Here’s what I’m getting out of this from a cursory reading of the indictment: Libby, after learning about Plame’s identity from either Cheney or some undersecretary or other (another unnamed administration official—Official A—seems to be the Novak source), told reporters that he’d heard about Plame’s CIA ties from other reporters. That is, he lied to reporters about how he knew what he knew [update: he confirmed for reporters, however tenuously]. He then repeated this origins story to the FBI (false statements), and to the grand jury (perjury)—who then concluded from this that Libby had mislead the investigation (obstruction). For this—for lying about when and how he heard of Plame’s CIA status—he faces a potential 30 years in prison.
So essentially, the crux of this indictment is that Libby lied about the way he talked to the press (Russert, Cooper, et al) to cover the original source (which for him seems to be Dick Cheney or another government official. Cheney and Libby did nothing wrong in talking about this, however, so Libby seems to have done lied for political reasons—most likely to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Which, if this is the case, is ironic on a number of levels). Lying to the grand jury is wrong and serious, of course – and Libby has to answer for it (as might Karl Rove, eventually)—but, as pertains to the reason for the investigation, there seems to be no there there.
That is, Valerie Plame, it now seems, was not “outed”—at least not by Novak’s report. And so the cover-up here appears to be the crime. Or, put more simply—this is Martha Stewart with a security clearance.
If this is the whole of the findings (and Fitzgerald hinted that the investigation is ongoing, though he also suggested the bulk of his investigation is complete), the political spin on the left—invocations of Watergate (from John Kerry), or suggestions that this Administration is “corrupt” for having fully cooperated with a two year investigation (Pelosi, et al)—are just plain silly. And so when Democratic representatives and their spinmeisters try to tie this to the outing of a CIA agent—as they will invariably do—they need to be forcefully called on it.
Allegations that a CIA agent was nefariously outed as retribution for Wilson’s fabricated accounts of intelligence misuse are false. And so those who made those claims now need to be held to account. Did they know Plame wasn’t a covert agent? Did they know that Ms Plame hadn’t been outed before making the allegations? Because if so, we’ve had a two year investigation, at taxpayer expense, based on an intentional, politically-motivated lie.
Which, it seems to me, would be a crime in its own right. Or it should be.
So I ask again: was Plame “outed”? If so, where are the charges suggesting that?
I honestly don’t know.
****
Glenn Reynolds says, “The mountain has labored and brought forth” a mouse large rabbit. More here.
****
update: from the Fitzgerald press conference:
Fitzgerald says Plame’s identity was “not well known” and was “classified.” He says Ms Plame’s cover WAS, in fact, blown (though his language seems very careful here) by Novak’s column. This is at odds with previous information, as reported by Bill Gertz and others. See my previous post for details.
Also, reports have it that Wilson was open about his wife’s CIA ties—having publicized it on his own web page.
Is there is a difference between covert and “classified”? More will certainly come from this.
Developing…
****
update 2: Fitzgerald makes a long and strained baseball analogy to explain the “leak”. Evidently, America was hurt by a high fastball, but we can’t know if Libby meant to throw chin music and missed, or if set out to drill the hitter (who, I suppose, is Plame).
Michael Isikoff asks the proper follow-up question: why, if the leak hurt America, wasn’t the source of the leak, who “damaged” a “classified” agent—Official A—not charged?
Who knows?*
****
update 3: Fitzgerald says he is NOT making the assertion that Libby outed a covert agent. There is no charge to that effect.
I repeat: Fitzgerald says he is NOT making the assertion that Libby outed a covert agent. There is no charge to that effect.
Which, that about sums it up for me…
The remaining question—did Libby pass on “classified” information…that’s possible. But he wasn’t charged with having done so.
****
REQUEST: Anybody have a link to Wilson’s admission on his site (or elsewhere) that his wife was CIA? I have it somewhere but can’t seem to find it.
