Libby Gets Responses From: Mitchell, Russert, Cooper, Miller & Time (PDFs)

[kpete]

All of the media Replies to Libby's Response to their motions to quash his subpoenas are now in. Here they are: Andrea Mitchell and NBC News; Matthew Cooper; and Time Magazine. Tim Russert is included in the NBC/Mitchell pleading.

http://talkleft.com/AndreaMitchellresponse.pdf
http://talkleft.com/cooperresponse.pdf
http://talkleft.com/timeresponse.pdf
http://talkleft.com/Millerreply.pdf

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014786.html

[bullimiami]

1. hopefully someone with time, patience and attention span will read these

and summarize them for us without.

[peacebird]

2. hopefully someone with bandwidth and hi-speed access will summarize?

for those of us out in the boonies with really poor internet connections?

[Pithy Cherub]

3. Thanks very much kpete! The NBC response is brutal.

From tortured reasoning of defendant, defendant's 'logic',to laying out from the start that the evidence in question was part of the March response and there is nothing further to share with Team Libby. Eyepopping as well was the accusation of Russert telling Ms. Mitchell about Plame and that's how the information was spread amongst the press. That Mitchell's testimony would try to be impeached with her own notes is further dispelled by the case law citing the 'bootstrapping'.

Definitely, Team Libby wants the press on trial and he is demanding without evidence that NBC has exculpatory evidence that would prove his "truthinness". Oh, this is just great reading.


on edit: NBC clearly cites the judges opinion about the scope of the evidence in regards to the charges Libby is actually indicted for.
:popcorn:

[H2O Man]

4. They are all fascinating.

I think that Time and Miller's may be the best. I'll start with Miller tomorrow, and unless something "unexpected" takes place, we'll zip right through them in the next few days.

One of the things I will say now is that you don't have to like an attorney, or agree with their political beliefs, to admire their ability to write a powerful document. Bennett's Motion (to Quash) was good .... but it got better. After the Motion came Team Libby's Response, then today Bennett's Reply -- which is fantastic.

The attorney(s) for Time take a thoughtful look at the constitutional implications in Libby's desperate attempt to distract from the real issues by trying to force an Amendment 1 conflict.

[Pithy Cherub]

5. Hmmm, each one is providing

great insight as you go along. The documents are wide ranging on what each are choosing to stake the 'quash' on. I have 2 to go...but must go to dinner first.

Here's to hearing from a very prolific H20 Man over the next several days! :toast:

[H2O Man]

6. Re-reading them is

making me laugh. These are classic. I think that Judge Walton is going to rule in favor of the motions to quash, and keep this trial on the "straight and narrow."