Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WSJ: Reporters May Get Hottest Seats At Cheney Aide's Trial

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-07-05 11:00 PM
Original message
WSJ: Reporters May Get Hottest Seats At Cheney Aide's Trial
Reporters May Get Hottest Seats At Cheney Aide's Trial

By ANNE MARIE SQUEO
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
November 7, 2005; Page B1

(snip)

William Jeffress Jr., an attorney for Mr. Libby, told a federal judge last week that he expected significant First Amendment issues that could delay the start date of the trial. While he declined to elaborate further, defense attorneys involved in the case and First Amendment advocates said Mr. Libby's lawyers would almost certainly want to go beyond the scope of the areas covered in testimony the reporters have provided to a grand jury.

Judith Miller of the New York Times, Matthew Cooper of Time magazine and Tim Russert of NBC News were cited in the indictment and are expected to be called to testify. Much of the case against Mr. Libby rests on contradictions between the journalists' accounts of conversations with him and what he told Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald about those conversations. Mr. Fitzgerald was investigating who leaked the identity of a Central Intelligence Agency agent, Valerie Plame, to the reporters in what may have been retaliation against her husband, Joseph Wilson, for publicly criticizing the Bush administration's rationale for launching the war against Iraq. His case against Mr. Libby doesn't involve whether he leaked the name per se, but whether he lied to the grand jury and federal investigators about how he learned about Ms. Plame's identity and what he told reporters.


(snip)

Already, embarrassing -- and potentially damaging -- information about some of the reporters in question has come out. In recent weeks, the New York Times has run a front-page story including a description of Ms. Miller as "Miss Run Amok," and the suggestion by one of the paper's managing editors, Jill Abramson, that Ms. Miller wasn't truthful when she asserted she had told editors they should pursue a story about Mr. Wilson. Two columnists, including the paper's public editor, have suggested it would be hard for her to return as a reporter, potentially weakening her as a credible witness. Mr. Cooper has said he talked to Karl Rove, President Bush's political adviser who remains under investigation, on "double super secret background." He later explained it was a reference to a joke in the campy movie "Animal House."

Mr. Russert may be the toughest witness for the defense to shake. Not only is he a household name but he also has a strong reputation. Mr. Libby told prosecutors that he learned Ms. Plame's identity from Mr. Russert. The television newsman says Mr. Libby called him to complain about another NBC show and the conversation was brief. Mr. Russert even mentioned the conversation to at least one other person, so the prosecution potentially has a supporting witness. Mr. Russert said he learned of Ms. Plame's identity only when reading about it in a column by Robert Novak, who first disclosed Ms. Plame's identity and attributed the information to two administration officials. Mr. Novak is believed to have cooperated with Mr. Fitzgerald though he has refused to publicly acknowledge his testimony or discuss his sources.

(snip)

-- Joe Hagan and Brian Steinberg contributed to this article.

Write to Anne Marie Squeo at [email protected]

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113132953054089733.html (subscription)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
asjr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-08-05 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
1. The defense must be setting things up
for a mistrial. I will bet this will be a most contentious trial for everyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-08-05 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Still a mystery: where is Novak? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bethany Rockafella Donating Member (916 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-08-05 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
3. When is the trial date set for?
If there is one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-08-05 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. No date has been set yet. Sometimes next year (nt)
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 Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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