The DU Libby Lottery

Team Libby will be filing a document in court later today. After Fitzgerald's powerful document last week, which landed three powerful blows to the Libby forces, it is interesting to speculate what they will respond with today.

Will they come out swinging?

Will they try to cool things down?

Will they focus attention on Bush? Rove? Wilson? Fitzgerald?

Will they hope to use Powell, Hadley, or Armitage as distractions?

What do you think?

His name is all over the place today, out in front of a story?

but the guy said with all the filings there'll probably be several revelations before Libby even gets to trial.

Unless I have that date wrong?

There were people who believed it would help the administration's friends by having it scheduled after the 2006 elections. The motions being filed, however, have the potential to keep the scandal in the public eye in a manner that is harmful to all the president's friends.

that Rove has been putting the hooks to Libby. Just a matter of time before they each try to throw the other under the bus aggressively.

I would like to see Libby at war with Cheney.

Since the White House has said they would not comment on pending cases (that actually is appropriate)Cheny will be left to trist in the wind and while surrogates will certainly intercede, inside the Beltway ols and pundits will start calling for him to resign.

ly that we'll see a war between Cheney's camp and Bush's camp led by Rove. Rove is going to do his darndest to bury Scooter as deep as he can.

gd, I hope that wasn't "it"

for when the filing is made public, I will copy and paste the important parts to get them here ASAP for you all.

I still don't know how to make the PDF's link to a new address so that people can view them without the required user id and password.

I am gonna try to check it every hour hopefully they will file the public documents between lunch and 5pm, cause from 5-8pm I disappear for a while. If they are not filed by then, then I will check later in the night. I'll try to pm you and others when they are released.:headbang:

It depends on whether the WH and Libby's lawyers have been in 'talks' or not as to what they will file, imo. If the WH leaves Libby hanging, the filing may well further the pointing of fingers elsewhere whereas if the WH has promised Libby something, they will come out swinging against Fitzgerald. Or none of the above, lol.

The article about Fitzgerald's clarification from "...a key judgment of the NIE..." to "... some of the key judgments of the NIE,..." may well have been done in preparation for the filing today by Libby's lawyers.

That is obstruction in its simplest form. Counsel's office if they condoned it would be setting themselves up for disbarment.

According to a reporter's comment at the Scottie McTwoChins presser.

I think they will try to stall this until after November, then cut their losses and give Libby a WEINBERGER pardon (a pardon ahead of conviction). Bush will take heat, but since his ratings are in the tank anyway, no biggie. He'll endlessly repeat that we "need to move on" and attack Iran to change the subject.

even to the pretense of caring about the laws of the land? The media has reported Libby has been at the WH and Snotty Scottie will not confirm nor deny.

otherwise, Snot would have given one of his smirkie, "absolutely not true" statements.

no one in the WH is a "target", but certainly Cheney and Rove remain persons of interest. It sets people up for obstruction charges. Harriet Meiers is an idiot for letting it occur if she in fact has. That being said if Libby's lawyers were deposing witnesses it would be a different matter. Doing so in the WH is just beyond stupid.

I think they will focus on Cheney and Bush.

Libby is smarter than both of them and he is going to use it.

My understanding of this current set of filings is that Libby wants access to lots of classified docs. If the judge says he needs that access or he can't mount a legitimate defense, then Libby wins. There's no way he's getting his hands on those docs - he doesn't really want them, just to be refused access.

My bet, in the new filings his lawyers aggressively go after access.

And will want to move the focus away from Libby and OVP which says to me he'll go after Rove in a fit of spite and/or FitzG. and again try to make the case that DOJ didn't have the right to give him the authority. Spaghetti against the wall time.

I choose Wilson - Valerie Plame Wilson.

to say for sure what Team Libby will do, it looks like the brain-dead Michelle Malkinite troops will be out quoting the fully discredited nonsense about Ms. Wilson not being a NOC, and the drunken blubbering of Christopher Hitchins parroting the fully exposed myth that Iraq was attempting to buy Niger yellow cake.

Can't they do any better than this?

Repeat it often and long enough and it's adopted as the truth. I think they've even brainwashed themselves, sometimes,...but, I doubt it.

But, they have so many "Malkinites" that their message gets out there widely enough to create some doubt in the minds of some people. And a reasonable doubt in the court of public opinion can carry a lot of weight.

Libby makes new filing in CIA leak case

RAW STORY
Published: Wednesday April 12, 2006

Print This | Email This

Lawyers for I. Lewis Libby, Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff who was indicted for obstructing the investigation of an outed CIA agent, made a new filing in the CIA leak case Wednesday afternoon, RAW STORY has learned.

The filing has not been publicly released. RAW STORY will provide more detail when it becomes available.

Libby's filing comes in response to prosecutors' assertions that he was authorized by President George W. Bush to take part in an effort to discredit Joseph Wilson, a critic of administration's Iraq policy and husband of the outed CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. Wilson traveled to Niger to investigate claims that Iraq had sought uranium from the African country; he found the claims to be spurious.

DEVELOPING...

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Libby_makes_new_filing_in_CIA_0412.html

kick

For those interested .... in a February hearing, Judge Walton scheduled the dates for filings on CIPA. They were changed twice. The decision was made to have the filing on 3-17; the response on 4-5; and the reply on 4-12.

Classified Information Procedures Act. The daily briefings.

When Libby raised the problem of discussing the NIE with Miller because of its classified status, the filing reports that Libby "testified that the Vice President later advised him that the President had authorized" Libby to disclose the relevant portions of the NIE. (Emphasis added.)

The word "later" here, in the filing, is crucially ambiguous: Did the President authorized Libby's actions before Libby actually revealed the classified information to Miller, or afterward? The distinction may make a large difference in Libby's defense: If the authorization was retroactive, then Libby initially revealed classified information without permission to do so; thus, he would have reason to lie.

In addition, Cheney's counsel (now Chief of Staff) "opined that Presidential authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to a declassification of the document." (Emphasis added.)

Again, the language here is telling. The filing says that the President's actions "amounted to" declassification, not that the President had unilaterally declassified the material. To the contrary, it appears the material was not declassified for several days.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060407.html

“As readers will likely be aware, Fitzgerald indicted Libby for obstruction of justice, perjury, and making false statements to federal investigators. In response, Libby has repeatedly sought discovery of government information that he argues is relevant to his defense. On April 5, Fitzgerald's office filed a response to Libby's third effort at discovery of such information.

In his response, Fitzgerald treated Libby's request as a mere fishing expedition, a fairly typical response by a party who does not want to give up discovery. But Fitzgerald also revealed crucial new information about his investigation and findings in opposing Libby's request.

The Plame controversy, readers will recall, began with a July 6, 2003 New York Times Op Ed by Joseph Wilson, taking aim at the Administration's claim that Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium from Africa to be used in nuclear weapons. The Op Ed began, explosively, as follows: "Did the Bush administration manipulate intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs to justify an invasion of Iraq? Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

Fitzgerald's filing noted that the "evidence will show that" that Op Ed "was viewed in the Office of the Vice President as a direct attack on the credibility of the Vice President (and the President) on a matter of signal importance: the rationale for the war in Iraq."

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060407.html

Fitzgerald's office should post faster.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/legal_proceedings.html