Reading all the blogs with the lawyers’ comments about the Libby Trial gave me a headache. It’s a mixture of their own personal bias plus punditing based on the history of American Juries plus a kind of divination that’s unfamiliar to me. Probably more interesting is my reactions to their spectulations. Two feelings predominate: "Oh no!" and "Yeah!" So after six days [Wed Thu Fri Mon Tue Wed], the subjectivity of the law is getting to me a bit. It seems like the Jury must be trying hard to do their job. I wish them my best. It’s easier out here where I have an immutable opinion that I’m sure is correct [probably accounting for the fact that I’ve never been chosen to be on a Jury].
But my summation of what I read is that the Cooper Charges, 3 and 5, are the most up-in-the-air. What Libby says he said versus what Cooper says he said. The Obstruction Charge, 1, hinges on their belief about the Russert Charges, 2 and 4. So, it’s all resting on their assessment of Tim Russert’s Testimony. I say, "What about all that other stuff?" But the commentors don’t talk about it very much.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.