If history is to judge the Washington Post by anything other than the irrational ditherings of Charles Krauthammer and his uncomfortable obsession with his prehistoric blow jobs, it will be saved by the presence of Dan Froomkin and his continued willingness to buck Donald Graham's party line with his excellent reporting. Witness the neat dismantling of Elizabeth Loftus' "Poor Scooter" Wall Street Journal piece on the Libby trial:
Elizabeth Loftus and Richard L. Steinberg write in a Wall Street Journal op-ed (subscription required) that "absence of expert-witness testimony may have contributed to an unjust verdict."
Loftus . . . Loftus . . . Sound familiar? Oh yes, she was the victim of what The Washington Post's Carol D. Leonnig called a Ginsu-like legal performance by Fitzgerald in a pretrial hearing last October.
"Fitzgerald's target in the witness box was Elizabeth F. Loftus, a professor of criminology and psychology at the University of California at Irvine. For more than an hour of the pretrial hearing, Loftus calmly explained to Judge Reggie B. Walton her three decades of expertise in human memory and witness testimony. Loftus asserted that, after copious scientific research, she has found that many potential jurors do not understand the limits of memory and that Libby should be allowed to call an expert to make that clear to them.
"But when Fitzgerald got his chance to cross-examine Loftus about her findings, he had her stuttering to explain her own writings and backpedaling from her earlier assertions. Citing several of her publications, footnotes and the work of her peers, Fitzgerald got Loftus to acknowledge that the methodology she had used at times in her long academic career was not that scientific, that her conclusions about memory were conflicting, and that she had exaggerated a figure and a statement from her survey of D.C. jurors that favored the defense. . . .
"There were several moments when Loftus was completely caught off guard by Fitzgerald, creating some very awkward silences in the courtroom.
"One of those moments came when Loftus insisted that she had never met Fitzgerald. He then reminded her that he had cross-examined her before, when she was an expert defense witness and he was a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office in New York."
Barbara Comstock probably didn't have to break a sweat to get the wingnutterati singing in harmony about what a victim poor lil' torture lovin', warmongering, spy-outing Scooter is, but the Washington ComPost ought to be ashamed of that kind of servile obeisance to power. If it wasn't for Froomkin and a few others since the Libby verdict came down, they might as well change their name to PRAVDA and just be done with it.
(graphic by alysheba)
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
Froomkin, Ftizgerald! Zed?
JANE!!
Though I still say, Carol Leonnig was the best MSM journalist covering this.
Someone said the other day–it’s fair and balanced. All the conservative BS on the editorial page, all the “facts have a liberal bias” on the news pages.
great graphic. kneepads and all.
“One of those moments came when Loftus insisted that she had never met Fitzgerald. He then reminded her that he had cross-examined her before, when she was an expert defense witness and he was a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in New York.”
If Loftus was quick she would have shot back that her forgetting that she met Fitzgerald proves her point about how faulty memory is. Heck, that was her chance to save the Shining Knight Scooter and she blew it (no Monica pun intended).
i must say i’m impressed at how much effort is being put into the whole “poor scooter” meme.
there was no rush to judgment; the man was guilty. if i’m a repug, i try to let it recede from the public’s memory.
but nooooo.
My position is that Mr. Libby is merely the tip of the iceburg. And that his involvement travels to the ‘highest’ levels. But I am beginning to wonder if the ‘highest levels’ are somewhere beyond Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush.
Jane, thanks for another great post and thanks for having Fitz’s back on this.
Elizabeth Loftus – the Bob Woodward of memory experts.
The lack of disclosure by these people is nauseating, to say the least.
Hi folks. Been reduced to lurking for awhile; must say you guys are the best thing to read every single day.
xo
Don’t ya just luv it. The Neocons calling upon those liberal California kooksto drum up a defense. I guess we’re OK when they need us. Is there nothing they won’t try? Hypocrisy to the ultimate end. From jury nullification to Crocodile tears? What trash!
When the far right isn’t using their unbridled power to destroy the careers, lives and credibility of their political adversaries they are claiming that they are beleaguered, under fire and the most victimized class in the world.
I still say that Mrs. Alito would have drowned in her own tears if hubby Sammy Alito was given one third of the right-wing Joe Wilson once over.
-GSD
There was a time when, I believe, you could do a ‘write-in’ on the presidential ballot. Is that still possible? Or has my party, the Democrats, schemed with the Republicans to prevent this?
they all take lessons from the claude rains shocked-shocked school of public speaking.
Oklahoma kiddo @
13
No, once Jerry Garcia died there was no competent write-in remaining.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 13
that train pretty much left the station at least a generation ago. if there was ever truly a chance of it happening.
Libby is not going to squeal. Pardon. We are locked in the box.
I like Froomkin’s view of Krauthammer from yesterday:
One of those conservative organs, Charles Krauthammer, writes in his Washington Post opinion column that a presidential pardon for Libby “should be granted now without any further delay.”
But Krauthammer seems to have not paid any attention to the prosecution case that convinced a unanimous federal jury of Libby’s guilt.
That was a fairly easy column to slap down.
I’m going to lose my lunch if I hear any more ‘poor Scooter’ crap. He is an architect of the neocon PNAC movement and ‘Cheney’s Cheney’. No hapless flunky he.
to continue along the thought of third party/write-in viability: it’s clear there’s a hunger for such an alternative, from the full range of the political spectrum. perot’s candidacy in 92 was quite potent. and the greens, bless them, are still i there doing the tough grass-roots work.
but the two-party system is adamant in keeping the door shut to other voices. it’s like what the big three networks would have done if they’d had the vision to imagine the impact cable would have on their viewership.
Mitch @
5
She’s never been that quick.
Loftus is to forensic psych what Condi is to the Office of SOS- Both should scurry back to the halls of academia where they can shove their opinions down the throats of hapless undergrads & leave the rest of us alone…
Mr Bush. Just who in hell do you think you’re dealing with? The FBI and the CIA, etc., got their signal to act lawless from YOU, Cheney, Rove and Gonzo.
ANCHORENA PARK, Uruguay – President Bush said Saturday the FBI has addressed the problems that led to illegal prying into personal information on people in the U.S., but “there’s more work to be done.”
To the WaPo’s credit, today marks the first day since the verdict that they haven’t run a “poor Scooter” piece on their Op-Ed page.
“Patience”, patience, patience. Sounds awfully like a Republican talking point.
fyi– and sorry for breaking in and not reading the thread yet.
cspan2 is carrying Fisk’s “The Great War For Civilisation” and he is interviewed by Laura Flanders.
Frank Probst @ 23
file this under: bar-setting, low.
Does there exist ‘conservative progressives’, ‘moderate progressives’, ‘liberal progressives’ and ‘radical progressives’?
Re: The “poor Scooter” talking point. I understand why Babs Comstock is pushing this theme. I just don’t get why anyone on the jury bought it. You think he’s a nice guy based on…well, what, exactly? The way he sat there at the defense table and didn’t take the stand in his own defense? Um, he didn’t do that because he’s “shy”, he did it because he (and his lawyers) knew that if he took the stand, he’d look even more guilty.
“So, what can be said about a newspaper’s editorial board that willfully lies to its readers and slanders an American citizen, Joe Wilson, who took on a difficult assignment for his government at no pay and who later tried to blow the whistle on a White House misleading the public on an issue as important as war?”
Robert Parry
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/030707a.html
And, all of you also ought to read his “Zeroing in on Cheney-Bush” at consortiumnews.com….March 7.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/030707.html
It is the best round up — in addition to firedoglake’s, that is — I’ve found. Really, really excellent. Practically an outline for the movie script!
I so appreciate the great public service these people (you!) are doing for those of us out here feeling so hopeless and desperate…..as we watch Bush and Cheney and Abu Gonzales, et al…..dismantle what’s left of what was best about this country.
Thanks again!
That paper should just call itself the Republican Post or the RightWing Post. I suppose the Grahamites think that if they keep one lefty, namely Froomkin, on staff, that constitutes “Fair and Balanced News.”
dmg @ 26
Baby steps, dmg. Baby steps.
You have to give credit where credit is due. In a similar vein, when people say that George W Bush has done absolutely no good since assuming office, I feel obliged to point out the Federal Do-Not-Call List.
Bumpersticker of the Day –
The Road To Hell Is Paved With Republicans
“There are no indispensable (wo)men.” Alas, when Meg Greenfield died, she took WaPo’s editorial page with her.
Who put Fred Hiatt as the Op-Ed Editor, anyway?
Talking points? Is that what Hillary engages in? Or is just plain old PR?
You can view that article on the Wall Street Journal site for free with a netpass from: http://news.congoo.com
That was on cnbc last week.
Frank Probst @ 23
Hmm. . . maybe that means Comstock took some time off, finally, to bleach her 3″ roots.
tokens. like olbermann. well meaning, and extremely rare
Frank at 31
I’m screaming laughing
Hillary. ‘If you don’t agree with me, vote for someone else’. Hillary: bad, bad Democrat. ‘Time-outs’ for you. And you will write three hundred times, “I will stop being a bad Democrat”.
Pachacutec @
36
They connect her.
-GSD
GSD: ROFL.
Has anyone seen this video of Roger Ailes embarrassing hisself? The Barack Obama joke is so funny it makes my arse bleed.
When I read this yesterday, I couldn’t help but wonder if Dan was calling Krauthammer a dick in a plausibly deniable way.
dmg @
4
I’ll second that…Even with the N.O.K.
;>)
Balrog @
10
Who reduced you?
Terry Olson @ 45
that’s what happens if you simmer for too long
angie @
25
I’m trying to wade through his book, which has great moments of history, mixed with anecdotes, sometimes brilliant, sometimes boring. It would be a wonderful book if it was better organized and a bit less self serving. I’ll probably end up finishing it, but I can’t help but think of Pierre van Paassen’s _Days of Our Years_ as I read TGWfC.
mui @ 42
He’s testing out material for Fox’s comedy program.
Terry Olson @
45
My kids and work. And a very pregnant Balrog-wife.
Balrog @ 49
CONGRATULATIONS!!! When is s/he due?
Ed*ard Teller @
48
Ailes, looking like Orson Welles in Touch of Evil. Only more sweaty and seamy.
-GSD
punaise @
46
Saute and simmer. The flavor can’t be beat.
Balrog @ 49
That trumps all. Make sure you give one of your closest FirePup peeps your email addy; if you go radio silent for a while and something big comes up, they can always email the good bits. ;-)
Just take care of business, Balrog.
Nice to see Bob Schieffer and George Stuffanappleupyourass chortling away at Roger Ailes lame jokes.
-GSD
A shameful injustice
Cuba’s 50-year defiance of US attempts to isolate it is an inspiration to Latin America’s people
Philip Agee
Saturday March 10, 2007
The Guardian
Rayne @ 53
I am doing my part. In 18 years I’ll have three votes against Lily Munster Bachmann!
Thanks for the thoughts!
GSD @ 54
But one has to admit that George S. has nice hair. And it’s always framed so nicely. No? ;0)
Ailes referring to Fox as “major news organization” and also reuses the “democrats are cowards” reinforcement in his attacks.
What a fracking liar.
-GSD
Terry Olson @
45
Why Mother’s Day, of course!
GSD @
12
Well said, GSD! And succinct. Has anybody seen an article that expands on that – comparing and contrasting media attention to the left and right when it comes to feeling sorry or not feeling sorry for people in Scooter’s position?
Ailes sure seemed comfortable in the stand-up role.
Almost as if he knew that it would come back to haunt him…
GSD @ 56
Reheating and serving the Half Hour Comedy Eternity leftovers, eh?
That runny sauce will stain their spats something fierce
;>)
Speaking of people that help keep us sane and informed, I miss Steve Gilliard.
The “Dirty Sanchez” story is the gift that keeps on giving!
darkblack @
62
Talon News eagle Jeff Gannon was spotted with a bib and hankering for some hot topping.
-GSD
Ed*ard Teller @
60
Valerie Wilson, fair game.
Mrs. Alito, fair dame.
-GSD
PLEASE, don’t give the Post too much credit for having Froomkin. AFAIK his column is only on the website, never in the actual paper.
I am sure the Post folks say all the links in his columns make it impossible for them to publish his work in the dead-tree version.
However, I am quite sure if they asked him, he would write a twice weekly op-ed column suitable for the paper.
The Post does not want his critical voice in their paper or the powers that be would put him there. They do appreciate that he drives traffic to the website, however.
GSD @ 65
If they are getting paid to laugh at Roger Ailes’ jokes, it’s not enough, because nothing in the world could make me want to give up my dignity like that.
-ck- @ 32
If you slice them thin….
GSD @ 66
GOP meme:
woman with brain – fair game
woman with little evidence of brain – fair dame
The “nice to see” was with tongue in cheek. It made me recoil actually.
-GSD
EPU’d from HK’s diary,
Great idea…
I always wondered why someone didn’t put together a single internet resource for the LEFT.
The site would have a calendar with events… demos, speeches, important legislative votes, hearings, even concerts, lectures, speeches, articles of interest on the net or in papers, TV and radio broadcasts… all things of interests to progressives.
It could more or less like a Wiki site where it was completely user developed and maintained. It could be searched, internationally regionally and locally and so forth.
And of course it would have LINKS to other web sites where you could drill down.
First stop to check on what’s happening each day, week, in your area! One website with it all and links to get more detail.
ThinkLeftLink.
According to the WaPo Editorialist, Loftus/Steinberg argue in their WSJ piece o’ birdcage lining that:
“Scooter Libby’s trial was “neither fair nor just” because of Judge Reggie Walton’s decision to bar expert-witness testimony from memory expert Dr. Robert Bjork. The authors argue that Bjork’s “testimony would have clarified the disputed facts that the jury found so troubling” and may have resulted in a different verdict …”
What disputed facts regarding memory would those be? Juror trial ?s & remarks afterward don’t seem to indicate any IMO.
GSD @ 66
OK. I have a cold so I reread that ziggurat I was in danger of going into a coughing fit.
Wait, it was the GSD @65 and Darkblack ziggurat that almost got me choking.
FWIW Elizabeth Loftus is a respected researcher in cognitive psychology, who has made a career out of calling into question the accuracy of eye-witness testimony specifically in identifying suspects.
So this is what Fitzgerald probably did: he went to her academic competitors and got their grad students to write critiques of Loftus’ work.
Damn, this guy is good.
Elizabeth Loftus?
Puh-leese!
From another case:
Loftus is not a clinician but a self-styled “researcher” on memory.
Her idea of research is more like browbeating 20 kids into falsely stating they must have seen a giant pink bunny in the mall, then asserting that this “study” shows that memories of childhood sexual abuse are therefore bogus.
Scooter’s keeping some very funny company.
What a surprise! The WSJ didn’t bother to disclose that she wasn’t allowed to testify at the trial because she didn’t know what she was talking about.
Aren’t these people EVER embarrassed? (that was rhetorical, of course they’re not)
Sorry, 76, but I must strongly contradict your assertions about Loftus.
(Which was the point of my post above, which overlapped with yours, but was not in direct response to yours, as this is.)
mui @
75
With apologies, I haven’t yet mastered the art of the digital Heimlich maneuver.
-GSD
On cspan just now, Fisk said something like this:
When Blair says he absolutely believes he made the right decision on attacking Iraq, he was not giving testimony to the rightness of the decision, but rather to his opinion of himself.
Good stuff.
GSD @ 12
You’re right. She would have drown. Because sackless, evil liars like Samuel Alito couldn’t tolerate a partner with a spine.
And then there are men like Joe Wilson. Who hang with women like Valerie.
Gay Man Implores Hometown Paper He Delivered As Boy To Drop Coulter
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..livery.php
Froomkin rules and what’s even better he does it in the same rag that publishes Novak and Krauthammer. How neatly subversive.
Balrog @ 15
Trouble Ahead…Trouble Behind!
And to complete the irony about WaPo becoming Pravda, the actual Pravda is not a half bad newspaper these days. They might be getting as much real news out as the Post. [I like some others better and the only real news is radio echo.]
There’s a joke there somewhere. All the other media are echoes…
Oklahoma kiddo @ 27
We’re about to find out, here, now that the elections and the trial are over.
echo and the funny papers
Been a lurker here for some time and this is my 1st comment. Just want to say that as a sort of captive audience of the Washington Post (Virginia burbie), I SO appreciate this post and yesterday’s, particularly the refs to the mummified Krauthaummer……I mean, you can’t expect any bettter from him, but speaking of bj’s, that BushCo. dick-sucking editorial drivel they published the day after the Libby verdict was about the lowest depth to which a once respectable publication has ever sunk. In my opinion.
Rock on, FDL…….
AOL poll on the Roger Ailes matter is pretty lame. According to the saps it was Moveon.org that made the Democrats drop out.
-GSD
welcome oddmommy!
oddmommy @ 89
Krauthammer delivers one heckuva a mummy hummer.
-GSD
Lurk no more, oddmommy. Welcome to the Lake!
Whatever will we do with the mummified critters like Krauthammer when their medium finally keels over belly up for utter lack of relevance?
We’re going to have to think of something to do with them…ugh.
A big ol’ fdl welcome to oddmommy!
Framing the issue:
Frame 1: Scooter’s Choice. They are now pushing the “Pardon Poor Scooter” meme. This should be countered by reminding the public that Scooter has it within his ability to avoid prison at any moment. His crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice are ongoing. If he were to decide to tell Fitz the truth, even now, there would be no need for jail time or a pardon. So it is his decision to go to jail, at every instant.
Frame 2: Executive accountability. Although the President’s authority to pardon is absolute, this is not a typical pardon such as one given for compassionate reasons, e.g. a murderer with an IQ of 50. In this case there is a conflict of interest, and for the President to issue a pardon would make it impossible for there to be any real investigation of the executive branch in all future administrations. It short circuits the entire rule of law, as subordinates will know they will be able to lie with impunity, and later be pardoned by a corrupt administration. How can the Executive Branch ever be held accountable if this is allowed to take place?
Frame 3: Cover-up. If despite the arguments above the pardon is issued anyway, then we must be prepared to scream “pre-arranged deal” and “cover-up” as loudly as possible and go for the political jugular. You know they would. Best would be to create the thread of some sort of conspiracy, with just enough truth to allow the conspiracy nuts run with it. And it probably would not be too far from the truth.
Thanks for the great trial coverage.
litespeed
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 85
Thankyou. I miss Jerry Garcia more than I’ll probably ever know. I saw these guys in Winterland, SF, I think, (perhaps it was the Fillmore) many ago. They had just released their first LP album. ;0)
Eureka Springs, AR @ 88
lol!!
Now that Oddmommy (89) has come out, she has shamed me into coming out also. Been lurking and reading here for a long time and I gotta tell you, it’s oh so great to read what everyone has been posting. Nice to be in good company, puts the Ho back in Hope!
Rayne!
My Little Pony Express message:
lhp got yr message and says tx
Things are cookin’. And we have a new member of the MROSS, Marcy-Rayne Office Supplies Support Group: CHS.
Welcome NickOdemus!
and…
Hi lurkers –
the Lake is warm today – please do jump in and get acquainted!
77, Loftus is a legitimate psychology researcher. Your attack on her is unwarranted.
Whether her research holds water is the stuff of peer review. She has certainly published plenty. Fitzgerald probably found some peers who disagree with her conclusions. It happens.
She should have been able to defend herself. Anybody whose career is based on standing up in front of peer researchers and making claims must be able to defend those claims. That she didn’t is admittedly damning.
I totally agree with the point of this post. It is disgraceful that Loftus did not herself reveal her conflict of interest in writing the op-ed piece. Sounds like her bruised ego led her to co-author a hit piece on Fitzgerald; unfortunately it will probably rebound and do her career some damage. Sad really.
Pull up a lilly pad, lurkers. The water is fine.
Hey NickOdemus—
Welcome! Please let us hear from you often. Nearly everybody here is a newbie within the last 12 months. If you’ve been here longer it’s like being a great-grandpa/ma.
So speak up, what you have to say might save the world. No pressure :)
Some call me names. Like ‘radical’. Makes me feel all warm and toasty inside.
Balrog @
56
Oh man. I hope the cosmos conspires to retire “Lily” from office long before your 3 new voters are ready.
That’s one intensely dedicated way to GOTV, though. Maybe we should talk about less expensive approaches. Heh.
litespeed,
are you new? Stupendous analysis. Whoever you are, want to hear more from you.
egregious @ 99
TY, egregious. Appreciate the feedback.
Really? CHS is a Post-It sniffer, too? Who’da thunk it?
Bet you she LOVES those little tape flags, the kinds used to earmark signatures on agreements.
oddmommy @ 89
Welcome, from another Northern Virginian! I know what you mean; we still get the Post on Sundays (Ms. Redshift likes the coupons and a couple of other sections; I hardly read anything but the comics any more.) But like it or not, it’s the hometown paper.
Did you know that Oklahoma was once considered a socialist state. True. It’s in the history books. And one day, Oklahoma will again be dark blue.
Taylor at 101,
I respect your opinion that she is a legitimate research analyst in psychology. But that does not immediately translate into being a specialist in memory defense for the courtroom.
One of my sisters [the lawyer] used to work for a company that procured people for expert testimony. This person would not have made the cut.
I’m sure she is a lovely human being that does fine reserach, it just didn’t hold up in court.
In a spirit of balance and objectivity, the Washington Post will probably ask Harriet Grant to weigh in on the Libby trial with an op-ed.
Is there an English version available on the net of Pravda?
Rayne
I’m a scotch tape person myself. Comes from many years of being scolded for using more than the minimum to wrap Christmas presents.
Now I’m a grownup and can use as much scotch tape as I please bwahahahaha!!!!
Plus my dad the city prosecutor had this amazing cupboard that was full of office supplies. You could just imagine doing so much with them.
I know, need to wait for the next meeting of MROSS…..
And my childhood allergist had this amazing cupboard full of medical supplies :D but who could imagine I would grow up to be a charity president that provided medical supplies to others?
Watch what you teach your children!
Yep, here it is. Pravda.
Hurry now, they still have my dreamy Brazillian anti-Bush protester front paged.
-GSD
Hugh @ 111
Well she IS a Democrat.
All we need is a miracle
All we need is Hugh
GSD @ 114
;0)
GSD @ 114
Truly inspiring.
Ladies? Are we up to the challenge?
Pravda has a way of cutting to the quick too.
Lookat this:
USA starts respecting Iran’s sovereignty as it moves closer to nuclear weapons
“Experts pointed out a curious detail: the closer a country moves towards the creation of nuclear weapons, the more attention it receives from the United States. The USA is uncapable of attacking Iran, at least in the near future…”
Smack.
-GSD
Taylor @ 76
Excuse me, have you read anything about Fitzgerald’s cross-examination that led the judge to refuse to admit Loftus as an expert witness? We don’t have to speculate about “what Fitzgerald probably did”; if you bother to read, we know exactly what he did:
Loftus may or may not be a well-established researcher, but publishing peer-reviewed articles is not the only qualification to be an expert witness in legal proceedings. And it is absolutely false to imply that Fitzgerald used some cheap legal trick to get her disqualified. That she also implied that she was unfairly disqualified in the WSJ certainly doesn’t raise my opinion of her.
Don’t look now, it’s Chimpy Chaplin.
-GSD
Rayne,
If you’re hard core you have tape flags in different colors.
Frank Probst @ 28
From my own experience on juries, I can tell you that feeling sorry for the defendant is a natural thing. If you find him guilty, he is likely to spend a considerable portion of his life without his freedom. That’s a disconcerting thought in itself. Combine that with the fact that anyone who had already formed a negative opinion of Libby thanks to the sorts of things we know about him, they probably wouldn’t have been on the jury in the first place.
So, basically, that impression of little Scooter sitting at the defense table and interacting with his supporters and defense team is about the only thing the jury really know about him. Under the circumstances, I don’t find their feelings too surprising.
LHP is upstairs
GSD @ 114
That’s one healthy-looking young protestor. Ola! Fora Bush!
also at the pravda site, ran across thissssss picture of Tom DeLay
egregious @ 113
Alas, too late. They use every Post-It pad and 3×5 card as soon as I buy them, for everything from missives that they literally stick on my nose while I’m on a conference call to miniature paper airplanes to throw at the pendant light fixture in the foyer. The older one created a new cover for her mandatory school planner out of a mixture of curling ribbon, Scotch tape and duct tape — because she was bored.
I try to hide them, but they find them, like adhesive-seeking missiles. Wish I could write the stuff off…
edit: rainbow tape flags!! is there any other kind?? I have the nifty little Franklin Planner insert that dispenses the rainbow, too!!
this picture, actually: http://english.pravda.ru/img/idb/photo/3-447.jpg
punaise @ 125
I don’t think he has that many legs.
Rayne @
107
Office supplies? Did someone mention office supplies?
I always thought that memory research and legal proceedings didn’t mix. A once sat in on a class on learning and memory a few years back. I came away impressed that some fine research was being done but I also saw that there were at least 5-10 theories of memory all with their strong points but also with significant weaknesses. You can kind of talk about how memory works some ways some of the time but there is still no comprehensive theory of memory that I know of. This rather takes away its usefulness I would think in a legal setting. You can only say that something might be a certain way with the caveat that it might not be.
Valley Girl @ 123
About here, I think.
Cujo359 @
124
Ole’, ole’, ole’, ole’, oy-vey.
-GSD
Thank you for calling the little prick “Irving”, he seems to hate it.
SteveNS @ 9
Maybe Ms. Loftus FORGOT that she testified in the trial during the evidentiary portions? Or maybe she FORGOT that disclosure is an ethical requirement? Or maybe she FORGOT that she actually lost that hearing. Or maybe she FORGOT to tell the editor.
Maybe she FORGOT which of these she FORGOT!
mui @ 42
And guess what…the Dems have pulled out of the F*UX moderated/sponsored Presidential debate in Nevada.
http://www.kcra.com/news/11220…..p;psp=news
Boo-hoo to Mr. Ailes…who will have his “balance” toward the Presidential candidates wiped in his face like meconium!
Taylor @ 101
My impression was that Fitz impeached her statements IN THIS CASE by citing the conclusions of her own PUBLISHED Papers that held just the opposite. He then asked her if she had PUBLISHED any work that supported her claims and she didn’t have any.
Sandy @ 29
Thank you, Sandy!
I came late to this comment thread, but that timeline overview of Plamegate by Robert Parry is the absolute best that I have read so far.
Particularly interesting was his outing of the Armitage-Rove relationship. I had previously been under the misapprehension that somehow Armitage was not a partisan gun-slinger. How wrong I was (and how wrong was Robert Novak’s characterization of him). He may have been Powell’s guy, but he was also a signatory to the neocon Plan for a New American Century (PNAC) which declared that Saddam Hussein was an enemy to the US and called for “regime change” in Iraq well before 9/11. That later became official US policy with the McCain-Lieberman bill of 1998.
I just taught the Loftus section of my own course, and I agree that her participation (I mean as she as behaved, not her choice to participate at all) is sad. Was sad even before the WSJ piece.
And I see no fleas on Loftus because she has worked on child-abuse cases — anyone who truly believes in “innocent until proven guilty” should IMNSHO appreciate her contributions. (The Wee Care case of very dubious questioning methods is an example of some of the general problems.) That doesn’t mean she wants to shield genuine perpetrators.
What’s very weird is how any of her work would relate to defending Libby, since he was not exactly claiming that someone implanted a false memory in him about a documented meeting w/Cheney or something.
And Fitzgerald did not just go into some intra-Tower (the ivory one I mean) mud-slinging, he offered critiques based on inconsistencies and admitted limitations in her own work.
What was she thinking? Why is she hanging with Comstock’s friends instead of picketing Congress until they restore full observance of the Geneva Conventions, which would be very germane?
Yeah I know I’ve been epu’d here but this is close to home…
DefJef @ 72
Although this may seem like a good idea at first glance, I am strongly of the opinion that it would not work out well for many of us.
In order to explain my position, I will lean heavily on the analogy of looking up a topic in a regular library. If you find that someone is using the reference that you want or the reference is checked out ( like the site is down temporarily or the server is overloaded and the response is too slow ) you naturally go to another reference for the information. The specific reference you choose will be, at least in part, determined by: the level of detail that you need at that time; the amount of time you have to secure the information; the amount of time you want to spend on the topic, once the information is in hand. If you are an expert in the field for which you are looking for some information then you may not need an exceptionally good search engine ( online catalog & a good librarian ) but most people will need a high quality search engine. If you are an expert in the field for which you want some data, you will probably know the library call numbers for the section where the information is to be found. All of the info would then literally be within an arm’s reach. This would be like knowing the web site that has the info you are searching for. Just one more point. An encyclopedia is almost never the best source for detailed information about a topic. Similarly what you are proposing would only be comparable to an encyclopedia, whereas if I find a curent news topic of interest I will usually want to dig deeper. By way of example, some links at Jabberwonk or Raw Story may have interested you but FDL was where to go if you wanted info about the Libby trial.
I’m mostly a lurker and not so familiar with all of the jargon around here — what does Jane mean by referring to the Washington Post as the ComPost, beyond “compost pile” — or is that just it? I’ll happily start using the term — I hate the Post.
And, my favorite Jane Hamsher stories are about the Post. Stick it to the man! :-)
Jane – You are SO right about MSM like WuzPost (wuz a good newspaper). It is important that you guys keep doing the job you are doing.
I’ve called it PRAVDA on Potomac for quite a while now
Re: the “Poor Scooter” meme — In order for the Irvster to be pardoned under these arguments, he has to be seen as memory-addled, ineffective, and holding an office of little relevance to the nation’s business. Wonder how it feels for someone with his ego to be portrayed THAT way? I guess it’s still better than the pokey.
And re: Froomkin — He actually reads the messages left on the Post Website, so show him some love sometime.
Loftus was a person who made her name on an ideology, not on science. She had an ax to grind about the “false memory syndrome,” and joined the people who took a legitimate scientific question into another almost “cult-like” realm. I’m sorry that she wasn’t allowed to testify too, though not for the reason that they suggest in the Wall Street Journal. I would have loved to see her taken apart piece by piece by the likes of Patrick Fitzgerald. She’s the kind of person that has made a mockery of “expert” testimony by people in the mental health field. She’s been an agent of harm in her own right and Fitz is just the guy to show that to the world. She’s lucky he took her out early and spared her a public humiliation of the third kind – on-stage and live-blogged…
Just stopped by to say thanks for your good work during Libby Trial. Lets hope the other shoe drops..
Analogies:
A. Elizabeth Loftus: legitimate research on memory
B. Toddler-whipping advocate James Dobson: good parenting.
C. George W. Bush: good government.
Which analogy is incorrect?
(Answer–none).
Hi Jane, Sorry ’bout the ‘Trojans.’ My ‘Ducks’ played a near perfect game.
Maybe a pardon now wouldn’t be such a bad thing.
If Scooter was going to flip, he surely would have by now. He’s probably planning to stay out of jail pending appeals until December 2008, when a pardon would be politically easier for W. So what’s his incentive to cooperate with investigators now? None that I can see.
Except by conservatives, a pardon now would not be viewed as a merciful act for poor Scooter – Bush is known to lack that quality. A pardon would be more generally interpreted as a reward to Libby for having lied to protect Bush and Cheney from investigation and prosecution.
An early pardon for Libby would be compared to Nixon’s Saturday Night Massacre, the firing of special prosecutor Archibald Cox (except don’t expect the AG to resign this time!). Both events would be examples of the most blatant abuse of Presidential powers, for the self-serving purpose of obstruction of justice.
I think a pardon now would set off a firestorm, which might help some more Congressional Dems, and possibly a few Repugs, to grow spines. A thorough and aggressive investigation by Congressional committee could be the outcome.
Testimony would be required. Efforts by a lying and intentionally forgetful witness to obstruct a Congressional investigation could result in indefinite incarceration, which may not be subject to pardon. Libby might then have greater incentive to help see that truth is served.
IMHO, the canary is unlikely to sing unless he is certain he will be confined to the cage.
In the game of chess, pawns are the least powerful pieces of the board, but their position in front of the big pieces make them the dominant forces to reckon with during the early and early middle game.
I think we are well into the middle game now. The major pieces are out in the open – exposed. Libby’s fate is immaterial to the outcome of the game. It’s time to focus on
Cheneythe Queen, either capturinghimher or renderinghimher ineffective.I wrote a letter to the Wash Post which – surprisingly – was not published asking why it is that Fred Hiatt opinion of perjury changes with administrations. Or is it because perjury and obstruction of justice in a act of revenge against a critic of the President’s conduct in war is – obviously – trivial compared to the private acts of two consenting adults?
radlib1 — You’re welcome! I’m so glad you found Robert Parry…and consortiumnews.com…as helpful and informative as I have. He’s really excellent, and I, too, learned some things I hadn’t realized before. Though I did know Armitage was one of the original PNAC signers and a neo-con …not just the inept “gossip” he has been made out to be.
What a story this is! If some novelist wrote it, who would believe it?
My heart goes out to the Wilsons…having to live it.