Replies

On May 26, 2006, Libby's defense team told the judge that they had located "five witnesses who will say under oath that Mr. [Joseph] Wilson told them his wife worked for the CIA." Do you suppose that the defense team was then acting in bad faith? And why do you suppose that Joe Wilson didn't come out and flatly deny he told others that his wife worked for the CIA at that time? Perhaps because he had done so?

And yet they didn't proffer any of those witnesses, even to have the judge deny them. Who are they? Where are they? Does the representation by a lawyer convince you of the fact of what was stated, when they have completely failed to offer such evidence?

Former General Paul Valleley would likely be one. I have not been watching this case all that closely and have no clue about the rest. I have no idea if the judge denied the witnesses because they had no ties to Russert. And, yes, a representation by a lawyer in open court is good enough for me.

If you think Joe Wilson is a doe-eyed innocent who told nobody that his wife worked for the CIA, I've got a bridge to sell you. When directly asked that question, he's never issued a simple denial. What would you infer from that?