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.
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 pm ET
1:40 pm ET
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.
[This is SO much more effective than Wells' statements. Reasonable, calm, common sensical]
I'm going to talk about journalists. Govt remember in opening statements, that Libby was leaker, set out to leak info on Wilson's wife. To combat story that Wilson was telling. You were told. Btw, I need notes. You were told that this investigation was about who may have broken the law by leaking classified information. This case isn't about this. Libby is not charged with leaking classified info. The anwers are relevant. Let's look at who did and who didn't talk to reporters. We're in agreement that Libby first learned about Wilson's wife on June 11.
[Shows note from Libby-Cheney conversation.]
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.
[This is SO much more effective than Wells' statements. Reasonable, calm, common sensical]
I'm going to talk about journalists. Govt remember in opening statements, that Libby was leaker, set out to leak info on Wilson's wife. To combat story that Wilson was telling. You were told. Btw, I need notes. You were told that this investigation was about who may have broken the law by leaking classified information. This case isn't about this. Libby is not charged with leaking classified info. The anwers are relevant. Let's look at who did and who didn't talk to reporters. We're in agreement that Libby first learned about Wilson's wife on June 11.
[Shows note from Libby-Cheney conversation.]
That's Libby's note of when he learned this information. Libby has absolutely no notes of any of these conversations. This is the one note that shows he was told back in June that Wilson's wife works in CIA. I guess if he were the dishonest person the govt thinks he is, he would have ditched that note, if he were that kind of person. As a matter of fact, he came into FBI and told them about it. You know, in opening, it was a little confused about when Libby spoke to people. Grenier, Grossman, Martin, all tell him that they learned about it back then. and he told a reporter about it.
This note was about what he should say he said to Walter Pincus. Let me talk about Walter Pincus. He wrote a story published on June 12, about the former Ambassador. Later, both Walter Pincus and. Fitzgerald knows about this conversation. Later Pincus cowrote a story. And what Pincus said is that a govt reporter was told on July 12 about the wife. In this GJ, Fitz asks Libby about talking with Pincus.
1:51 pm ET
1:51 pm ET
More on Wells' closing arguments.
No comments:
Post a Comment