*** New Thread at Firedoglake.com- Libby Live: Zeidenberg’s Prosecution Summation One

[ralps]

Libby Live: Zeidenberg’s Prosecution Summation One
By: emptywheel
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/20/libby-live-zeidenbergs-prosecution-summation-one/

Thanks to Christy for finding this picture–I had a hard time finding one of Zeidenberg. Zeidenberg will be up first this morning. And since both sides are lobbying for more time, there's a chance we won't finish up today.
We've got a full house in the court room: Jane, Christy, Pachacutec, Sid Blumenthal, and others. And me, sitting here with you all.

Both teams are in the courtroom right now. Ted Wells looks all contemplative–probably getting into character for his Big Show this afternoon. Debra Bonamici looks like she hasn't slept for over a week–which she may well not have. Zeidenberg looks pretty dapper this morning.

Libby is standing by the defense table, hands in pocket, talking to his wife.

Okay, here goes. We'll have thirdy minutes of argument, then we'll get Zeidenberg.

Walton: No objections to govt's proposed jury instructions. I understand you want to change the word "conversation" in instruction.

Bonamici: That won't be addressed in closing. The types of tapes, one is conversation and grand jury testimony and media publications. Suggestion govt made was to change description to audo recordings, to cover all three types of recordings jury has heard.

Jeffress: Introduced by witness.

Bonamici: In case of some, not introduced by witness.

Walton: Defense now prepared to waiver interrogatories on conversations amounting to violation of law.

Bonamici: We've requested an additional 15 minutes of argument time, without the special verdict form laying out conversations. We want to take the time to lay out which conversation relates to which count. When special verdict form did it, we didn't need to spend that time, but now we feel like we need to spend some time to lay thi sout.

snip
edit I forgot the link

[ralps]

1. *** New Thread at Firedoglake.com- Libby Live: Zeidenberg’s Prosecution Summation Two

Libby Live: Zeidenberg’s Prosecution Summation Two
By: emptywheel
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/20/libby-live-zeidenbergs-prosecution-summation-two/

Zeidenberg
Russert treated exactly same as Woodward, Kessler, Pincus. Why would the lure of this be so great with Russert, but Woodward, Kessler and Pincus could resist. BC of feud? Bad blood? You'd have to believe that when Russert got call from Eckenrode, and he told Russert that Libby said Russert told him, that would have been his chance to stick it to Libby. He'd have to continue that lie. Evidence of the feud is completely absent from Trial. Wouldn't you think that Libby would have known about the bad blood when he went before GJ? Woudln't you think that Martin who said Russert was ? It's a sign of how desperate the defense is to discredit Russert that they would even suggest such a thing.He doesn't remember any of those other conversations. But this one, he says he remembers it perfect.

What's next. Cooper.

You remember COoper said at end of conversation. He said What have you heard about Wilson's wife sending him on the trip. Libby's response, "yeah, I've heard about that." Wells suggested that differences between LIbby's version and Cooper's version, is just difference between a few words. Cooper said, I heard that too. And Libby said, I heard that too, but I don't know if it's true? But is that the evidence in the case. Do you remember what Libby ACTUALLY said what occurred in that conversation? I'd like to play portion of what Libby said he said to Cooper.

Libby, then Cooper said, why did Wilson say it?



By anybody's count, that is not a few words. By any account, that is not what Cooper said Libby said. He never told Cooper, I don't know if it's true. It's made up, made up out of whole cloth. Ladies and gentleman, Cooper could never have taked as confirmation the things Libby had told him. Cooper took this as confirmation. How could he have taken it as confirmation?

snip

[cal04]

2. hi ralps, thanks for the thread

:hi: :hug:

[ralps]

6. Hi cal04, you're welcome

[myrna minx]

3. I've been offline for several days.

I need to catch up! Thanks ralps. :hi:

[ralps]

7. Hi myrna minx. you're welcome

[H2O Man]

4. Nominated!

Enjoy this day.

[ralps]

8. Hi H2O Man!, Thanks, I hope Fitz kicks Wells' ass!!

[ralps]

5. *** New Thread at Firedoglake.com- Libby Live: Wells’ Defense Summation One

Libby Live: Wells’ Defense Summation One
By: emptywheel
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/20/libby-live-wells-defense-summation-one/

Folks are pretty impressed here–Jeralyn definitely impressed, though she'd remind you that there are two sides to every pancake. Now we'll get to see the other pancake.

Walton: Govt took a little less than 1 hour 18 minutes.

Fitz, I think we took more time than you think we took, but I think we have more than you think we have left.

Walton Hour 50 minutes.

Fitz Hour 25 left, is that right?

Walton We'll go until 12:30, then we'll pick up at 1:30, I'll ask everyone to be ready before to get started.

Now we wait for jury. We've got a slightly different view. We can see prosecution and defense table (we got the defense table instead of witness). And we get a bit of angular view of Well's stand. Here comes the jury.

Get ready for showtime, folks!

Wells up.

Walton, members of proscution, members of jury. I was sitting listening to prosecution listen to what I said, after a few minutes I said, maybe I was drunk, it sure sounded like I said a lot of things I could no deliver on. Prosecution said, there were a very few words. I heard that true. Prosecution said Wells said that but then he played you GJ, the rest of the conversation. You are going to get instructions exactly what the charges are.



Let's show you what the charge is. Let's just show you if what was charged what I said in my opening. Count 3 alleges that Libby falsely told FBI that Libby falsely told that during conversation with Cooper Mr Libby told Cooper that reporters telling admin that Wilson's wife worked for CIA. But that LIbby did not know if this was true. That's what the charge is.

snip

[Cerridwen]

9. G'mornin', ralps.

:donut:

I'm doing some catchup reading over here. Thanks for putting these up.

Dang! You do such a good job!

:yourock:

[ralps]

11. Hi Cerridwen, Awww Shucks! Thanks

[merh]

10. Is there a site that has the transcripts of the openings?

I'm looking to read the opening statements, can anyone help?

thanks in advance

[ralps]

12. Hi merh, Here's the Firedoglake Libby LiveBlog page that has the opening

statements. these aren't exact transcripts. I hope this helps- http://www.firedoglake.com/category/libby-trial-live-blog/page/8/

[merh]

13. thank you ralps

that will help - I do appreciate you! :patriot:

:hug:

[ralps]

14. You're welcome merh

:hug:

[ralps]

15. *** New Thread at Firedoglake.com- Libby Live: Jeffress’ Defense Summation Two

Libby Live: Jeffress’ Defense Summation Two
By: emptywheel
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/20/libby-live-jeffress-defense-summation-two/

Okay, this picture is misleading–we'll actually have Jeffress after lunch. then Wells. You'll just have to imagine Jeffress.
The interesting tidbits during lunch: Jeffress made a nice smile when Ted said he was going to take Jeffress' time. But one of the associates made an "oh no!" look when he said it.

But the coolest insight came from Christy. The graphic Zeidenberg used–and he used it consistently–showed everyone that spoke to Libby about Plame–or that he spoke to. For most people, they showed the faces of the people–these are, after all, witnesses who took the stand. But with the two CIA witnesses, Grenier and Schmall, they used just the CIA logo. Christy thinks it underscored the importance of keeping CIA employees' identities secret. Nice touch, huh? Kudos to Christy for having caught it!

Other opinions from lunch: Jeralyn thinks Wells had great body language, Pach agrees, and thinks that Zeidenberg (who was apparently pacing in front of the jury) wasn't effective. Jane thinks Wells made a mistake in making this all about him, Wells, rather than Libby. And it appears that Wells has gotten his team into timing problems, because he took 20 minutes to respond to Zeidenberg, which he needed to present his case.

Here we go, Walton's in, waiting for the jury.

1:40

Walton asks if they fed them alright. Someone makes a half-hearted yes.

Jeffress. The most improtant thing I have to say to you. THe govt asks you to find that Libby lied, that'll mean the loss of his freedom. The govt wants you to find that he made up a story, that he told it to the FBI and the GJ. They want you to find that Libby made up as his source the most famous TV newsman. They ask you to find that, in making up this story, Libby would say he forgot the conversation with Cheney and no one else, when Libby knew that the FBI would go out and talk to all the govt officials. They ask you to find that Libby did all this to protect himself from a crime he did not commit, to protect him from losing his job or security clearance, that were never in jeopardy. These are the things that govt asks you to find. Your standard is beyond reasonable doubt. Common sense alone tells you they did not carry that burden. The witnesses taught you a lot more about fallibility of human memory. Remarkable thing from govt is a statement that we have no difficulty in remembering conversations. Let's talk about every day lives, someone brings you in and says, what did you say four months ago. We don't have a problem remembering that? That's not so. And the govt tells you this is not a case about memory, but of course it is.

snip

[ralps]

16. Yay!! Jane Hamsher is on Thom Hartmann's program now!

[ralps]

17. *** New Thread at Firedoglake.com- Libby Live: Wells’ Defense Summation Three

Libby Live: Wells’ Defense Summation Three
By: emptywheel
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/20/libby-live-wells-defense-summation-three/

Ted's turn again. I suspect we'll get the contrite Ted. But that's just a guess.
Also, I'm using "L&G" as abbreviationg for Ladies and Gentleman. I've included it to give the civilized tone of the discourse. But it's too damn long.

Wells has 50 minutes.

Yup, contrite, calm Ted.

Good Afternoon. I have 50 minutes left to speak to you. I'm going to have to be quick, cut some things about. I was talking about relevancy of meat grinder note. If you look at top part of that note, Libby is saying in his own handwriting that he did not leak classified info. That's a note he gave to the VP of US. He DID. NOT. did not leak classified info. Prosecution played a tape from McC, I say, give me a break. He had to go to Card, McC, then VP. That ain't a team I think he should WANT to be on. They didn't treat him like he should want to be on it.

In terms of time. THe record is very confusing. Russert says he thinks one call. He said call could have been 10, 11, or 12. When interviewed by Eckenrode, possible that there were two calls. Libby always thought two calls. One on 10th and one on 11th. No phone records to nail it down. I'm going to give you homework assignment. I'm going to ask you, if you look at Libby's GJ on March 5, you'll see LIbby's all over the place. if you also read GJ on March 24, there's more discussion. And Fitz on one of those pages, even says is it possible you talked to Rove before, withdrawn, Russert before you talked to Rove. Because I'm telling you what if Rove left early that day. Remember one of the rules. Questions by lawyers are not evidence. THat's just Fitz' question. Maybe he talked to Rove first and Russert second. What you'll see is mass confusion, bc there are no phone records. When you have this kind of confusion, benefit of doubt must be given to Libby.

This case built on theory that does not have hard evidence. They're asking you to speculate.

snip

[Annces]

18. Wells is crying

"I told you that when we chose you, we alread made the most important decision. For some of you this will be the most important decision you will ever make. Trust in the evidence and trust in each other. Be protector, if somebody begins to go off track and have a situation where Libby has to prove innocence, help that person, if someoen says, "he's a Republican, he worked for Cheney, let's just do him," help that person.

Don't sacrifice Scooter LIbby for how you may feel abotu war in Iraq or Bush Administration. Treat him the way he deserves to be treated. He worked every day to be NSA for this country. Analyze it fairly. Fight any temptation for your views if you're Democrat whatever party. This is a man who has a wife kid. He's been under my protection for the last month. Just give him back. Give him back to me, give him back."


Oh my goodness, what a show.

[Annces]

19. Yaahheee - Fitz summation

How come DU is not paying attention?

[ralps]

21. Hi Annces, Woohoo!!

[Annces]

22. Yey - I think we are in the better position by far

[ralps]

20. *** New Thread at Firedoglake.com- Libby Live: Fitzgerald’s Rebuttal

Libby Live: Fitzgerald’s Rebuttal
By: emptywheel
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/20/libby-live-fitzgeralds-rebuttal/

Well, that was unconvincing, to me, at least. The problem with Ted's schtick is that he went from a very rushed, though somewhat rational argument, to fake tears in about 16 seconds. Somehow that didn't convince me. The character was completely unconvincing. I'm not sure it helped.

FiTZUP!

Madness. Madness. Outrageous, THe govt brought a case abotu 2 phone calls. And they just want you to speculate. The defense wishes that were so. Saying it, Saying it loudly, pounding the table, doesn't change the facts.

Is this case about 2 reporters, that's it? This is about a one on one he said she said.

It's a he said he said he said he said she said she said she said he said (shows the graphic of nine people)

Is this the greatest coincidence in the world. Tat the only person he said he talked to forgot it. It's not one on one, it's all the evidence taken together.

Maybe the best example is to focus on Russert. He wants you to believe that Russert has to be proof beyond reasonable doubt When you saw witnesses on stand, you saw them look me in the eye, I'll tell you that Russert alone can give you proof beyond reasonable doubt. You don't need Russert to convict on Russert charge. Now you're saying I've lost my mind. One part of this is, that I knew it as if it were new. No one wished this, but if Tim Russert were run over by a bus and went to that great newsroom in the sky, you could still find plenty of evidence that Libby was not surprised when he heard this from Russert. The first day he briefed about Plame, he told Schmall about.

You know you're not surprised on Thursday, if you gave it out MOnday and Tuesday, you weren't surprised. If Tim Russert alone can prove it, then without Tim Russert.

One of the myths is that Wilson wasn't improtant.

Her name Valerie Wilson. She had a life before Joe Wilson, but to them she wasn't Val Wilson, she wasn't a person, she was an argument, she was a fact to use against Wilson. We keep hearing about merits. The two things Jeffress points out about Wilson. He said he wasn't sent by VP,

THey said the wife was important. It cast suspicion that Wilson got sent because of "the wife."

snip
Go Get Them Fitz!!!

[ralps]

23. *** New Thread at Firedoglake.com- Libby Live: Fitzgerald’s Rebuttal Two

Libby Live: Fitzgerald’s Rebuttal Two
By: emptywheel
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/02/20/libby-live-fitzgeralds-rebuttal-two/

none of the other witnesses had the same intense focus on Wilson's wife as the defendant.
People followed up on what he was interested in.
He's doing the inside baseball. None ofthem invented a conversation.
There's one small factor. He did talk to one person.
Why in Fall 2003, does he not tell VP, btw I did talk to reporters. Doesnt tell McC, btw, you should know that Rove spoke about the wife.
Does he tell VP, that he talked to Miller?
What's the one thing he told, he told the one person from whom he learned from in the first person. Why is that one fact so important.
Why does the one thing, of all the facts in the case, not that I heard it through Rove, all he tells VP that it was Russert. What they tell him, when he saw the note, he goes back and tells the VP, the VP cocked his head.
Why is the ONLY thing he told anyone is who he said was the source, to the guy who was his source.

Do you believe that Libby is going around with a string around his finger. He doesn't know if Libby read the briefings,but he knows LIbby read the Wilson briefings. He doesn't he knows that

I wonder if Wilson's married, I wonder if he has a wife. What examples do you have of how good his memory was. Zeidenberg has a phenomenal memory of someone else talking about Wilsons wife. Rove, he had a conversation with someone else's wife.
Defendant had a better memory of Roves conversation with Novak, than Rove did.

He remembers things. If I told you what conversation you had. If I asked what days of the week a series of articles ran. IN March 2004. When asked about Pincus articles, he says there were articles from the fourth week of May last year. THat's why we showed Pincus some articles. Libby could remember those articles. Could remember the week in March 2003. Which shows you hos focus on the press. Remember his discussion of leak to WSJ. They seem to have good relationship with WSJ. Libby talks about how to get oit, give it to Wolfie, and lo and behold it's on the editorial page. He says, VP and I talked abut it on Tuesday, and it appeared on Thursday. He can tell you the day o fthe week.

What are people suppsoed to say. Investigators already know that Russert said that never happened. He wasn't charged with leaking to Kessler. Of course he was questioned closely. When someone is questioned closely in GJ, it's like being in a house of mirrors. What

Matt Cooper, he was sitting there with two other witnesses. Libby wasn't going to tell all these other reporters.

