Fitz explains that the reason for the break was, the GJ testimony on tape was about to discuss David Sanger, and in reading ahead ("because I have no patience") Fitz had realized some material that should have been redacted was not. So they're fixing that right now.
And away we go…
NOTES: (1) This is not an official transcript — just a very loose paraphrase, at best — so don't treat it as one. Even exchanges that look like verbatim dialogue are just the gist of each question and each answer, with any key phrases or pauses included as best I can. (2) My own notes will be in parentheses and/or italics. (3) I'll tell you the time at the end of each update; expect about 15-20 minutes before the next one. The hamsters that run the servers will appreciate it if you don't refresh excessively in the meantime. (4) I didn't write the book on the Valerie Plame outing — but you should buy it, if you haven't already. If you're wondering who this "Swopa" character is, my previous writings on Plamemania can be found here.
(Fitz brings up Libby talking with David Sanger of the NYT on July 2nd. Shows note saying "talking points – Hardball 7/14, wrong statement," along with others saying "Shapiro – Adam Levine knows," "Eric Sorenson," and "fax a station")
F: Can you clarify these talking points for us
L: First three were points Matthew got wrong, fourth was that Wilson report wasn't definitive, fifth is unclear, maybe that Hadley was told (what?), not Tenet
F: Have you talked to Russert since July 14th & Novak column about uranium/Niger
L: (pause) No
F: Have you talked to him about leak investigation
L: Once, to ask if he would talk to my lawyer
F: Did you talk to him about substance of investigation
L: No
F: Did you talk to him about whether he would testify
L: No
F: Have you talked to people other than your lawyer about what happened in GJ last time
L: (pause) no
F: Have you talked to VP about any of your interviews or testimony
L: Only told him that I would be absent for this general matter
F: Have you spoken to Karl Rove about the investigation since it began?
L: No.
F: Getting back to Russert, you mentioned that you felt you were learning about Wilson's wife for the first time. Any reason why you wouldn't have told VP about this new fact?
L: No.
F: Any recollection of doing so?
L: Question is, did I have time to mention it, didn't have any private time until Air Force Two when we were focused on uranium matter
F: When you spoke to Rove, you remember it being the 11th
L: Yes, was later in the day, I was checking to see if Tenet statement was locked down
F: Being later in the day makes it likely that you didn't talk to VP
L: Yes, private time is usually in AM, don't see him later sometimes
F: Why would it have to be private?
L: (I was distracted and missed this answer)
F: If you were told that Rove left on vacation the morning of the 11th, would that make it more likely that conversation was on 10th or morning of 11th?
L: Probably, WH is indoors, time can run together
(walks through Cooper story)
F: Did Cooper say he had heard about the wife before, when you told him
L: Don't think so
F: Did Miller?
L: Don't think so.
F: Did Kessler?
L: Don't know if I told Kessler that day, but whenever it was, don't think so.
F: So no reporter told you they had already heard about it when you told them?
L: (pause) No.
It's 11:08.
(long discussion of who might have been present during each Libby call on July 12th. Fitz brings up October 12, 2003 Washington Post article.)
F: This article mentions WaPo reporter was called on July 12. You had spoken to Kessler of WaPo on July 12. Did you think article was talking about you?
L: No. Did realize I had talked to reporter on July 12.
F: You didn't think you had told him (quoting from column) that Wilson trip was boondoggle set up by his wife.
L: No, because I said the opposite, we discounted report because findings weren't definitive, nothing about boondoggle
F: But VP had expressed concerns about this, as you say.
L: Our main concerns were other points.
F: I'm not concerned about other points. Was boondoggle one of the points, among others?
L: Actually, Kessler raised it with me (hubbub in media room) Asked me, "was this a boondoggle?"
F: Did you agree?
L: Felt it might have been a boondoggle in the sense of wife arranged trip, but not really in a bad way, we had not discounted report because of it
(Libby then gets very vague about when he had this conversation with Kessler — was it in the van, was it at a later time, was it a later date, was it even Kessler. Nothing is certain.)
It's 11:23.
(Tangent about whether Libby told FBI about his phone call — calls? — to Judith Miller; missed his answer)
(Tangent about Andrea Mitchell at Ford birthday party)
(Fitz pulls out WaPo 1×2x6 article)
This article mentions Time magazine story talking about Wilson's wife, and WaPo implied you were a source for the Time article. You showed this to your staff?
L: Yes.
F: And you had spoken to Mr. Cooper, right?
L: Yes.
(Walks through Libby having Cathie Martin chew out Cooper for not using full quote, causing separate July 17 web article — Libby had 1×2x6 article sent to Time with note saying "Have you seen this," but Libby says was just regarding use of full quote)
F: So, three articles — WaPo 1×2x6, and you had talked to Cooper, Miller, and perhaps Kessler before the 14th. And you had spoken to Russert, who had told you about the wife. And you had spoken to Rove Did you think this article — "two WH officials leaked to six reporters" — might be about you?
L: I thought it might be mistakenly referring to me.
F: Around this time, WH spokesman Scott McClellan made a statement that Rove was not involved in this. Asked about you and Elliott Abrams, McClellan drew the line and stopped at Rove. How did you learn about this?
L: I was at WH and this came out, and I spoke to WH chief of staff Andy Card and McClellan and they said, we don't want to go down a whole list. I didn't think it was fair since I hadn't talked to Rove, but I accepted it. Then later it became clear there was no "list," really just me and Karl. So I wanted something said about me.
F: Did you tell Card and McC about Rove speaking to Novak?
L: No.
F: Why not?
L: Was more focused on having something said about me, also Rove said Novak had told him, so neither of us had told it to Novak
F: As you sit here today, is anyone in WH aware that you and Rove talked about Novak?
L: I don't think so.
F: Did you seek VP's help to have Card & McC clear you?
L: Yes, at some point (discusses what he said to VP)
F: Recall if VP ever called Card & McC to make this happen?
L: I hope he did. He may have told me that he did, but I don't recall.
F: Did you tell VP that you had talked to Cooper about Wilson's wife?
L: I don't know that I did.
F: So when October comes around and headlines are saying two officials may have called six reporters, did VP understand that you had called reporters and discussed Wilson's wife?
L: (quietly) I don't recall
F: In late September or October, did you bring it to VP's attention?
L: Went to him and said I didn't talk to Novak, added I learned about it from Tim Russert. He tilted his head a bit. I may have said that I talked to other reporters.
F: You're not sure?
L: I don't recall. What was important was telling him I did not leak to Novak, and I heard it from Russert, who said all reporters knew it.
It's 11:42.
F: You say VP tilted his head when you said you learned it from Tim Russert. Did he say, "No, you learned it from me, remember?"
L: No.
F: Did you tell anyone else about talking to those reporters?
L: Well, Cathie Martin knew about Cooper.
(Fitz brings up the haiku Libby wrote for McClellan — "it was ridiculous about Karl, it is ridiculous about Libby," etc.)
F: Why deny leaking classified information, instead of talking about Wilson's wife?
L: Because that's what was being talked about. Perhaps I felt that was what people thought I had done.
F: Did you tell McClellan, "So you're not surprised, I spoke with Cooper, Miller, Kessler," etc.?
L: No.
F: Why not?
L: Thought it was more important to deny being Novak source, and leaking classified info
F: Did you tell President?
L: No.
F: As far as you know now, does President know you talked to those reporters?
L: I don't think so
F: And you never told VP?
L: I'm not sure.
F: You were precise in telling him you weren't source for Novak, but not precise saying you weren't source for others
N: I'm not sure
F: Did you think this was something Pres and VP would want to know? (Fitz continues to grind Libby into the dirt over why he didn't tell VP or Pres. Libby says at some point he asked if Cheney wanted to know more, and VP said, "I don't need to, I know you weren't a source for the leak.)
L: Did tell VP when investigation began
F: What did he say?
L: Didn't say much. Something like, "From me?" and tilted his head.
F: Did you tell him about Cooper, Miller, Kessler?
L: No.
F: And you had another conversation after this?
L: Yes, and again offered to tell him everything, he said he didn't want to know
F: Was this before you were interviewed by FBI?
L: Yes, think all conversations were.
F: Was investigation why Cheney didn't want to know details.
L: Not what he said.
(Fitz shifts to Cheney notes on McClellan haiku… Libby slow to accept that "this Prez" is crossed-out part)
F: What is meat grinder?
L: The fact that press was talking about me
F: And incompetence of others?
L: Uranium claim getting into SOTU in frist place, then early in July, backing off. One or both.
F: Maybe the delay in issuing Tenet statment?
L: I wouldn't have speculated on that.
Time for a break, both on tape and in real life.
It's 12:09. New thread when we come back. 39 minutes of tape left.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
FITZ! ; )
FITZMAS !!!
Go FDL and Godspeed.
Here’s an invitation. When the server load gets high, as it DEFINITELY will when Timmeh hits the stand, you may wanna join some of us at a live-chat on another server, over at
http://gabbly.com/firedoglake.com
It’s a fun kinda chat-app. Rayne introduced it a few days back. Sometimes we get harrassed by hackers, in which case we retreat to a private redoubt. Others of us know how to get its URL to you without publishing it here.
C U over in chat-land, if you wanna join us. Remember, because Gabbly runs on a completely other server somewhere on the ‘net, using it’ll take some of the heavy load off the FDL servers while Timmeh is walking over hot FitzCoals later…
Good morning ladies and gentleman, great job as always!!
EPU’d in prev thread:
***
Christy or Marcy, could one of you who are in the know talk about the obstruction of justice charge. Fitz has been all over the lying charge, but I’m not seeing much that points to obstruction. The mantra that “it’s not the crime but the coverup that gets ya” and the lying points to the coverup, right? But somewhere I read speculation that Fitz knows who committed the crime (outing a NOC), but because Scooter wouldn’t give them up, that’s why he is charged with obstruction. Somewhere there must have been someone who knows who is guilty of outing Valerie, but Fitz is holding him/her back else how would the prosecution know?
***
Thanks FDL bloggers. This is the most fun I’ve had since 1974.
Good morning Firedoglakers! I’m finally back from my extended tour of Siberia–actually Michigan and Minnesota–and wanted to reiterate my thanks to Christy, Jane and the gang for the live blogging of the Libby trial. This coverage –and by the way, trying to take detailed notes of a trial is grueling!–has gone a long way towards filling the gaping hole left by the mainstream media. Looking forward to the Book Salon discussion of U.S. v. George W. Bush et. al. on Sunday!
NIE was not declassified, they threatened to jail jane Harman over talk about ‘classified material.’
Did I miss it or did Libby suggest that Wolfowitz had leaded the Intelligence Estimate BEFORE it had been declassified? Uh, isn’t that, you know ILLEGAL?
froggermarch @ 7
Yeah I caught that too, and had the same reaction, so at least you’re not alone!
Wasn’t it also illegal for Scooter to talk to Sanger about it on July 2? I thought the insta-declassification occurred several days later, right before Scooter was going to talk to Judy Judy Judy.
It appears Fitzy has a good case against the VEEP…
If the VEEP’s testimony (June 2004) conflicts
with Libby, or if Libby’s testimony with respect to Cheney diverges, doesn’t he have an obligation to bring charges or to clarify?
Jack
Me too! Mornin’, Maam.
Elizabeth at 6 — Good to see you in the comments! Looking forward to doing Book Salon with you on Sunday. :)
Thanks for all your work and the opportunity to be in the front row for this historic event. Love the comments! Riveting stuff!!!
Just sent another $50.07.
Bay State Librul @ 10
Cheney has yet to be under oath, so no, yet
I’m not sure we have an exact date pinned down on the insta-declassification (TM).
F: So no reporter told you they had already heard about it when you told them?
To borrow a phrase from the inestimable Jane Hamsher: “Libby is SCREWED!”
Makes sense that the Media Patsy (Russert) whom you most trust to faithfully disseminate (catapult, ahem) your propaganda should also be your willing fall guy as well.
Russert was not apparently willing to take the fall. Herein lies the dilemma.
“F: Have you talked to people other than your lawyer about what happened in GJ last time
L: (pause) no”
Now we can start expecting more Libby pauses… He knows by now he’s being pigeonholed into telling the truth or telling a lie with every question, so he is formulating the chess game now with every question.
So a (pause) before a Libby statement might well be translated into (give me a moment to figure whether and how I should lie about this)
Wonder if it was Cheney again he was NOT referring to? Surely Cheney’s people debriefed all loyal parties after the GJ, so future lies could be better aligned.
PunchPrincess, from last thread
Fitzgerald alleges that Libby obstructed the investigation because the lie he told was specifically designed to take the IIPA charge off the table.
There are two important aspects of the IIPA. You need to have learned the Agent’s identity through classified channels. And you need to know you are outing her when you do so.
By saying the mode of learning of Plame that was operative when he leaked Plame’s identity was Russert, and not Cheney, Libby takes the classified channel out of the equation. And by claiming he said, “I don’t know if it’s true or not” when he leaked to Cooper and others, he’s pretending he didn’t know full well that Plame’s ID was classified.
