Juicy bit from the Libby filing: What does this mean?

[Patsy Stone]

"In addition, the events alleged in the indictment occurred during a period of increasing bureaucratic infighting, when certain officials at the CIA, the White House, and the State Department each sought to avoid or assign blame for intelligence failures relating to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction ("WMD") capability. The fingerpointing that went on within the Executive Branch about who was to blame will be a key issue in examining many of the government’s witnesses because it goes to the question of bias. When the full context of the controversy over the sixteen words is presented to a jury, the jury will see that the relevant events were far more complex than the government has suggested in its discovery responses, and that the role of Ms. Wilson was peripheral. If the jury learns this background information, and also understands Mr. Libby’s additional focus on urgent national security matters, the jury will more easily appreciate how Mr. Libby may have forgotten or misremembered the snippets of conversation the government alleges were so memorable."

Pg. 4 of the filing .pdf

Anyone? What is he implying? I'll bet none of these insinuations come to light, because I doubt Fitzgerald will have cause to provide any of the stuff they've asked for, but I'm just itching to know what they are alluding to. Aren't you?

:popcorn:

[bullimiami]

1. sounds like, "there were so many BIG things going down in the WH that

a little felony like this one was easily forgotten, so mr libby is not responsible"

tough shit, liar.

[Patsy Stone]

2. I wanna hear about

the infighting and the fingerpointing -- in detail.

I wanna hear about the "full context of the controversy over the sixteen words". The "relevant events {that} were far more complex" than Fitzgerald suggested. What is this magical "background information" the jury will hear that's gonna make it all okay?

Not saying it's not a crap defense -- it is. Still, selfishly, and knowing it's a longshot, I want to hear Scooter sing. :)

[Emit]

5. Sounds like they will be rehashing the same stuff that was

thrown into the Senate Intelligence Committee's whitewash Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq whereby people from the CIA, DIA, DOE, NSC, NIE, NIO, INR, NIC, etc., etc. (and whatever other acromymed agency might have been involved) were interviewed. The report is a "he said, she said" prolix document that offered up more confusion than it did answer any relevant questions.

Pay particular attention to the "Niger" section, and the conclusions in the end. That might be what they are going for here. More prolixity.

[Warpy]

3. It sounds like "Powell wouldn't play ball, and we were all at our

wits end trying to figure out how to neutralize him and this stuff was SO much more important than remembering that the pResident and vice pResident ordered me to destroy Plame's career in a vindictive snit."

It's bullshit, in other words.

[Patsy Stone]

4. Please see my post above yours. :) n/t

[global1]

6. When Did Misremember Become A Word?.......n/t.

[cynatnite]

7. Sounds like they're saying that the 16 words...

were a hell of a lot more complicated than they sounded and Plame's role in the CIA wasn't that big of a deal.

It also sounds like they're going to overwhelm the jury with making it complicated to muddy the waters.