Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Simple question about Libby trial

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:58 PM
Original message
Simple question about Libby trial
Doesn't the whole thing come down to Tim Russert? As I understand Libby still maintains that he heard about Plame from Russert. Doesn't the prosecutor simply have to put Russert on the stand and ask him if he told Libby anything about Plame, while in fact the opposite is true (correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall seeing Russert flatly deny Libby's assertion, almost laughing at the concept on TV once).

If Russert never told Libby about Plame, but Libby said (and still says) he did, doesn't that alone constitute lying to the grand jury and/or perjury and/or obstruction?

All these other witnesses are certainly entertaining and they shed light on the atmosphere in the administration, which is nice and bound to lead in new directions... but as far as this trial goes, doesn't Fitz have an ace in the hole with Russert? When can we expect to see Russert on the stand? And is there any indication that he wouldn't be a cooperative witness?

gary

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Annces Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think the defense can say people memories are all questionable
Edited on Tue Jan-30-07 01:10 PM by Annces
So Russert may have forgotten what he said to Libby, etc.

I think Fitz is bringing in witness after witness to show how focused Libby was in outing Plame. There seems to me to be an utter wealth of witnesses against Libby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Not only that...
Ari, Russert and Judy will all contradict what Libby said. Fitz is building a pretty strong case. The defense is looking weak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'm not sure when Russert is scheduled to testify
The prosecution is building their case, brick by brick. Russert may be the key, but at the same time, they are forming an impenetrable wall of evidence. The defense will have to scale their wall, and so far, it doesn't look good for Scooter.

Julie
president for life of the PFEB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Scooter may just be the appetizer. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I happen to agree with you
I think someone will answer a question and open a whole new can of whoopass on this administration. I will dance in the streets when that finally happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. I'll be dancing with you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jbonkowski Donating Member (243 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. You don't build a whole case on that
Fitz is building an ironclad case against Libby, with multiple testimonies.

It is also possible that he is annoyed that he couldn't charge anyone with the actual crime involving the leaking of Plame's identity, so he is revealing as much as he can about the whole affair into the public record, while still staying within the bounds of the perjury indictment against Libby.

jim
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. "annoyed that he couldn't charge anyone with the actual crime"
how do we know that case is closed? all we know is that Rove received a letter saying he won't be indicted. Isn't it possible the case is still open for others (Cheney?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC