To this point, Scooter Libby’s Grand Jury testimony has yielded a few interesting nuggets. One of the more nuggety being how ludicrous the hemming and hawing, pausing and tap dancing around Vice President Cheney can be.
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.)
Protecting the flank of a Vice President is hard work. And never mind the fact that Fitzgerald's investigative team unearthed a copy of the Wilson op-ed with Cheney's handwriting at the top — with the question of the trip and "the wife" front and center. Talking points, anyone? Because, as Cathie Martin's testimony amply showed us, Vice President Cheney is fond of writing down precise talking points for his minions to disperse to the media on his behalf, isn't he? Especially when he's "disturbed" by his credibility being questioned.
And then there is this from later this morning:
…F: And Cheney wrote "junket' on Wilson op-ed sometime after July 6th
F: So it's possible, though you don't remember, that he told you to tell reporters about Wilson's wife
L: It's possible, but I don't remember
F: When you spoke to Kessler, and you thought maybe boondoggle but not negative, do you think reporter might have gotten impression you thought it was boondoggle?
L: Perhaps, but maybe he got impression on his own from Wilson op-ed or Novak article
F: Pincus before June 12th, did you tell him about Wilson's wife
L: No
F: Pincus said on WaPo website that he was told. You don't think you told Pincus?
W: No.
(Now there's a very long, painstaking discussion about what Libby understands to be classified, including insta-declassification, whether a leak to the press makes something non-classified — Libby says no, it's still not to be talked about — and whether CIA employees are assumed to be classified. Libby says he knows CIA people socially, he plays softball & football with them, they tell everyone at the game they work for CIA.)
F: But you were told this by the VP of the US, not at a football game.
L: Didn't have a sense that it was classified.
F: So you forgot that you learned this, thought it was new information when Russert told you, didn't remember until you saw note about VP and wife in CPD, but you have a recollection of sensing that it wasn't classified? (someone laughs in press room — um, me actually. Sorry, everybody…)
(Libby excuses himself lamely, and then Fitz rubs his nose in asks him again about conversations with Grossman, Cathie Martin, Fleischer, etc. Libby still doesn't remember them. Walks through the Russert conversation, and the info about Wilson's wife striking him as a newly learned fact.)…
F: Can you explain the protocol for discussing classified information?
L: Stuff in briefings is clearly classified, stuff on TV/newspaper clearly not, other times person will say "this is just for you." Generally clear from context, only sometimes told specifically
F: Does VP ever ask you not to write things down
L: (slowly) Sometimes, once or twice over a great period time
F: like what
L: Something operational like a war plan
F: Any time VP says it because he doesn't want a permanent record?
L: Dont think hes ever told me that
F: Never told not to write anything down about uranium/Wilson?
L: no, sir…
Is anyone else getting the sense that Cheney's interview with the FBI or some other person involved in this investigation has divulged a tantalizing detail somewhere that we may or may not ever get to know? Or is it just me?
Funny how, with Libby, the blame always gets shifted to the media and away from the Vice President. Could this be a pattern of behavior? And, if so, don't you think that members of the jury have also noticed this Libby quirk? And, even more interestingly, don't you think that folks in the media have noticed the same — and will they tire of being the Administration's scapegoat and, instead, stand up and investigate the myriad of issues that need much more oversight and scrutiny?
If so, I'd start with war profiteering. And exactly why it is that Vice President Cheney's son-in-law is refusing to cooperate with Congress and the General Accounting Office oversight. (H/T to BobbyG for the link.)
Funny how folks connected with Mr. Cheney continue to pop up in an obstructionist capacity all over the Beltway, isn't it? I'm certain that this has nothing whatsoever to do with Halliburton. Nope. Nosiree. Nothing over here. Presto.
Is it me, or is the Tower of Babble that is the Vice President's office listing a bit too far to the right these days? And, really, isn't it about time people started asking some questions — a whole lot of questions — about what is still propping it up? Because it is well past time for some accountability inside the Beltway for Vice President "Go F**k Yourself," isn't it? Especially with the Team Libby defense starting to sound a whole lot like our pal Beaker: "memememememememe…"
(And a thank you to twolf1, from whom I snagged "nuggety." Good one.)
Related posts:
- Cheney’s Betrayal Made an IIPA Charge for Libby Possible
- SCOTUS Denies Valerie Plame Wilson Her Day in Court
- Hung Out to Dry: One Former VP Chief of Staff
- Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby, and the “Unremarkable” Meat Grinder
- Late Night: The Babble Phlegm of the Wingnut Republic; OR, What’s a Half a Million or So, Give or Take?





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

FITZ!
fitz and fdl baby
Conservative is the “C” word.
swopa!
Wooo, John Forde gets the zero. :)
i so agree with christy, there are all the signs of some big iceburg under the surface implied by its effect on everythiong else
see my other rants
I hope you guys enjoy the video. It cracks me up. *g*
nina totenberg on npr right now
HUH?
OK, Ill try again,.
Is Timmeh all done with his testimony or will he be back?
His defence is looking even more flimsy. I have a suspicion that the examination of the witnesses will be finished within the week.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 7
Beaker looks a little like Timmy
is there any way to legally be ordered to lie to federal investigators?
I don’t know, CHS. The WaPo still features Broder’s babbling, and Fred Hiatt’s last hire remains Michael Gerson of the
White House Information GroupLie Factory.Bill Kristol is enjoying his new job at Time, and CNN is still trying to outFAUX FAUX.
I think we’ve got some welcome changes coming, but I don’t think they’re coming from the corporate media.
Bustednuckles @ 11
Looks like Timmeh will be back tomorrow for redirect.
I’m really starting to dislike Timmeh (duh I know). I don’t think he would have testified if he hadn’t have blabbed his mouth to the investigator before NBC said no way. He, like Judy, did his best to not perjure himself while providing very little info or insight during testimony.
Tweety is choppin in high cotton. He’s going to run down what he was doing that so upset the pugs in a bit!
OK, Christy, I see your Muppets and raise you…
Christy Hardin Smith @ 7
perfect! tee hee
Thanks. I have no idea where my original question disappeared to.
Spooky.
While the attention of teh msm was focused on their buddy Timmeh, J-Lie was on SitRoom proposing a surtax on the income tax to pay for Bush’s
criminal enterprisewar in Iraq.Can you say war profiteering… Capital gains tax on profits. Enlist yourself, J-Lie? I knew you could.
Delay now fearmongering re Hillary. Shiny thing.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 7
It’s hilarious. I know I must have seen it when it was broadcast, but I don’t remember it. Beaker has always been one of my favorites (after Gonzo and Kermit.)
Bustednuckles @ 11
He’ll be back tomorrow, for Fitz’ redirect questioning.
[EPU’d and reposted] For all of Wells’ questioning, I think Fitz will have little trouble refocusing the jury on the four corners of the indictment when he gets to re-question Russert. I’m guessing it will look something like this:
F: Mr. Russert, how many complaint calls have you taken at home in the last five years?
T: A handful, including this one from Mr. Libby.
F: That makes them kind of memorable, doesn’t it?
T: Sure.
F: So let’s review this memorable call. Did Mr. Libby talk about Joe Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame?
T: No.
F: Did you tell Mr. Libby that lots of reporters, including yourself, knew that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA in the Counterproliferation Division?
T: No.
F: Did you mention Mr. Wilson’s wife at all in that phone conversation?
T: No.
F: No further questions.
That ought to sum things up nicely for the jury, don’t you think?
Christy,
FDL did good today. I hope Swopa’s fingers are holding up.
Recall that Bush/Cheney crony corporations doing Iraq bidness have been allowed by this administration to withold contract expense data, on the arrogant grounds that it’s “proprietary information.”
_
obviously i got nuthin, and my wireless keyboard is acting up
must be the nsa van outside
off to work, aloha
Wells cross of Russert to this point has been as lame as an old arthritic three-legged dog. Wells seems to think this is a ‘he said/she said case’ as opposed to a ‘he said/they all said case.’
To buy the Wells’ take on this case all the jurors would need to be wearing tinfoil hats.
Wells has not lived up to his advance billing.
EPU’d from last thread:
Dear Christy,
Thank you, and please thank all your collaborators once again from me for the great work they do and the information as well as insight you and they provide. I very much appreciate many of the comments and the sense of community you and Jane have created even though so much of it is virtual, but then I realize how much over the past year plus has been simply building to the best team to cover this trial. You all work and post so well together.
A very appreciative daily reader
My typical day during the Libby trial.
http://www.dahothouse.com/add/scary.html
One thing that gets me is how they (apparently) tried to discredit Wilson by insinuating nepotism, when the administration is just rife with it. (The Cheney son-in-law situation being just one of many.)
Projection, anyone?
David Shuster’s about to do his report on Hardball about RUSSERT today at the trial…
This is all a big stall…
Impeach Cheney and get it over with.
Then empanel a special commission and form a grand jury to go after the money they stole from us taxpayers in Iraq. Should be a pretty easy, slimy slugtrail to follow.
That ought to keep the blogs a hoppin’ for a few years, make up for all the small fish we don’t get to fry, one at a time, like we are doing with Libby, as CheneyCo. profits daily.
Hopefully, the gap time between truth and consequences is “contracted” so sooner than later, these rogues pay back their ill-gotten fortunes.
old gold @ 28
Assume 6 witnesses. Assume further that there’s a 10% chance of each being “wrong.”
The probability, then, of them ALL being wrong is
0.1 raised to the 6th power, 0.1^6 = one in a million.
Goes very quickly to “reasonable doubt” i.e., that everyone is lying/wrong but Scooter.
I was musing over some of the early material today, and while this may have been mentioned at the time, it struck me how incredibly offensive it is that at a time when the country was in a shooting war, the VP’s staff referred to just dealing with the press as “the meat grinder.”
It shows such respect for the troops, that while they may be fighting and dying over there, our poor political appointees are really suffering. Boo-hoo!
Mary McCurnin @ 31
LOL – I think we can all relate.
litigatormom @ 29
From a common sense perspective, if all you have to say to the FBI is that you have no information about Valerie Plame, it makes sense that you would talk to them so that they can go talk to others who really might know something.
And I agree that the attempt to get out of the subpoena was a corporate decision; it was in their interest to try to avoid a precedent in this matter. And is what the NY Times and Time did.
Though I am still curious about Novak…did he testify voluntarily or was he also subpoenaed?
CNN – mistrial in Ehren Watada court-marshal
Hey how was Nina’s report on NPR?
Christy Hardin Smith @
7
rolling on the floor
My gawd.
When will the damn mainstream media pull back the curtain here?
It’s the Cheney Administration…
… and Cheney’s the fucking Wizard of Oz.
twolf1 @
13
Christy, your posts always have such … meat, I guess, for lack of a better word, but the icing on the cake is the glorious choice for graphic or video you accent it with. Loved it!
Is that Tim mmmMMMEEEEH singing?
annx @ 40
I thought it was good. She talked about how unflappable Russert was on the point that he did not tell Libby about Plame, and furthermore, when the Novak article came out, he asked his staff and none of them knew anything about Plame either (the old “everyone knew” canard)
I see that the defense plans to call Jill Abramson as a witness.
On 1/8/07, in Ann Arbor, MI, Abramson sat on a panel as part of a conference titled “Covering the New Secrecy: The Press and Public Policy.” I watched much of the panel discussion on TV.
If I recall correctly, Abramson sat between Greta Van Sustern and Bob Woodward. At one point, the discussion turned to the Plame/Libby matter. Van Sustern opined that the whole matter was much ado about nothing. Abramson, to my surprise, agreed. She said she agreed with her colleague John Tierney’s characterization of the matter as “NadaGate.”
I used to think of Abramson as a sensible, fair-minded moderate, but I guess I was wrong. As I see it, anyone who thinks of the Plame/Libby matter as “NadaGate” is not worthy of the labels sensible, fair-minded, or moderate.
Is Abramson too close to this mess to be objective about it? Has she, like Woodward, evolved into a Team Bush cheerleader? Has she turned into a wingnut? What is going on with her?
David Shuster’s on live right now on HARDBALL..
libby trial on cnn – playing tapes soon
…as in now!
Prairie Sunshine @
22
A corporation’s net income is taxed as ordinary income; gain on the sale of corporate stock held at least one year is normally taxed at capital gains rates.
The video cracked me me me up, too.
voxpopgirl @ 42
…or a de facto prime minister, perhaps?
msnbc – live at 7PM est on hardballz – libby grand jury testimony tapes
I was following the Libby trial while watching the Waxman hearing wrt reliance on private military contractors. And I had a little bit of a churning feeling in my stomach, partly because some of the subject matter of the hearings was sad and disturbing, but also because it just feels like the tide is slowly turning, and all these things that need to be exposed are finally being brought into the light. Thank you FDL; you are doing a wonderful job.
I had an idea – that might help give the servers a breather. I have no idea whether IE has these options (I refuse to use IE) but Opera and Firefox both have options to load/not load images. Also Opera, I know, allows one to specify how often to check the server for updated cached pages and so on.
You could add a TIPS section to the standard warning at the top of each liveblog. I’d be happy to write up how to do it in Opera, and I could install Firefox or go over its docs. I could even host something off-site. I’d have to research IE’s options.
If you think it would help, let me know; pee NOSPACEHERE jay NOSPACEHERE bradshaw ATT gmail DAHT com
Ah heck, I could probably write a script to do t.
Wolverine (45) — good stuff, thanks for sharing that. Would love to see Abramson have the screws put to her.
Maybe a note conveying that to Dan Abrams might be helpful…biggest story MSNBC should be covering this year, and Abramson’s such a crappy journo/editor/manager that she can’t see it even if it’s biting her in the *ss.My bad, I don’t know why I was thinking Abramson was with MSNBC and not NYT.
NYT is toast until they rebuild cred for several years post-Matahari Miller.
Delurking to just thank the FDL pups for all the hard work keeping us informed. Also since I do not get MSNBC, Hardball updates are appreciate.
BTW….
HARDBALL’s chyron is reading:
“Breaking News: Read Transcripts of Libby Grand Jury Testimony” at MSNBC.com”
libby grand jury testimony PDF
…198 pages
Quoting from what Christy posted above:
Christy – can war crimes committed in Iraq be prosecuted using the Code of Hammurabi? (snark)
7pm Hardball all Libby — including audio (released today)
From the WaPo: On a Wintry Night, the Press And the Politicians Get Cozy
By Jose Antonio Vargas
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
I wish other reporters would learn from her.
musicsleuth @ 59
Going out for dinner. Have the VCR set!!!!
BTW,
the judge declared a mistrial of First Lt. Ehren Watada who refused to deploy to Iraq…
…saying the soldier did not fully understand a document he signed admitting to elements of the charges.
Dubbya’s the Wizard.
Cheney’s the Wicked Witch of the West.
JPL @ 55
From Shuster…
The direct on Russert was 12 minutes long. The cross was two hours and he expects ANOTHER two hours more.
Redshift @ 36
It is really pathetic when a chickenhawk is forced to lug himself up from his big plushy chair and untuck the bib long enough to pretend he cares in front of the vewy scawy People; that he can’t even do it without whining. Thanks Rubber Stamp Congress! Thanks MSM!
Matthews and the gang are talking about how it’s amazing that it’s taken a Libby perjury trial to unearth just how everything leads back to the Office of the Vice President.
“We’re off to see the Wizard….”
Wonderful job!
I want to say that I’m aware that Tim Russert takes a lot of hits, but I thought he comported himself well today. Wells is like a little lap dog nipping at the heels, and Tim stayed in the groove…
Cozumel @ 63
That’s a desperation coefficient of 20. (240/12)
_
voxpopgirl @ 62
This case had a chance of getting some traction in the media and giving a boost to the anti-war faction (60-70 percent of US). Better to let the guy go and try to keep things on the “QT” when possible.
Eric Boehlart has a great post up at Media Matters wherein he takes the MSM to the woodshed:
Wolverine @ 45
I was actually there–and asked the question about NYT losing its credibility on reporter privilege issues (as close as the NYT has come to throwing Judy overboard, IMO).
And I agree–but then Abramson and Sustern have gotten so distracted by shiny objects, they have no fucking clue what went on. They’ve bought the Armitage shiny object hook line and sinker.
Woodhall Hollow @ 70
And that’s why the Plame investigation then, and the Libby perjury trial now, so perfectly capture what went wrong with the timorous press corps during the Bush years as it routinely walked away from its responsibility of holding people in power accountable and ferreting out the facts.
Perfect summary.
Anyone figure out the likely identity of the ex-Indep Counsel Shuster spoke with per yesterday’s report?
BTW – if you want to start with Profiteering, Waxman had a great hearing today. Blackwater got a prominent spot. Apparently – the reason no one could find contracts for months and months and months is that Blackwater was in Iraq as a subcontractor for Halliburton. I guess through the months of Congressional questions, no one at Halliburton or Blackwater volunteered that info.
you know what, I’m gonna say it, we all know it, we’ve all hinted at it, maybe someone already said it so in that case I’m saying it again;
this trial was specifically intended to implicate the vice president
fitz wins this trial and waits for the public outcry to indict the vice president
I’m telling you, this is why rove is not indicted, fitz wanst cheney and rovce rolled
Thanks for the GREAT work live-blogging the Libby Trial.
When I visit here, I really get the feeling JUSTICE is with this blog, like an Umpire in baseball.
Hear the Scooter Libby tapes LIVE on Hardball 7pm ET. (Banner on MSNBC right now).
Is it just me, or does this seem a bit nonsensical?
So, in November 2003 Russert talks to Eckenrode, telling the FBI guy his side of the Libby conversation. He says Eckenrode tells him what Libby said he told Russert, and Russert doesn’t confirm or deny anything. He only tells Exckenrode that Libby called to complain.
Fast forward to June 2004, when NBC has this statement that Russert cannot divulge information given in confidence from a source.
Besides the content issue already discussed, how could Wells be arguing that doing something in 2003 is in violation of a rule you signed in 2004?
I suppose there are only so many straws to grasp at, so many shiny objects to try to distract the jury with.
Great day of liveblogging and content discussion, FDL! I hope everyone is enjoying a nice beer-thirty.
my parents continually remind me that a the very beginning back during the Nixon days, this whole “Watergate” thing, looked like nothing more than a burglary … and if not for the hearings…
This Libby trial is our modern day version of Watergate.
perris @ 74
Yep.
mc @ 78
double yep.
Like everyone else in the MSM she isn’t to be trusted from here to the door.
Just remember one simple thing THEY’RE ALL WHORES.
Neil @ 74
It would be nice if they had someone like Eric Boehlert on to discuss the media’s role in all this.
David Ehrenstein @ 80
Well, there’s our tagline:
twolf @57
thanks for the transcript pdf!!!!!!!!
and could someone please explain how to quote someone and have it show up on my comments???
1) click on quote this comment, got that part
2) THEN WHAT?
would appreciate it……
Wolverine @
45
…wherein “sensible, fair-minded, or moderate” = blithe spectator to the dismantling of a crucial element of our national security.
that’s some sick co-dependency.
Christy Hardin Smith @
7
I sent you a little “thank you present.”
dmac @ 83
Just click on the
QUOTE icon, then type what you wish to have in quotes, and when you want to *close* your quote, simply click again on the QUOTE* icon (which will have an asterisk to the right of it.
[Mod Note; Also, be sure to close all open tags. Thank you.]
John Patterson @
34
John Patterson? Elmwood St. mean anything to you? vmweenie_98 hat-h yahoo.com
litigatormom @ 29
At best, it is that everyone except Scooter is either lying or forgetting. More likely he’s just blowing smoke. I am not a Russert fan but accusing him of lying to a federal judge for no particular reason seems really over the top, and if I were a jury member I would be extremely offended by it, and by Wells.
Mary McCurnin @
31
Oh, I hope this doesn’t start a trend: that we each need to post such photos. Could be real trouble!! [5th Amendment, anyone?]
funny stuff scooter and the shooter telling the truth. under oath, that’s even better. swearing on a bible, better still, on their sainted auntie’s urn, starting to laugh
there are few people in the courtroom that even understand what the truth means. you can’t live in the environment and be truthful under most circumstances. Fitzgerald and his team can, as they have the ultimate ability to maintain such discipline, it is their way of life. but folks in the government? elected officials and their toadies?
the whole concept is hilarious. rome has fallen. pick up the pieces. embrace the hun. how you doing hun? zeig heil. (sound of fissile material vaporizing)
HEADS UP:
Leher’s Newshour is reporting on the Libby Trial right now…
voxpopgirl @ 87
I think the question was how to quote a comment. If that was the question, click quote this comment, then it will appear in the comment box at the bottom. Be sure to then scroll all the way down past the last stuff and then put in your comment.
BTW…
it’s interesting tuning in to NBC NEWS right now… their report’s happening about the Libby Trial…
petedownunder @ 92
Easy enough.
Simply click on the Quote This Comment LINK directly at the bottom of the post you’d like to quote :-)
Hugh @ 88
Going back to my earlier math example, the probability that ALL unfavorable witnesses are wrong quickly vanishes off into beyond-a-reasonable-doubt land. Empirically, it’s just a variant of “what’s the probability flipping ‘N’ tails in a row?”
_
I’m sorry but I am having a hard time being gleeful over this trial. If anything, my rage has only increased.
Let’s recap. This administration has:
-shredded the constitution
-bankrupted this great country
-made the Middle East a tinderbox
-alienated not just all Muslims but our European allies as well
-made it impossible to have their crimes investigated
-destroyed FEMA
-destroyed the CIA
-taken MY tax money and given it to their cronies
-Lost nearly 9 billion dollars
-went on vacation and allowed 9/11 to happen
-lost the great city of New Orleans
-weakened the military
-And caused the death or injury of tens of thousands of our brave soldiers
And I’m supposed to be happy because Libby might be convicted of Perjury????
solai @ 97
well solai, that is one great post, I emboldened, formatted for my tired eyes, and added one at the end, hope you don’t mind
I was thinking more fo the Eye of Sarron getting a wee bit wobbly, rather than the Tower of Babble.
Truth as the ring is a more apropos metaphor than anything biblical in this case.
But I understand it can be hard to come up with just the right bon mot, when the deadline is now, always now. Oh you missed it. So the deadline’s NOW. (Missed it again.) Now! Hit submit, durnit!
solai @ 96
Patience. The best may well be yet to come. We all share your rage and frustration.
_
And I’m supposed to be happy because Libby might be convicted of Perjury????
no, but we have to start somewhere
Libby convicted
Cheney convicted
Bush convicted
Rove gets off cause he flipped.
Or am I dreaming?
To reiterate on the quote this comment- make sure you scroll down all the way to the bottom of the typing screen, or your own comment will end up in the middle of the quoted comment. Arrgh! and, Preview!
Also, it took me ages to notice that there is a built in feature for doing the html stuff for adding a link. Click on link box, enter copied URL, enter, new box comes up where you can put in your own text.
Was it Cheney who ordered Chertoff to kill the Ptech Investigation??? And Remember “Operation Greenquest?” That investigation was killed too!
http://rigorousintuition.blogs…..ptech.html
A tipster was Indira Singh, who has said she recognizes the separate command and control communications system Mike Ruppert describes Dick Cheney to have been running on September 11th as having “the exact same functionality I was looking for (Ptech).”
The Ptech case turned into an ugly dispute last year when company whistleblowers told Greenquest agents about their own suspicions about the firm’s owners. Sources close to the case say those same whistleblowers had first approached FBI agents, but the bureau apparently did little or nothing in response. With backing from the National Security Council, Greenquest agents then mounted a full-scale investigation that culminated in a raid on the company’s office last December. After getting wind of the Greenquest probe, the FBI stepped in and unsuccessfully tried to take control of the case.
Whatever the truth, there is no dispute that the case has so far produced no charges and indictments against Al-Qadi or anyone else connected with Ptech.
What role did Dick Cheney play in killing the investigation into Al-Qadi?
Now, how does Chertoff figure in the Ptech story? It goes back to the turf war of two years ago over Operation Greenquest, “the high-profile federal task force set up to target the financiers of Al Qaeda and other international terrorist groups.”
*
Clearly ptech represent some nexus between the government and terorism that must not be revealed, and Chertoff is just the man to cover it up.
punaise @ 101
I would be profoundly happy to see Libby in all orange.
OK, let me see if I get this right? Christy posts an essay about the Tower of Babble falling down after a day of hearing the last of the Libby JG stuff and the beginning of Russert’s testimony. At the same time the MSM is basing their evening stuff on their observations of the testimony and their really quick read of the JG PDFs. They’re doing their job the way it has been done since….
At the same time we’re pooling information about how the MSM is handling that in real time, comparing views and accumulating new info at the speed of light. Well, almost the speed of light.
Remember, that at a time when almost every type of MSM is seeing diminishing resources, the web’s ability to share, pool and refine info doubles every 22 to 23 months. New media platforms in the blogging world are overtaking the old media platforms in the MSM so fast, it seems like they’re going in the opposite direction, when in reality, we’re merely passing them by so rapidly it appears that way.
Valley Girl @ 103
I need to practice that in some old thread somewhere. gotten so used to typing a href= etc.
Tim Ruten, LA Times Media Columnist, 10 minutes ago as a Guest on Newshour
Ed*ard Teller @ 104
In a word, Wikinomics.
_
Valley Girl @ 103
It took me so long to notice that feature, I find that I can make a link faster the old fashioned way. /blogaddict
This is the same son in law I wrote about who blocked then IG Clark Kent Irvine from Hiring IPSIGS to keep on top of Katrina expenditures in the Homeland Secuity Undocumented piece. Don’t know how to do internal links.
Ed @ 104 and Bobby G.
MSM–they’re so far behind they think they’re first….
Patience Solai, patience. We ALL feel your pain but this particular episode may or may not be nearing its end. The Scoots will get his, but that dont’ mean there isn’t more to come. Fitz! could be on a looong strategy. Plus, there’s a new sheriff in Congress, with subpoena power.
For a long time I’ve been wondering how BushCo could possibly think their house of cards would stand forever. Hubris? Maybe, but they’re not really stoopid(tm), most of them; they should have KNOWN it would fall.
I never thought of the media in the same way even though I long ago, along with so many of the folks here, recognized their game. Did they really think they would never get called out?
Probably, the best answer in both cases is the usual one: They weren’t thinking at all.
Peace.
looseheadprop @ 110
Proprietary information, sorry.
Why is Cheney writing war plans?
bobby G at #109,
Wikinomics describes a similar process to what I see happening during the blogging of this trial. One of my students loved the book, and was sharing the ideas with me. But maybe we can come up with a more specific word for what is happening here.
mattes @ 115
uhm…
because he’s the actual president…
I have only used the “quote this” button once, and at first I thought nothing had happened. What had indeed happened was it automatically moved the “quote” down to the “Leave a Reply” section ready for you to add your own before and after comment.
I think when nothing happens on screen, it is confusing to this computer fool, but it works great. Being mindful of those dreaded ziggerauts (sp? – what a strange word for the quote within a quote within a quote circumstance.).
Ed*ard Teller @ 117
I believe two words that are instantly recognizable will do for now;
Warp Speed.
Prairie Sunshine @ 113
Well, WE know we’ve lapped them. But our perspective is changing so rapidly that at the same time we’re running the same race, we can observe their performance from so many simultaneous viewpoints we can see that they’re just running around in little circles.
Watched Carol Leonnig on News Hour give her re-cap on the Libby Trial. When Ray asked her what the significance of Russert’s testimony was, her narrative went vague.
So, I went to the wapo and sent her this note:
Carol – Thank you for the Libby Update. I thought the significance of Russert’s Testimony was that his was the ‘keystone’ for the Obstruction Charge:
Libby’s Obstruction Charge stems from the ‘Story’ he tells – that Libby heard Plame’s name first from Russert (’all the reporters know it’) and that Libby then spread as gossip the news of what he heard from Russert.
We’ve already heard from Cooper and Miller that Libby didn’t tell them that other reporters were saying Wilson’s wife works at the CIA – which earns Libby his two False Statements to the FBI and his two Perjury Charges to the Grand Jury.
Russert’s testimony today put the lie to the whole ‘heard it from a reporter as if it was new (Plame/CIA) and passed it on.’ So, today Russert ‘hands back’ to Libby the knife Libby plunged into his back.
The purpose of the Obstruction by Libby is to show a ‘Story’ that features Plame’s name coming from the Press, instead of government sources – Why? Because it’s only an IIPA Violation if the source is a government source, not if the source is a reporter.
Great live-blogging and an archive of Libby Trial facts at Firedoglake.com.
Thanks again for the Update!
voxpopgirl @ 108
PBS News Hour comes on @ 7 p.m. here (PT), but after that quote I’ll watch live instead of TiVo. Rutten is excellent- the media review god locally. Thanks…
OT, but a legal case…
A mistrial has been declared in the Ehren Watada court martial. As I understand it this had to do with being unable to agree on the meaning of a stipulation that had been accepted earlier. Would one of the “legal beagles” please help me understand this? Thanks. In it’s own way this case is as important as what’s going on in the Prettyman Courthouse…
libby tapes on msnbc…
HEADS UP…
live on HARDBALL:
they’re playing recordings of LIBBY Grand Jury Testimony right now.
Ed*ard Teller @ 117
The MSM is undergoing a paradigm shift without a clutch.
Ed*ard Teller @ 115
N-dimensional-meta-analytic-realtime-synergistic-proactive-patriotism.
(LOL!)
Libby just sounds smarmy and evasive.
One word
WEASELY
I can’t believe Libby’s voice is so high pitched and whiny!
Fitz sounds exactly like I think he would.
And, new thread!
Many thanks to all at FDL for covering the Libby trial.
BobbyG @ 128
punaise – HELP!!
voxpopgirl @ 78
I was in college during Watergate and I agree with your parents. The Nixon admin & GOP kept downplaying the whole thing for two years – characterizing it as “just a two bit robbery, no big deal.” Once the hearings started and information like we are seeing in the Libby trial began to come out, the whole thing started to unravel, fairly quickly. And it was amazing to find how interconnected everything was..
The fact that the House and Senate are now headed by Dems gives me hope that the evil that is the Bush administration will start to unravel, and soon. Once that snowball starts rolling down the hill…..
new thread dick EW
Ed*ard Teller @ 131
Brother, can you paradigm?
so, am figuring that is a way to ‘box’ a quote? i want to know how to do THAT, too, will see if that worked when i submit this……..but i’m also trying to figure out how to quote YOU ALL and respond…..
petedownunder-there is no arrow to scroll down further, that’s all it shows, the blockquote thing….. and under that, an empty box until i type into it.
am going to now click on ‘quote’ again and see what happens
am not normally this stupid, really has me perplexed how in the heck i quote someone and then comment, am tired of cutting and pasting everything……figured out how to provide a net link, that part i figured out.
and am on really slowwwwww dial-up, so this is taking me a while to try and also try to keep up with everyone’s comments, so if i missed some, thanks………will read them after i try again this time……
Marion in Savannah @ 124
IANAL. The little that I have heard about this suggests that Watada may have unknowingly signed a document admitting to some extent to the charges against him. Since this compromised his defense and his 5th Amendment protections, a mistrial was declared. It looks like the military judges acted appropriately in safeguarding Watada’s rights.
OOOOOOOoooooohhhhhhh, just listening to the second go-round of Hardball.
“Ted Baxter,” “archangels of death….” Chris is on a roll. Gotta love it.
Why did Libby think he’d get away with blaming Russert? Timeline, Chris, timeline. Who was in charge when….
Our sunshine concensus? “Tony and Carmela” Chee-knee are truly evil people.
click on “quote this comment” under the comment you want to quote.
It will be automatically pasted into the “leave a reply” window.
Scroll to the bottom of the “leave a reply window, find end of the copied text, hit enter for para break, then add your own comment. Preview to make sure it’s what you want. Then hit “submit comment”.
grandmaj, thanks, am trying it, everyone just keep ignoring my tries till i get it right, thanks in advance.
tried that before and the quote didn’t show up when it posted, but will try it again…..
I thought Dick Cheney avoided testifying to the original grand jury “under oath.” I thought both he and Bush would only testify with their lawyers and not under oath.
Am I right or wrong?
voxpopgirl @ 80
From your finger tips lips to god’s ear.
Valley Girl says: February 7th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
click on “quote this comment” under the comment you want to quote.
It will be automatically pasted into the “leave a reply” window.
Scroll to the bottom of the “leave a reply window, find end of the copied text, hit enter for para break, then add your own comment. Preview to make sure it’s what you want. Then hit “submit comment”.
******************************************
i hit ‘quote this comment’ in the one i want to quote, but it’s not automatically pasting into the window, no copied text, and there is no scroll arrow, just a box until i type enough into the window, then scroll appears…..
and no preview, just submit comment and spell check options buttons….am using safari…….
so still didn’t work.
and thanks everyone for the help, will get it eventually…….
kristinejoy @
130
Did the Gannon visitation logs ever come out?
dmac- I use Firefox. Maybe there’s a browser issue? Sure sounds like it. Try to get some input from Safari users. I seem to remember people talking about glitches before.
Valley Girl @
145
I’m using safari and have no problem
inmymind’seye @ 146
Thanks for the info. Always good to know if problem is general or specific. (If it’s a general problem, then FDL powers that be need to know).
selise @ 45
dmac @ 136
a couple of suggestions….
1. after you click on the “quote this comment” link, wait a bit (since you are on a slow dialup. maybe it will take a bit before the text will show up in the comment box at the bottom of the page. is that part working?
2. don’t click on the “quote” button on top of the commenting box (unless you’ve highlighted text you want put in ANOTHER blockquote box. i suggest you wait to try that until after you get the “quote this comment” working.
thanks everyone, it’s definitely not doing what it’s supposed to do, i think…….am on an older computer, may have something to do with it. may be the version of browser……..thanks again, i appreciate the help…….. have a few other things to go do now, and then am going upstairs to new thread to catch up…….(((((((firepup helpers))))))))
OMFG…THAT was funny!
Thank you for the very brilliant use of the internet to emphasize a point. There are tears in my eyes.
selise @149 says
will just start doing it this way……..boxing people in a quote box that i make……learned that one a little while ago……with help.
the dial-up issue-i experimented with that suggestion and when i hit quote this comment, takes me immediately to ‘leave a reply’ so waited a while to see if anything appears, and no, nothing did, so must be because is an older browser…have a friend that i can ask about that…..so, will just start using quote-unquote with people’s names at the top, if this works!!!!!!
thanks everyone!
dmac – glad you were able to figure out a workaround… good luck!
Mauimom @ 90
The fun starts at 6:30 a.m. here. If this keeps up, I’ll have to start drinking coffee!
-S
kristinejoy @ 17
Well it all depends on whether you think reporters should protect sources who are using them to commit criminal acts. As the US Court of Appeals judges in the Cooper/Miller case (several sympathetic to journalist-source privilege) stated…there’s a big distinction between a whistleblower revealing acts of government malfeasance and misbehavior, and someone within that government who are using the media to conceal or perpetrate malfeasance and misbehavior.
voxpopgirl @ 95
test (sorry, but it is late, right?)
:)
[Mod Note; Nicely done and no apologies necessary. One cautionary note, more than 4 nested comment in a single comment can push the edges of the screen margins. Hence, “zig alerts”.]
Fitzgerald operates at the pleasure of the President.
The Bush Legacy and GOP Presidential politics in 2008 will not be sacrificed to Cheney.
Because Cheney has become recalcitrant, power mad, and downright disobedient. The MSM says that he is of the school of thought that “reserves power to the the Executive.” Indeed, but he waylays the vast majority of it to the Vice Executive.
He was told to stop. He did not.
The Family and its old guard advisors, scary, stern people like James A Baker III have been rebuked by Dick Cheney. Who in the WH said, “Jim Baker can now go back to his day job”?
Long in play, a legacy protecting weapon, Fitzgerald is now off the leash. Scooter was stupid and told a lot of lies that are now choking him, helping to make the wily prosecutor’s job that much more thorough.
My Theory:
The Government wins against Libby. The truth of what has been obstructed will come out; Cheney will be indicted. Legally snared, and perfectly so, he will be forced to resign.
The Family will appoint McCain as VP. He will then run in 08 from a real Executive Catbird seat.
Rove has flipped and the deal has been struck to protect the Chief Executive from scrutiny, let alone indictment.
The target is Cheney.
And I say Hooo-ha!
bobby G at #109,
Wikinomics describes a similar process to what I see happening during the blogging of this trial. One of my students loved the book, and was sharing the ideas with me.
But maybe we can come up with a more specific word for what is happening here.
Wirearchy, helping to pull apart or undo traditional hierarchy gone bad.
I say “traditional hierarchy” because hierarchy in and of itself is not necessarily bad or ineffective, just not the way to run everything.
test