Libby Trial Pre-Game Show @ Firedoglake

[laststeamtrain]

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/16/libby-trial-pregame-show/

"Nothing has begun yet, other than a bunch of press people assembling in the media room. I don't have access to the courtroom today, though we do have a courtroom pass: while voir dire proceeds, and jurors are being interviewed, only two pool reporters have access to the courtroom itself. This is a mixed blessing: I don't have access to anything other than closed circuit television to observe the days's events, but I also have online wireless access (thanks to the helpful intervention of courthouse staff - booyah!). If jury selection takes as long as late Thursday afternoon, then I'll take my turn on press pool duty in the courtroom, but it may not last that long.

"The screen in front of me is a large digital flatscreen divided into four boxes, four camera views of the courtroom. One camera appears set on Judge Walton's seat at the bench, one on the witness stand, one at the attorney's lectern and one covering the courtroom itself from a wider angle.".....

[Annces]

1. thanks for this

question to jurors reported by Pachcutec

""Is there anyone who believes that everyone’s memory is like a tape recorder and that therefore everyone can remember what exactly what they were told or said in the past?

Is there anyone who feels that a person could not honestly say something they believe to be the truth even if they said something different several months earlier about that same matter?

Is there anyone who believes that it is impossible to mistakenly believe that a person was told something by one person when in fact they were told that thing by someone else several months earlier?

Is there anyone who believes that it is impossible to strongly believe a person has memories about something when in fact it is determined that those memories are inaccurate?""

All question paraphrased.

[pacalo]

2. Apparently, the jurors as a whole are being asked these questions...

Pachacutec says:

January 16th, 2007 at 7:12 am *

The potential jurors have a sheet of boxes they need to check off in response to the forthcoming questions.

First questions have to do with whether the potential jurors know any of the government’s attorneys, and then they’ll get to defense counsel and the defendent. He’s introducing each lawyer by name, and an FBI agent.

And here's a list of potential witnesses read to the jury:

Pachacutec says:

January 16th, 2007 at 7:26 am *

Next question asks if they know anyone else in the courtroom the recognize, including anyone, including other potential jurors.

Then he’s going to name potential witnesses or anyone who may be referred to in thgis case, even if they don’t end up being witnesses. They can check their boxes if they have heard of the person AND what they’ve heard makes them feel they could not be fair and impartial:

Floyd Abrams
Spencer Ackerman
David Addington
Mike Allen
Michael Anton
Kurt Armfeld (?)
Richard Armitage
Daniel Bartlett
Robert (Bob) Bennett
Deborah Bond
Massimo Calabrese
Andrew Card
Jay Carney
VP Richard B. Cheney
Matthew Cooper
John Dickerson
Jack Eckinroad (?)
Eric Edelman
Douglas Feith
Jennifer Feild
Ari Fleischer
Donald Fierce
Allen Foley
Carl Ford
Jared Francisco
Paul Gigot
David Gregory
Robert Grenier
_____ Grossman
Steven Hadley
John Hannah
Bill Harlow
Deborah Hayden
Seymour Hersh
Richard Polk ?
John Judis
Glenn Kessler
Walter Kransteimer
Nicholas Kristoff

About the blank in the above list:

Christy Hardin Smith says:

January 16th, 2007 at 7:28 am *

That would be Mark Grossman (State Dept.) with the blank, Pach. That’s my guess.

[pacalo]

4. And the list goes on...

Pachacutec says:

January 16th, 2007 at 7:28 am *

Deborah Kuntz
Emily Laramour
Adam Levine
___________
Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Kathy Martin
David Martin
Mary Matalin
Chris Matthews
Jennifer Mayfeild
Scott McClellan
Dean McGrath
John McLaughlin
Judtith Miller
Jennifer Millerwise ?
Andrew Mitchell
Robert Novak
Neil Pateo
Timothy Phelps
Walter Pincus
Colin Powell

[pacalo]

5. And on...

38 Pachacutec says:

January 16th, 2007 at 7:31 am *

Dana Priest
Condoleeza Rice
James Risen
Karl Rove
Newt Royce
Tim Russert
David Sanger
Craig Small ?
Hannah Seimers
Bruce Schwartz
William Taft IV
Joseph Tate
George Tenet
Evan Thomas
Larry Thompson
Paul Valery ?
Joseph Wilson
Valerie Plame Wilson
Paul Wolfowitz
Bob Woodward

These are all journalists, FBI, CIA OVP, etc.

[fooj]

3. I'm thrilled that Firedoglake has access...

Thanks for the post. Heading over there right now.

[pacalo]

6. I like this post...

Christy Hardin Smith says:

January 16th, 2007 at 8:15 am *

John at 120 — No, this is what we like to call justice. It may not be swift, but exposing all of the little nasties to sunlight via a forced public reckoning under oath is an awfully good first step in accountability. And we aren’t changing our coverage, so please stop asking us to do so — we feel that this is important for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which is that Cheney will be forced to answer questions publicly and under oath if and when he is called to the stand, along with a whole host of other individuals tied directly to the Office of the Veep — which will lead to a whole host of follow-up opportunities for Congress, should they choose to avail themselves of them and/or for us.

This trial has never been simply about the charges filed or the verdicts rendered. It is about exposing the festering cronyism and the mess that is this Administration to public scrutiny — and I say more power to the judicial system for having the ability to do something that the Republicans in Congress have failed, miserably, to do for the last six years. If you want speed, you’ll have to go with the Queen of Hearts (verdict first, trial afterward) in Alice in Wonderland. In the US, the presumption of innocence is taken very seriously — and the methodical presentation of every piece of evidence in this case regarding every single person who goes on the stand under oath is going to be one, long indictment of the way the Bush Administration conducts its business.

It’s about time someone did this work. And I an grateful for the opportunity to witness it. So, I’m sorry, but I’m not walking away from my seat at history for anything in the whole world — this is important detail, and we’re going to cover it as thoroughly as we possibly can because someone ought to do so.