Still no sense of irony or self-knowledge (part 2 of probably many)-- Nancy Grace on CNN with exclusive details of Anna Nicole Smith's embalming. Including how the remains are refrigerated. And then a rant as to how everyone is exploiting the poor woman for their own ends. In this parallel media universe or just parallel universe, there is no war in Iraq, no global warming, no Scooter Libby trial: the eyes of the world and Nancy Grace are focused on a Florida courtroom where various people are going to fight over custody of Anna Nicole Smith's child and Anna Nicole Smith's remains... and Nancy Grace will have the full story... and we will know everything.. and as we watch we will know less and less until we will know nothing.
Update: Thanks to my friend Jeff. The spell check on my computer doesn't work. So I called him to ask whether "parallel" has one "l" or two. And he told me three. That really clears things up.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Do any of these people have any sense of irony or self-knowledge?....On CNN, some unidentified talking head just said of Britney Spears that "We tend to consume these celebrities until there is nothing left of them," as he was consuming Britney Spears until there was nothing left of her. Then the correspondent reporting the story questioned whether the news media was giving the story too much attention, as she was... giving the story more attention. Oops, I guess I was just giving the story more attention, too. Well, at least I have some self-knowledge about it!
I know I should be covering the Britney Spears head shaving story. A psychologist on CNN just said that Spears was suffering from post-partum depression and dissociation-- and all without apparently ever clinically seeing the clebrity client!
For those interested in the Libby trial, I have a new story online this afernoon at the National Journal.
Here is the top of the story:
In the fall of 2003, as a federal criminal probe was just getting underway to determine who leaked the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame to the media, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the-then chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, sought out Cheney to explain to his boss his side of the story.
The explanation that Libby offered Cheney that day was virtually identical to one that Libby later told the FBI and testified to before a federal grand jury: Libby said he had only passed along to reporters unsubstantiated gossip about Plame that he had heard from NBC bureau chief Tim Russert.
The grand jury concluded that the account was a cover story to conceal the role of Libby and other White House officials in leaking information about Plame to the press, and indicted him on five felony counts of making false statements, perjury, and obstruction of justice.
At the time that Libby offered his explanation to Cheney, the vice president already had reason to know that Libby's account to him was untrue, according to sources familiar with still-secret grand jury testimony and evidence in the CIA leak probe, as well as testimony made public during Libby's trial over the past three weeks in federal court.
Yet, according to Libby's own grand jury testimony, which was made public during his trial in federal court, Cheney did nothing to discourage Libby from telling that story to the FBI and the federal grand jury. Moreover, Cheney encouraged then-White House press secretary Scott McClellan to publicly defend Libby, according to other testimony and evidence made public during Libby's trial.
To read the entire story, click here. It's free to read.
Update: For those who don't want to read the whole story, John A'mato boils it all down to one long paragraph, and explains to people what the story really is about.
For those interested in the Libby trial, I have a new story online this afernoon at the National Journal.
Here is the top of the story:
In the fall of 2003, as a federal criminal probe was just getting underway to determine who leaked the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame to the media, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the-then chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, sought out Cheney to explain to his boss his side of the story.
The explanation that Libby offered Cheney that day was virtually identical to one that Libby later told the FBI and testified to before a federal grand jury: Libby said he had only passed along to reporters unsubstantiated gossip about Plame that he had heard from NBC bureau chief Tim Russert.
The grand jury concluded that the account was a cover story to conceal the role of Libby and other White House officials in leaking information about Plame to the press, and indicted him on five felony counts of making false statements, perjury, and obstruction of justice.
At the time that Libby offered his explanation to Cheney, the vice president already had reason to know that Libby's account to him was untrue, according to sources familiar with still-secret grand jury testimony and evidence in the CIA leak probe, as well as testimony made public during Libby's trial over the past three weeks in federal court.
Yet, according to Libby's own grand jury testimony, which was made public during his trial in federal court, Cheney did nothing to discourage Libby from telling that story to the FBI and the federal grand jury. Moreover, Cheney encouraged then-White House press secretary Scott McClellan to publicly defend Libby, according to other testimony and evidence made public during Libby's trial.
To read the entire story, click here. It's free to read.
Update: For those who don't want to read the whole story, John A'mato boils it all down to one long paragraph, and explains to people what the story really is about.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Libby trial: This single paragraph in Neil Lewis' NYT story sums it all up:
Prosecutors have built a detailed case to support their charges, presenting several plausible witnesses whose testimony conflicts with Mr. Libby’s sworn statements. Still, the prosecution has the burden of convincing the jurors of Mr. Libby’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, an imprecise concept that makes the outcome of most complicated criminal trials unpredictable.
Prosecutors have built a detailed case to support their charges, presenting several plausible witnesses whose testimony conflicts with Mr. Libby’s sworn statements. Still, the prosecution has the burden of convincing the jurors of Mr. Libby’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, an imprecise concept that makes the outcome of most complicated criminal trials unpredictable.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Libby trial: The defense rests... but not before the presiding judge becomes quite angry at defense counsel.
Early tomorrow afternoon: I have a new story in the National Journal. It is long, more than 5,000 words long, and some, although not very much about the trial. Thanks to my editor, Bob Gettlin,and his patience. If this post is so short, it is because I don't have hardly any energy left to write another word.
In the meantime, the Times profiles Jane (Hamsher).
It wasn't the NY Post or Daily News that had the best headline from the trial, but Jane...
The jurors speak.
Early tomorrow afternoon: I have a new story in the National Journal. It is long, more than 5,000 words long, and some, although not very much about the trial. Thanks to my editor, Bob Gettlin,and his patience. If this post is so short, it is because I don't have hardly any energy left to write another word.
In the meantime, the Times profiles Jane (Hamsher).
It wasn't the NY Post or Daily News that had the best headline from the trial, but Jane...
The jurors speak.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Libby trial: Finally... Walter Pincus discloses who his source was who told him that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, has allegedly sent him on his mission to Niger, and also suggested that he was sent because of nepotism: Ari Fleischer.
That explains more why Fleischer only agreed to testify with a grant of prosecutorial immunity, both before the federal grand jury and trial. It is surprising that this information did not come up during Fleischer's own lengthy testimony.
It's interesting as to why neither the defense or prosecution brought this out when Fleischer testified. It would seem to help the prosecution's case, one would presume, because Fleischer learned the information from Libby, thus seeming to corroborate Fleischer's testimony that he learned about Plame from Libby.
Update: The Washington Post now has a long story posted online regarding Pincus' testimony.
That explains more why Fleischer only agreed to testify with a grant of prosecutorial immunity, both before the federal grand jury and trial. It is surprising that this information did not come up during Fleischer's own lengthy testimony.
It's interesting as to why neither the defense or prosecution brought this out when Fleischer testified. It would seem to help the prosecution's case, one would presume, because Fleischer learned the information from Libby, thus seeming to corroborate Fleischer's testimony that he learned about Plame from Libby.
Update: The Washington Post now has a long story posted online regarding Pincus' testimony.
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Today at trial: They're probably going to flash up on the big screens in the court room Tim Russert's own words and try and trip him up. Libby's lawyers, that is.
Monday, February 05, 2007
Tomorrow morning at the Libby trial: The jury gets to hear audio tapes of Scooter Libby testifying before the grand jury, before the tapes are then released to the public.
For those who want an advance preview, I recommend this story, aptly titled: "The CIA Leak Probe: Inside the Grand Jury." (I know, I know that is my own story, but it is the only story around that extensively examines what Libby has previously told the grand jury.)
Jane Hamsher's first day at the trial and her first post! Check out the video of Jane and Swopa by PoliticsTV as well.
Also, for anyone who wants to catch up on what happened today at the trial, here is David Corn's account that appeared in the Nation. Here also is Neil Lewis' account in the Times.
For those who want an advance preview, I recommend this story, aptly titled: "The CIA Leak Probe: Inside the Grand Jury." (I know, I know that is my own story, but it is the only story around that extensively examines what Libby has previously told the grand jury.)
Jane Hamsher's first day at the trial and her first post! Check out the video of Jane and Swopa by PoliticsTV as well.
Also, for anyone who wants to catch up on what happened today at the trial, here is David Corn's account that appeared in the Nation. Here also is Neil Lewis' account in the Times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