He was busy telling Pincus a lie, That an aid caused the trip.

snip

[SlowDownFast]

24. OMG! Defense Attorney Wells Cries for Scooter!

Very end of closing arguement from FDL:


I told you that when we chose you, we alread made the most important decision. For some of you this will be the most important decision you will ever make. Trust in the evidence and trust in each other. Be protector, if somebody begins to go off track and have a situation where Libby has to prove innocence, help that person, if someoen says, "he's a Republican, he worked for Cheney, let's just do him," help that person.

Don't sacrifice Scooter LIbby for how you may feel abotu war in Iraq or Bush Administration. Treat him the way he deserves to be treated. He worked every day to be NSA for this country. Analyze it fairly. Fight any temptation for your views if you're Democrat whatever party. This is a man who has a wife kid. He's been under my protection for the last month. Just give him back. Give him back to me, give him back.

Wells gets all choked up, crying.


-----

That is so fucking pathetic!

Did they teach him that in law school???

Perhaps he thinks he's up for an Academy Award!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Annces]

25. mentioning the VP big time in summation

Anger - re Wilson article

"We all know, when you're angry at someone, you remember. Whether you're a chief of staff, whatever you do for a living, He was angry about Wilson. What Wilson said is that country got lied into war. One of the people he blamed was defendant. ANd VP. Don't for a second believe, that the defendant wouldn't get pissed if someone said you lied the country into a war."

[blogslut]

26. K&R

Thanks for the reminder. I'm reading Fitzgerald's summation coverage right now. :)

[ralps]

28. Hi blogslut, Thanks

[Spazito]

27. Thanks, ralps, for doing this thread, it is invaluable!

Here are Fitzgerald's final words, NOT a transcript but close enough, imo:

"DONT YOU THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE ENTITELD TO ANSWERS. If as a result his wife had a job, she worked at CPD, She gets dragged into newspapers. People want to find out was a law broken when people want to know, who did it. What role did Defendant play. What role did VP play? He told you he may have discussed this with VP. Don’t you think FBI desesrves straight answers. When you go in taht jury room, you commonsense will tell you hthat he made a gamble. He threw sand sin the eyes o fthe FBI. He stole the truth of the judicial system. You return guilty you give truth back."


Wow, repeat, WOW!

[ralps]

29. Hi Spatizo, Thanks for posting that!!! & It looks like Fitz will finish tomorrow!

snip

5:16

Scooter, looking impassive at this point.

Walton: Sometimes during course of argument. Lawyers say things they don't mean to say. I want to say a couple of things to make sure. Reference to AG guidelines, those were admitted for a limited purpose, so you could assess whether Fitz' interaction was consistent with those guidelines. Argument that Libby would have been aware of those guidelines. There is no evidence before you

Walton THe truth of whether someone could be harmed based on disclosure of covert identity should not be dismiseed. What is relevant here is what, if any impact, things had on his state of mind.

Walton Considering the hour, we'll recess at this time. Same time tomorrow. I hope my voice will hold out. I've been fighting a cold, my throat is being challenged. Based upon my calculation, it'll take 1.5 hour, I'll give you half, then give you the other half. With that I would hope that sometime before 11 the case will be submitted to your for your proceedings. Continue to avoid havign contact with anyone associated with, also with media coverage of this case. I trust you will continue, and have not had any contact with media coverage. I assume it hasn't happened. I implore you to continue to avoid media coverage.

See you tomorrow at 9:30.

Beer Thirty, A big one.

The cautionary instruction I just gave do you want me to introduce that to writing?

Have a good evening.

[Spazito]

30. Hey ralps! Fitz has finished and what a closer!

The 90 minutes the Judge talked about refers to his jury instructions. He is going to do them in two parts 45 minutes each and then the jury starts their deliberation.

The difference between Fitzgerald's closing and that of Wells couldn't be more glaring. Wells cries and begs the jury to send Libby back to him (very weird closing, imo) while Fitzgerald talks about justice and truth.