That’s teh narrow aspect of teh OBstruction charge. The larger aspect of it is the centrality of Dick and Bush. When Libby says he was authorized to leak the NIE, he’s lying (buy my book if you want to see hte logic). He was actually authorized to leak Plame’s identity to Judy Miller; they wanted to launder it through her, as the Admin had done with the aluminum tubes, so they could point every journalist to it, as if it were fact.
By telling the lies he is, Libby is preventing Fitz from getting directly to Cheney. That’s the wider obstruction here.
I think Fitz has Cheney anyway, but in such a way that it would raise constitutional issues if he went after him (for example, Cheney would just say, I declassified Plame’s ID, suck it up). So the only thing we’ll get, if we get anything furhter, is a Cheney Perjury charge. IMO, anyway.
Cozumel @ 15
If Cheney lied to investigators,it’s still a crime, oath or no oath. And what would he take an oath on, The Satanic Verses”?
Hackworth- you made me think of a new word I’m coining today-
“PropagEnda”
waddya think?
What happened to
“Mystery Witness”?????
Seriously, I don’t know.
You can laugh or send me a get-well card but please someone fill me in?
ADDan
Tap at 22 — LOVE it.
JEP @ 18
The pause is reflective of the fact that LIbby is realizing that he is 100% out of the loop as to what others in the admin are testifying to. I doubt there was any more talk among members of the OVP staff (unless by Libby on deep, deep background with the VP himself) at this point because he does not have a clue as to who he can “trust” to carry water for him or not.
Elizabeth de la Vega in the house!
Love your work! Thanks for all you do.
Hey, Christy, Swopa, Jane and Pach;
My brother who is computer illiterate has been watching over my shoulder, and he was asking if this blog will be published as a book after the trial, so “normal folks” can read it.
Interesting thought.
That would be the ballgame:
F: So no reporter told you they had already heard about it when you told them?
L: (pause) No.
curve666 at 23 — That was actually discussed yesterday afternoon. Fitz is thinking about using a DoJ attorney to explain some legal intricacies.
froggermarch @
8
Just one more piece of proof that the NIE story is a ruse.
They were leaking it without declassifying it–as Libby’s earlier leaking to Woodward proves.
It was Plame’s ID that had been “declassified.”
OOOOhhhhhhhhhh, MSNBC busily vapor-izing hour by hour. Look, shiny object…astronaut in diapers. Is she blonde?
Corporate media are probably harnessed heavily by their lawyers on reporting Libby…too many co-opted media people, per Pach’s genius post this morning….meanwhile…
Rudy’s wife thinks he’s hot….
Here is what Scott McClellan had to say on July 18, 2003:
Q: When was it [the NIE Report] actually declassified?
MR. McCLELLAN: It was officially declassified today.
According to Fitzgerald’s court paper – Libby disclosed information from the NIE to Judith Miller on July 8, 2003 – ten days earlier.
So, what was the official status of the report for those 10 days? If it was declassified prior to or on July 8, why was it only shared with Judy Miller, and not released “officially” until July 18?
IANAL, but In a nutshell
Libby’s lies made it impossible for Fitz to determine whether Libby (or Cheney, or someone Libby had told) had violated IIPA.
That’s obstruction.
Tap Duncan @ 22
I like it. Hope is all we’ve got. It was the last thing to fly out of Pandora’s Box.
Prairie at 31 — Correction — Rudy’s THIRD wife thinks he’s hot. Accuracy is a beautiful thing. *g*
JEP @ 27
Don’t forget all this erudite commentary
/Preen :)
(unless by Libby on deep, deep background with the VP himself)
Well, doesn’t that mean he lied when he said “no?” What I meant was that his pause was not to protect himself, but to protect the VP.
_____
I wanna hear Deadeye make that specific assertion unequivocally in public for the record, that mendacious prick. They keep tangentially proferring that, via the ostensible ‘unfettered classification authority’ of POTUS and VPOTUS.
_
JEP @ 36
That’s what I meant!
Christy Hardin Smith @ 35
The devil’s in the details, Christy!
BobbyG @ 38 — And then he gets pilloried in public opinion for obvious TREASON. Catapult THAT propagenda, assh*le.
Hey, gang…. Just listened to Nina Totenberg’s morning coverage of yesterday’s GJ tapes, etc. on NPR (still 7:35 a.m. here). Like Christy, I’m a longtime fan of Nina’s, and have been glad to see her animated about this trial. But in today’s report, it seemed like her sense of humor has picked up more than a little bit of fdl-type snark. Must be my imagination.
BobbyG @ 37
I know! And will a reporter have the guts to ask him about this when he is next interviewed (if he is). Better yet, I would love to see one of the WH press corps ask either Tony Snow or Bush himself…
emptywheel @ 20
So when Libby is facing jail time (do you suppose Judy’s orange attire would fit Scooter? /snark), and he decides to come clean re: Cheney, could Dick be charged? Could he be charged after 1/20/2009?
Hmmmm…isn’t it interesting how vague Liby’s memory gets when the details have something to do with Vice President Cheney? What a coincidence, I’m sure.
/snark
Tap @ 22 — propagenda. Word of the year! You deserve the Colbert Truthiness Award
Is Swopa (?) providing just highlights? What is happening during the times he is not reporting?
hackworth @ 34
Actually hope didn’t fly out, Pandora managed to close the box before it could fly away and presumably back to the gods.
PunchPrincess at 44 — The Vice President could be charged with a crime at any time. The Spirew Agnew precedent on tax evasion stands up on criminal charges for the Veep. It’s only the President where that gets very murky and unlikely. But for a Vice President to be removed from office unwillingly, that would have to be done through impeachment, as I understand it. So a Veep could be indicted criminally and stay in office until impeached or until s/he resigns.
Teller @ 42 — Ooh, the thought of Nina even MORE snarkier :) than usual gives me goosebumps. She better not get TOO snarky or the toady-sucking NPR cowards will boot her, though… :( Stick to yer guns Nina!!
O/T (but apropos) -
Another U.S. chopper down in Iraq. Seven dead.
_
What was the date Wolfowitz started leaking the NIE details? Are there three dates on this getting out, ie Wolfowitz, Libby, McClellan?
JEP 27
Oh you just KNOW it’s coming! *g*
Why else all the gathering up of related comments within their own neat little separate baskets a week or so ago. HEH.
I’d buy it!
oops – one thing at a time – back to lurk…
prairie @ 46- Thanks so much, I get a kick out of Colbert, I can only accept on behalf of FDL because they are the TRUTHIEST!!!!
Getting closer each day to a real life Col. Dickhe*d moment – “You can’t HANDLE THE TRUTH!”
truthWoodhall Hollow @ 43
If they’re playing GJ audio tapes, how does it work when Fitz or someone
– that is, how do the auditors at the current trial know what was shown, or underlined, or redacted, from the exhibits? Does Fitz give a description of what he’s showing, or is there a voiceover commentary, or what?
(new poster here – kudos to all at FDL for the incredible job you’ve done and continue to do!)
Funny, all this testimony only further proves the unbelieveable amount of information being leaked thru a tremendous number of administration officials. Wasn’t it Bush who was railing that he wants to find the leakers and make sure they’re “taken care of”??
Methinks he may need to “take care of” his whole staff, starting with the Veep!
President Bush – 09/30/2003:
“Leaks of classified information are bad things. We’ve got too much leaking in Washington…I want to know who the leakers are.”
And if a Justice Department investigation of the matter reveals that the leak was a violation of the law, the “person will be taken care of.”
BobbyG @ 51 — every US soldier killed is a knife in my heart.
not to mention all the innocent Iraqis who have died and will die because of the LIES perpetrated by these chickenhawks.
EW, do you have a thread somewhere for book comments? The e-mail at thenexthurrah bounces back.
The financial links between those who lied, and those who benefited as a direct result of the lies (primarily in the oil and military industries – to say nothing of Israel) are clear. The evidence that the President’s speech knowingly included a lie about the Niger Yellow Cake is proveable in a court of law under oath.
That the Vice President knew for a fact that the claim was based on a forgery in advance of the President’s speech is a given (he ordered that the forgery be created and sent Ledeen to meet with Mel Sembler in Italy do it). That he instructed others to ensure that the sentence made it into the speech is also a given. What did the Vice President know, and when did he know it?
Every time the Vice President knowingly lied to the American People to advance the cause of war, he committed a crime against the United States which both directly harmed other US citizens and directly enriched himself.
Indict Dick Cheney for Fraud.
Section 1031. Major fraud against the United States
propagenda begets propageddon
Nina Totenberg this am!
Prairie Sunshine @ 46
that’s a word that deserves it’s own blog underneath it
Linda @ 57
Bushney: “It’s not a ‘leak’ if we do it. It’s ‘getting important information out to the Murkin Peeple.’”
_
punaise @ 61
Great… and
Chickenhawks down Blackhawks
punaise @ 61
what’s good for the propagoose is good for the propaganda
BobbyG @ 38
Precisely!! It sure would’ve saved the taxpayers a bundle on this whole investigation it he had just admitted that on Day 1!!
“Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all.”
Michael Rivera
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when
everything the American public believes is false.”
– William Casey, CIA Director (from first staff meeting, 1981)
SOS at 36
“Don’t forget all this erudite commentary..”
Hey, half the readers of this book will probably skip all the “erudite commentary” looking for something of a silly trollfest.
But this is a serious blog, except that its hosts tend to have a sense of ironic humor that makes it entertaining along with being informative.
I’ve spent some time on some very frivolous blogs, inhabited mostly by opinions sans- expertise, so I can attest to the fact this blog is making REAL history and not just imagining its own self importance.
Otherwise, why would they be talking about it all over the internet?
Christy Hardin Smith @ 49
It’s just too beautiful and gratifying a scenario to even hope for. Harps would play joyfully, angels would sing in the heavens!
Linda @ 57
Scoots was sure taken care of. Wasn’t he a “think-tank” beneficiary while awaiting trial?
JFinNE @ 47
He posts a chunk, then works on another chunk while we’re digesting the first piece. Updates happen about every 15 minutes, or longer if the court takes a break.
The servers would snap if the on-site poster was updating every minute, as they would if we all reloaded the page with the same frequency.
“Dinosaurs”
Mr.Murder @
7
The Decider only declassified it to reporters.
This is hysterical!
F: So, three articles — WaPo 12×6, and you had talked to Cooper, Miller, and perhaps Kessler before the 14th. And you had spoken to Russert, who had told you about the wife. And you had spoken to Rove Did you think this article — “two WH officials leaked to six reporters” — might be about you?
L: I thought it might be mistakenly referring to me.
Relevant Raw Story headline:
Ummm. Bear of little brain, here…
Even with his putative ‘insta-declassification’ super-power, Cheney couldn’t just ‘declassify’ Plame’s name and job! That’s the whole point of the IIPA, isn’t it?
emptywheel @
20
Didn’t the Executive Order giving Cheney the power to declassify go into effect just a few days or weeks prior to this leak to Judy Miller? Is it possible to pre-date an EO? And couldn’t Bush undo this EO to freeze out Cheney if he wanted to, and also reduce his access to intell?
S.O.S. from MA @ 36
WELL! Lah Dee Dah! Now it starts.
Hey Pups: Don’t glaze over, dreamin’ ’bout tomorrow’s treats & forget all the corn yet to pop today.
Sit. Stay. Good boy!
Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 77
the ship of state is leak king
Linda @ 75
Actually, McClellan Acknowledged that the information was released SPECIFICALLY TO REFUTE THE DEMOCRATS CLAIMS that the administration had cherry picked intelligence information to lead us into war.
McClellans use of the term “Public Good” must only have been for the good of Republicans, as no Democrats were helped by the LEAKING OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION WHICH SERIOUSLY DAMAGED INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES ON THE MOST RELEVANT SUBJECT (MIDDLE EAST WMD) DURING WAR TIME IN THE MIDDLE EAST…and he even CHERRYPICKED the information that was leaked, leaving the balance of the report which refuted the information that was leaked, CLASSIFIED.
McClellan ADMITS that this was done for POLITICAL REASONS, and then claims that if it’s good for the republican Party, it’s good for the ENTIRE PUBLIC, half of who did not vote Republican.
“Post-Leak Declassification?”
When King George begins to form a thought in his mind about the prospect of declassifying information, even if during sex or while sleeping, the Classified Information in question begins to change status. The more he thinks about it, the less Classified the information becomes.
The instant the thought takes form in his mind and manifests itself to the world in words, even if it occurs while he’s alone, say, taking a dump or shaving in the morning, at the very moment that he hears himself say the words: “I think I’ll declassify that” – the Classified Information comes flying back into the universe as “Officially Declassified.”
The King’s minions then run frantically to go through the quaint details of preparing the burdensome documentation necessary to create a good cover story for the media about how and when the information changed form, but really it’s just window dressing.
“It’s good to be King…it’s good to be an anus!”
There is no question that Libby’s job is to take the fall for VP. (And what does he get for his services?)
Peeved @ 73
OKok, what have we here? Someone who has trouble getting information from a human being rather than a tape recorder? :) hang in there Peeved, this is heavy lifting he’s doing, and only with his hands. And you’ll notice his fingers never leave his hands! :) :) Sure am glad it’s not ME in the media room. No way I could cope.
emptywheel @ 20 Awesome post, unsatisfactory justice. Perjury only for Evil Dick? But then, there’s that civil suit…
perris @ 63
Just what I need, another project, but I might think it over!!
They lied and lied with impunity..
The Congress needs to take up this issue…
Are they being briefed on this trial?
I want Articles of Impeachment!
And we are a democracy?
Sad
Canuck Stuck in Muck @
78
Laws/Process regulations (IIPA, FISA, 4th Amendment, Geneva, etc ad nauseum) are for The Little People, not for His Supreme Magnificence Cheney.
_
Gang — if we could all please keep comments in compact size, it would be much appreciated. The livebloging takes quite a bit of bandwidth and longish comments add to that substantially. Keeping the liveblogging up and running has to take priority on trial days in a liveblogging thread — thanks.
Ed*ard Teller @
52
THe article appeared on July 17, so the day before it was “officially” declassified.
As far as we know, Libby leaked or had leaked the NIE on the following dates:
June 23 (which he didn’t admit in GJ) Woodward
July 2 Sanger
July 8 Judy (though Judy says she got nothing new)
July 8 (possible) Mitchell and David Martin
July 17 Wolfie to WSJ
“That the Vice President knew for a fact that the claim was based on a forgery in advance of the President’s speech is a given…”
In Greenwald’s “The Truth about Iraq”, wasn’t one of the expert witnesses, the one with sons in the military, suggesting that Cheney may very well have ordered the forged documents to be created and passed along to the Brits?
Which means not only did Deadeye KNOW about it, he may well have orchestrated it.
I think the same fellow suggest that, if we just had the will to do the research, there would be no problem finding out the truth of this matter. Maybe the more Libby’s and Rove’s lipsloosen up, the more likely this hard evidence of Cheney’s subterfuge will come to light.
IMPEACH CHENEY FIRST!
On Countdown yesterday, David Shuster to Keith Olbermann:
Hi Everyone. Frustratingly way over the top too busy with work to stop in much (even to read -even the front page, alas). But I have a question, to check back on later. If Rove was cited at the outset by Webb as the cause of the problems for Libby, and Rove now is barely cited, is it possible that Webb hung Rove out there at the outset in part to get a deal from the WH to promise to pardon Libby early so he wouldn’t spill the beans? And, could this also be part of the strategy in not having Libby himself speak? Keep well, and enjoy it all. I won’t even get to read about Timmeh until late tonight. Thanks FDL for doing this for us (U.S.) -interesting how the two converge!
Up next on MSNBC? The news everybody’s talking about!!!!!!
Snickers.
That ’bout says it all.
Lois Fairbanks @
56
The jury (and we) will get these exhibits–we get our copies tonight.
Question for you legal types: Assuming Libby is convicted and appeals his conviction, what are the chances he would be out on bail while the appeals process plays out?
Prairie Sunshine @ 94
QUICK!!! Do something Manly!!!
Apropos of CHS @ 89
Go FDL and Godspeed.
Here’s an invitation. When the server load gets high, as it DEFINITELY will when Timmeh hits the stand, you may wanna join some of us at a live-chat on another server, over at
http://gabbly.com/firedoglake.com
It’s a fun kinda chat-app. We’ve had as many as 35 folks in today… Rayne introduced it a few days back. Sometimes we get harrassed by hackers, in which case we retreat to a private redoubt. Others of us know how to get its URL to you without publishing it here.
C U over in chat-land, if you wanna join us. Remember, because Gabbly runs on a completely other server somewhere on the ‘net, using it’ll take some of the heavy load off the FDL servers while Timmeh is walking over hot FitzCoals later…
Peeved at 8:48 am: You sound like someone who harps on the occasional dropped note at a music concert.
You should express your appreciation for the extraordinary job being done here (and not in the corporate media) by hitting FDL’s PayPal button.
TomJ @
79
The logic Addington gave was not that EO, it was Navy v. Egan.
THough that’s all assuming that Dick even bothered to get a legal justification.
Keep it short.
Beware the zigs.
Feed the kitty.
Later, pups….
This is not a transcript and it was awful early in today’s caffeine cycle, but some guy on CourtTV this morning seemed to have caught some Foggy Bottom bit in yesterday’s GJ rendering that led him to claim that the mystery witness could be Condi Rice, or maybe Powell.
There does sometimes seem to be a Team Libby triangulation thing going on about CIA/State/OVP etc.
-
Canuck Stuck in Muck @
78
That’s why I say we’d get into constitutional issues right quickly.
Actually, Cheney will walk unscathed (other than his reputation, which is hard to damage given how bad it is). No way will he testify for Libby and let himself be sworn under oath. The long expected spectacle of Fitz cross-xamining Cheney, sadly will not come to pass.
JEP:
Mel Sembler is the key to the Niger Forgery.
Mel Sembler heads up Scooter Libby’s Legal defense Fund. Mel is a lifelong Republican with a very checkered past:
http://alternet.org/story/27725/
http://www.thestraights.com/index.htm
How’s this for coincidence? Mel just happened to be the Ambassador to Italy (of all places, in that he didn’t even speak the language) at the same time that Ledeen makes a trip to Rome to meet with him and others – then magically – the purported Niger Yellow Cake document appears in Italy.
Even more interesting, when Lieberman loses to Lamont in the DEMOCRATIC primary, it is Republican Sembler who hosts a fundraiser for Lieberman to run as an Independent (with the full support of the White House and Karl Rove).
Now if you always keep the PNAC in mind, and remember the AGENDA that is being pursued on Israel’s behalf, it becomes very clear that a massive conspiracy to SELL THE INVASION OF IRAQ was in play.
Kristine @ 96
Almost 100%
It depends on the likelihood of the appeal. But honestly, this kind of technicality is one of Ted Wells’ strong points. So I think really unlikely that Scooter goes to jail while waiting for his multiple appeals to play out.
Peeved at 8:48 — You think you could do better than Swopa? Then you do the work to set yourself up with a media pass, pay for your trip to DC, get your butt to the courthouse, take your laptop, pay for your room and board, and show up to blog the trial day in and day out for weeks — all the while maintaining the servers, keeping the comments threads running smoothly and making certain that there are substantive posts running on the blog outside of court time as well. Oh, doesn’t sound so easy? Then try a little more gratitude and a little less armchair quarterbacking. If you had ANY idea how difficult and exhausting this entire undertaking has been for all of us, you’d realize that the remark to Swopa was rude and uncalled for — and you’d apologize.
Kristine @96:
100%.
You know, as I follow this and see first hand the seriousness of this trial and I’m listening to my liberal radio station, and when they do the news it seems that even the liberal news is glossing over the trial!!!!ARGH!!! I’d like to know where the so-called liberal media really is? It’s all in their pin-heads!!!
emptywheel @ 20 “It was Plame’s ID that had been “declassified.””
Would Special Counsel ever bring the legality question of unilateral declssification (by POTUS and OVP of CIA assets) to court? …or is that just an issue to be taken care of by elections and civil suits.
Fitz believes great harm has been done by the disclosure of Plame’s Identity. He said so in his press conference. Will he be satisfied that justice has been served with a guilty verdict for Libby’s lies and obstruction? (No. I say)
How would Fitz bring the case against Cheney?
Not having time recently to follow all of the comment threads recently, I don’t know if this thought has surfaced. When we(the Dems) capture the WH in 08(and we will), Fitz would make the perfect candidate for AG. It would be nice to have an incorruptible man in place to help clean up the mess that BushCo has created.
I’m loving this live blog trial!! Thank you, Thank you!! Can anyone say “Liar, Liar, Pants Exploding!”
Dumb question: Would Team Libby have had these recordings as part of discovery, or have to rely on I Lewis’s memory?
emptywheel @ 20: Libby et al concocted the testimony well in advance knowing full well that if reporters talked Libby would go down. I think he was expecting to go down from the very beginning. “Must protect VP at all cost.”
Christy Hardin Smith @ 106
Or why not just become a right-wing pundit.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 106
Second the sentiment. FDL et al are doing an awesome job, a true patriotic national service.
_
“what are the chances he would be out on bail while the appeals process plays out?”
I’m not a lawyer, but I would guess it’s 100%.
Unless he’s considered a flight risk…
Aspen, maybe?
Don’t know if it would help, and someone would have to help me set it up but, I’ve got 45GB of spare, secure bandwidth if you need it.
dave AT tellercreations dot com
Punaise: The ship of state is leak king
Libby: May I bail?
Based on this snippet it is hard to see that Cheney can avoid testifying, even though the rumors may be to the contrary:
If Cheney does not testify, then the jury can reasonably make the inference that Cheney could not back up Libby’s mis-remembering of the Russert conversation. Fitzgerald would not miss pointing out this fact during his closing arguments, especially since the voir dire insistently probed whether jurors would have trouble believing what Cheney would say under oath.
S.O.S. from MA @ 84
Actually, since the tapes are to be released to the public, Peeved & every other curious grasshopper will get to read/hear that question AND answer pretty-quick-now, RIGHT?!
Breathe, everyone. and make sure that popcorn’s ready for this afternoon.
And someone warn Swopa any MSNBCedes might be even noisier & more distracting when Timmeh finally speaks in the flesh. eh?
Christy- I wholeheartedly second that emotion!! you guys are doing such an awesome job with an awesome task at hand. I can’t even imagine anyone being critical, unless their a right wing hack trying to be an a*hole. Hang Tough, you’re doing just fine!!!
JEP @ 116
He is: well connected, well funded, and former legal counsel for a longtime fugitive from justice (until Clinton pardoned Mark Rich).
It’s worth drafting a few hundred letters to the court letting them know the citizens are concerned Libby may flee.
How can Cheney avoid testifying?
“L: I don’t recall. What was important was telling him I did not leak to Novak, and I heard it from Russert, who said all reporters knew it.”
Libby just can’t help repeating the lie that Russert told him about Plame’s CIA identity.
We discussed this a bit yesterday, but if Libby wants to claim that he misremembered his conversation with Russert, he is also going to have to explain how he “misremembered” his subsequent motivations and thought processes that rely wholly on his claim about the conversation with Russert, such as the example above.
There are many, many examples like this in Scooter’s testimony thus far – of subsequent belief states that presume Russert leaked to Libby and this was Libby’s sole remembered point of information regarding Plame.
This gets absurd in the example above, because we all now know that Cheney was the one who told Libby initially about Plame’s CIA identity. And before the GJ, Libby has the nerve to say that he wanted Cheney to know that he “heard it from Russert”? Wow. Lies on top of lies.
I don’t comment often but would like to offer praise for all the intelligent insight offered here. And a HUGE thank you to FDL for this historic blogging event.
Fitz for AG?
I agree wholeheartedly.
Curiously, I find Iraq to be a catastrophic disaster and the President to be a brain dead idiot but I mean that in a good way.
emptywheel @
100
Ahhh, even better proof! I thought that about a year after this leak (2004) we found out about the EO that gave the VP the same authority to declassify as the Prez. The date of the EO was within a month prior to the leak to Judy. It seems to me that if the EO had been written at the time, everyone in OVP would have known that the VP could do it, and no need to ask Addington this question.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 106
-uh-, -um-, any lingering questions Peeved?
That’s our gurlll, ReddHedd.
{{{{{hugs}}}}}
Marcy,
What if the material was not declassified at the time of the leak and Fitz can prove it?? And doens’t Bush have to at least warn an agent that her status has changed?? Could V.P and Pres be unindicted co conspirators here?? And couldn’t that cause impeachment proceedings??
JFinNE @ 47
He types for 20 minutes and then posts it. Then he gets up for coffee and a cigarette outdoors. He grabs his coat, hat and gloves and shleps out of the media room, rides down the elevator, and steps outside in front of Prettyman Courthouse. You get the picture…
There is a brand new thread at JustOneMinute just waiting for a few objective comments on this case they still believe is going Libby’s way.
http://justoneminute.typepad.c…..t-28932401
Swopa-
You’re doing a great job. Thanks.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 106
There are other media outlets visiting FDL (and some even nice enough to credit them) to obtain their coverage.
The Plame House group are doing an outstanding job. I am so grateful for the opportunity to read the coverage, and so thankful that the several who’ve been involved are willing to make the sacrifice to be in the courtroom each day of testimony. Thank you again.
-S
Redd!!!! Swopa – excellent job, man.
And, if somebody could pass this note to the scooter – the fun hasn’t started yet. if you’re puckering already, you might consider a muscle relaxant prescription.
> Fitz for AG?
> I agree wholeheartedly.
Perhaps there could be a discussion post for this topic at some point. I have some thoughts, but don’t want to disrupt the thread.
Cranky
Brel1 @ 111
i believe someone just did… ;->
“It’s worth drafting a few hundred letters to the court letting them know the citizens are concerned Libby may flee.”
Hold that thought, it should be seriously revisited as we near the end of these historic histrionics.
JEP @ 126
and Ambassador Joe Wilson for SecState, Ms. (”the wife”) Valerie Plame Wilson for DCI. Icing on the cake.
Aah, fantasy DC. Whattagame.
Marcy @ 9:01 am -
Although I am not a lawyer, I can’t see how David Addington could have relied on the Egan decision to justify his reasoning concerning declassification; it appears that he took an excerpt from the Egan decision out of context, since lawyers have posted comments on prior FDL threads that essentially state that the Egan decision did not address the issue of declassification of classified material.
Has anyone looked at the United States Code to see what it says about improper declassification of classified documents and/or misuse of classified information?
Fitzmas @ 132
ask them about Aldrich Ames. They are in la-la-land.
Any possibility that Russert tapes his phone calls?? Some states admit that as evidence, some don’t – ??
new thread
JEP @ 126
Not in this administration and maybe not ever. He likes to prosecute, not take orders from slimy pols. Maybe he could negotiate terms acceptable to an administration that was not corrupt like the Texas mafia.
Ed*ard Teller @ 135
the cleanup crew might not appreciate that so much…
Fresh lunch thready goodness, everyone. Thought you could use some fresh digs for the break.
F: You say VP tilted his head when you said you learned it from Tim Russert. Did he say, “No, you learned it from me, remember?”
L: No.
Innocent on grounds of collective amnesia :)
Could V.P and Pres be unindicted co conspirators here??
Isn’t that the trillion dollar question…
All-star Administration IMHO
President Gore
V.P. Obama
Sec. of State Clinton (Bill)
AG – P.J. Fitzgerald
Sec. of Defense – Chuck Hagel or Jack Murtha
dqueue @ 122
Excellent point. It’d be fun to launch that letter writing campaign, at the very least.
Linda2 @
143
there may yet be a Butterfield moment….
Fitzmas @ 150
UN Ambassador – Jimmy Carter
Fitz to Scooter:”You’re an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill”
“F: Why would it have to be private?
L: (I was distracted and missed this answer)”
Swopa seems to miss an awful lot of these potentially important exchanges because of his tenency to “mis” things, and it makes a deeper reading more difficult. I miss Emptywheel’s less neat spelling but decidedly more thorough listening.
fitz @149
AG fitz. sigh…
also, cheney flight risk?
emptywheel @ 106
IANAL but I think the judge needs to consider three things:
1. the strength of appeal (which is weak)
2. the strength of the evidence convicting Libby, (which is overwhelming)
3. The importance off applying pressure in a continuing investigation.
I think Walton should order Libby to report to prison in 7 days.
Unfortunately, I think the odds are high that another court would stay it anyway.
FDL et al You ROCK the (court)HOUSE!!! MSM must be crapping their pants over your outstanding exceptional coverage of their downfall! LOL
I have done this sort of semi-live transcription, and it is very, very difficult. The FDL crew are doing the best job I could imagine being possible under the circumstances.
I suggest the moderators just delete any further comments that criticize the liveblogging effort – they add no value to this discussion.
Cranky
emptywheel @ 151
LET’S DO THIS!!!!!
Fitzmas @ 150
I was with you to the last line; Hagel is a right wing ideologue whose voted with Bush more than any other sitting Sen. He’s a wacked out dirtbag, even if his statements of late have been thrilling. But even after all the bluster , he voted with his party against the bills for withdrawl, against Cloture . He’s full of S$&^ and the best thing his late bluster can do is set the stage for some very entertaining repug infighting, but never fall for the set dressing, Hagel is a rotten wing nut.
Other than that , great list!
And for Sec Def , why Not Wes C?
Peace
Icarus @
155
Icarus, what Swopa is doing is really hard! And in any case, it hardly matters. The transcript of Libby’s GJ testimony is about to be released to the public. You can go and read the actual testimony this afternoon.
A.Scott at 161 – Agree with you about Sec’y of Defense. Wes Clark-IN. Hagel-OUT.
Re: Icarus@155 and others.
You all sound like Major Frank Burns in M*A*S*H*:
Jeez, Colonel Potter, I liked it way better when Colonel Blake was here. He was way easier to baffle with bullshit
STFU
JEP sez: among other things wrt FDL and the live blogging:
They are even mentioning it in the normally inert MSM here and there – good on you firepups.
Flight risk? Cheney or Libby?
Hello, International Court? I’d like to report some war criminals on the loose outside their native country…
Wes Clark! How did he slip my mind? Absolutely!
Now help me find jobs for John Edwards (EPA?)
Richardson, and James Lee Witt?
emptywheel @ 106
So, the plan is to run out the clock with the appeals until January of 2009, when he will be pardoned.
Damn.
BTW, Thanks everyone for the awesome job. I’m so greatful for the job you are doing. And a check is in the mail (honest).
neil @ 145
I’m from Chicago where Fitz spends alot of time on cases (not like there are alot of political crooks in Chicago).
I think it was a miracle he got appointed as SP in this case because of his integrity and dedication to justice vs political affiliations. He has brought credibility back to the SP position (remember Ken Starr????).
Fitz also has a lot of experience investigating and prosecuting issues on national security, so this is right up his alley. I hope he gets to the bottom of the forged uranium receipts. It boggles my mind why no one things that was a big deal.
Edwards-Pres.
Obama- VP
Gore- EPA Chief
Fitz OR Spitz-AG
Bill Clinton- UN
Hillary Clinton-Majority Leader
Vilsack-Education
Clarke-Defense
Richardson-State
Gephart-Labor
Harkin-Agriculture
Huffington-Press Secretary
OK the last one is a bit tongue in cheek, but a worthy suggestion, nonetheless… she would sure pretty-up the press room, and compared to Snowjob, Scottydog, and Flesh, the IQ would jump precipitously.
Just responding to a previous post…
JEP @ 170
Ralph Nader – Sec. of Interior
President Bush – Amb. to North Korea
Fitzmas at 167 – John Edwards – Sec of Labor. Lets get the unions up and running again!
Please, don’t encourage images of the Decider having sex, I want to keep my breakfast – thinking of him and Karl disturbs me!
Rayne @ 166
hm-m-m-m. Let ‘em run?! I doubt Murcans would be apt to do to them what sm’others might contemplate.
run-shooter-run(?), please(?)
i plead insanity…
office pool.
which country will take cheney when he goes into exile?
JudeanPeople’sFront @ 175
and why/for what purpose…(?)
Unfortunately Cheney’s health wouldn’t allow him to live long enough to do the time he deserves. I think that in itself is a better argument for torture than the ones this administration uses!
Adie @ 176
endless source of dark energy?
“Flight risk? Cheney or Libby?
Hello, International Court? I’d like to report some war criminals on the loose outside their native country…”
Hadn’t thought of that, it will be even less safe for these rogues out in the “real” world.
But then there’s always the Marianas. Pina colatas, anyone.
Or Dubai. I hear golfing is great in the desert.
JudeanPeople’sFront @ 178
nah. hazardous waste problem.
Speaking of torture, does the new waterboarding rule include this investigation?
adie,
you’re right, so what IS the accepted method of disposal for toxic dicktators?
JEP @ 170
Wow! Is that the “Dream Team” for 2009?
I’d like to offer a few tweaks–Powell for Secy of Defense. Clarke Homeland Security.
Rayne @ 166
They could go to Paraguay. Paraguay already has a no extradition for war crimes thingy goin’ on. Bush already bought land there, and there are some kind of U.S. troops there.
This may have been asked before, but where can one go to read the official transcripts or does it involve paying money?
Speaking of money, I donated to FDL Sunday for all this hard work! You guys rock!!! Thank you.
will the transcript of this trial be made public?
linda2,
Bush has land in paraguay? can we have a whip around for his airfare?
dick too?
JPF 182
As Ohioan, I have no right to stand tall on this one.
EPA’s currently rubbing their collective chins over smelly, dangerously percolating (chemical? underground fire? potentially explosive?) dump in North Canton OH. And OH continues on its merry way importing more lethal junk.
ACourse, that’ll probably prompt administration to cut off what’s left of their meager budget, thus “solving” the problem.
Enuf. I like the other comments today, those with all those elegant potential-candidate Dem. names popping up into view. Do the Dems have WAY more depth on their bench that the Reps, or is it just my bias showing? Yeehaw!
-uh, !GORE for Prez!, guys, since he already won, AND [trillion reasons]. ;->
Fitzmas @ 150
I like the way you think. I’d also take Feingold as VP. I’ve been saying I’d love to see Bill as SoS for a long time now, but Wilson would be okay, too. As for SoD, I had picked Clark, but found out he has to be out of the military for 10 years before he could take that post.
Thanks FDL. This is great coverage. I hope your resting well at Plame house. Forget peeved at 8:48 obviously this person is clueless as to the task at hand. Keep getting the truth out.
There is a brand new thread at JustOneMinute just waiting for a few objective comments on this case they still believe is going Libby’s way.
Thanks for thinking of me; my comments are normally baned here (I am out of line with the prevailing sentiment, and the operating philosophy seems to be that this comment board is for like-minded folks), but do drop by.
[CHS notes: Tom — That is the single most ludicrous thing you have EVER said. Your blog is on our blogroll, and you have never, ever been banned here. Period. ]
JudeanPeople’sFront @
187
We’ll be asked to pay for a Paraguay terror tax to pay for their one-way tickets and their future lifestyle.
Tom at 191 — That is the single most ludicrous thing you have EVER said. Your blog is on our blogroll, and you have never, ever been banned here. Period.
Fitzmas @ 171
Sadly, Clark not eligible to serve as SecDef; his active military service is too recent. I think he would be great at State.
“By statute the secretary must be a civilian who has not served in the active component of the armed forces for at least 10 years “
from wikipedia
Tom Maguire @ 191
Tom never said he has been banned here. He said he was “baned” here.
I, for one, have never seen Tom baned or banned here.
TomJ @ 79
The executive order is dated sometime in 2003, but I don’t think that it was just a few days before. And it doesn’t really speak to declassification, it speaks to classification — unless the Veep is suddenly a “supervisor” of whoever initially classified the information. And I don’t think either Cheney or Bush could have declassified the identity of a NOC without going back to the CIA, but that’s another issue….
“Sadly, Clark not eligible to serve as SecDef; his active military service is too recent. I think he would be great at State.
“By statute the secretary must be a civilian who has not served in the active component of the armed forces for at least 10 years “
from wikipedia
Had Powell been inactive for ten years before he became Secretary of State? He was active during the Gulf War in 1991, wasn’t he?
JEP @ 170
Hey, what about Dean?? I used to think Surgeon General but I guess you gotta be a surgeon so something to do with healthcare, for sure.
Woodhall Hollow @
43
Shooter will just say, “I can’t discuss anything about a matter for which I might be called as a witness.”
The real question is, will the conservative Fitzgerald get the VP to testify? Under oath. That’s what we all want to see.
Major kudos to FDL and all the bloggers here. Stellar stuff!
litigatormom @ 197
Had Powell been inactive for ten years before he became Secretary of State? He was active during the Gulf War in 1991, wasn’t he?
The restriction regarding prior active military service applies only to SecDef. Powell, as SecState was not affected. This is why I suggested Clark for SecState. ;)
Punchprincess @ 5
Me too!!!
I remember coming home from law school classes and plopping down in front of the tv to watch the Watergate hearings. This was before the day of VCR’s [at least there wasn’t one in my home], and WAY before personal computers or the internets.
It was riviting to watch the Watergate saga unfold under the relentless questioning of Senators. And the press was helping things along.
To the Time Machine, Batman.
Sorry kiddies. We old folks are just engaging in a little nostalgia.
ace @ 105
Tap Duncan @ 9
Wolfowitz (according to the former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neil in Ron Suskind’s book the “Price of Loyalty” (a must read) Wolfowitz and Cheney are the architects of the catastrophe in Iraq) walked out the back door to the World Bank…let’s hope Fitz walks him back in the front door.
Wolfowitz is just another radical drowning in American soldiers and the Iraqi peoples blood. He deserves to be part of the Frog March!
Lois Fairbanks @ 56
I get from swopa (our glorious paraphraser) that Fitz is showing the exhibits he showed Libby on the Elmo to this jury at the same time that he handed them to Libby (on the tape). Thus the jury can see the versions that Libby saw.
I don’t know if there were subsequent redactions… (seems there was some)but the DEFENSE didn’t protest these, so it’s most likely that Libby saw additional material that has been ruled not germane to his testimony but that should remain confidential (either personal information, like phone numbers, or classified information).
These should be in todays release of exhibits by Fitz on
http://wid.ap.org/documents/libbytrial/index.html
CHS notes: Tom — That is the single most ludicrous thing you have EVER said. Your blog is on our blogroll, and you have never, ever been banned here. Period.
I can’t imagine how I would prove that from time to time my comments have been “disappeared”, but that has been my experience on occasion.
Cinnamonape @ 204 -
Ah, thanks! It makes more sense now.