****
update 4: Rich Lowry: Lanny Davis is making sense on CNN. Says Rove probably thought he was trading in public information to knock down a false story, and that’s his job: “Paul [Begala] and I did that everyday.â€Â
****
update 5: Was the leaking of Plame’s identity in and of itself a crime? The charge, had it been brought, would have proceeded under the Espionage Act, Fitzgerald hints—but, in a general sense, such a charge was frustrated by Libby’s obstruction. But the fact that Official A—the source of Novak’s column—wasn’t indicted suggests that Fitzgerald doesn’t think the leak met the criteria necessary to prosecute under the Espionage Act.
Washington reporters, who earn a living off these kinds of leaks, should be breathing a sigh of relief. But we’ll see. I suspect feigned indignance and outrage, followed by a return to business as normal.
I still maintain that Plame’s CIA ties were already known publicly. She did, after all, work at the CIA. And so if she wasn’t “covert,” then how the hell was she compromised?
****
update 6: Cliff May:
The accusation—from Wilson and his allies—was that there was a conspiracy at the highest levels of this administration to expose Valerie Plame, to reveal that she was an undercover agent. And the accusation was that this was done as a way to punish punish Joe Wilson and to send a chill to all others who might criticize the Bush White House.
That does not appear to be the case. Fitzgerald is alleging no such conspiracy. And he even added: “We’re not saying that Libby knowingly outted a covert agent.â€Â
So did anybody? Or not? Does it really not matter? I’m asking .
****
update 7: Joe Wilson’s attorney, Christopher Wolf, gives a statement from Wilson: “My family was attacked for my speaking the truth […] Today is not a day to analyze or debate. Today is a sad day for America […] This case is not about me or my family.”
Jesus. The gall of this guy is absolutely stunning. [More here and here]
****
update 8: Moments ago, FOXNews’ Shepard Smith framed the indictment in the context of whether or not the US was “misled” into war with Iraq. Which is strange, considering Fitzgerald himself made it absolutely clear that the indictment should not be used in that way, and that the investigation shines no light whatever on that political question.
This will be the media take, I suspect. Why? Because it is sensational and fraught with intrigue.
However, I certainly welcome that discussion. Joe Wilson believes now is not the time to have such a public debate—convenient, given that we now know his charge that the White House organized a conspiracy to out his “covert” wife was as much a prevarication as his claims about Niger forgeries and other pre-war intelligence matters.
But shouldn’t we be investigating Wilson? After all, presumably he knew his wife’s status—or, at the very least, HIS WIFE knew it.
Why was the investigation allowed to proceed? Was it because of a potential violation of the Espionage Act – a leak of “classified”?
****
update 9: Mark Levin:
It doesn’t matter what Plame’s neighbors did or did not know, which is why sending FBI agents out to interview neighbors had, in my view, little to do with the law, and everything to do with Fitzgerald wanting to announce, as he did today, that her neighbors didn’t know she worked at the CIA. Fitzgerald is trying to claim this is about defending a CIA officers identity and national security. But this is not the case. The issue, as a matter of law, is whether she was classified as covert by the CIA, and whether the CIA took steps to protect her identity.
[My emphasis]
Meanwhile, President Bush comments on the Libby indictment: “Each individual is presumed innocent and entitled to due process and a fair trial […] I got a job to do and so do the people in the White House.” [text of statement available here]
And Carl Cameron on FOX is suggesting the investigation could move on to investigate why Libby lied—an attempt to give credence to suggestions that pre-war intelligence was doctored. Already, Democrats are calling for just such an investigation.
It’s time for the Administration to get serious and fire back substantively, not simply let it be known that Joe Wilson, the source of such claims, was sent to Niger by his CIA wife, and that certain CIA stalwarts were interested in undermining the President’s foreign policy.
****
update 10: Shep Smith ends his broadcast by leaving this question hanging out there: “Why the lies…?” The implication is that Libby was hiding some grand conspiracy about a coverup over faulty Iraqi intelligence and a desire to mislead us into war.
