08
Feb
Don’t buy the bad red herring
I notice that some usually insightful bloggers are buying Libby’s defense team’s argument against Russert’s credibility on the basis of his supposed “hypocrisy” for defending himself to the FBI against Libby’s wild accusation, while at the same time asserting a journalist’s privilege not to reveal sources when subpoenaed by the grand jury. Arianna, for example, says:
When he left the stand at the end of the day…his credibility had been so hobbled it needed a pair of crutches of its own.
And Jane Hamsher (via Atrios), says:
To claim that it was a “confidential conversation” because Eckenrode was giving HIM information is incredibly dishonest…he is sweating and swinging.
Apparently, it’s so bad Atrios doesn’t know “who[m] to root for.”
I understand that Russert has long been despised on the left for his toadying to the power elite. And I think that everyone agrees about what became obvious in the Judy Miller case—that journalists’ privilege ends when it entails becoming an accomplice to a serious crime, especially one being perpetrated by someone in power. But I also can’t fault Russert and/or NBC for taking a default position in favor of press freedom when this issue arises, and then letting a judge make the decision on whether the circumstances in the case merit the incursion on press freedom.
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Google]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[LinkedIn]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/linkedin.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
Being a hypocrite wouldn’t prove Russert is lying or has a faulty memory over whether he told Libby about Plame. That just doesn’t compute.
Worse from the defense’s point of view, Russert’s explanation that he was defending privileged conversations other than the one with Libby from any Fitzpatrick fishing expedition does come through in his testimony.
It seemed more incriminating that Russert couldn’t remember the complaining phone calls he made, but reports suggest that didn’t resonate enough with the jury to impeach Russert’s testimony.
It does tend to support the idea that Libby could have as bad a memory, though. Good grief, what guy my age could keep all those conversations straight? :eek
February 8th, 2007 at 9:27 amI don’t think that Jane and Ariana are “buying” the arguments of Libby’s defense team re: Timmah’s credibility. They’ve been critical of Russert and his credibility problems for ages (I mean, Ariana does a “Russert Watch” column every Sunday on Huffington Post….)
And quite frankly, Russert did not appear to be taking any kind of “default position” with regard to the First Amendment in resisting the supoena. Libby was not acting as a source when he called Russert, and Russert did not act in the role of a “journalist” when dealing with Libby’s complaints.
Russert should be roundly condemned for his claim that he considered all interactions with those in power to be “off the record” by default — for a true journalist, just the opposite should be true.
February 8th, 2007 at 10:41 amp. lukasiak,
Very good. I just didn’t see this as impeaching Russert’s credibility, at least as regards his testimony. I can easily believe that he would act as he did, because of fear, selfishness, arrogance, complacency, etc.
February 8th, 2007 at 11:09 amWhile I think that Arianna has a technical point, I posted on her web site that she was likewise taking her eye off the ball here. Yes, Russert failed Journalism 101 but Russert is not the issue. The interaction between Cheney and Libby on this matter are the issue.
It seems likely that Russert failed to tell his boss that he spoke with the FBI either before or after speaking with them. At this point Russert has made a serious mistake by making himself part of the story. NBC has every legal ground for firing Russert, but with his TV ratings that will never happen. And Russert calculated correctly that he could get away with this cover-up. Why, because Russert would land on his feet elsewhere, witness what happened with George Will after it was found that he knowingly used stolen campaign documents from the Carter campaign to help prepare Ronald Reagan for an upcoming debate with Carter.
Both Russert and Woodward are tarnished as journalists by this episode but it in no way undercuts Russert’s damning testimony. Hopefully this tarnish will cause others in MSM to reassess what journalism really stands for. They have, after all, been getting failing grades for several years now. It is long past time they look inwardly at the practices that have landed them in such disrespect.
Good trial coverage Eric.
February 9th, 2007 at 8:05 amI’m with Dallas. Fitz is gonna hammer home what’s important: That Scooter didn’t get told about Plame from Timmeh. He’s gonna point out that so what if NBC fought the subpoena, so what if Timmeh talked to the FBI: Timmeh told the same story to the FBI, the GJ and in court. There’s no issue of credibility here.
I’d think that as a journalist a motion to quash would be a knee jerk reaction to receiving a subpoena and that’s how it sounds Timmeh played it. Look at Mitchell and Ackerman (??) who’ve been subpoenaed by the defense, they’re both fighting it.
Arianna and Jane have long had it out for Timmeh, I think in this case their — not improper, but — misapplied bias is clouding their thinking.
February 9th, 2007 at 9:25 amThis trial is just another recurring problem for the administration; the botched intelligence (or worse) from the administration is the main story. Each day, reporters pound away at the adminstration’s credibility. At this rate, the President will leave office with approval ratings in the low 30s or even lower. And I can almost hear Vice President Cheney grinding his teeth whenever he reads a newspaper or watches Fox News.
By the way, if Russert is lying, then what about Judith Miller (a reporter who was sympathetic to the adminsitration and a favorite source for their leaks)? She testified that she heard about Plame from Mr. Libby. If Mr. Libby did not lie to the Grand Jury, he must have been poorly prepared by his lawyers. Ouch!!
February 9th, 2007 at 12:11 pmLibby: Leftly Leaning – Monday, February 12th
Over at MainWebReport, Lance Dutson battles the urge to purge after watching MSNBC’s tragically incomplete coverage of Russert’s testimony which has so far glossed over or ignored compelling reasons to doubt his account.
February 12th, 2007 at 12:55 pmEric Brewer at BTC News chas