Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Judge orders CIA to turn over presidential briefings to Libby

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:12 PM
Original message
Judge orders CIA to turn over presidential briefings to Libby
Edited on Fri Mar-10-06 03:14 PM by brooklynite
WASHINGTON(AP) -- A federal judge ordered the CIA on Friday to turn over highly classified intelligence briefings to Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide to use in the aide's defense against perjury charges.

U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton rejected CIA warnings that the nation's security would be imperiled if the presidential-level documents were disclosed to lawyers for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff.

The judge said the CIA can either delete highly classified information from the briefing material and provide copies of what Libby received six days a week, often with Cheney. Or, Walton said, the CIA can produce "topic overviews" of the matters covered in the briefings.

The judge also ordered the CIA to give Libby an index of the topics covered in follow-up questions that the former White House aide asked intelligence officers who conducted the briefings.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/10/cialeak.ap/index...
- - -
Gee, the public release of CIA information endangers our national security? How come nobody thought of that before?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. oops....this is getting interesting isn't it!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. The CIA doesn't want to do this but who is the CIA?
Porter Goss, the President's lackey?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. Now this is a great question!
Chopped up to smitherenes...The CIA is truely unknown to
us all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. It was like pulling teeth to get Condi to give the title of the Aug 6th
briefing. This is major! Who is Libby trying to blame it on with these?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seattlemetal Donating Member (51 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. So does this mean Libby doesnt get to pull an Ollie?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. Dumb question - Does Fitz get copies too? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Good thing Libby's got a National Security clearance...
Edited on Fri Mar-10-06 03:29 PM by brooklynite
otherwise they might get misused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpj1962 Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. discovery
Yes as part of the Discovery process. Fitzgerald is allowed to look at the evidence. They have to give each other their witness list as well as access to all evidence that will be admitted into the record. Unfortunately real courtroom drama is nothing like what you see on tv. It is very controlled and very procedural.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I'm not sure that it matters.
I'm guessing that there is probably nothing in them that will exonerate him anyway. This was just an attempt to get the case thrown out because the defendant was denied access to materials he claimed he needed for his defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. Yes
I did think either side can withhold evidence from each other.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuffleClaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. when has the government EVER actually obeyed a court?
really, they have ignored court rulings, 'forgotten/misplaced' documents they've been ordered to release...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Is it now up to the White House to exert exec privilege?
And what we do if they do? That would kill the case, wouldn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpj1962 Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. executive Privilege.
If the WH claims Executive Privilege then this case will end up before SOTUS. Clinton claimed executive privilege in his dealings with Bruce Lindsey and the Supremes told him to stuff it. Most of the indictments were based on redacted material that only a special judge and the GJ ever saw so I think its going to be hard for the WH to win this one but they will try.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. They are loosing the PR battle with congress as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. Lindsey wasn't the right goy to cite executive privilege with.
PDB's are a lot more appropriate for such an argument.

I'm worried this'll graymail the Justice Dept. into making the case get dropped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. kicking for answer
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maine-ah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
11. K&R, baby.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
17. Libby is getting old fashion due process. The same kind of due
Edited on Fri Mar-10-06 04:54 PM by The Backlash Cometh
process which he and his conservative cohorts are trying to kill for everyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. a very accurate analysis of what is happening.
having this stuff out, means, obviously that it will become evidence. Once it becomes evidence, there is NO WAY that even more embarrassing items will be in the public domain.
The upshot is Cheney and Bush will look even worse. If possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
21. Brer Libby and the Greymail Briar Patch
http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/03/brer_lib...

Brer Libby and the Greymail Briar Patch
by
Larry C. Johnson

Today's judicial ruling that Scooter Libby's defense team should get access to highly classified documents probably is a blow to Libby's greymail defense strategy. "Greymail" is a reference to past attempts by government officials charged with wrongdoing to derail their prosecutions by trying to expose national security secrets. In this case Libby's lawyers were clearly counting on the judge to do one of two things--either refuse their request or order the CIA and the White House to turnover everything they desired.

If the judge had refused their request then Libby would have had grounds in an appeal that he had not been allowed to defend himself. If the judge granted their request "carte blanche" (i.e., imposing no limits) then the CIA and White House would certainly stonewall, continue arguing executive privilege, and force the entire process into an appeal that probably would wind up before the Supreme Court.

The judge appears to have undermined the ability of the CIA and the White House to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court. He appears to have insulated himself against that course of action by offering up very reasonable conditions for protecting some of the most sensitive intelligence. As noted on the CNN website:

The judge said the CIA can either delete highly classified information from the briefing material and provide copies of what Libby received six days a week, often with Cheney. Or, Walton said, the CIA can produce "topic overviews" of the matters covered in the briefings. The judge also ordered the CIA to give Libby an index of the topics covered in follow-up questions that the former White House aide asked intelligence officers who conducted the briefings.
So, what will Libby's lawyers find in the PDB and other documents? Nothing that will save Libby's traitorous ass. In fact, I can't wait to see the notes reflecting what Cheney and Libby requested at the end of each briefing. Was it Cheney or Libby who asked about the identity of Joe Wilson's wife? Those notes should help clarify that question.

But, Scooter's team will not find tidbits that exonerates Scooter. They tried to creat a briar patch and were praying that the judge would toss Brer Libby into it. Looks like the judge has burned the briar patch down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Hey there (Big wave) - check this thread out on this
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Walton split the baby today, ruling that Fitzgerald was overstating the likely objections from the White House and CIA, and Walton noted importantly that both have been forthcoming already in providing Fitzgerald what he needed to indict Libby, which undercuts any future refusal by the White House to release this material. Walton ruled that Libby's defense could be just as adequately served by summaries or indices of the subjects covered during the weeks in question, and that the actual PDBs were not necessary for Libby to prepare his faulty memory, "I'm too busy" defense. It is a clever response because it may leave Team Libby with nowhere else to go in pursuing this defense, as they cannot now say they need the actual documents, when they will still be receiving summaries of what Libby already read while in his job.



http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007065.php


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rageneau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
23. Happy Freepers see this as another way Bush can obstruct justice.
We all know that Republicans are dishonest liars, and the response to this news over on Free Republic again proves this.

Freepers hope and expect the Bush Administration to refuse to allow the CIA to respond to this subpoena, using the phoney excuse of Executive Privilege (a term another corrupt Republican, Nixon, invented). It's called graymail, and its ONLY purpose is to keep the truth from coming out. They may lie and say there is some other, more acceptable reason. In fact, we should expect it. Because hiding the truth and lying about it has always been fine with the BFEE (and the GOP in general).

It is breathtaking (and revealing) to see how quickly conservative republicans will adopt dishonest tactics in order to hide their immoral actions -- while hypocritically claiming to hold the high moral ground.

When it was Hillary's deeds being looked into, the wingnuts howled for Starr to go through her underwear drawers -- which Starr happily did. No executive privilege there -- sniffing the underwear of the President's wife is a perfectly legitimate line of inquiry to right-wingers -- but only if the President is a Democrat.

But when it comes to seeing that the laws of the USA are faithfully enforced (something Bush took an oath to do), Freepers (and Bush) have a wholly different point of view: they think their minions ought to be above the law -- immuse to it. They want Republican officials to use their positions of authority to cover up their illegal deeds. They cheer for that to happen. They openly agree about it among themselves. Go to Free Republic (if you can stand it) and see.

When people hide the truth, it is because they fear it. Hiding the truth for personal reasons is dishonest. By their works we will know them, and dishonesty is a 'work'.

What a nice thing it would be if Freepers really, actually, truly had the knowledge, wisdom, intelligence, honesty, patriotism, and love of God that they CLAIM they have.

But of course if they did, they'd all be liberals.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
24. NYT-Judge Tries Compromise on Briefs Libby Is Seeking

By NEIL A. LEWIS
Published: March 11, 2006

WASHINGTON, March 10 A federal judge ruled on Friday that I. Lewis Libby Jr. was entitled to review a limited amount of information from highly classified intelligence documents in order to defend himself against charges that he lied about his role in disclosing the identity of a C.I.A. operative.

Confronted with a legal issue that has the potential to sabotage the prosecution of Mr. Libby, the judge, Reggie B. Walton, sought a compromise to allow the case to go forward.

To accommodate the government's reluctance to turn over sensitive documents as well as Mr. Libby's claim that without them he would be unfairly hampered in mounting a defense, Judge Walton told prosecutors to turn over a listing of the "general topics of the matters" involving intelligence that were given to Mr. Libby when he was chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

~snip~

The ruling does not necessarily mean that Mr. Libby's lawyers can share with the jury all the information they are provided, or otherwise make it public.


~snip~

Judge Walton also said the government need supply only those summaries from June 7 to July 14, 2003, which is the period in which Mr. Libby spoke to three reporters; and for the two days before and two days after his appearances before the grand jury and his interrogation sessions by the F.B.I. He also ordered that Mr. Libby be given general information about his inquiries to intelligence officials.


Read Full article here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/politics/11libby.html...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Is Greymailing Possible Here?
I'm a little confused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 01st 2014, 02:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC