
I've been inspected, see-lected, accepted and di-rected. Here I am, gang, to welcome you to Firedoglake's pregame coverage of the Libby Trial, live from the Prettyman federal courthouse in Washington, DC, courtesy of the Huffington Post.
Actually, for all the levity, entering a federal courthouse is deadly serious business. I've been poked and prodded and shepherded through something like a big MRI tube, and even had to give up my Treo at the front desk, having as it does a camera function attached. Oy. No indulging my addictions.
All the security is a stark reminder that the end result of these proceedings could involve a man having a door close behind him at some point that he cannot open, wherein he loses his freedom, much of the control of his life and much of his lifelong identity, his place in the world. He may or may not be innocent. For all the sports metaphors (that picture above is a hat tip to my Met fan homeboy, Patrick Fitzgerald), this is deadly serious business.
Nothing has begun yet, other than a bunch of press people assembling in the media room. I don't have access to the courtroom today, though we do have a courtroom pass: while voir dire proceeds, and jurors are being interviewed, only two pool reporters have access to the courtroom itself. This is a mixed blessing: I don't have access to anything other than closed circuit television to observe the days's events, but I also have online wireless access (thanks to the helpful intervention of courthouse staff – booyah!). If jury selection takes as long as late Thursday afternoon, then I'll take my turn on press pool duty in the courtroom, but it may not last that long.
The screen in front of me is a large digital flatscreen divided into four boxes, four camera views of the courtroom. One camera appears set on Judge Walton's seat at the bench, one on the witness stand, one at the attorney's lectern and one covering the courtroom itself from a wider angle.
My approach to your coverage will be informed by my training in clinical psychology. Yes, for the process of jury selection, you get a shrink's eye view, with the caveat that in my professional life, I don't specialize in forensic matters or jury selection. I will sustain writing under my online pseudonym out of respect and deference toward my clients in real life: I keep my blogging separate from my professional life.
I'll be back later if and when I have anything to report. So far, everyone has been acting normal, pretending not to notice my paisley moo moo and feather boa.



242 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Fitzgerald just took the podium and introduced his co-counsel staff. Judge Walton is convening the proceedings.
Fitz!
Pach!
Justice!
May justice reign.
Thanks much, Pach — have been looking forward to this for weeks.
Judge Walton is priming the potential jurors on the reasons for and purposes of his coming questions. His tones are stern. Like any federal judge, he’s taking firm control of the room.
EPU’d, but worth repeating here:
On the opening day of this trial, I’ve got to say that, along with hundreds of others, I was first drawn to fdl because of this same subject – the intentional sliming of Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson by the White House. And, possibly, the intentional takedown of Brewster-Jennings as an intelligence gathering tool, but takedown nevertheless. I’ve learned so much about this subject here, and have been linked to others who were also very knowledgeable about aspects of the case and their ramifications.
Over the past 18 months, I’ve watched this site change, grow, teach and evolve. What a great place!
Thanks, everyone. Let’s hope this trial has a lot of positive unintended consequences for the rule of law and the process of government oversight.
Now off to get ready to return to work/school after the Holidays.
Pach
I am SOOO looking forward to this live blogging
Thanks for doing this
Walton telling the potential jurors not to be angry with the lawyers for the questions forthcoming. “If you want to be angry with anyone, be angry with me.” He’s also warning the jurors not to discuss with anyone at all, including other potential jurors, what questions they are asked or their answers. They are also warned not to have any contact with any media coverage of the case, including reading any newspapers, radio, etc.
No hemp shirt? No hackey sack? Great picture of the Mets broadcasting crew btw. Lindsey Nelson rocked, even if he did cover Notre Dame Football!
Although this trial will be chock full of juicy revelations, sadly it has “PARDON” written all over it. Futility, thy name is Dubya.
Digital LSD
Have they sentenced Libby yet or am I being a tad too impatient?
snarkoff
The potential jurors have a sheet of boxes they need to check off in response to the forthcoming questions.
First questions have to do with whether the potential jurors know any of the government’s attorneys, and then they’ll get to defense counsel and the defendent. He’s introducing each lawyer by name, and an FBI agent.
Pass the popcorn!
I’m glad my 18 month FDL investment didn’t turn out to be a sunk cost.
Thanks to our gracious hosts and equally accomplished commenters.
Go get ‘im, Fitz!
Twisted -
For this Red Sox/Notre Dame fan…you got it backwards.
Ain’t that Kiner and Murphy too?
I’m glad Pach enlightened me…method to the Mets madness.
Now, ‘Play ball!’ (And no throwing sand in the ump’s eyes, this time.)
I have to say, having been in both Team Libby and Team Fitz’s shoes in my legal career, this is the point where you feel like your stomach is somewhere down around your shoes and, at the same time, you have this weird need to kick someone’s ass, but you have to dial it back about 20 notches because jury selection is all about being pleasant to the potential jurors, lest they form a poor opinion of you before the trial even starts.
It’s very much like having a job interview — with a hundred or so strangers that may or may not get to know you over the next few days. It’s a weird experience. And I’m so happy to be having it vicariously instead of having had to suit up as a trial attorney this morning.
Thank you Pach, Jane, Christy and all for this historic participation and recognition in the acceptance of citizen journalism. It is appreciated.
Next questions about strong feelings about the Bush administration, positive or negative, that might keep jurors from giving a former admin member a fair trial. Jurors listening attentively.
Next question about Wilson the general outlines of who is Joe Wilson, and Plame. . . a summary of what the case is “supposed to be about,” in Walton’s words. He’s presenting the general outlines, and asking if anyone personally knows anything about this case.
Second question asks if people have heard or read anything about the case in the news media.
