Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FIBBY gets CIA Intel Briefings - Judge Walton orders it.

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 » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:36 PM
Original message
FIBBY gets CIA Intel Briefings - Judge Walton orders it.
Edited on Fri Mar-10-06 04:38 PM by stop the bleeding


Spy agency fought release of presidential-level documents

Friday, March 10, 2006; Posted: 4:12 p.m. EST (21:12 GMT)


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.

~snip~

In seeking CIA input late last month, Walton appeared to have been trying to broker a compromise between defense attorneys and prosecutors to avoid a lengthy court battle with the Bush administration over the briefing material.

The judge's order indicates he is ready for such a fight. He set a schedule for the Bush administration to file any objections by March 24.





Read full article here:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/10/cialeak.ap/index...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Nickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good, this hamstrings Libby's defense tactic. "We can't get a fair deal
because the White House won't give us the papers we need to defend ourselves"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I don't think so.
I think, could be ever so wrong, this puts it in the WH court to exert exec privilege.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. They can try, but US V. Nixon seems to handle that.
"The Supreme Court has the final voice in determining constitutional questions; no person, not even the President of the United States, is completely above law; and the president cannot use executive privilege as an excuse to withhold evidence that is 'demonstrably relevant in a criminal trial.'"

That's from Wiki.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. Yes, it clearly sets up a prolonged pretrial court skirmish
I'm not sure if it's going to be executive priviledge, I would guess the WH doesn't want to look imperial right now. What the WH needs is to look like they are strong on national security. So, I believe that will be the angle the WH takes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. This is wonderful, unless the CIA appeals it. Which it probably will.
I'd truly love to see those documents. What did Bush-Cheney know, and when did they know it on a thousand topics? What a bonanza for showing more of the Administration's public lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Burning Water Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I thought that was
part of the rationale for "Fitzmas", anyway.

However, the WH will probably exert executive privilege,and Libby will walk. That's what Fitz gets for not prosecuting on the real charges, anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Libby's not going to walk.
The issue will be litigated and trial will start as scheduled next year. Plenty of time for the Court of Appeals to decide on the issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Burning Water Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #8
17. maybe, maybe not.
You never can tell with a jury.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. wouldn't we all love to see those intel docs
those and the emails
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fiendish Thingy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
6. couldn't the judge have ruled PDB's not essential?
wouldn't that have been the best possible outcome to prevent Libby from walking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CabalPowered Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. Probably not. Walton's compromise has a better chance
of standing on appeal than an outright denial of the motion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
9. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. The CIA doesn't want to do this but who is the CIA?
Porter Goss, the President's lackey?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
12. Talking about this right now on CNN
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 06:28 PM
Response to Original message
13. Recommended!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
14. Here's the opinion from Judge Walton
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. I'm not
getting anything from the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. worked for me - just slow
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. This morning
it worked. Thank you.

Judge Walton just precluded the OVP from not cooperating in the trial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starfury Donating Member (615 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:48 AM
Response to Original message
19. Larry Johnson (No Quarter) doesn't think this helps Fibby at all!
http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/03/brer_lib...

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.


So it looks like Fibby won't get anything useful, and the WH and CIA won't have any excuse to refuse to provide the material.
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 Mon Nov 24th 2014, 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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