just to hammer home that point about andrea mitchell -- and unreliable testimony

i thought it might be useful to
make plain just what mr. libby swore
was true, at a march 24, 2004 before
a federal grand jury, as to what he knew about,
and from, andrea mitchell.

now, note particularly that, unlike in
the below grand jury proceeding, there
would have been no way for patrick fitzgerald
to cross-examine the veracity of anything his
defense lawyers offered as evidence at trial
related to ms. mitchell -- simply because he could
not be asked questions -- once he invoked
his fifth amendment right not to testify
at his own criminal trial.

so -- let's now look at these transcript
excerpts with a view to whether ms. michell's
videos, posted earlier, would have, in any
manner been relevant, or trustworthy, without
the ability to ask scooter libby about them:

Transcript of Libby Grand
Jury Testimony March 24, 2004

. . .By Mr. Fitzgerald:

Q. And it remains your testimony that with regard to Andrea Mitchell, you don't recall whether or not you discussed Wilson's wife working at the CIA with her, but you have a recollection of being in a dilemma that if she were to ask you how you knew, that you were afraid that you would have to tell her that Russert had told you. You didn't want her to learn from you what Russert may not have told her?

Mr. Libby:

A. That's, that's the bit about that conversation that sticks out in my mind, sir.

Q. And now, did you at all feel uncomfortable in the fall of 2003, having had these conversations when you did get cleared by Mr. McClellan and the word came out that there's no White House involvement in these leaks whatsoever, did you feel uncomfortable that in any way you had misled Mr. McClellan, or the President, or anyone else in the administration to believe that there was no White House involvement in this, in this factual scenario when in fact you had been talking to reporters?

A. Certainly not at all uncomfortable with what I wanted Mr. McClellan to say which was I was not the source for Mr. Novak. I'm not uncomfortable about what Mr. McClellan said because I had gone to the Vice President and told him, "I would be happy to tell you everything I know if you want me to." And so I think I did what I was supposed to do. And it's my understanding that I wasn't supposed to be going around talking to lots of people about what I recall and exchanging memories on it. So I'm comfortable with that.

Q. And just so we're clear, I've been asking you questions about prior -- on your conversations with people prior to the FBI beginning interviews. I'm not at all asking questions about what people should be doing henceforth. So no one is asking you to go out and have conversations with people from this point forward.

A. Okay.

Q. And given that you understood that the better practice was not to have conversations with people, why did you pick up the phone to call Tim Russert rather than have your lawyer call him?

A. Tim Russert doesn't know my lawyer, and I picked up the phone and only said, I'd like you to -- I'm wondering if you would be willing to talk to my lawyer, and so I didn't think there was anything wrong with that because I didn't go into details about anything. And he said, "I better talk to my lawyer." And so we then had -- I think his lawyer called mine, or mine called his, and that was that.

Q. Did you ever hear back from Tim Russert whether he would -- did he ever tell you he had talked to your lawyer?

A. Never heard back from him.

Q. Sir, sir?

A. I never heard back from Tim Russert.

Q. Have you reached out to any other reporters, asked them whether they would be willing to speak to you, or your counsel?

A. I have not reached out, but I had a conversation with Evan Thomas at one point about a different subject, and he said, "What's the story about this Wilson stuff?" And I said, "I'm not allowed to talk about that. But you know, if you want, I can -- you can talk to my lawyer, but I can't -- I'm not allowed to talk to you about this stuff." And he said, "Okay.". . .

. . .Q. And just so we're clear, so as you sit here today, it remains your testimony that you recall no conversation with Marc Grossman in which Marc Grossman told you that Wilson worked -- wife worked at the CIA. Correct?

A. I don't recall that.

Q. And as you sit here today, it's your testimony that all during the week of July 6th to July 14th you never recalled your conversation back on or about June 12th with Vice President Cheney who had told you that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA in counterproliferation. Correct?

A. Right. To be exact, I believe my testimony is I don't recall recalling that, and I recall being surprised by what Tim Russert said. And from that I believe that I did not recall it at all during that week. I know I didn't -- I recall being surprised when I learned it from Tim Russert, and therefore I don't think I remembered it in the day or two beforehand. . .

"i don't recall recalling that. . ." -- that bears all
of the indicia of being a false statement -- a false denial.

and the engine of cross-examination, in the skilled hands of
patrick fitzgerald, makes that plain. contrast the above,
with that essentially-unanswered sound-bite opening
my other post -- and then it is easy to understand
why unchallenged triple hearsay is always inadmissable
(save for impeachment purposes -- and why should any
judge have allowed trafficing in collateral rumors, in
front of the jury, or the impeachment of the same,
or different rumors, unless mr. libby was willing
to testify he was aware of them?). . .

do tell, mr. robbins.