LIBBY, PLAME, AND THE NIE. The defense rested in the Scooter Libby trial yesterday, after offering a very brief case and without, of course, calling either Libby himself or Vice President Cheney. Was this a sign of the defense's confidence? Or a sign it believed Libby's odds on appeal were better than at trial, and that therefore it was better to avoid the political damage that may have been caused by Libby and Cheney's cross-examinations?
Byron York makes the argument from strength today, suggesting that the defense is hoping that the jury will take away a negative impression of prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald after listening to eight hours of tapes of him questioning Libby before the grand jury back in March 2004. In the course of illustrating this claim, York makes an important error:
You may also like
You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)