Next subpart asks if there’s anything they’ve just heard that might affect their abilities to be a fair and impartial juror in this case.
Can’t we just put them all in jail? Where are all the other investigations the Democrats promised?
pac, are you kidding me? lindsey, ralph and bob? and you’re saying fitz is a mets fan?
as tim mccarver might say, oh baby.
a great, great portent.
Thanks so much for the color, Pach, very happy you are covering this for us.
For other FirePups and newbies joining in, you may also want to set up bookmarks with these resources:
And now back to your regularly scheduled live blogging at Prettyman federal courthouse in Washington DC…
I appreciate your comments here, Pach, but I’d rephrase that last sentence if I were you. “I keep my professional work for my clients in real life separate from my professional blogging, out of deference to both my clients and my readers.”
You’re a pro, Pach – even (or especially) when you’re behind a keyboard.
One thing, though, about your Treo. You really ought to see someone about that addiction. Maybe someone could recommend a good counselor . . .
;)
Cool! Jury selection is loads of fun. No, really. I was sued by a crossguard last year. (don’t ask. She lied like a snake in the grass in a ditch in a canyon) When the jury was selected, I was really impressed at how seriously everyone took it. I couldn’t figure out at first why each lawyer was rejecting or accepting jurors but patterns started to emerge. Fascinating.
They picked a good one for me. It took them about 5 minutes to reach a verdict of not guilty on the first count. The other counts were dependent on the first and it was over. Yeah!
So, I am dying to know what questions they are being asked. What patterns emerge from each side?
rumi at 16 — Believe me when I say that we were all really thrilled at being given the opportunity to have a press pass for this. The details and minutiae that Jane and I and Marcy and Pach and everyone else have been delving into for the past few months on this case…and watching them all come spilling out into the public courtroom…who could possibly turn down an opportunity to watch it happen?
I am so proud of FDL. Pach, I am refreshing as fast as possible to get every detail I can.
Kiner’s Korner….. great memories!
dmg @ 19
In Flatbush, the Irish are Mets fans, and the Italians are for the Yanks. Sorry, there is no in between.
Next question asks if they know anyone else in the courtroom the recognize, including anyone, including other potential jurors.
Then he’s going to name potential witnesses or anyone who may be referred to in thgis case, even if they don’t end up being witnesses. They can check their boxes if they have heard of the person AND what they’ve heard makes them feel they could not be fair and impartial:
Floyd Abrams
Spencer Ackerman
David Addington
Mike Allen
Michael Anton
Kurt Armfeld (?)
Richard Armitage
Daniel Bartlett
Robert (Bob) Bennett
Deborah Bond
Massimo Calabrese
Andrew Card
Jay Carney
VP Richard B. Cheney
Matthew Cooper
John Dickerson
Jack Eckinroad (?)
Eric Edelman
Douglas Feith
Jennifer Feild
Ari Fleischer
Donald Fierce
Allen Foley
Carl Ford
Jared Francisco
Paul Gigot
David Gregory
Robert Grenier
_____ Grossman
Steven Hadley
John Hannah
Bill Harlow
Deborah Hayden
Seymour Hersh
Richard Polk ?
John Judis
Glenn Kessler
Walter Kransteimer
Nicholas Kristoff
This is definitely bonafides for the netroots. Congratulations to FDL for getting their foot in the door and deep appreciation to Huffpo for all their assistance in this.
That would be Mark Grossman (State Dept.) with the blank, Pach. That’s my guess.
Doug Feith? Really?
Oh, I couldn’t be unbiased, glad I’m not in the pool.
Deborah Kuntz
Emily Laramour
Adam Levine
___________
Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Kathy Martin
David Martin
Mary Matalin
Chris Matthews
Jennifer Mayfeild
Scott McClellan
Dean McGrath
John McLaughlin
Judtith Miller
Jennifer Millerwise ?
Andrew Mitchell
Robert Novak
Neil Pateo
Timothy Phelps
Walter Pincus
Colin Powell
Doug Feith — well, that is interesting…
Wow. The stupidest man on the planet made the list.
Pach,
Are you, like, the only blogger reporting from the courthouse?
What are the other “press” (OK, press) doing as they watch those screens?
Do they have little computer thingies that they use by their thumbs?
Or do they have real laptops?
Can you live-blog from there?
Do tell.
This is so, ya know, kewl!
(OK, back to my boring law professor persona.)
Only to the letter “P” so far…
The suspense is wonderful!!
Jen Millerwise, VP press secretary
VP Dick Cheney. . . . heard of him? Can you be impartial towards him?
Simple answers to simple questions. Yes. No.
Dana Priest
Condoleeza Rice
James Risen
Karl Rove
Newt Royce
Tim Russert
David Sanger
Craig Small ?
Hannah Seimers
Bruce Schwartz
William Taft IV
Joseph Tate
George Tenet
Evan Thomas
Larry Thompson
Paul Valery ?
Joseph Wilson
Valerie Plame Wilson
Paul Wolfowitz
Bob Woodward
These are all journalists, FBI, CIA OVP, etc.
Prof — I’m betting that any other press had to give up their “little computer thingies that they use by their thumbs” just as Pach did with his Treo, unless they have an older or lower level device. Newer ones have cameras in them and would be banned.
Does the “One Percent Doctrine” apply during the jury deliberations?
Would the fact that former or present members of the Bush admin impair your ability to be fair and impartial jurors?
Would any of you have any difficulty fairly judgeing the believability of any former member of the admin?
Do any of you have any feelings or opinions about VP Cheney that might . . .. make you unable to be fair in assessing his believability (paraphrase).
kemo @ 26
and for the jews of flatbush, of which i am one, it goes like this:
brooklyn, jewish, liberal, national league.
I can’t believe that I am sitting in an office less than 10 miles from the great Fitzy. May his aura help me to get some work done today…not.
Wolfowitz?
Jeepers, this is going to be really amusing; the comb-licker made the list!!
Would any of you have any difficulty fairly judging believabiity of member of news madia?
Next question asks about ability to be fair regardless of race.
Bill Taft IV was counsel at State, I think — am trying to remember his connection with Grossman on all of this, or whether it was through Fred Fleitz (who is not, I note, on the list…hmmmmmmmm…)
Next he’s introducing concepts such as burden of proof, reasonable doubt, presumption of innocence. He’s asking if anyone has any problem with or problem following those principles of law.
Next, anyone here think a defendent should have to prove his innocence?
Christy — here’s Taft’s Wikipedia entry; note the external link at the bottom (just look for the name Novak).
Anyone here that feels that merely because defendent has been charged, it probably means he’s guilty?
Next. . .. every defendent has the absolute right not to testify. . . you can’t hold any such decision against defendent. Anyone have a problem with that or following it?
Defendant not required to call witnesses. If that happens, would you conclude on that basis that he’s guilty?
There are only two members of the press who are inside the courtroom today — the jury selection is pretty wide-ranging and potential jurors will be taking up much of the space in the courtroom along with the lawyers and investigators. As I understand it, Judge Walton has 100 potential jurors in the initial pool for selection, with another 100 on stand-by if the initial pool is pre-emptively weeded out due to bias or other issues prior to a full jury being seated.
Judge Walton has two seats reserved for press inside the courtroom, and there is a press pool reporting from them for all the folks with passes. Pach is in the WiFi press room adjacent to the courtroom that has video and audio feed, and is reporting from there. He’s done a detailed description of the room above in the comments. Just FYI for everyone.
Pachacutec @ 41
No, I think I’ve got an fair take on him that isn’t biased by emotions, but one based on facts and his pattern of behavior: if he’s talking about restoring the power of a monarch to the Executive branch, he’s telling the truth. If he’s talking about respect for the other two branches of government, he’s selling something.
If you are selected, you must be willing to discuss the facts of this case with your fellow jurors after the case is submitted. Anyone here think they can’t do that?
yknow i have to say, i couldn’t get through that list without having extremely strong opinions about the worth of some of those folks. i’m wondering how many members of the jury pool could.
Hmmmm…MSNBC just had video of the arrival of Libby and his team this morning. Libby selected a striped brown tie for day one of jury selection. Interesting choice.
If you are selected, can you make your own independent assessment of guilt or innocence?
If selected, you will be told that if governemtn has proven beyond a reasonable doubt, it will be your duty to find defendent guilty. If not, you MUST find defendant not guilty. Would anyone here have difficulty following that?
PAUL VALERY, FRENCH POET, 1871-1945
Entre le vide et l’vnement pur,
J’attends l’cho de ma grandeur interne,
Amre, sombre, et sonore citerne,
Sonnant dans l’me un creux toujours futur!
I have long suspected he had a hand in this!
An unbiased jury in a nation divided 70/30. Tough job.
Pachacutec @ 17
Did they ask them about online sources? When I was in the jury pool for the Moussaoui trial, they specifically asked whether we’d read about the case in online news sources in addition to news media.
(We only had a few oral questions, including the one about knowing anyone in the courtroom, and then had a written questionnaire that took about two and a half hours to finish answering.)
striped brown tie = intends to appear traditionalist and helpful like a subordinate might be, not a power tie.
Nuts, now I have to turn on the TV and check cable…
dmg @ 53
I get the feeling that those that haven’t followed this story very closely over the past few years have very little knowledge of most of these people, outside of VP, Rice, Russert, Matthews. Just thinking about my wife – casual news watcher – she would definitely fall into this category.
Is there anyone who believes that everyone’s memory is like a tape recorder and that therefore everyone can remember what exactly what they were told or said in the past?
Is there anyone who feels that a person could not honestly say something they believe to be the truth even if they said something different several months earlier about that same matter?
Is there anyone who believes that it is impossible to mistakenly believe that a person was told something by one person when in fact they were told that thing by someone else several months earlier?
Is there anyone who believes that it is impossible to strongly believe a person has memories about something when in fact it is determined that those memories are inaccurate?
All question paraphrased.
So far, everyone has been acting normal, pretending not to notice my paisley moo moo and feather boa.
Surely, though, with your trained clinical eye, you can detect their jealousy.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 54
Brown is the color of choice for attire for many salesmen.
Swopa — you notice he didn’t mention he was “wearing” an iPod filled with Celine Dion tunes either?
Pach, per everyone else, really appreciate the live blogging.
Rayne at 59 — Here’s the tie of choice today. Very interesting, don’t you think? It says money, along with being a subtle power tie — very Scooter persona, I’d say. Interesting that this is the first impression tie.
From Marcy:
MSNBC’s Howard Fineman, meanwhile, is concerned that the trial will expose an “unhelpful” side of the relationships between government and media, telling Hardball’s Chris Matthews, “It’s gonna lay out all kinds of details about how things work that are not necessarily going to be ennobling or helpful to us in the future
(Raw Story)
Oilfieldguy — yeah, salesmen want to appear non-threatening and helpful, friendly, hence the brown suits and not navy blue or charcoal gray.
Looks more like B.S. warning to me.
Rayne @ 39
Could be, though reporters and organizations who do this more regularly would no doubt know about the restrictions, and might keep non-camera devices for the purpose.
Oilfieldguy @
33
o hecque! can’t stand it. I wooda failed right offn the bat by standing & cheering !FITZ! to start the day.
among the must-knows, OFG, who’s yer pick for stoopidest? I can’t get it pared down past 7-8 min. help me out here, puleeze.
Pach, Christy, Huffpo, all: you’re just golden!
I won’t need any caffeine today, thas for sure! Woo Hoo.
Would any of you have trouble fairly judging the credibility or believability of a law enforcement witness?
Have any of you or your friends or relatives served as or applied to become a law enforcement official, including parole officer, private guard, policeman, prosecutor (wide net)?
Have you or any of your very close friends or relatives had interactions with the police that might impair your ability to give either side in this case a fair trial?
Are any of you lawyers or have any of you studied law?
Have any of you or your close friends or relative served as a defense attorney or worked on defense team or applied to do so?
Any of you have any feelings about prosecutors defense lawyers or people charged with crimes. . . affect your ability to. . . etc?
Ever applied to (friends, family) intelligence job, including CIA?
Ever had access to classified information?
Ever participated in any kind of anti-crime or neighborhood watch group?
Any of you ever participated in any inmate assistance or ex-offender programs?
Any of you ever particptaed in efforts to increase or lessen punishment of people convicted of criminal offenses?
Ever served as a grand juror or petit juror in criminal case?
Christy Hardin Smith @ 54
I think someone told him it makes him look taller.
Have you (close friends or relatives) victim, witness to, or charged with a crime, no matter what happened afterward?
It’s cool that you’re doing this and I’m looking forward to the Bob Murphy style “happy recap” at trial’s end.
Shocking to see Lindsey in such a conservative sports jacket. But that picture looks like circa 1962 so it must have been before he went to live on that commune.
Eeewww…thanks for the pic, Christy; that tie says he has problems with inadequacy.
It’d hit the Salvation Army bin at my house.
Pachacutec @ 27
Pach, you really gotta lay off those cinnamon rolls in the morning. Your thumbs need all the help they can get in the next days.
;-)
(Hugs, hugs)
Pachacutec @ 41
SNORK!
omagawd. i wouldn’ last 30 sec.
Whew. . . fingers bleeding here. . .
At some point, you will be casting judgment on one of your fellow human beings. You will be required to do this. Do you have an religious, moral or philosophical beliefs about that which might prevent or impair your ability to cast judgments?
Do any of you have any health problems that might impair your ability to serve as a juror?
Any of you taking medication that might prevent your ability to pay full time attention to evidence?
Any of you have problems hearing or seeing?
Any of you have problems either understanding or speaking English (good thing he didn’t ask about typing!)
Rayne @ 39
Sure, they would.
But what’s Pach using? (Treo with camera disabled?)
Adie @ 71
Doug Feith. He was given that title by General Tommy Franks, I believe.
Walton estimates trial will take 4-6 weeks. Will you have problems serving that amount of time? Court takes some factors into account: we don’t want you here if you don’t feel, due to time pressure, that you can’t give this your full attention or diligence in decision making. However, we all have obligations as citizens to serve as jurors. . . (lots of explanation of question by Walton). Basically, can you put up and stick with it, and I’m making you think about this very seriously, given civic duty.
So far, the questions seem pretty “boilerplate” . . . but that witness list sure is interesting!
Memo to the FDL Safe House: stock up on hand lotion and bandages. A good masseuse might not be a bad idea either.
Prof — Pach must be on a laptop, can’t imagine him keeping up with typing on anything else.
Pach — fabu job, very speedy typing!!! I’m very impressed!!!
Christy — Team Libby is going to call Paul Vallely to discredit Wilson and Plame…what’s your take on this? don’t rush, we have lots of time.
Walton has some humor. He’s going into this sidetrack about the Russian jury system. Making points about importance of participation in jury system, and the stuff Americans take for granted.
whoo boy, 4-6 wks! Come on, Justice!
Thanks Pach and FDL and Arianna!
OT – CNN – Webb will deliver the Dem response to Chimp’s SOTU – back to work now
Walton has some very likable African American cadence to his style.
twolf1 @ 87
hooray!
Finally– a wise decision by the dem leadership.
Oilfieldguy @ 81
He had a carnal adjective to go with the stupidest. “Plan Of Attack”?
More warning to stay away from any media coverage unscreened by Walton (newspapers), and don’t watch the news.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 66
He’s trying not to be the icon. He is trying to not be the center of attention.
twolf1 — thanks for that.
I’d put money down that Webb ASKED for the opportunity to follow the SOTU. Damn, I might actually have to watch that wretched POS SOTU #7.
Lucky number 7. ;-)
another OT.
Obama is in.
Did everyone step out of the Federal courhouse for a cup of Starbucks?
Now, with all that box checking and questioning reviewed, Walton asks lead counsel to approach the bench. They shut our sound feed for that.
RevDeb @ 67
This doesn’t mean they will be witnesses. This means their names are expected to come up in the trial during important testimony. Odd that Bush’s name is not on ht elist.
OFG 81 thanks!
‘ere. y’wanna be a dear & pass these bandaids on thru to Pach? He.must.not.falter!
Now the jurors are filing out to another room so each can be reviewed, by potential juror numner, individually.
Doug Feith was always my choice of the original leaker. Booyah!
I think they are shooting for credibility.
dmg @
42
yea, but they left town and the Mets came too late for me.
Pach — you might be the best live blogger on the planet. Kudos to you and your fingers.
Hey Pach, what is Fitz wearing?
Pachacutec @ 88
I was impressed with his recent reversal of his opinion on the sentencing disparity between crack and coke sentences. He saw it as unfair to the extra harshness of sentence.
fwiw: my father is a flatbush irishman and a yankees fan.
ccmask @ 104
Boring blue fed suit. Lights are not friendly to his, or anyone else’s, male pattern baldness.
Shock and awe.
lhp 92
*SNORT!*
…um…if you say so…., bu-
okay, i’ll shuddup, promise….
lhp,
from Marcy’s post on TNH there is a link to a pdf that has it noted correctly, “Potential Witnesses and Names that may be Mentioned during the Trial”
The list is annotated with names and who they are. Can’t tell the players without a scorecard. This is the scorecard.
Christy, looseheadprop — have we seen the proposed voir dire questions before?
I found something, but I don’t know if we’ve already seen it or if it’s even relevant at this point.
Jack Eckinroad is an investigator with the FBI, according to Google. Nothing on Kurt Armfeld.
Kiss me, I’m Irish!
ccmask @ 113
I eat potatoes too!
Pach, kudos (as in the French “kudos”, or as the Greeks might say it, kudos).
Others: Does anyone know whether there is any blogging of the Libby trial going on, anywhere else on the blogosphere?
Christy, I think you said that Pach’s description of the scene is in a comment on the previous thread. I need to find that and link it, or maybe someone else can link it here.
looseheadprop @ 92
Sneaking a look before driving to work.
Paraphrasing Gen. Tommy Franks, that’s got to be the stupidest f*cking tie on the planet. Did Doug Feith pick it for the Scooter?
LindyH @ 112
scorecard says Armfeld is FBI also
Jury selection by Thursday? I don’t know about that.
Would any of you have any difficulty fairly judgeing the believability of any former member of the admin?
Wow, I guess they don’t want to impanel a jury after all.
While the fine points of lawyering are discussed, a way of life that allows lawyers to exist is tipping on the edge of the cliff. The only thing that matters is impeaching Bush and Cheney.
I mean, I admire what you’re doing here at FDL, but isn’t this like discusssing deck chair assignments on the Titanic?
Oilfieldguy @ 114
I hope they are freedom taters, ofg
Peterboy @ 102
yea, but they left town and the Mets came too late for me.
we all run the risk of making bad choices early in life. the door is always open.
Oilfieldguy @ 114
but do you root for the mets?
neil @ 119
my sentiments exactly. They may need a change fo venue to Machu Pichu.
Deborah Bond, Jack Eckenrode and Kirk Armfield are all FBI agents; they are mentioned in the proposed voir dire that I’m looking at right now.
Must have handled the original questioning under Ashcroft, pre-grand jury.
or possibly Mars.
Props to FDL for getting us to this place with so much back story. It has been a long ride.
As to pardon, if you were going to do it, wouldn’t you do it before the trial–before some ugly shit came out?
That’s what they did with Cap the Knife after finding out that letting Ollie and Poindexter go to trial wasn’t so nice.
Oh, and I love the Boa, Pac.
sifgh. i hate being a coding dunce.
[Mod Note; it’s fixed. Refresh your screen]
No action at the moment. Court in a break. I’ve been chatting with David Corn and David Schuster. The later likes us. The former, not so much.
The one potential witness might be Major General Paul Vallely, USA (Retired). He is now a consultant that works a lot for Fox. I played golf with him once – he had a better score than I did – not sure how he is involved in this case. Will be interesting to find out.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_E._Vallely
Christy Hardin Smith @ 66
That is the ugliest f**king tie I have ever seen. What tie is Fitz wearing?
Wow, exciting! Thanks Pach and FDL.
OT: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..lus_stings
Nothing like the incompetence of selling surplus military parts to Iran…twice. Isn’t it evident by now that these f$#ks don’t have the slightest clue how to run a govt? All politics all the time.
Adie @ 109
I didn’t mean to suggest it was going to work!
It’s just he is not wearing the bright red “look at me” tie that we will proabably see at ssome pointRevDeb @ 110
exactly my point. There mere fact they are mentioned does not mean they are going to testify. It may mean that some testitmony or other evidence will be about them. I didn’t want folks to get too excited about future testimony thta may not come to pass
I have gone to many Met games in my time. I still have a big shoebox (Keds!) with my cards in it. Tommy Agee, Cleon Jones, Ron Svoboda…
Oh–and I love the Boa, Pac.dmg @ 122
yea, but they left town and the Mets came too late for me.
we all run the risk of making bad choices early in life. the door is always open.
DMG:
than I moved away to new england and had to defend my honor…so I stayed with the pinstripes.
Wow, this lighting on the camera is bad and unforgiving.
If I did not know better, I’d think Fitz was wearing a white yamulka.
lina @ 106
lina, shoot me an email, it might not be too late for him ;-)
Pachacutec is my new hero.
Rayne @ 111
Most of them probably come right out of the Federal judges Bench Book. I lonked to it inthe School Daze post.
The rest came in the two sides proposed Voir Dire questions which were filed in hte cour docket and have been discussed a bit around the net. I forget if they are hosted anywhere
The whole world is watching…but don’t sweat that…
Rayne @ 44
eeeeewwwww! have you seen that old wolfie tape?! he didn’t just LICK it. ohhhhhhhh YUCK! Tw’ that image plus scooter’s tie, personally, i’m glad there’s no video of the trial. *blergh*
Here, finally got the PDF file for the prosposed voir dire questions to open up, could only crack an HTML file.
I think this is what Team Fitz will ask the jurors during the next 2 days; YMMV, consult Christy, looseheadprop, Pachacutec and emptywheel for the definitive on this subject.
Peterboy @ 127
The difference is that in Iran-Contra, there was no pending civil litigation. If Libby gets pardoned, then he can’t plead the fifth in the civil suit filed by the Wilsons – and everything will have to come spilling out then.
Not a pretty picture for the folks who work at 1600 PA Ave.
Fitz is said to have a photographic memory.
Pach, (I hope you don’t mind the nickname,) where is Scooter sitting at the defense table?
Thank you for the great blogging. I’m really enjoying it.
-S
ccmask @ 134
Hmmm, $50 for the box?
John at 120 — No, this is what we like to call justice. It may not be swift, but exposing all of the little nasties to sunlight via a forced public reckoning under oath is an awfully good first step in accountability. And we aren’t changing our coverage, so please stop asking us to do so — we feel that this is important for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which is that Cheney will be forced to answer questions publicly and under oath if and when he is called to the stand, along with a whole host of other individuals tied directly to the Office of the Veep — which will lead to a whole host of follow-up opportunities for Congress, should they choose to avail themselves of them and/or for us.
This trial has never been simply about the charges filed or the verdicts rendered. It is about exposing the festering cronyism and the mess that is this Administration to public scrutiny — and I say more power to the judicial system for having the ability to do something that the Republicans in Congress have failed, miserably, to do for the last six years. If you want speed, you’ll have to go with the Queen of Hearts (verdict first, trial afterward) in Alice in Wonderland. In the US, the presumption of innocence is taken very seriously — and the methodical presentation of every piece of evidence in this case regarding every single person who goes on the stand under oath is going to be one, long indictment of the way the Bush Administration conducts its business.
It’s about time someone did this work. And I an grateful for the opportunity to witness it. So, I’m sorry, but I’m not walking away from my seat at history for anything in the whole world — this is important detail, and we’re going to cover it as thoroughly as we possibly can because someone ought to do so.
Peterr @ 143
Interesting, Peterr. But can he plead the fifth after this trial–he will either be guilty or not then and there is no double jeopardy.
Redshift @
58
He made no explicit reference to blogs under his descriptions or questions about news media.
kemo @ 137
he’s 89 and demented. might have to let this one go. he switched to the yankees after the dodgers deserted him.
Adie @ 141
That tie is Irving’s way of trying to avoid the Jack “Yes, I’m a guilty mobster” Abramoff look.
John H. Farr @ 120
Lots of icebergs in the water, but they might miss the hull, or be too small the make a dent. This particular iceberg looks promising, and so we’re following its movements closely.
Pach, tell Corn to shove it.
Let’s see, $3 million defense fund…
$1 million for actual suit we are entering today;
$1 million for the firewall between the suit and OVP;
$1 million for Libby as compensation for time served once he’s done.
Libby was at the defense table. He stood up when the Judge identified him, but the angle was not good on the camera. We don’t have direct feed trained on the defense table or the prosecution table.
FOrmer Fed at 130 — My guess is that they would use Vallely as a potential impeachment witness for Amb. Wilson. He made quite the splash on Fox regarding his impressions of Wilson and things that he said Wilson said in a green room at some point — so it would be a “he said, he said” between the two, if Wilson is actually called to the stand by the defense (he has a motion to quash pending on his subpoena, unless there was a ruling on that while I was on vacation that I missed).
Christy
in re: tie of choice.
power? money?? SUBTLE????
OMG, yer not joking, are you?! I was firmly in the “Goodwill bin” camp on that one, but if you say so, I have yet another reason I’m just as glad to stay outta the stores save my money, egad!
Pachacutec @ 45
Huh? Is Scooter planning to play the race card?
Peterboy @ 135
we all run the risk of making bad choices early in life. the door is always open.
DMG:
than I moved away to new england and had to defend my honor…so I stayed with the pinstripes.
honor and pinstripes i’ve rarely seen in the same sentence together.
i apologize. couldn’t help myself. peace, bro. we’re on the same side concerning slightly more important issues, i’d wager.
Rayne @ 142
There is also a set of propsed questions from the defense. The judge picks an dchoses from the two sets, adds his own and changes them as he sees fit
rwcole @ 68
Good. Open that fetid sewer and all its slimy inhabitants to the harsh light of day.
ccmask @ 134
gee, that must be taking up a lot of space in your place. i’ll take them to the dump for you for, say, 100 bucks.
ah heck, what am i thinking? you’re a mets fan. i’ll do it for free.
In Salon today, Jonathan Turley says this case reads like a political parable of the seven deadly sins:
rumi @ 73
It looks like TV static to me.
Pachacutec @ 136
looks aren’t everything, Pach. *g*
lessee a pic of YOU under those lights, huh? huh? That “keeping my lives separate” stuff is getting old, now that you’re a star… and take off the clown hat & wig 1st.
Can I assume that the “us” referred to is their “us” and not our “us”?
lina, sorry about that. During the years 58-62, many fans were vulnerable.
No problem, DMG. (@159)
I like the Mets, but it is sort of like Woody says:
the heart wants what the heart wants.
I guess I line up exactly with Lina’s 89-year-old dad. The dodgers left and I got stuck with the yanks. Still feel that way and now I am living in Los Angeles.
(sorry for this digression–you other pups.)
LindyH @ 112
Eckinrode was the primary investigator on the case. He stood behind Fitz at the 10-28-05 presser. Retired from the case in 2006.
Peterboy @ 168
I think it very charming how the Mets memories are getting almost equal billing with the trial.
looseheadprop (160) — found the Team Libby proposed voir dire questions (PDF format).
Hmm.
This question was amusing:
There’s no b. to that, BTW.
Sadly, I have to leave now and will be away from the computer until after the lunch break. WIll play catch with you all then.
Christy I’m gonna email you my cellphone # in case you need anything while I’m away from the screen.
Peterboy @ 168
completely understandable, and of course, each must find his own path. am glad you don’t root for the dodgers NOW.
ccmask @134
My mother took me out of 7th grade to go to the ‘69 World Series. I’ve been hooked on the Mets ever since.
Andy McCarthy, who has been admirably loyal to Fitzgerald (at least relative to his NROnline colleagues) wrote a sweet essay about going to the ‘69 games as a kid. I’d get the link for you but my computer crashes when I go to the NRO site. Seriously.
Rayne @ 171
What an incredilby insight provoking question! I really like that one. I will bet you a nickle Pat wrote that one himself.
Longworth House Building being evacuated
headed out, will check back later for the play-by-play.
let’s go FITZ! let’s go FITZ!
CNN reporting that the Capital Police have ordered the Longworth House office building evacuated
EvilDrPuma @ 164
Maybe the camera is just picking up his aura.
Things could be worse. You could be a Chargers fan.
Peterboy @ 168
yep. even with his cognitive impairment, Dad is still pissed at the dodgers.
looseheadprop @ 139
The proposed voir dire questions (submitted by Libby’s side) are here:
http://www.pegc.us/archive/US_…..061117.pdf
dmg @ 173
Gotta say dmg, it doesn’t make me many friends, but I pull for the Bums against the Yanks.
looseheadprop has our next primer upstairs: Part Deux on Evidence.
In Salon, more Jonathan Turley on the seven deadly sins:
OT: Betcha didn’t see this coming. Another Thug presidential wannabe, and he too is running as a REAL CONSERVATIVE.
Cue Shatner!
Thank You, Thank You, Pachacutec !
Massimo Calabrese ?!?! – mangilo con un cucchiaio! I’m sure your SO wont mind an up close and personal – for the sake of citizen journamalism ;)
22 deg here – redefining blerggh, and these damn toobz aren’t cooperating !
SubwaySerenade @
10
I Argue that if there was going to be a pardon, it would have happened by now. The point is to keep the dirt out of the public eye, not Libby out of the slammer.
Libby would have pleaded guilty, Bush would have pardoned, the media would have murmured, “National security, of course we understand.” And that would have been that. Instead we get a circus. More popcorn, anyone?
kemo @ 183
well, sure, the yanks are the Enemy of All That Is Right and Good. you back any crew what goes up against it.
no one said fandom was easy, but at least the moral issues are pretty clearcut.
Wise decision….
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16651765/
Rosie @
3
When justice reigns, we all get wet.
Sparkles the Iguana @ 169
Did he go to KPMG?
Pachacutec @ 136
Watch yourself. You’re speaking about a national treasure.
Thank you Pach, I feel like I’m there.
BTW, Scooter’s tie is butt ugly.
rumi @ 192
Yes.
I should have known you were a psychologist! Your writing is great! Wonderful for us non-lawyers. Keep it up!
Rosie: My grandmother used to take me all the time. I have a feeling she was more into the Shaeffer beer than the game :))
looseheadprop @ 92
He’s trying not to be center of attention with that very busy tie? Reminds me of a lie detector graph!
neil @ 193
I think Pach has just never seen a halo before. ;)
This morning on NPR, I heard Cheney say that Scooter is “one of the most honest people I know,” or somesuch like that. THAT says it all.
Pach, thank you for the Scooter update. I was wondering because of looseheadprop’s mentioning the other day that we should watch to see where he’s sitting at the table.
I’m sure Scooter thinks his tie is signaling that certain carefree elegance to the jury. I’m surprised he didn’t wear one with aspens on it. (Maybe he’s saving that one for when Judy shows up.)
In the meantime, thank you for the Patrick Fitzgerald color commentary. I was dying to ask that question!
-S
If you have a moment, could you elaborate on Corn’s absence of affection for us? I found that a bit vague.
Also, will the good judge Walton call for a lunch break? At what time? I Don’t Want To Miss A Thing.
bg @ 200
It sounds like that may have been a clip from Cheney’s interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 156
Christy – Thanks for the memory jog – I do remember something about the green room. A “he said – he said” between these two will be interesting. I have never met Mr. Wilson, but seeing him on the tube tells me that the jury will see two “large sized personalities” on display.
BTW, the work you and Pach and all the FDL/Huff Po team are doing here is absolutely historic – don’t let folks like John waste your energy – unless it invigorates you!!!
Keep up the great work!!!
Ed*ard Teller @
116
Lordy, that is one ugly tie. I think that is designed to set up a defence of insanity.
Neil @202, it goes something like this, Corn gave cover for Vicky Novak (Time reporter), who allowed Rove’s lawyer to use her as an alibi for his client’s faulty memory in his GJ testimony. Turns out V Novaks husband is Corn’s tennis buddy.
Sparkles the Iguana @ 195
My tinfoil is glowing red. Is that normal? Should I seek an extinguisher or will the glow subside, unsubstantiated?
Rayne @171
Team Libby came up with some thoughtful questions. At least when Team Fitz wins, it won’t be because Libby had inadequate representation.
Former Fed @ 121.
One thing that I’ve learned from working with lawyers for many years is that tough questions posed to them do not neccesarily work in favor of the questioner. John’s question, while on its face somewhat dismissive of the importance of this trial, gave Christy a forum to spell it all out. Without the question, the context may not have been explored so thouroughly. Ask the right person the tough questions, and you’ll get the best answers.
Former Fed @
130
Vallely shot his mouth off to the so-called right-wing press (WorldNetDaily) that Wilson had revealed Plame’s NOC status to him before it was revealed by Novak.
My overall impression of Corn is that his reporting was OK on Plame at first. But over time the lure of the cocktail wieners proved too strong.
kemo @ 153
I think we already have. That’s why he doesn’t like us.
kemo @ 206
I remember that development. I read about it in Corn’s blog. So was FDL critical of Corn point of view on the issue?
