:04 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt
Walton said "there can be little doubt" that when Fitzgerald has asked either agency for help in his probe, there has been "a rather free flow" of information.

"These entities have contributed significantly to the investigation and without their contribution it is unlikely that the indictment in this case could have been secured," the judge wrote.

The tone of the news article is slightly misleading. It isn't the "Bush administration" which is blocking the divulging of this material. It is the CIA. This whole mess is a matter of infighting between the CIA and the Bush people with the fire stoked by Fitzgerald.

These two paragraphs make it sound like the judge understands this!

24 posted on 03/10/2006 3:25:07 PM PST by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt
Thanks for the extended remarks.

"It is inconceivable that the defendant's memory of matters of significance to him have totally vanished," Walton wrote.

Isn't amazing how much more is expected of Republicans than of democrats like Hillary, Stephy, Hubbel, Didi, in fact all the clinton representatives who's memories evaporated under questioning?

48 posted on 03/10/2006 8:01:40 PM PST by Nomorjer Kinov (If the opposite of "pro" is "con" , what is the opposite of progress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt
""It is inconceivable that the defendant's memory of matters of significance to him have totally vanished,"

But it worked for the clintons......"I don't recall"....Vince Forster, Whitewater, Craig Livingstone, Rose billing records, the cattle futures. .....

Seems only thing shrillary can recall is what's in her Weseley thesis......

50 posted on 03/10/2006 8:52:49 PM PST by spokeshave (I'd rather go hunting with Dick Chaney than drive over a bridge with Ted Kennedy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt
"It is inconceivable that the defendant's memory of matters of significance to him have totally vanished," Walton wrote.

I would assume Libby reviewed his notes and is requesting only specific dates as observed in Post 41 to be of significance. In Post 46, Libby's concerns seem to revolve around information he requested during those times. This is where the charges of lying to the FBI come in? Sounds like he may have been seeking info regarding Plame and the Wilson trip but went about it in a roundabout manner? I'm beginning to wonder if Libby was not a lone soldier?

I haven't been following the case that closely and so please don't smack me if this is way off base. Perhaps, someone with better knowledge can sum it up for me.

66 posted on 03/11/2006 9:11:29 AM PST by Eagleami (Israeli Hero - Moses Hess - Communist Manifesto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson