Fitz court filing from May 19.

[rodeodance]

enjoy.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/fitzmay19.pdf

[liberal N proud]

1. Link did not work

[katinmn]

2. Worked for me..links to a pdf

try going to Fitzgerald's home page.

[jschurchin]

3. The link works fine.

Do you have Adobe Reader 7.0 installed on your computer? You are going to install it to be able to see that link. You can download it for free here: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html

[panader0]

4. Who is Bill Harlow? Mentioned as a defense witness.

[rodeodance]

6. yes, I wondered that myself. I will have to do a bit of goggling.

[rodeodance]

7. Can Rove be a defense witness if he is indicted? He is listed as a

potential witness? I really do not know.

[KharmaTrain]

9. Why Not? His Testimony Will Be Compelled...

...just like it was in the FBI investigation. Again, keep your eyes on what Fitz said at his Press Conference last summer (seems like forever...) when he said needed to find who was throwing the "dirt in the umpire's eyes"...meaning those who were involved in the cover-up of the investigation than the actual person who leaked...he can't get the leaker until he gets the "dirt out of the ump's eyes"...thus both Rove and Libby sit in the way and their cases have been deliberately separated by Fitz, yet will interweave as both were doing the dirty work of what appears to be Fitz's ultimate target.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

11. I'd imagine he could just take the Fifth

If he had to incriminate himself to answer a question.

[TahitiNut]

12. It seems the plea bargaining scenario is panning out.

I wonder what Rove's "Pearl Harbor File" looks like.

[AndyTiedye]

15. Maybe That is Why No Karl Rove Frog March Yet. IS ROVE SINGING?

An indictment might have been just the thing to get KKKarl to find his singing voice.

[Spazito]

10. He is a former spokesperson for the CIA

Here is a good read on him and the others Libby listed as potential witnesses, from Talkleft:

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014839.html

Now for the factual goodies in the pleading: First up is former DIA spokesperson Bill Harlow, whom Libby says was the source for Cathie Martin.

To use one potential defense witness to illustrate the nature of the documents we seek, the defense may call Bill Harlow, the CIA's former spokesperson, as a witness. Mr. Harlow is an important player in the events described in the Indictment. We believe that Mr. Harlow is referred to in the indictment as the government official who disclosed Ms. Wilson's employment status to Cathie Martin, former Assistant to the Vice President for Public Affairs. See Indictment, Count One, ¶ 18. Mr. Harlow may be called to testify about that conversation and about whether he told her that such information was secret. Such testimony would support the defense's contention that Ms. Martin did not tell Mr. Libby that Ms. Wilson's employment at the CIA was classified, which would help the defense to contest the government's argument that Mr. Libby should have known such information was classified.

[rodeodance]

5. Basically, Fitz says Libby does not need any more gov. docs for his

defense. Filed electronically by an assistant to Fitz (look at end).

[panader0]

8. Harlow- former CIA spokesman

[TahitiNut]

13. The Libby defense team strategy is crystal clear.

Under the guise of 'discovery' in defending Libby, the defense team has named some of the most likely future indictees of Fitzgerald's investigation, i.e. Richard Armitage, Stephen Hadley, Bill Harlow, Colin Powell, Karl Rove, (as well as) Joseph Wilson and Valerie Wilson. Using a specious and contrived interpretation of a precedent (Marshall), they've asserted a 'right of discovery' to any and all documents in Fitzgerald's possession that relate to these individuals, irrespective of whether they relate to charges against Libby.

This is a bald (and unethical?) ploy, imho. They're attempting to gain a view to the information which may be the basis for Fitzgerald indicting these "witnesses" in the future, most probably with an eye toward informing these people so they can "tailor their testimony" to the grand jury and evade perjury traps.

While defense counsel is well-advised to 'over-reach' in an abundance of energy in defending their client (as it should be), it seems clear to me that they're using the discovery process as a kind of (unethical?) legal sonar in service to as-yet-to-be-charged defendants - perhaps to help them construct better lies?


That Baker Botts is part of the Libby 'team' just makes this clearer - Bushoilini organized crime's primary consigliere's law firm.

[annabanana]

14. k&r. . . . . n/t