Summation of Libby Trial for February 8, 2007

Russert is done with cross-examination and the prosecution rests..

The defense attorney, Wells, picked up where he left off yesterday, He started probing Russert on his original refusal to testify before the grand jury, after having spoken to the FBI about the conversation:

Wells: At no time in these appearances did you talk about your interview with the FBI, did you?
Tim: That was a confidential conversation.
Wells: Which conversation?
Tim: The one you mentioned.
Wells: Oh, with Eckenrode?
Tim: Yes.
Wells: That was confidential?
Tim: He asked for it to be.
Wells: So you never talked about it, because he asked to keep it confidential?
Tim: And because he was transmitting information to me.
Wells: But you said both sides of conversation were discussed.

Wells: (puts up a letter dated June 2, 2004, the first letter from Fitz to Russert's lawyer) Is there any reference in this letter to that it would not view your disclosures to the FBI as a waiver of confidentiality

Tim: (asks to read letter) No, sir.

Then Wells discuss Russert's statements about the case on several occasions on TV. Wells leads up to what is expected to be defense claims that Russert's colleague reporter Andrea Mitchell's remarks on Don Imus show. Mitchell at first said that reporters knew about Plame working at the CIA before all this -- and then she recant that remark, on the Imus show, suggesting to the defense that Russert had something to do with this shift.

Tape on Mitchell on Imus show:

There's nothing in her notes or memory that she knew. Imus bring up Russert, and Mitchell says, "It's not fair to ask him [Russert] about what I said, or what I knew."

Walton sided with the prosecution that it is much ado about nothing much. And Walton added that he does not want a trial on whether Mitchell quote is accurate. Prosecution questioned value of evidence of any value emerging from the Imus show. Then Wells tried to show the jury that Russert was thrilled when news broke of Libby indictment. Russert explained that it was merely a case of news hype -- getting ready to cover a big story. Then he recalled he was surprised when he heard his name come out of the prosecutor's mouth as he explained indictment:

Wells: And possibility of Mr. Fitzgerald being Santa Claus?
Tim: (bewildered) No.
Wells: You look very happy in the picture.
Tim: 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?
Tim: No and I don't take pleasure in being here.
Fitz: Which is bigger news, possible indictment or actual indictment?
Tim: Actual indictment.
Fitz: What do you remember personally from October 28, 2005?
Tim: 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.

Now it's Libby defense team's turn for defense witnesses. Still lingering questions: Will The New York Times' Jill Abramson and David Sanger, and NBC's Andrea Mitchell be forced to the stand? And what about Cheney and Libby? Stay tuned...

Here is summation from FDL:

It's hard to know where the defense plans to go — at times they seem to be claiming that Russert had a bad memory, at others that he was lying to cover his ass, and then at still others that he was lying because of malice toward Libby. But it never seemed to come together in some kind of consistent, cohesive view of what happened, and unless they can shake the jury's faith in Russert it's going to be tough to get them to believe Libby's story. The jurors seemed restless and uninterested throughout Wells' cross-examination of Russert, and aside from coming off as a bit of a scum for his First Amendment hypocrisy and his opacity with regard to how easily he gave up Libby's "confidentiality" to FBI agent Jack Eckenrode, he came off as credible.
Team Libby didn't manage to find any chinks in his armor that really seemed to cast much doubt on his really quite simple story about his conversation with Libby.