[Cboldt]

One can only ignore so many motions to compel before you end up in contempt or drop your case ...

So far, Fitz has been responsive. He doesn't necessarily give the defense what they want, but he's been arguing his case in writing before the Court.

This motion of Libby's will go through the same process - both sides have their say, then the judge issues a ruling and order. Judge Walton did that with the Presidential Daily Briefings (PDB) request of Libby.

There are a number of lines of argument in play ...

1. Plame's "covert" status is an issue
   • A CIA Leak Trial Without the CIA Leak - Byron York
   • A CIA Leak Trial Without the CIA Leak - FreeRepublic
2. The grant of authority to Fitzgerald is defective
   • JustOneMinute: Fitzgerald - Too Independent?
   • Libby's Filing - Did The WaPo Miss The Point?
   • Fitzgerald Response to Libby Motion
   • Prosecutor opposes Libby motion to dismiss
   • Libby wants charges thrown out - Politics - MSNBC.com
   • Fitzgerald Refuses ... - FreeRepublic
   • NRO "Corner" discussion
3. The witnesses against Libby may have an axe to grind
   • CIA Witness List (Libby)
   • Libby Trial May Be Embarrassment for Bush
4. Access to PDB's is necessary to develop a "preoccupation defense"
   • Libby's Lawyers Want to See Secret Papers
   • Obstruction Trial May Jog Libby's Memory - Jason Leopold
   • Judge Says Libby Can See Bush Briefings
5. Reporter and news agency subpoenas
   • Many Are Called
   • Tim Russert, N.Y. Times Subpoenaed In CIA Leak Case
   • Libby's Lawyers Serve Subpoenas on Miller, N.Y. Times Co.

[Blueflag]

Responsive perhaps. Forthcoming, hardly. Helpful - not.

Kinda typical of a prosecutor who has a weak case.

[dblshot]

Two quick points: One if Documents are found that Saddam was in fact trying to replace his yellow cake uranium that was under UN Inspectors seal, will Wilson be tarred as a liar and would that matter to Fitzgerald? And second how can anyone defend himself against lying if he is not able to discuss what he lied about?