The Judge issued three orders in the Lewis "Scooter" Libby case today. The first two are no big deal. One set a schedule for subpoenaing jounalists, filing objections to the subpoenas and holding a hearing in April on the objections. No further court permission must be sought before either side issues the subpoenas.

The second order denied a request by Libby that Fitz not be allowed to continue filing ex parte affidavits with the court. (Ex parte means one-sided -- only the party who files it and the judge get to see it.)

The third order indicates to me that Libby is going to lose his request for being provided with the Presidential Daily Briefings, and even the documents he will receive will be for a much shorter time period than he had requested. I have uploaded the two page order here.

At today's hearing in the Scooter Libby case, Patrick Fitzgerald told the defense the White House recently had turned over to his office 250 pages of e-mails from Dick Cheney's office.

Is Cheney in trouble? Jason Leopold reports:

The emails are said to be explosive, and may prove that Cheney played an active role in the effort to discredit Plame Wilson's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a vocal critic of the Bush administration's prewar Iraq intelligence, sources close to the investigation said.

Sources close to the probe said the White House "discovered" the emails two weeks ago and turned them over to Fitzgerald last week. The sources added that the emails could prove that Cheney lied to FBI investigators when he was interviewed about the leak in early 2004. Cheney said that he was unaware of any effort to discredit Wilson or unmask his wife's undercover status to reporters.

At today's hearing on Lewis "Scooter" Libby's motion to compel discovery, Libby won one round and lost another. While he prevailed on his request to have his handwritten notes turned over to him, he lost his attempt to learn the identity of a government official who told two reporters that Valerie Plame Wilson worked for the CIA.

To defend himself against criminal charges, however, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby does have the right to copies of all the classified notes he took as Cheney's chief of staff from spring 2003 to spring 2004, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said. Libby sought the notes to refresh his memory about matters he was handling while discussing Plame with reporters and when questioned by investigators about those conversations.

....Walton's decision to continue to protect the anonymity of one administration official, whom Libby's attorneys described as a confidential source about Plame for two reporters, one of them apparently Washington Post Assistant Managing Editor Bob Woodward, is a blow to Libby's case. Defense attorneys had said they needed to know the official's identity and the details of his conversations with the two journalists to show that Libby was not lying when he testified that many reporters knew about Plame's identity. But Walton said the source's identity is not relevant, and there is no reason to sully the source's reputation because the person faces no charges.

So, Woodward's source talked to two reporters. Was the second reporter Walter Pincus or Bob Novak?

While lawyers for Lewis "Scooter" Libby yesterday moved to dismiss the Indictment against him claiming irregularities with the appointment of special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, the Judge yesterday issued an order asking both sides for more information related to Libby's motion to compel documents, scheduled to be heard today.

In response to the court order, this morning Libby's attorneys filed this response. They also asked to supplement the record with this letter from Kathleen Kedian, deputy special counsel.

One thing I noted in a brief review of the Libby's pleadings on the document issue is the continued emphasis on Libby's faulty memory. Team Libby says it has spent months researching the principles of memory. It sounds like there could be a battle royale at trial between psychological memory experts discussing the three phases of memory -- the acquisition stage, the storage phase and the retrieval phase. I'm looking forward to this, having studied it extensively with two of the nation's leading experts, Elizabeth Loftus and Gary Wells, as it relates to eyewitness identification.

As for Libby's motion to dismiss, Reddhedd at Firedoglake analyzes it here and here.

This made the rounds of legal message boards today -- the Scooter Libby Defense Trust website. Check out the folks on his advisory committee. And the introductory message:

Since September 11, 2001, Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been one of the unsung heroes in fighting the war on terror, working diligently and making countless contributions on some of the most critical life and death issues that our country has faced. For the past five years, Scooter Libby served selflessly as an Assistant to President Bush and as the Chief of Staff and National Security Adviser to Vice President Cheney.

But Scooter's great service to our country has now been cut short, and his good name attacked. A distinguished group of friends, business leaders and former government officials have joined The Libby Legal Defense Trust to help Scooter defray his legal costs from the recent charges. We hope you will join us in supporting this effort.

If you find that moving, there's also a link where you can sign up to donate money.

Update (by TChris): Raw Story has the goods on the site's origins.

Jane at Firedoglake asks whether Cheney had the authority to declassify the NIE report so it could be leaked to reporters in an attempt to shore up support for the Iraq War or discredit Joseph Wilson.

The Wall. St. Journal tries to answer the question today. Shorter version: He probably does, but it's very sleazy.

The implication from the disclosure that Mr. Libby had authority to discuss sensitive intelligence matters with the press "is that the White House -- the vice president -- has been using his declassification authority as a way to advance the administration's political agenda," said Mr. Aftergood. "In other words, information that supports the administration's position on Iraq or whatever is selectively declassified and other information is not. That's not a criminal offense, but it's kind of sleazy."

My view on why Libby is seeking classified information (it's not to blame Cheney) is here.

Rep. John Conyers has sent this letter today (no link yet, received by e-mail from his office) to Bush and Cheney seeking answers about Murray Waas' reporting yesterday that Cheney or others authorized leaking classfied information to reporters.

Dear Mr. President and Mr. Vice President:

Yesterday, the National Journal and AP reported that the Vice President's former Chief of Staff, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, had testified to a federal grand jury that as part of an effort to discredit Ambassador Joseph Wilson and defend your Administration's use of prewar intelligence, he had been authorized by the Vice President and other White House superiors to leak classified information to journalists.1 Moreover, correspondence filed by Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald also reveals that Mr. Libby has asserted that he had been authorized to disclose to the media a still-classified portion of a National Intelligence Estimate about alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons to the media.2

The New York Times, Washington Post and Associated Press are both reporting on Murray Waas' National Journal article disclosing that Patrick Fitzerald mentioned in a January 26 letter to Libby's lawyers that Libby told the grand jury he had been authorized by his superiors to disclose classified information to reporters.

The prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, said in a letter to Mr. Libby's lawyers last month that Mr. Libby had testified before the grand jury that "he had contacts with reporters in which he disclosed the content of the National Intelligence Estimate ('NIE')," that discussed Iraq's nuclear weapons capability. "We also note that it is our understanding that Mr. Libby testified that he was authorized to disclose information about the NIE to the press by his superiors."

Fitz's full letter is available here. (pdf) An earlier letter from Fitz to Libby's lawyers regarding their discovery obligations is available here. Both letters were were filed by Libby's lawyers on January 31 as exhibits to his Motion to Compel Discovery of Rule 16 and Brady Material in the Possession of Other Agencies (pdf). Check out footnote 4 on pages 3-4.

Bump and Update: Libby's lawyers deny he would try to blame higher-ups as a defense strategy. [link fixed]

Sen. Kennedy comments on the Cheney aspect to the story:

"These charges, if true, represent a new low in the already sordid case of partisan interests being placed above national security," Kennedy said. "The vice president's vindictiveness in defending the misguided war in Iraq is obvious. If he used classified information to defend it, he should be prepared to take full responsibility."

********
Original Post (11:00 a.m)

Murray Waas breaks new ground again in the Scooter Libby case: Cheney and other top Administration officials authorized Libby to release classified information in the summer of 2003 to counter Joseph Wilson's charge that Bush misrepesented intelligence information in order to make the case for going to war.

Lewis Libby had a court hearing today. His trial is set for January, 2007.

Raw Story analyzes the Libby filings from January 31 and reports that Libby's lawyers say his superiors authorized the Valerie Plame leak.

Former federal prosecutorElizabeth de la Vega opines why Rove is not off the hook.

Continuing from my post below, here is today's unsealed information in the Judith Miller case from the newly revised opinion (pdf):

With respect to Miller, the special counsel seeks evidence regarding two exchanges with I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff and National Security Adviser: first, an in-person meeting in Washington, D.C. on July 8, 2003, and second, a telephone conversation on July 12, 2003. Before the grand jury, Libby testified that although he had previously learned about Wilson's wife's employment, he had forgotten it by July 8 and recalled no discussion of Wilson during his meeting with Miller. (I-105, 134-35, 279.) As to the July 12 conversation, Libby stated, "I said to her that, that I didn't know if it was true, but that reporters had told us that the ambassador's wife works at the CIA, that I didn't know anything about it." (I-208.) Because other testimony and evidence raises oubts about Libby's claims, the special counsel believes Miller's testimony is "essential to determining whether Libby is guilty of crimes, including perjury, false statements and the improper disclosure of national defense information." (8/27/04 Aff. at 28; see also id. at 1-2.)

There's movement in the Scooter Libby case today. Tom Maguire has the basics and the news links to Libby's latest attempt to put the media on trial. I just downloaded the filed documents. Here is what Libby is seeking:

1. All documents and other information reflecting knowledge by any news reporter or employee of a news organization of Valerie Plame Wilson's possible affiliation with the CIA or her role in connection with Joseph Wilson's trip to Niger prior to July 14, 2003.

2. All documents and other information reflecting any mention of Valerie Plame Wilson in any communication between a news reporter and a government official, another news reporter, an employee of a news organization, or any other person prior to July 14, 2003.