It didn't get dismissed. But they did go through jury selection. Those who've ever been on jury duty know the drill. Here in Memphis a typical day involves sitting around in an auditorium, reading, staring and lapsing in and out of a catatonic state, broken every second hour or so by a "tie guy" who strolls in with a list of index cards and reads about 20 or 30 names. There are over a hundred in the room hanging on his every word. After awhile you start praying your name is called just so you can leave the room, even if the case is MS-13 against the Gambino Crime family.
In the courtroom the judge asks everyone to introduce themselves, identify your profession, etc. Next he asks questions pertaining to potential bias. Last time I 'did jury' they called me into a medical malpractice trial and the judge began asking people about conflicts. He came to an attractive late 30-ish, early 40-ish woman who said she might have a conflict. The judge asked why. She said it was private. He pressed. She finally admitted she'd been involved in a lawsuit, over silicone breast implants. It was as if E.F. Hutton had just whispered something in there--everyone strained as the judge asked for further clarification. She was eventually tossed.
This happened today in the Libby trial. Judge Reggie Walton quizzed potential jurors on whether they harbor Bushitler tendencies, and many simply couldn't hold back. Whether they were really haters or just creative liars remains unknown.
The AP made the most of those anti-Bush quips, repeated in the New York Times and WaPo, (who yesterday said the Bush administration "cherry picked" intelligence without proof) but we don't know what else was said in that courtroom. For example, someone could have said this:
"With all due respect your honor, Bush-hate has no more bearing on this case than Bush-love. As laid out this case is only about whether Mr. Libby misled the FBI and Grand Jury, not about what Mr. Wilson didn't find in Africa, or whether Ms. Plame-Wilson's status at Langley was covert, or whether Bush and Blair blew the towers. Sir, it's not our job to speculate about why Mr. Armitage was never indicted or why we won't be hearing directly from the CIA officials who sent Mr. Wilson to Africa to begin with. We're only here to judge Mr. Libby in this narrow context, and I feel confident I can do that."Meanwhile, as most of America yawns and concerns themselves with football and the latest edition of 24, they're tossing weenies on the grill over at the tailgate party. For the record, I'm taking the Colts and the Saints.
MORE 1/17/06
I remain a mere spectator in comparison to sites like JustOneMinute, THE go-to site for Libby speculation. ScooterLibby.com also has some helpful stuff, for those who care. I'll continue to babble about it here from time to time because, well, I can. And it's free.
So far my favorite speculation comes from McGuire's site, which says it might work in Libby's favor if the jury ends up being chocked full of DC-area Democrats. That will make any final guilty verdict appear partisan and biased, making it politically easier for Bush to later issue the pardon. Could be the reason Cheney has agreed to appear, since they know "Old Man Potter" is a lightning rod for virulent lefty-hate (more than Bush himself) and his appearance will create a feeding frenzy.
My prediction is Libby will go down with a pardon at the end, but the administration is hoping to score political points along the way by making Wilson and the Democrats appear childish in light of serious national threats being handled at the time, some of which will come out during his defense.
By the way, some of those threats (certainly only some) appear in "America's Secret War" by Stratfor's George Friedman, which includes panic about nukes and other WMDs in the hands of AQ. Perhaps it's a good sign if the administration is willing to exploit those in defense of Cheney, since it would seem to diminish them at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment