How Libby Used Info From Cheney As Source For Pincus+Dueling Libby Motive Briefs Filed

[kpete]

Dueling Libby Motive Briefs Filed
http://www.talkleft.com/LibbyTrial/422brief.pdf
http://www.talkleft.com/LibbyTrial/422libbybrief.pdf

As an aside, this is interesting -- how Libby used information from Cheney to be a confirming source for Walter Pincus:

....Defendant testified before the grand jury that he could have been a source for Walter Pincus’s June 12, 2003 article, and that it was during preparation for providing information to Mr. Pincus that the Vice President informed him that former Ambassador Wilson’s wife worked at the
CIA. 3/5/04 GJ Tr. at 60-63.

................

And here's a preview of coming attractions:

Next week, the jury will hear grand jury testimony by the defendant indicating that he was specifically focused on the possibility that Ms. Wilson’s employment was classified, based on allegations“ whipping around in the press.” 3/24/04 GJ Tr. 54-55.

My take: If the articles hadn't been underlined by Libby and weren't so close in time to his FBI interviews, I might agree with Team Libby. But, since they have argued to the jury he had no motive to lie because he knew he hadn't leaked to Novak and he thought the criminal investigation was limited to that leak, and he knew he hadn't disclosed classified information about Plame to journalists, I think I side with Fitz on this one.

much more plus PDF Briefs at:
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/2/3/162435/4321

[H2O Man]

1. Very interesting.

Very, very interesting! Thank you for posting these.

(nominated)

[kpete]

2. H2O Man

You are very welcome - helping you in any way is helping the country!

Thank you for all you do, kpete

[H2O Man]

3. Team work!

These are fascinating documents. I think they help us take measure how much pressure that Scooter is under this weekend. Next week may be full of surprises.

[Me.]

4. What's Also Interesting Is

Jerilyn Merritt has been a strong advocate for defendants in the past. Whenever there was a lawyer v. lawyer segment on cable news or other shows, she usually argued for the defense.`The fact that she agrees with Fitz. gives added weight to the likelihood that the judge will rule in his favor.

[H2O Man]

6. Good point.

Many of us tend to favor defense attorneys. But Mr. Fitzgerald stands out among both prosecutors and defense attorneys.

[Patsy Stone]

5. Game. Set. Match.

There goes Scooter's "no reason to lie" story right out the window, I'm thinking. I love Patrick Fitzgerald.

If the first exhibit is admitted, then it also helps those future indictments right along. If I were Wells, I'd be trying to keep this out too.

He's defending the next case here, not this one. That's evident from the fact that he's apparently willing to have portions of the articles admitted, but not the entire articles. In fact, as he later suggests, introducing this state of mind evidence any other way except in full would be just fine with him, thankyouverymuch.

Wells' argument in the end is that this would be prejudicial because it would "put explosive allegations about Ms. Wilson's employment status and harm to national security before the jury under the guise of providing evidence concerning Mr. Libby's state of mind." Nah, it's because he knows if they're not admitted in full, they're left for future evidentiary arguments another day in another trial.

K&R

[H2O Man]

7. I am curious

what Team Libby's conversations with Scooter are like this weekend? It seems highly unlikely that they are saying things are going well.

[Me.]

8. Ya Think?

Do you suppose Cheney has made any "I'm there for you buddy" calls to Scooter?

[Patsy Stone]

9. Noooooo

I think he made an "I'm not there for you, buddy" call to Scooter. :)

[Patsy Stone]

10. I think it would go a little something like this:

"Enjoy the Super Bowl, Scooter. You probably won't see it next year from jail. Or, have you chosen to take the plea?"

[cassiepriam]

26. H2O man, can Libby cut a deal now, mid trial? Is it too late for that?

Because if I were him I would be having a chat with Fitz right now.

[H2O Man]

28. It can happen

at any time until the jury returns a verdict. Because the prosecution and defense attorneys have had contact this weekend, there is speculation that it could indicate that Mr. Libby is at least considering a deal.

[cassiepriam]

29. Oh I did not know they were talking. What do each of the players think about a deal?

Libby? (If he has any sense he will cut a deal after
watching the parade of witnesses against him.)

Fitz? Wouldn't he want this to go to jury? Or not?

Cheney? Would want a deal cut for sure, so it is over?
Unless whatever deal Libby cuts involves him?

And what is the deal? What does Libby have to give Fitz so that
Fitz is inclined to cut a deal?

[H2O Man]

30. Talking to each other ....

The prosecution and defense have been in contact about a large number of issues they have been able to agree upon outside of court; Judge Walton had commented on how much time has been saved, and conflict avoided, because of their ability to reach common ground.

The contact over the weekend could have been restricted to simply providing copies of the filing of court documents (3 261 and 262, Re: government Exhibits 422 & 423); there may have been communication about related things; or, as a few suspect, Libby may be considering a deal.

