Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Mitchell Mystery at the Libby Trial
The American Thinker ^ | Jan 21, 2007 | clarice feldman

Posted on 1/21/2007, 6:30:15 AM by the Real fifi

Over the weekend an intriguing mystery about Andrea Mitchell surfaced. On Friday, Matt Apuzzo reported:

A federal judge said Friday that he likely would allow NBC News reporter Andrea Mitchell's notes to be used in the CIA leak trial, setting up another potential fight between journalists and the court in the case.

Mitchell's notes on her conversation with former White House aide "Scooter" Libby have been under subpoena for nearly a year, but U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton had ruled that, because Mitchell was unlikely to testify at trial, her notes would not be released.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: andreamitchell; cialeak; libby; media; mitchell; nbc; plame
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last
What is it in Mitchell's handwritten notes of her conversation with Libby which makes it likely that she will be a witness and which has persuaded the judge that they are now relevant after first ruling they were not?
1 posted on 1/21/2007, 6:30:16 AM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi

Perhaps the judge decided to watch NBC/MSNBC news coverage for a while and decided what a bunch of left-wing nuts they are who wouldn't/could't report the facts if they had them in front of them. (Not a serious answer of course....but the "reportage" on NBC/MSNBC on this case has been ridiculous). I like how Mark Levin now refers to Matthews/Olberman/Scarborough as the propagandists. HAHA


2 posted on 1/21/2007, 6:46:51 AM by Laverne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi
"What is it in Mitchell's handwritten notes . . ."

Federal Reserve plans to raise interest rates?

yitbos

3 posted on 1/21/2007, 6:49:59 AM by bruinbirdman ("Those who control language control minds." -- Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laverne

heh


4 posted on 1/21/2007, 7:04:00 AM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi
Boy oh boy, now that the NiFong injustice has been thoroughly publicized, the New Media can concentrate on this injustice...Capt Kirk, she's gonna' BLOW, Scotty!
5 posted on 1/21/2007, 11:36:40 AM by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iopscusa

bttt


6 posted on 1/21/2007, 2:45:33 PM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: iopscusa

NBC/MSNBC is so anti-Bush and their reporting is so bad, I hope that Team Libby has lots and lots of clips of Matthews, Olberman, Russert, Schuster to show the jury how NBC so distorts the news. I really want to see Fat Tim decimated on the stand. I do wish the judge would throw the case out and slam Fitzy for providing false information during his presser and distoring the facts of the case. But if it has to go forward, then I look forward to hearing about Russert and Mitchell, et al, try to defend their horendous reportage.


7 posted on 1/21/2007, 10:30:00 PM by Laverne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Laverne

Of course, a defendant can attack the credibility of a prosecution witness but I am certain Libby will be very limited in what he can put on about the network.
As the article makes clear, Libby called Russert to complaint about Matthews show on July about Wilson and Libby and perhaps we will see that episode or relevant parts of it.


8 posted on 1/22/2007, 3:20:12 AM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Laverne

The people you mention will probably be heroes to the jury and they will be nodding in agreement as to how awful the administration is.


9 posted on 1/22/2007, 2:17:46 PM by San Jacinto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi

James Joyner (Outside the Beltway) is live blogging the jury selection from the courthouse and reports there are now 36 potential jurors available who have not been struck for cause. Next come the peremptory challenges. You can read his minute by minute reports here:

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/


10 posted on 1/22/2007, 3:56:11 PM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi

>>What is it in Mitchell's handwritten notes of her conversation with Libby which makes it likely that she will be a witness and which has persuaded the judge that they are now relevant after first ruling they were not?<<


The only way this is consistant would be if the the standard for releasing the notes to the public are different from the standards for saying they are admissible during the trial itself.


11 posted on 1/22/2007, 3:59:25 PM by gondramB (It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

The judge had earlier ruled that if she testified her emails would be producible for impeachment purposes, and yet he ruled her notes wouldn't be--so he did seem to draw a distinction, didn't he?


12 posted on 1/22/2007, 4:02:18 PM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi
>>The judge had earlier ruled that if she testified her emails would be producible for impeachment purposes, and yet he ruled her notes wouldn't be--so he did seem to draw a distinction, didn't he?<<

Maybe I'm reading too much into the article's use of the word released. The way I read it any notes that eventually used in the trial would be released but the judge has not authorized their pre-release since they may not be used.

But I'm not sure, the language is confusing and this is such a strange case its hard to wonder where everybody involved stands politically.
13 posted on 1/22/2007, 4:39:49 PM by gondramB (It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

Well, I grant you it is not transparently clear, but in distinguishing between his treatment of her emails and her notes, it seems he originally found the former would be relevant and admissible if she testified and her notes would not be, but something has happned to change his mind about her notes. (I don't know what. My guess is a reference to "armitage" or without use of his name, info which could have come from him when read together with the emails)


14 posted on 1/22/2007, 4:59:54 PM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Laverne
In addition to IMUS and Russert connections and discussion with Mitchell, I heard her speak 3 times on Matthews show saying repeatedly, it was well known in Washington that Plame (Wilsons wife) worked at CIA.

It seems the judge has bought into the notion that if a journalist says something, that is the truth..the measuring stick... the benchmark. It is they who should be on trial, not LIbby.

15 posted on 1/22/2007, 5:06:38 PM by Texas Songwriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi; piasa; kcvl; ravingnutter; Howlin; onyx; Fedora; Lancey Howard; Enchante; ...

Scooter PING ! Long, convoluted and complicated, but you can see what a web of contact, leaks, spin and cya exist here in this article.

realfifi -- would you please ping me when you post Scooter articles .. thanks a million .. ;)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Apuzzo adds:

"Mitchell's testimony and notes could help Libby's case by describing an atmosphere of tension and finger pointing within the Bush administration regarding intelligence issues on Iraq. That could bolster Libby's claims that there existed a hectic and tumultuous climate in which he could not accurately remember certain conversations." (Id.)

Well, that compounds the mystery.

(1) Why did the judge change his mind?

(2) Why did the defense withdraw its request for the moment?

With a lot of digging in the Just One Minute's attic of old posts (Tom Maguire is taking a richly deserved weekend away ) I found some things which may help explain what is going on. But I still feel that I haven't got a handle on it, and if you've finished your latest mystery book or crossword puzzle and want to consider what's going on, here goes."


16 posted on 1/22/2007, 5:17:19 PM by STARWISE (They (Rats) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war-RichardMiniter, respected OBL author)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

R-U-S-S-E-R-T


17 posted on 1/22/2007, 5:18:11 PM by samadams2000 (Someone important make......The Call!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

starwise, tell me how to do that and I'll try to remember.


18 posted on 1/22/2007, 5:24:01 PM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: the Real fifi

You just have to put a semi-colon after each name, as you add new names ... any more questions, please feel free to ask.

It's simple:

therealfifi; laverne; onyx; fedora;

etc.

I have a word document for ping lists for different subjects .. names, semi-colons typed .. all set to go to just copy and paste into the "To" header.


19 posted on 1/22/2007, 5:32:31 PM by STARWISE (They (Rats) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war-RichardMiniter, respected OBL author)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

testing.


20 posted on 1/22/2007, 7:28:21 PM by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson