I don’t know if I’m competent to recap Ted Wells cross-examination of Tim Russert, it was so abrasive. I’m surprised that Judge Walton let it go on [and on and on] like it did. Yesterday, Wells established the paradox of Russert’s open conversation with the F.B.I. Agent versus
NBC‘s attempt to keep him from testifying before the Grand Jury. That was an interesting point, though, if anything, it smelled like Russert was
protecting Libby. Then he went through event after event, microdissecting Russert’s newscasts. It seemed like he was trying to show that Russert’s memory was bad. At other times, it seemed as though he was trying to imply that Russert had an anti-Libby bias. He went from Andrea Mitchell, to Imus, to the
Today show. It reminded me of a local trial up here in the Georgia Mountains where the obnoxious lawyer mocked everything a witness said, but never got around to making any points – just sort of implied vague disdain and contempt. Who really knows what Wells is going to make of his interrogation of Russert in his closing argument? If today was an indicator, Wells’ defense portion of the trial is going to be a three ringed circus, full of sound and fury, signifying not so much. Fitzgerald’s
redirect was calm, short, and to the point. He simply asked what Wells had been implying for hours, allowing Russert to answer directly:
Fitzgerald: Did you take joy in Mr. Libby’s indictment?
Russert: No and I don’t take pleasure in being here.
Fitzgerald: Which is bigger news, possible indictment or actual indictment?
Russert: Actual indictment.
Fitzgerald: What do you remember personally from October 28, 2005?
Russert: Press conference was a network interrupt, which was significant — and then hearing my name, which was jolting. And then Brian Williams talking me about the case and asking me to explain my role, which I did. First time in my life I’d heard my name spoken by a prosecutor.
Fitzgerald: Any chance Xmas and surprises was personal joy at seeing Libby indicted?
Russert: Absolutely not.
Personally, my interest in this trial doesn’t have to do with Libby getting convicted, though that seems like the right thing to me. My bias is too strong to claim any objectivity about that. I think he and most of his friends are guilty as sin. My interest is in:
- How the Bush Administration has been able to take over our country and send us off to war on false pretenses.
- How to end this absurd, made up, Civil War that Bush has fomented to stay in power.
- How to get out of this horrible war we’re fighting in Iraq.
Certainly, this trial relates to the first. Scooter Libby was deeply involved in his boss’s plan to discredit Joseph Wilson by outing his wife’s C.I.A. status. There’s no more question about that. The way Bush seized power, maintained power, was with similar dirty tricks. Further, the things Libby said on the stand were grossly untrue – a plan hatched as a cover-up alibi. That’s how Bush operates.
But as to the second two points – there’s nothing that this trial directly has to offer. The only hope of a return to sanity is for the American people of all political persuasions to rebel against the moral corruption of this Administration as displayed in this Trial – to rebel and support holding these yokels acoountable for what they’ve done. Nicholas Kristof says it well in Mr. Cheney, Tear Down This Wall. Short of that, we have almost two more years to plunge deeper into their abyss…
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.