There had been talk of a deal in the weeks before Libby was indicted. He turned it down.

The only people who could participate in any deal at this point would be the prosecution and defense. Of course, Judge Walton would play a role. But Cheney can't put pressure on Libby. (It would not escape the prosecutor's notice, and would result in fireworks.)

Libby must know he is going to be convicted. Judge Walton hands down stiff sentences. A deal might seem attractive for that reason alone. More, Libby must recognize that the trial is extremely harmful to the OVP/Cheney, as well as himself. His attorneys would certainly respect his decision either way, but they -- and Scooter -- are smart enough to see that Scooter would do better boxing Mike Tyson with his (Scooter's) hands cuffed behind his back, than to face Mr. Fitzgerald in front of the jury. Cheney would do far, far worse on the stand. Libby might look to save him that humiliation.

[cassiepriam]

32. Psychology is just as important as legalities right now?

Let's see if we can do a bit of educated guessing here. Seems to me we have the poker game aspect of this trial front and center right now.

We know that most likely Fitz offered Libby some sort of deal pre trial. Any guesses on what that deal was? A deal means that Libby has to give Fitz something, and in return Libby gets a lighter sentence? Fitz tells Libby: plead guilty to the charge, and tell the truth about what really happened. No more lies. Given Fitz's personality the deal he offered most likely was simple, honorable, but tough.

We also know that Libby turned down that hypothetical deal. Why??
Any deal involved prison time and psychologically Libby was not ready to accept that? Instead he preferred to gamble. What was his thinking at that time? The jury might acquit him? Some sort of OJ miracle? Or the jury would find him guilty but give him a lessor sentence than he would have obtained in deal cut with Fitz? Was this denial? Grandiosity? Smugness? Or did Libby have some reasonable expectations that things would go his way?

I suppose he thought his attorneys might get the more damaging info suppressed somehow on legal technicalities? But certainly Libby knew the witness line and exhibits before hand? And Libby knows full well that he is guilty. Perhaps he did not think the witnesses would be so frank or damaging? He underestimated Fitz? Now that Fitz has done a razzle dazzle show of force Libby may now have second thoughts and want to deal.

Or perhaps Libby knew it would be bad but was willing to take the rap for Cheney. Was willing to go to prison so he did not have to tell the truth? In this scenario, if Libby's loyalty to Cheney erodes, the dynamics change significantly.

Or perhaps Libby was just buying time, knowing that he could deal anytime during the trial. But typically once a person refuses a deal, and then later asks to revisit that deal, the original terms are off the table. The second offer is not as good as the first. Or the deal is taken off the table altogether.

Most people are not motivated to change unless they are in some degree of discomfort. Happy people do not tend to change. Unhappy people do. So it seems that at some point Libby became more afraid? More alone? More angry. More uncomfortable? Why? What changed for him? I think H20man you have indicated that perhaps initially Libby felt protected by the power structure and had the hubris inherent in that system?

Libby may now be ready to accept some prison time, and he may be ready to see that a deal is the lessor of two evils. He is afraid and also angry enough to tell the truth. Angry that the power structure abandoned him? Afraid of prison?

I wonder if Fitz would offer him the original pre trial deal, or if that deal is off the table and a tougher one will be made? Or perhaps Fitz is no longer in the mood to cut a deal. A deal is off the table totally. The truth would be better coming out in open court than in a backroom deal?

The infrastructure is in place for a deal. The attorneys on both sides sound reasonable and mature, they have worked quite well together. The judge will also be cooperative. So we have fair, honest, mature adults focused on doing the right thing. And all willing to cooperate. So at this point it is all up to Fitz and Libby?

[bleever]

20. Ted, Ted, Ted:

If they're explosive, Scooter the defender of our nation would have been all over them, right? Onaccounta the explosiveness?

This is getting goofy.

[Cerridwen]

11. Did I just read that first brief correctly?

Excuse me, I'm "new" to these threads so, although most here already knew about this, is this information (422brief.pdf) just now (?) being established at trial?

If I read and understood the brief correctly what Fitzgerald is arguing (via the first brief 422brief.pdf) is that Libby knew he was guilty of a crime (passing on classified information), for which he is NOT being tried and that was his motive for lying, for which he IS being tried. Did I get that right?

So then, if this evidence is admitted and 'proves' that Libby knew he was guilty of passing classified information and then is found guilty of lying to hide that fact, can/will he be tried for the (already proven by this evidence) crime of passing on classified information? In other words, evidence of guilt from this trial could be used as evidence of guilt in a subsequent trial? Not double-jeopardy, right?

Please, correct where my logic goes haywire.

[Patsy Stone]

12. Maybe new, but spot on regardless.

Welcome!

The issue is whether (and if so, how much of) these articles should be admitted. They are coming up at this time because this is the time to introduce them.

ed: clarity.

[Cerridwen]

13. Thank you! And thanks for getting back to me about this.

It looks like a set-up for the next trial. Team libby must be.., is panicking the right word here? Now we get to wait until Mon (8 hours of GJ testimony?) or Tue (?)! Eek, this is worse than a season finale for a favorite tv show. :D

Now I just want to see if team libby puts cheney on the stand and what Fitzgerald does to/with him once he's on the stand. Damn, I'd pay good money to see that!

edit to add: and if I'd just read and *understood* your earlier post upthread, I wouldn't have had to ask my questions in my previous post. D'OH!

[Patsy Stone]

15. No D'oh! required

There have been so many times I've said, "Did I just read that right?"

I think Libby's team knows this case is a goner. IMO, and I am so very not a lawyer, I'd be shocked (shocked!) to see Darth take the stand.

I also think Scoots knew once Fitz took this over from Ashcroft (who was sure to put the whole thing on a slow boat to China) he was going to have to take the bullet. ("You can say what you want. It's always the guy in my job that ends up doing 18 months in Danbury minimum security prison." -- Lewis Rothschild (Michael J. Fox) in The American President)

Cheney's testimony was a possibility if it could help; but unless this is the most miraculous defense in the history of litigation, nothing's gonna help at this point.

ed: gram.

[Cerridwen]

16. What I truly hope, is that this trial brings out enough

information that our elected officials in Congress are forced to begin the impeachment process - cheney first. There have been so many things for which bush and cheney, et al. should have been investigated, possibly convicted, yet haven't been, that I hope a legal trial and a guilty verdict will be the catalyst.

"unless this is the most miraculous defense in the history of litigation" Hee, hee, I hope they hired lawyers of the same level of competence as the rest of the bushco gang. :evilgrin:

[LonelyLRLiberal]

14. I hope Scooter is on a suicide watch.

Would he kill himself to stop the trial? Would "someone" arrange a suicide to stop further disclosures? Is it too late?

(Okay, I know this is drama queen territory, but I'm serious.)

[Danascot]

17. I don't know about suicide but it wouldn't surprise me

he's decided by now that since he's going down, he'll take a few others with him.

[Sydnie]

18. the Aspens turn together - they are connected at the roots

Perhaps that's just exactly what he was telling Miller ... that he was going to expose all the roots!

[LonelyLRLiberal]

25. I hope he does. Whatcha bet Cheney is p.o.'d that Scooter wasn't a better liar?

Yeah, it would be fun to see Scoots take down Darth and the Chimperor.

[bleever]

19. Having read the first link, I am flat on my back

staring up at the fireworks.

Give this Special Prosecutor's Office an A+.

On to the defense...

[bleever]

21. Reading the defense filing:

is "incendiary" a word established in the practice of law?

Or is it linguistically a member of the same club of hyperbole as "sensitive" re: facts about government activity?

Still reading...

[bleever]

22. Defense: Can't say Libby was worried about blowing Plames's cover

(when he read it in the paper) because the government hasn't had to PROVE she WAS undercover, so maybe he wasn't worried about the possibility there was a crime despite it being in the news.

They must be working on Plan C at this point, right?

[bleever]

23. Methinks the lady doth protest

too much like Condi, in going straight to the crime and declaring that it did not happen:

Putting such articles in evidence would cause jurors to speculate about these issues, and threatens to undo the Court's efforts to date to prevent the jury from trying to punish Mr. Libby for the unauthuorized disclosure of classified information.

One of the superest Super Sundays ever!

:toast:

[bleever]

24. Thank you very much,

and I hope we passed the audition.


(I think we might have.)

[Spazito]

27. Very interesting! Thanks, kpete, for posting this

Is it just me or is there not a delicious albeit ludicrous irony that the defense, in their brief, is saying you can't allow the articles containing info on the outing of a CIA agent due to it's extreme prejudice even though, during the defense cross-examination of previous prosecution witnesses, it was perfectly okay to bring up exactly that.

Just when I think this trial couldn't get more fascinating, it does, lol.

[bleever]

31. I've rarely wanted Mondays to come

This much.I don't know which foot
The ball will come to, but both
Are ready to kick.

Thank you,
Mr. Fitzgerald, your team;
The gleam of the service of
Valerie and Joseph Wilson,

The will
Of Larry Johnson to sum up without fear his
Own part of this history,
The story of people all over

The Internet who follow and invest
With their own energy in seeing justice
Used to protect the Constitution,
(When institutions trusted to do so

Have been co-opted), and all who've opted
To still think and feel, to read emptywheel,
And feel the sun coming up,
Humming up, from the soles of their feet

Til the circle's complete.


:thumbsup: