Comments on: Libby Trial: Government Opening Arguments – Assessment

By: bain

bain — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:48:43 +0000

It turned out that none of the original charges were founded.

Still sticking to that? Wells just refuted you.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:48:45 +0000

ken, I'm simultaneously live-blogging the trial, giving my best impression of what's happening, and doing analysis of what it all means. My role isn't to be dispassionate--I'm a commentator, not a reporter--just fair. And I'm not arguing that the law doesn't apply to Libby, just questioning whether he actually broke it. My very post on the Plame controversy said that, if true, people should be jailed and the president impeached. It turned out that none of the original charges were founded.

By: ken

ken — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:10:42 +0000

James, what role are you taking here?

Are you a dispassionate observer, reporting the facts for those of us not there?

Or are you embracing the conservative ideology that the law applies only to others, like liberals, and using your blog in support of that ideology?

Seems to me you are doing the latter.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:47:28 +0000

Nothing I got from the opening argument had him directly telling the grand jury that he hadn't learned the information previously, just that he had told various reporters that. Further, he claims to have heard from reporters about Plame's identity, which he in fact did.

By: bain

bain — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:40:51 +0000

Come on, he 'forgot' the pushback started before the op-ed? He 'forgot' the briefing from the CIA guy? He 'forgot' all the pushback he did with the reporters and getting Scottie to deny, deny? And then when he started to pass it around ... he 'forgot' he and the OVP did all that - and was startled by that info later that week?

By: clarice

clarice — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:36:03 +0000

And something that questioning of reporters should establish is normal procedure.
A number of the key articles leading up to the investigation were deliberately falsely sourced (particularly the WaPo piece suggesting one WH official said 2 WH officials told 6 reporters). After at least one revision and tons of accusations against Rove and Libby it turned out to have been made by some low level pressie who didn't know what he was talking about.
Just saying--we may all get to see how sausage (political news) is made in this town and perhaps Fitzgerald will learn a thing or two in the process.

By: The Hindsight Factor | We Hold These Truths to be Self-Evident

The Hindsight Factor | We Hold These Truths to be Self-Evident — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Creative Ink - Libby trial: Fitzgerald opens the Libby trial OTB-Libby Trial: Libby Defense: Scooter Had TWO JOBS OTB-Libby Trial: Libby Trial: Scooter Feared Being Scapegoat for Rove OTB-Libby Trial: Libby Trial: Opening Arguments - Defense (Live Blog) OTB-Libby Trial: Libby Trial: Government Opening Arguments - Assessment