NO POST FROM PACH, IS COURT ON LUNCH RECESS?
Neil @202, it goes something like this, Corn gave cover for Vicky Novak (Time reporter), who allowed Rove’s lawyer to use her as an alibi for his client’s faulty memory in his GJ testimony. Turns out V Novaks husband is Corn’s tennis buddy.
-
Can you provide any facts?
Pachacutec @
129
Pac, please tell David Schuster that I am really impressed by the job he has been doing on MSNBC and to keep up the good work of good journalism.
The implication that this is about someone’s tennis partner is silly. Corn is a serious journalist just as FDL columnists are serious bloggers. If there is a tiff, it is likely to be substantive such as two people having a different understanding of the facts.
kemo @
206
I thought it was basketball, not that it changes anything
When is court scheduled to be on lunch recess?
neil @ 216
I agree. That is why it got hard to take him seriously. Please refer to archived threads here at fdl if you wish.
I read it was 12:neil @ 218
I read it was 12:30-1:30 Eastern this morning.
-S
No not when the implication is that Corn’s relationship with Novak was somehow NOT disclosed?
From:
http://www.davidcorn.com/archi…..ened_b.php
I’ve known Viveca Novak for close to 20 years, and this all squares with my nothing-but-positive impression of her. (Interest disclosed: I used to regularly play basketball with her husband, a career labor lawyer, whom I always had trouble guarding.) Will Novak’s slip (if that’s what it was) of the lip end up bolstering Rove’s defense? If so, it’s not because she aimed to do that, and, it seems, it’s not because she did anything wrong.
Posted by David Corn at December 3, 2005 06:37 PM
Corn has been V. Novaks friend for twenty years.
No small wonder Corn might not gush as a FDL blogger – he cares about facts not BS and gossip.
You couldat least get your facts straight and a quote or two? You might start sounding serious your-own-bad-self.
justice seeker @ 221
I don’t have any interest in the disagreement but I have to ask what facts are in the example you gave? I note the disclosure as any disclaimer that otherwise warns bias. Is that the point? Other than that, all I see is opinion of character based on (admitted) bias.
Is the Ex-WAPO water boy there?
Jack
I did not mean to imply he witheld any facts, only that he was too close to the story to be impartial. Sorry if I offended.
Strategerie @ 220. Thanks for info.
justice seeker @ 221. I’m not sure where the hostility is directed but thanks for the links.
kemo @ 206
Yeah, but we were highly critical of him prior to that incident. Don’t you remember the “pajamas media” (I think that’s the name) affiliation? Matter of fact, I’m not sure I’ve ever heard anything nice said about Corn here no matter what he says or writes. To my knowledge, he’s never gotten an “attaboy.”
rumi, kemo — it would be reasonable to expect certain parties with biases to drop in at FDL during the course of this trial. They will have chips on their shoulders, and expect their own offerings of opinions (theirs and/or others) to serve as adequate justification for whatever position they take. Witness the frequent sock puppetry that pops up from time-to-time at The Next Hurrah; there’ve been similar kinds of “guests” here at FDL, too.
Not worth the energy if they haven’t been following along; it’s not like this is a secret society and people cannot find adequate information laid out for them using search tools.
damn it, gotta get my facts straight: tennis is not the same as basketball…
kemo @ 224. No offense taken.
See all y’all after the lunch break.
That tie is Irving’s way of trying to avoid the Jack “Yes, I’m a guilty mobster” Abramoff look.
He must be going for the Charlie Brown “someone stole the ball out from under me” clueless victim look.
IF (and it seems to be a big if) they call MG Valelly as a witness to Wilson blabbing Plame’s name, how does that distract from the charges in teh case.
Sure, it backs up the ‘everybody knew’ meme, but even if everybody knew, it doesn’t absolve Scooter of false staements and perjury, does it?
Or is Valelly another one of the shiny objects they’re hoping to use to show that Scooters to sexy for his shirt?
Pachacutec @ 136
yamulka? Then he’s definitely national league.
So where is EW sitting during the trial?
That tie looks like an EKG.
I think Pach has continued LIVE blogging on the new THREAD. HERE
Looks like the media is going to be forced to cough up their “anonymous sources” secrets. LOL. This is going to cook the media overdone.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 147
Are we naive and deluded to believe that these
guys want their dirty shorts hung out for all
to see? Do we believe that this is for real
or some sort of Barnum and Bailey circus
and the performers have been selected
while the magician performs a little slight
of hand?
kemo @ 26
So what if you’re half-Italian, half-Irish?
Well then, you must be second generation.
rumi @
207
Sorry about asking the reporter for her psychological credentials. The answer to KPMG is the financing of the Afghanistan war through CIA via USAID hiring through KPMG in Canada. It had alot to do with Chayes and the planning. The people they were looking for were RPCVs. Like Wilson, Shayes, Chayes, etc.
So, now he does the forensics for KPMG? Maybe it’s like the movies.
When Wilson called Novak, after his friend tipped him off, Wilson refused even to speak about his wife. Wilson sounds like one careful person when it comes to his wife. He was familiar with the CIA rules. Fitzgerald needs to find a way to discredit these people.
Does anybody here even know the reason behind this trial anymore?
It is still all about NOTHING but the Conservatives chance to put a bunch of Journalists on the stand and blow them to credibility Hell right in front of us on TV. That is what it is all about; get the journalists out there and make them look even more stupid than they are.
You think Russert, Gregory, Mathews, etc WANT to have to swear to tell the truth and then face question after question about this case?
Good LORD; the Libby defense money is having a field day with this. He is raising millions to keep it going.