Tag: Libby Trial (page 8)

For all Plameologists, and those that want to make heads or tail of the Scooter Libby trial, Marcy (Empty Wheel), who has been live-blogging the testimony at Firedoglake, has a terrific diary up at Daily Kos on Libby, potential witnesses, and problems with Libby's timeline.

Marcy agrees with me that Rove's testimony may be more problematic than helpful for Libby. And, she raises the possibility that since Fitz isn't calling Rove as a witness, he may not have turned over all of Rove's statements. Fitz has taken the position since day 1 that he's not obligated to turn over statements of defense witnesses, only those of witnesses he intends to call. (That wouldn't be acceptable in my federal District, which has a more open file policy, but each District is different.)

First, thanks to everyone who responded to my request for assistance with travel expenses for my trip to Washington tomorrow to cover the Scooter Libby trial this week. I just got my thank-you e-mails sent out.

I will be in the actual courtroom, sitting in for Christy of Firedoglake who did such a great job of providing observations and analysis last week. Together with Marcy's outstanding live-blogging from the media courtroom which reads like a line by line transcript (although she cautions it is not), FDL has provided coverage that makes the blogosphere shine.

Originally, I was just going to attend the trial Monday and Tuesday, but Christy has asked if I'd stay the full week, so I will be in the courtroom Monday through Thursday.

I think it's too soon to say whether Karl Rove will be called as a witness at Scooter Libby's trial. Michael Isikoff of Newsweek has a new scoop up telling us Rove and Dan Bartlett have been subpoenaed by Team Libby, but it's not known whether either will testify. Isikoff think it got more likely Rove will testify after Ted Wells gave his opening.

The possibility that Rove could be called to testify would bring his own role into sharper focus—and could prove important to Libby’s lawyers for several reasons. Rove has said in secret testimony that, during a chat on July 11, 2003, Libby told him he learned about Plame’s employment at the CIA from NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert, a legal source who asked not to be identified talking about grand jury matters told NEWSWEEK.

It must be true that trial lawyers never sleep when they are in trial. Check out the motion (pdf) Team Fitz filed yesterday alleging a new motive for Scooter Libby to lie to investigators and the grand jury. Shorter verson: Libby knew that he had signed non-disclosure agreements in connection with his employment and was afraid that by telling the truth that he disclosed Valerie Wilson's employment with the CIA to reporters, he was in violation of his agreement and would be fired and lose his security clearances.

Fitz alleges:

The government intends to prove that, at the time he made the charged false statements, defendant was aware that, if Ms. Wilson’s employment status was in fact classified, or that Ms. Wilson was in fact a covert CIA officer, in addition to potential criminal prosecution under a number of statutes, defendant faced the possible loss of his security clearances, removal from office, and termination from employment as a result of his disclosures to New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper.

It was a big day in the Scooter Libby trial. Marcy (Empty Wheel) did an outstanding job of live-blogging all of it at Firedoglake, here and here. Three witnesses, former CIA employee Robert Grenier (Tenet's "point person on Iraq",) Libby's former CIA briefer Craig Schmall and Cheney's former press aide Cathie Martin all testified they discussed Joseph Wilson's wife with Scooter Libby before July 10, the date Libby spoke with NBC's Tim Russert.

Libby told investigators and the grand jury he learned of Joseph Wilson's wife from that July 10 conversation with Tim Russert. Russert says he didn't know about Wilson's wife before Robert Novak's article identifying her came out on July 14.

We also know that it was Vice President Dick Cheney who told Libby in June, 2003 about Wilson's wife supposedly being behind Wilson's trip to Niger. And that former State Department Undersecretary Marc Grossman also discussed Wilson's wife and CIA employment with Libby in June, 2003 -- before Libby discussed her at meetings with Judith Miller that month. And that Libby told Ari Fleischer about Wilson's wife during lunch on July 7, 2003, the day before Fleischer left for Africa with President Bush.

Wells tried to show that the memories of all of the witnesses, like Scooter's, were faulty.

A huge thanks to Empty Wheel who live-blogged Fitzgerald's and Ted Wells' opening statments this morning over at Firedoglake. Wells will continue his statement this afternoon.

Shorter Version so far: Libby says the White House set him up to take the fall for Karl Rove.

Attorney Theodore Wells, in the opening statements of I. Lewis Libby's perjury trial, said Libby went to Vice President Dick Cheney in 2003 and complained that the White House was subtly blaming him for leaking Valerie Plame's identity to columnist Robert Novak.

''They're trying to set me up. They want me to be the sacrificial lamb,'' Wells said, recalling the conversation between Libby and Cheney. ''I will not be sacrificed so Karl Rove can be protected.''

More below the fold, to be updated throughout the day. Also, if you'd like your own place to discuss the trial, you can use the TalkLeft Libby Forums. Free registration is required as they are on a different part of the TL server than the blog.

The jury has been seated in the trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Christy at Firedoglake reports the jury is composed of:

9 Women, 3 Men
10 Caucasian, 2 African American And one of the Caucasian women may or may not be Hispanic — there's some uncertainty there.)

....The alternate jurors are summed up as 2 African American women, 1 white woman and one white man.

As for occupation:

Empty Wheel, Pachacutec and Christy of Firedoglake have been doing a great job of live-blogging this morning's jury selection in the Scooter Libby trial.

The magic number of needed jurors is 36, so that the Government can have 8 peremptory challenges and the defense 12. This will leave 16 jurors, 12 regulars and 4 alternates.

The jury pool has been directed to return at 3:00 pm. At that time, each side will exercise their peremptory challenges. Since no reasons for the strikes need be given, it will take each side just a few moments to regroup after hearing the other side's challenge and the whole process should take well under an hour. Then we will have a jury. Opening arguments begin tomorrow. My thoughts on openings in the case are here.

More below the fold:

Today was another day of jury selection. To get the full flavor, you need to read Pach at Firedoglake who lived-blogged the whole thing. His updates are in the comments here and here.

His reporting makes you feel like you are in the courtroom, witnessing the questioning and hearing the jurors speak.

Recaps are one thing, but it's great to get the play by play.

He'll be live-blogging tomorrow too.

Murray Waas has a new article on Scooter Libby up at HuffPo. He recounts yesterday's N.Y Times profile and an earlier WAPO profile, and asks,

How could it be that Libby--- seemingly such a stickler for the rules-- outed Valerie Plame, as prosecutors claim in their case against him?

There is always, or course, the possibility that Libby will be found innocent of any and all of the charges. He should be entitled, as should any of us, to a presumption of innocence.

As Murray notes, people don't become loose cannons overnight. He gives two possibilities:

There has been a dearth of reporting on who got deals in the Scooter Libby case. Who agreed to testify for the Government only with the assurance that they wouldn't be charged with a crime? Similarly, who, if anyone, copped a plea to a minor or lesser charge in exchange for testifying against Libby.

Why do I think there's at least an immunized witness? First, there almost always is in cases like this. Second, Patrick Fitzgerald says as much in his Response to Libby's tendered jury instructions:

The government proposed that the Court give 15 additional D.C. Form Instructions: .... 2.23 (Testimony of Immunized Witness) (if applicable);

I think the "if applicable" part means Fitz may or may not call an immunized witness, but if no one had been granted immunity, there'd be no need to ask that this instruction potentially be given to the jury.

Jury selection has begun in the trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Pachacutec from Firedoglake is in the media courtroom, blogging away (make sure you read the comments where's he is posting continual updates.)

The Judge has read the jurors the list of potential witnesses. Here they are: