The Scooter Libby perjury and obstruction of justice trial continues today with the government’s case for the prosecution. The early word from the court’s media room – where I spent last week liveblogging the sensational court case that is riveting Washington and much of the rest of the nation — is that much of the next day or two will be spent hearing Libby’s own words as he spoke them while testifying to the grand jury he is charged with deceiving.

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has convinced Judge Reggie B. Walton that audiotapes of Libby’s closed-door testimony should be entered into evidence, and he is set to play about eight hours of them. First, however, lawyers for the opposing sides will argue over the public release of those tapes.

Judge Walton has previously ordered that trial evidence be released after each court session. But Libby’s lawyers say the sworn statements Libby gave the grand jury about his conversations with Vice President Dick Cheney and journalists are sensitive – and that the release of the tapes might prejudice Libby’s right to a fair trial.

The tapes would certainly be given big play, and although jurors are under court order to avoid the media, defense attorneys argue it may be impossible. ‘’Although it cannot be assumed that the jury will ignore the court’s warnings to pay no attention to reports on this case that appear in the news media, likewise it cannot be ignored that this is a politically charged trial taking place in the most politically aware city in the nation,'’ Libby’s attorneys wrote in court documents filed this weekend. ‘’Press scrutiny has been intense and the risk of inadvertent taint is not insignificant.”

Attorneys for more than a dozen news organizations also weighed in, arguing that Libby’s words should be made public. Judge Walton will hear arguments on the matter today before defense attorneys resume cross-examining the lead FBI agent in the case.

Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald plans to start playing the tapes later today and seems on track to conclude his case as early as tomorrow, when NBC News star Timothy Russert will join the ranks of media bigwigs who have sat as prosecution witnesses in the unseemingly hot seat of a criminal trial.

Although the defense has yet to have its turn — and I’ve sat through enough trials to know better than to prognosticate on the outcome at this still-early stage — a few observations and conclusions can fairly be drawn from the trial’s first two weeks.

The first and foremost is that there is a truly frightening level of dysfunction at the top-level nexus of politics and media in America. Nearly a dozen witnesses have been called thus far from the State Department, CIA, the White House and the mainstream press. The most common reactions to their testimony thus far have been incredulity, ridicule and embarrassment, as literally one witness after another forgot key details – even entire meetings – involving an affair that has arguably endangered the lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. It was almost enough to make one shamed –at being a journalist, and at times at being an American citizen…

Longtime CIA official Robert Grenier, for example, said he told Libby about Valerie Plame on June 11, 2003 – but he only remembered recently. State Department official Marc Grossman said he told Libby on June 11 or 12th – but he couldn’t remember if he did so in person or over the telephone. Former White House press spokesman Ari Fleischer said he told two reporters of Plame’s CIA connection around the same time – but one of them, John Dickerson, says that’s not what happened at all.

Nor did members of the Fourth Estate acquit themselves well on the stand. Former Time reporter Matt Cooper says Libby confirmed Plame’s CIA status to him in an off-the-record phone chat – but his notes of the conversation don’t reflect it in any way, and he reported the conversation differently in two versions of an article for Time. And former New York Times reporter Judith Miller said she first discussed Plame with Libby on June 23 – but she failed to remember the meeting during her first grand jury appearance and only recalled it much later when she found her notes in a shopping bag under her desk.

Miller, in fact, summed up much of the testimony for the prosecution to date by stating at one point, “I can’t remember what I don’t remember,” She concluded that she cannot be “ absolutely, absolutely certain” that she did not learn of Plame’s identity from someone other than Libby.

Got that? In some respects, it’s all clear as mud.

On the other hand, there are nearly a dozen people who have now said under oath that Libby spoke to them about Plame’s CIA status prior to when he says he first remembers hearing it from Tim Russert on July 12 (Libby of course says he had forgotten about a June meeting with Vice President Cheney, wherein (as he now remembers) he first learned of Plame!) And Russert is about to get on the stand and deny he ever said anything to Libby about Valerie Plame.

So who you gonna believe in a case that revolves around memories – and when everyone’s memory seems to be failing miserably? Will there be enough reasonable doubt from the faulty memories of the prosecution’s many witnesses introduced into the minds of the jury members? Or will they decide that with such a preponderance of evidence against Libby, he must have been lying – and not simply “misremembering” – what he knew and when he knew it?

Court ended last week with an FBI agent on the stand for the prosecution describing the Bureau’s first interview with Libby. When defense attorney Jeffress asked whether Libby had told her “he had been told by the vice president during a telephone call that Mrs. Wilson worked at the CIA in the Counter Proliferation Division,” Agent Deborah Bond replied, “Yes, but that he had forgotten about it.”

The phone call between Libby and Cheney took place on June 12, 2003 — about a month before Libby claimed he first learned about Wilson’s wife from NBC’s Russert. The prosecution contends Libby learned Plame’s identity from Cheney and discussed it with journalists. Libby contends he forgot about his conversation with Cheney and, when he heard about Plame from NBC reporter Tim Russert weeks later, it seemed like new information.

Fitzgerald hopes to prove that Libby lied under oath to save his job. Last week in court, he said can prove what Libby “had in mind when he made up a story that says, ‘You know what? I forgot everything that ever came from the vice president.’”

Is this anyway to run a country? You bet it isn’t…