My Case "Lacks Emotional Appeal..?"
NY Times - At Libby Trial, Russert of NBC Gives and Gets
"White-collar criminal defense lawyers said on Wednesday that Mr. Libby’s lawyers faced an uphill battle, although most cautioned that a criminal trial almost always appeared bleak for a defendant after the prosecution had presented its case, before the defense put on its own evidence.
Some of the lawyers, including those with clients in the case who would not discuss the trial on the record, said Mr. Fitzgerald’s case lacked emotional appeal, but gave the jurors an uncluttered and convincing story of wrongdoing.
Defense efforts to trap prosecution witnesses in contradictions and memory lapses had probably helped Mr. Libby, the lawyers said, although they expressed doubt that the effort had jelled into a plausible explanation of Mr. Libby’s conduct.
Andrew G. McBride, a lawyer in Washington, said that the defense could seek to show that Mr. Libby dealt with a wide array of issues that were more important than responding to an Op-Ed article published in The New York Times on July 6, 2003, by Valerie Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV." <more>
Tomorrow I promise to stomp my feet, clench my fists, pound the table and make my face turn red...in no particular order. ;)
"White-collar criminal defense lawyers said on Wednesday that Mr. Libby’s lawyers faced an uphill battle, although most cautioned that a criminal trial almost always appeared bleak for a defendant after the prosecution had presented its case, before the defense put on its own evidence.
Some of the lawyers, including those with clients in the case who would not discuss the trial on the record, said Mr. Fitzgerald’s case lacked emotional appeal, but gave the jurors an uncluttered and convincing story of wrongdoing.
Defense efforts to trap prosecution witnesses in contradictions and memory lapses had probably helped Mr. Libby, the lawyers said, although they expressed doubt that the effort had jelled into a plausible explanation of Mr. Libby’s conduct.
Andrew G. McBride, a lawyer in Washington, said that the defense could seek to show that Mr. Libby dealt with a wide array of issues that were more important than responding to an Op-Ed article published in The New York Times on July 6, 2003, by Valerie Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV." <more>
Tomorrow I promise to stomp my feet, clench my fists, pound the table and make my face turn red...in no particular order. ;)
posted by Patrick J. Fitzgerald at 2/07/2007
24 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mr. Fitz! Team America! Coffee!
You are making a closing statement, correct? That will do.
A nation has been betrayed for at least 40 years...the same crooks and spawn has deceived the nation again. Shame on us, no letting off evil-doers this time.
Team America: You guys are doing an awesome job. Don't change anything. You don't need to convince the media. You need to convince the grand jury. I think they would just want the facts.
From Fitzworld newspaper:
Journalist: SP Biloxi
Title: Scooter is Hosed
You are now in the know:
"It has been 3 weeks in the Irve trial and we are still looking for the meat and potatoes from the defense. My journalists are falling asleep from the 8 hours of audio from a guilty man. And they are still on the floor dying laughing at Judy Miller's memory lapse and misplacing her bills and reporting notes in her shopping bag! We would like to know where is the evidence for Scooter being an scapegoat? Are we are going to hear that Scooter is not really Scooter? That his evil twin did it? I wanna know. In a nutshell, Libby has no case. Never have and never will. To Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald: have that drink on me, my friend. This case is over. Pass the weenies."
no stroke victims , please.
"My Case Lacks Emotional Appeal..?"
I guess Fitz they want you to notify your face.
Emotional appeal? Hello? Fitz is not there to hold the jurors' hands and give a prayer here. And didn't Tucker Carlson say that Fitz was a lunatic? Isn't that emotional, you think? Fitz, tomorrow, act like a raving lunatic that needs some meds and get those dancing feet moving then maybe you will an emotional appeal! Get real folks! This is a court case not a soap opera! Sheesh. I guess the media thinks that you are a prosecutor that is like a robot with zero feelings:"can't compute. work, work, work.."
Just nail the baby conjones in your case and don't worry about the thumbsuckers who are journalists that are nitpicking you about your demeanor. Just keep doing what you are doing.
Calling it a night folks! Biloximan out!
I think it is amazing myself how you have remained low key, took the high road at all times, and let the defense hang themselves based on your evidence and witnesses presented.
The media probably realizes this and wants to provoke you into being a bully. Fools...that is because that is how the right wing now operates. America is on to the right wing and the media now.
So, if little Irv and the defense says he doesn't want to testify now, Judge Walton can make him based on their opening statement to the jury and memory defense? Either way, I think he's toast.
"...but gave the jurors an uncluttered and convincing story of wrongdoing."
Despite the shortcomings of your case, Patrick, At Least you can take consolation in this .....
I agree, Teak.
"So, if little Irv and the defense says he doesn't want to testify now,"
If he doesn't testify, it will make him look even more guilty than he already looks.
"Just nail the baby conjones in your case and don't worry about the thumbsuckers who are journalists that are nitpicking you about your demeanor. Just keep doing what you are doing."
Biloxi is right. Don't give those lazy ass journalists some cheap sound bites they can throw on the TV news. Make them write their own stuff.
I wonder what Can't Dance Tucker would consider the lunatic Fatal Attraction astronaut. (I hope that lady gets the mental help she obviously needs).
This one is for Former Fed. The head tilt is when the guy lies.
Fitz, it's still brutally cold in Chicago but don't stay in D.C. too long because the Stroger family is stinking with corruption and it looks like The Bishop is based somewhere in Illinois.
We Didn't Start The Fire
What ever happened to the hula hoop? LOL
Goodnight all..
And if Cheney doesn't testify, I would think that Judge Walton would be pretty ticked at the defense.
After having manipulated voir dire the way they did, on the pretense that Cheney was going to take the stand....
Fitz just be yourself you don't have to prove anything to anyone. Now I like the way Timmy testified. I was wondering something. The tape of Libby was first and Libby gave him comments about what a great person Timmy was you know honest and all that. Then comes Timmy's testimony as that honest journalist who says Libby never told him about Plame. That was really interesting. As for Wells he can't get a guilty man off. All that talk about Timmy's article about the hometown paper was like what's your point. Yes I know he was going for the memory thing but Wells open this case with the scapegoat defense and has never talked about it since. Oh Fitz see if you can get a picture posted of Randall by himself thanks. With the 3 hour difference I'll be back at noon your time.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/
features/2007/0703.levine.html
n March 2003, when the world’s attention was focused on U.S. soldiers heading to Baghdad, twelve senior officials in the Bush administration gathered around a long oak conference table in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, part of the White House complex. They were meeting to put the final touches on a proposed legislative package that would address what was perhaps the most dangerous vulnerability the country faced after 9/11: unprotected chemical plants close to densely populated areas.....
...Philip Perry could boast one more source of authority: he was, and is, the husband of Elizabeth Cheney, and son-in-law of Vice President Dick Cheney. After Perry spoke, only Bostock dared to protest, though to little effect. “He was obnoxious,” Bostock recalls. more
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
art-levine/dick-cheneys-dangerous-
s_b_40695.html
Unbelievable family with too much evil and too much power.
What a compliment. One leg of ham is enough!
Mr. Cheney, Tear Down This Wall
February 6, 2007
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
At the Republican National Convention in 2000 that nominated him for vice president, Dick Cheney told a rapturous crowd that Democrats “will offer more lectures, and legalisms, and carefully worded denials. We offer another way, a better way, and a stiff dose of truth.”
So, Mr. Cheney, now that the Scooter Libby trial is raising doubts about your own integrity, you owe the nation an explanation. Here are a few questions to help frame your explanation of your activities:
Mr. Vice President, did you push Mr. Libby to dig into Joe Wilson’s background and discredit him? Mr. Libby made such a major effort to gather materials from the C.I.A. and State Department about Mr. Wilson — both before and after you told him on June 12, 2003, that his wife worked at the C.I.A. — that it seems likely that you commanded the effort. True?
What did you mean when you wrote, in a note to Scott McClellan that has been entered into evidence, “not going to protect one staffer + sacrifice the guy the Pres. that was asked to stick his head in the meat grinder because of incompetence of others.”
First, you wrote that it was “the Pres.” who had asked Mr. Libby to do this, and then you crossed out those two words. Did President Bush indeed ask that Mr. Libby take charge of the effort to discredit Ambassador Wilson? And is it true, as was hinted at in the trial, that the White House tried to block the release of this document?
When you discussed Joe Wilson with Mr. Libby on Air Force Two on July 12, 2003, what instructions did you give him?
