AP: Libby believes NBC News could clear him

http://www.al.com/newsflash/washington/index.ssf?/base/politics-9/1171269288318470.xml&storylist=washington

WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorneys for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby believe that NBC News holds a key to clearing him of perjury and obstruction charges in the CIA leak case.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, wants a federal judge to let his lawyers question Andrea Mitchell, NBC's foreign affairs correspondent, about when she learned that the wife of an outspoken Bush administration critic worked for the CIA.

.....

Plame was outed in a July 2003 syndicated column. Three months later, Mitchell said in a television interview that she had known Plame worked for the CIA before the column.

"It was widely known among those of us who cover the intelligence community," Mitchell said.

Mitchell has since recanted those comments and has said she can't explain them.

.....

Though the comments (Mitchell's) seem to bolster Libby's case, it's unclear whether his attorneys will be allowed to play them for jurors. Attorneys are not normally allowed to present hearsay evidence or call witnesses simply to do so.

The article goes on the say that Mitchell is fighting the subpoena to testify. It also mentions that Russert did not support Libby's claim.

So how would this help explain Libby's 'learning it as if it was new' from reporters bit? By what, saying all NBC reporters knew so Russert perjured himself?

Since Russert directly contradicted what Libby said, now they have to try to discredit him. And all they have is a statement that has already been recanted by the person who made it.

It's weak, and it shows just how weak the defense is. Mitchell's statement, even if allowed and believed by the jury, cuts both ways. It might show that Russert lied and that in fact "everyone" knew about Plame, but it still doesn't prove that Libby found out from Russert like he told investigators. And if "everyone" knew, it makes it even more unlikely that Libby found the information so unimportant that he "forgot" that he found out from Cheney.

The defense is desperate.

If Libby is convicted it will lend more weight to the trial testimony and possibly open the door for a reduced sentence in exchange for testimony against Crashcart. If Cheney goes down in criminal court then that hurts the whole administration more, and they are already wobbling on their pins as is.

If Mitchell's recanted statement about everyone knowing about Plame were true, which she says it was not, then possibly Timmy knew about Plame, which he said he did not, and told Libby, which he said he did not.

to "prove" Libby didn't blab Plame's identity to every reporter he met

what that has to do with the perjury charge has me flummoxed

She, like Timmy Russert, like Rick Sanchez at CNN and Miami'Channel 7 prior to that have a penchant for speaking things that they think makes them look good without knowing what they are really talking about like having to say later, especially when faced with some legal challenge, :I can't explain it." Malarky.

I just don't see how it helps Libby...

put a few other *sses in the frying pan; cheney's and bush's for example.

I'm saying it doesn't help Libby's case because I'm roasting marshmellows eagerly watching his high priced defense team produce nothing of use for him.

And it's not like I can "help" him even if I wanted to (which I don't).

"family"?

hmmmmm.....

""It was widely known among those of us who cover the intelligence community," Mitchell said.

Mitchell has since recanted those comments and has said she can't explain them."

WHORE!!!! one word says it all. When she was called on her BS in court, she issued a retraction. Until then it was all pom poms and Bush support.

She wasn't under penalty of perjury in front of a TV camera. That's part of why those hearsay rules exist...

but it does show just how much of a whore and cheer leader she was for the administration. She helped them commit high crimes by trying to sway public opinion etc.... This is the part of this trial I have been enjoying, and I have said to my wife several times that it has nothing to do with the perjury charge. But it does put all of their business in the street, airs that dirty laundry. Those 21 republic senators that are up for re-election in '08 will have a fight on there hands because they have defended this administration. Rudy and John are engaged in a love-fest with this administration and its war policy. I think if they keep going we could run Gerry Studds and Barney Frank for president and still pick up the religious right and all of the south. Not a thing to do with perjury, but a lot to do with a veto proof congress and a lot to do with getting rid of the oppositions ability to filibuster. The republics will get all of the up down votes that they can stomach in the senate. The only reason there would be a non-binding resolution at that point is because some spineless bastard wants to get voted out of office.

But then they would have to fire 90% of their on-air personalities (can't really call them news reporters/commentators anymore) starting with Russert and Tweety.

Can you imagine a twit like that testifying and trying to lie in front of a federal jury? oh be still my heart.

remember who her hubby is. that says it all

I agree that she lied on purpose when she said everyone knew about Plame's identity.

I think she was lying in an effort to protect the Bush administration.

If Andrea Mitchell gets on the witness stand, she will be asked directly if her statement "I don't know why I said that" is true.

He lied and obstructed more than just once during his GJ testimony.

It does not all hinge on the Russert phone call!

I've been listening to the tapes, and it's highly amusing. Libby is a really BAD liar. He giggles and stumbles over his words when he's lying, for one, and for two, he's got this amazing clarity when he's discussing "peripheral" issues and then he gets all hesitant and can barely form a coherent sentence when he's talking about something central to the case.

I'm sure this is obvious to the jurors as well

And silly me I thought it was because of Olbermann.

Nope they have had this in the works for months.

Well they may not be honest, reasoned, grounded, or in reality but they ARE organized!