Trial testimony indicates that on that flight, Mr. Libby looked over some questions a reporter had sent in about Mr. Wilson and then said: “Let me go talk to the boss and I’ll be back.” After consulting with you, Mr. Libby later called reporters to feed them a skewed version of Mr. Wilson’s trip.
Mr. Cheney, on that plane, did you specifically tell Mr. Libby to leak to reporters the fact that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked at the C.I.A.?
Deborah Bond of the F.B.I. has testified that Mr. Libby acknowledged in one of his interviews that on that flight, he might have talked to you about whether to tell the news media about Ms. Wilson. So did he?
Since Mr. Libby is renowned for his caution, it seems highly unlikely that he would have leaked classified information twice to reporters right after talking to you, unless you had sanctioned the leak.
During the leak investigation, were you aware that Mr. Libby was telling the F.B.I. apparently false information?
You rode to work with him nearly every day in your limousine, and the issue never came up? Or did you ask Mr. Libby to protect you because you didn’t want it known that in fact you were the one who had told him about Ms. Wilson? Was there some other information you wanted kept secret?
Were you trying to cover up your own reliance on misinformation about Iraqi W.M.D. by blaming the C.I.A. and anybody else within range, like Mr. Wilson?
More than anybody, Mr. Vice President, you made the argument in the run-up to war that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. And one senses, in the indictment and trial testimony, that by the early summer of 2003, there was panic in your office that the W.M.D. had failed to materialize.
So when Ambassador Wilson came forward, you seem to have been infuriated. You tried to blame the C.I.A., and then your office tried to discredit Mr. Wilson by arguing that he had simply enjoyed a junket arranged by his wife.
Robert Grenier, a C.I.A. official, told the court that he thought the White House was “trying to avoid responsibility for positions that they took with regard to the truth about whether or not Iraq had attempted to acquire uranium from Niger.” So did this all arise from an attempted cover-up?
So when are you going to come clean?
When Richard Nixon was accused of misusing campaign contributions in 1952, he gave his famous Checkers speech. When questions rose about Spiro Agnew’s conduct in 1973, he repeatedly addressed them in public. (Look, you know you’re in trouble when the press tries to hold you to the same standards of transparency and integrity as Nixon and Agnew.)
I’m not accusing you of committing a crime. But there are serious questions here, and you owe the nation not legalisms, but that “stiff dose of truth.” If you continue to stonewall, then you don’t belong in office and you should resign.
Jeepers!
You lack emotional appeal!
That might have something to do with not being a journalist or an actor.
Not sure.
"Tomorrow I promise to stomp my feet, clench my fists, pound the table and make my face turn red...in no particular order. ;)"
Fitz:
This I gotta see! LOLMAO
Have a great day!
Go Team America!! :)
Well, Fitzie, I rather admire your subdued, dramatic style.
I have to laugh thinking that you started this case with indictments for a fellow on crutches, and you end your case with the star witness on crutches! Now how did you finese that one, Prosecutor?
One more thing, Fitzie. Just tell the jurors, if the glove fits, you must convict!
Good Morning JBs...
Go Fitzie and Team A!
The case you have built is full of appeal, and will stand on appeal I am sure.
"One more thing, Fitzie. Just tell the jurors, if the glove fits, you must convict!"
Nice try but you ain't Johnnie! LOL!
Yup, Fitz started with indicting a little man on crutches to his last witness on crutches. Tsk tsk on Irve.
W: And possibility of Mr. Fitzgerald being Santa Claus?
T (bewildered) No.
W: You look very happy in the picture.
T: It's a still picture.
Wells says something about it being a nice picture and sits down. Fitzgerald gets up for re-direct.
Fitz: Did you take joy in Mr. Libby's indictment?
T: No and I don't take pleasure in being here.
F: Which is bigger news, possible indictment or actual indictment?
T: Actual indictment.
F: What do you remember personally from October 28, 2005?
T: Press conference was a network interrupt, which was significant — and then hearing my name, which was jolting. And then Brian Williams talking me about the case and asking me to explain my role, which I did. First time in my life I'd heard my name spoken by a prosecutor.
And it truly ashamed that Russert was set up and used by Libby and the Administration. And I am glad that Russert will be giving his side to his story to the public when this case is over.
Post a Comment
<< Home