But the simple answer is, Libby knew there would be fallout from his having gotten the info from Cheney and other admistration sources, and that, because the info was classified, he didn’t bring Cheney’s name into it. Besides, naming Cheney as the source to reporters would have looked like the White House was out to get Wilson (which they were, but only as a way to rebut his story), and with a hostile press, such directness would have been made to look like a conspiracy.
Ironies abound here, it seems to me. [internal update: Warren Bell concurs]
****
update 11: Here’s Byron York, on the whole question of Valerie Plame’s status:
The question of whether Valerie Wilson was a covert CIA operative at the time her name was published in the Novak column is simply not answered in the Fitzgerald indictment. Instead, Fitzgerald argues that the very fact that Wilson worked for the CIA was classified, and thus Libby’s saying that she worked for the CIA—regardless of any mention of covert/noncovert status, or whether Libby even knew about that—constituted a release of classified information:
At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community.
The responsibilities of certain CIA employees required that their association with the CIA be kept secret; as a result, the fact that these individuals were employed by the CIA was classified. Disclosure of the fact that such individuals were employed by the CIA had the potential to damage the national security in ways that ranged from preventing the future use of those individuals in a covert capacity, to compromising intelligence-gathering methods and operations, and endangering the safety of CIA employees and those who dealt with them.
[that latter bit is excerpted from Fitzgerald’s press conference]
****
update 12: More, from Michael Ledeen (who still hasn’t been indicted), who comes to similar conclusions I do.
To be clear, I don’t believe Fitzgerald is acting in bad faith. Instead, I picture him as the Elliot Ness type, and I feel he’s boyscouting this thing a bit.
****
update 13: A statement from Libby’s counsel.
****
update 14: More from Lorie Byrd and Ace. And Sullivan is OUTRAGED at the gobsmackingly vile torture of…oh, who the fuck cares about Andrew Sullivan. Skip it.
More, from Volokh.
****
update 15: FOXNews’ Megan Kendall just said that Libby wasn’t charged with outing a covert agent because his lies made it impossible to tell if he’d done so.
This strikes me as nonsensical. If Plame was “covert,” he outed her, as did whomever it was who gave Novak his information (and who WASN’T indicted for perjury or giving false statements). Where he says he got his information from is irrelevant to this fact.
If I’m wrong, I’d like to know why. And please, let’s see if we can get a handle on this before it becomes the new media meme: ONLY LIBBY’S LIES KEPT HIM FROM BEING CHARGED WITH THE LARGER CRIME OF OUTING A COVERT AGENT. TRUE OR FALSE?
Remember, Fitzgerald said he is NOT making the assertion that Libby outed a covert agent. And Wilson had himself noted that his wife was CIA (though I’m still searching for that link; meantime, here’s someone else referencing it; and, as Sean reminds me in the comments, Stephen Hayes references this in his Weekly Standard column).
****
update 16: More Ledeen:
[…] Please notice that Libby a couple of times said that, in conversation with journalists, he was straining NOT to confirm that Ms. Wilson was a CIA person. In retrospect he probably wishes he had just refused to discuss it at all. instead, he was probably too clever by half. But his instinct was right. When I handled classified stuff I was always reminded by my bosses that it was one thing if a journalist had some sort of leak, but it was entirely different if a government official confirmed it. so i tried never to confirm anything classified.
I am quite sure this will be raised in his trial.
To which Rich Lowry replies, “UH, MICHAEL. Doesn’t the indictment allege that when Libby said that he was careful not to confirm anything about Plame with reporters he was lying?”
More, from John Cole, Jeralyn Merritt (and, in response to Jeralyn, Mark Moore).
****
update 17: Jane Skinner (FOX) is reporting that several CIA sources are claiming the Libby indictment as vindication, re-issuing the charge that they felt pressured by the White House to make the case for war. I’d thought a Senate Report had put the lie to those claims (and Fitzgerald himself said the indictments say no such thing), but then, the truth is only what we repeat most often, so….
****
update 18: From Forbes, in the comments:
It’s very simple, Plame’s employment status was classified (which is one part of the two part definition), but she wasn’t a covered person regarding the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421 et. seq.) because she wasn’t working outside the U.S., and hadn’t been within the prior 5 years (the second part).
Second, the Espionage Act contains a very specific and detailed list of items (mostly armaments, material, and munitions, or their manufacturing facilities), the disclosure of which would be a violation of the Act—one’s employment status as classified is not among those detailed. Remember the Espionage Act was World War I-era legislation, pre-dating the CIA/OSS of WW II vintage.
So Libby’s indictment revolves around differing memories between the participants of various conversations with reporters, i.e. a he said/she said-type dispute.
Warm beer, at best.
I am underwhelmed by Fitzgerald’s concern regarding national security. Truth telling by way of exposing nepotism at the CIA is a story the public should know. Nepotism that produced a three-time liar in Wilson. The disclosure of such should have resulted in stories regarding the CIA’s engagement in politics/policy—which is outside their scope of responsibilities—rather than limiting themselves to intelligence collection, which is their responsibility.
Sadly, at least one person in the administration didn’t trust the press to get that story out there without tricking them into doing so.
****
update 19: From the NRO editorial, just posted:
Please spare us the excuses warmed over from Democratic talking points in the 1990s: the prosecutor is out-of-control, there was no underlying crime, etc., etc. It is the responsibility of anyone, especially a public official, to tell the truth to FBI agents and grand juries. If Libby didn’t, he should face the consequences. Fitzgerald’s indictment is not a Ronnie Earle-style partisan production, held together with scotch tape and malicious intentions. But this is the prosecutor’s day, when he gets to make the argument against his target unrebutted. Libby will get his chance to respond, and it might be that Fitzgerald’s case looks weaker soon.
But conservatives would be well-advised not to start slamming Fitzgerald. We don’t know all the facts and until we do, his acts are open to dueling interpretations. It seemed unfair for him to talk at his press conference of Libby damaging national security by revealing classified information, when Libby wasn’t charged with that. But this was a departure for the otherwise restrained and responsible Fitzgerald. The Bush administration, for its part, has conducted itself with notable forbearance in this case, avoiding the sort of smears that the Clinton administration routinely resorted to whenever a prosecutor proved inconvenient.
Fitzgerald’s merits aside, the limits of special-prosecutor investigations were once again evident in this case. Two years later, we still don’t know important facts. Was Plame covert? Fitzgerald can’t or won’t say. Who is “Official A†(although we can all guess)? Who were the other unnamed officials? It is a prosecutor’s job to build a criminal case, period, full stop. But in high-stakes political controversies, that’s not really the public interest  disclosure is. Then, everyone knows the facts and the public can make its judgments on what is appropriate. Offending officials can be punished with resignations and public obloquy. Except in dire cases  say, bribery  that process should take precedence over prosecutions rather than the other way around.
Unfortunately, Republicans and Democrats engage in alternating opportunism over “the criminalization of politics,†and it is the Democrats’ turn to pin their political hopes on the work of a prosecutor.
****
update 20: Watching Chris Matthews just now, it’s clear the left media’s next push is to go after Cheney as part of a larger conspiracy. In fact, Matthews seems to consider it a foregone conclusion, and it’s just a matter of how “careful” Cheney was.
To me, that doesn’t fly if Plame was not covert.
But here’s an important question: why didn’t Fitzgerald just find out her status, and if she wasn’t a covert agent, end the investigation there?
Could more be happening? Can’t someone other than Fitzgerald tell us for sure what her actual status was?
****
update 21: Michelle Malkin liveblogged the day, as well. Interesting to compare her posts with mine . See also, Austin Bay and Wizbang.
****
update 22: NRO contributor and Fitzgerald pal Andrew McCarthy offers a compelling summary of the day’s events, one that helps to explain some of the prosecutor’s actions with regard to the charges leveled (and, conspicuously, not leveled):
The indictment does not allege an offense of the espionage act (18 USC 793), but it does indicate there may well have been one.
There are several crimes laid out in the espionage act, but the one that applies most closely on these facts requires the government to prove that a person (a) obtained classified information lawfully (e.g., in his official capacity), communicated it to someone not entitled to receive it, and (c) did so willfully.
The indictment charges the mere fact that Plame worked at the CIA was classified information. (“At all relevant times … Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified.â€Â)
It is worth noting that many people, including me, have been wrong about this. I assumed that the fact that she was a CIA employee was well-known and not classified, but that some aspect of her relationship with CIA was covert and classified. The latter may be true (Fitzgerald, as he should have, declined to comment on it), but it turns out to be not so important because the very fact that she was a CIA employee was classified. It really doesn’t matter whether we think it should have been classified or not. The fact is that it was. People privileged to handle classified information well know that they mustn’t disclose it even if they personally think there is no good reason for it to be classified or that some higher purpose of theirs would be served by disclosing it.
So, if the allegations in the indictment are true, then Libby did obtain classified information in his official capacity and he did share it with reporters who were not entitled to receive it. The rest of the equation is: did he act willfully?
Fitzgerald did not charge an espionage act offense. To the extent he spoke about the act today, he explained that he thought it was a statute that had to be used very judiciously to avoid its becoming a British-style official secrets act. That is the policy reason for not charging it, and it could be argued either way. I think he was right, but reasonable minds could differ.
What also could be argued either way is the obvious evidence reason for not charging the espionage act, which is the difficulty of proving willfulness. Pat did not go into this today – again, appropriately; as he noted the prosecutor’s job at this stage is to announce charges, not vouch for them, and not to discuss charges or persons not indicted. But that doesn’t mean we can’t analyze it.
Willfullness is a high mental state in the criminal law. Although the adage that “ignorance of the law is no excuse†generally does apply, a willfulness requirement in a statute comes close to making ignorance of the law a defense. The government must prove that the defendant was fully aware of the unlawfulness of his actions (not that he knew the statute number of the crime but that what he was doing was illegal) and that he performed those actions with a bad purpose.
There is basis in the indictment to suspect that Libby acted willfully – he is alleged to have done a lot to inform himself; to have asked Judith Miller not to source him as a senior administration official but as a Hill staffer (strongly suggesting that he knew what he was saying should not be said); and to have lied about what he said and how he knew what he knew (strongly suggesting he was worried about having said what he said, and worried about having it revealed that he came about the information officially rather than casually).
On the other hand, though, Libby also clearly was not trying to out Plame for the purpose of endangering her, punishing Wilson or harming the CIA. He was trying to do something that was legal and appropriate: to discredit Wilson and knock down Wilson’s misleading story about why he was sent to Niger. He should not have done it the way he appears to have done it, but he surely was not doing what Wilson and the Left have been claiming.
So, while Libby may have had a bad purpose as far as the law is concerned, he did not have a purpose to do damage to the country or help an enemy. That is what the espionage act is most concerned about. Under the circumstances, he was given the benefit of the doubt on his state of mind. I think that was an appropriate exercise of restraint on Fitzgerald’s part. The charges brought are serious ones. There was no reason to bring a questionable one just to rebut a talking point about how it’s only a cover-up and not a crime.
The irony here is of of course the Libby committed a technical crime under the espionage act with regard to “compromising” Plame (crimes set forth to protect against damaging the country and helping the enemy, which he violated in letter but not spirit) in order to rebut the lies being proferred by Joe Wilson, which were intended to hurt the President’s foreign policy and weaken the position of the US with regard to Iraq in particular, and the GWOT more broadly.
What a tremendous waste of time, money, resources, energy and, frankly, my attention span. Can we please move on now? Please???
What I want to know is why everyone thinks Fitzgerald is such a great prosecutor. He’s had TWO years and free rein to nail everyone in the White HOuse. And now…now he wants an extension. This whole thing is a joke, has been a joke, and will continue to be a joke. It’s time for Fitzie to pull up the stakes. Nothing good will come of this unless Moxiegrrl OD’s on percocet out of grief.
And does Patrick Fitzgerald, or is it that Gerald Fitzpatrick?
Jeff,
Did you notice the choice of words in the indictment re Plame/Wilson? The indictment chose to use the word classified not covert when discussing Plame’s employment status at the CIA. I don’t know the terminology the CIA uses but I know from my time in Force Recon there certainly were different uses for those words.
Also, from reading the indictment, Libby certainly was more than economical with the truth. Unless he convinced himself that the story he was telling the GJ was what actually happened. I have a hard time believing that someone who was trained in the law and had attorneys advising him would be untruthful to the GJ.
I am bewildered.
All the same, he could have avoided indictment by not lying. It may be a waste of resources and a political prosecution to go after this lie, but that is a fact.
The sheer genius of all this is that the left has been able to duck the consequence of its lying operative(Wilson), and instead stick it to the Bush administration by getting its stooges in the media to pick up the narrative.
Marc Steyn summarizes Plamegate:
Indicted – on charges he knowingly lied and misled the GJ about where he got his insider knowledge.
Bad.
Not Sandy Burglar bad, but bad.
Slap his wrist. Then go get a freakin’ life.
Sheesh. Can we lose this non-story now? Please?
SB: about
time
To follow up on the Steyn article. Has anyone else noticed the language parsing going on re: Wilson? He keeps saying (to paraphrase): “Iraq never purchased Uranium from Niger!!!!!”. But that is not, and was never the claim. The claim was that Iraq attempted to purchase Uranium, which was essentially substantiated by an aside remark of Wilson’s when he debriefed. He completely validates the central claim in this whole mess, but then tries to move the goalposts.
But of course, the press refuses to acknowledge this.
While I agree that this is very reminiscent of Martha’s situation, I would consider it a personal favor if you didn’t publish the prison diaries of Scooter Libby.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
This is it?
Two freaking years and a pile of taxpayer money for what will amount to a slap on the wrist – if there is even a conviction. And now we have to wait again for another undetermined period of time?
Fitzgerald can stand up there all he wants and say Plame was outed, but if he can’t put forth any charges to back it up, I have to say that he is full of it.
And now, we have a 50-ring “Circus of the Political Stars” to look forward to in what will be a joke of a trial if these are really the only charges the Fitzgerald could come up with after all this time.
Seriously, by all means, try Libby on the charges and if he is guilty, send him off to his minimum security boarding camp for the next 10 months – for all the good it will do – but I am getting tired of these piddly little political fishing expeditions that cost the people of this country far more than the outcomes justify.
lol I’m not sure why anyone believes the democrats claiming Fitzgerald’s “not political”. This entire fucking process was political. And if Fitzgerald isn’t political, I can guarantee you he has an incredible amount of pressure from the demo elite to indict somebody, anybody.
I guarantee you, the new target is Cheney- watch if there’s not a big article in the Grey Slut tomorrow about how Libby’s links to Cheney obviously mean Cheney should also be indictment, even if there’s no, you know, legal basis for doing so.
I heard Ann Coulter on Hannity yesterday talking about how this wouldn’t hurt the Bush admininistration. If the MSM wasn’t firmly in the democratic camp, I’d agree its much ado about nothing. However, whats ultimately going to happen is the indictment (which in the minds of the readers of the Grey Whore, means Libby’s already convicted) is going to be spun into a referendum on the administration and how “corrupt” it is, which is essentially what the liberals have been accusing Bush of for 6 years. Up until now, there hasn’t been a “scandal” to hang the accusation on but now we have it and we’re going to be putting up with this horseshit until 2008.
Quite frankly, Libby obviously made a HUGE blunder and its amazing to me that a lawyer would lie to a grand jury and think he wouldn’t be called to the mat. If you’re a part of the Bush team, its your damn duty to realize that everything you say to a reporter is going to be twisted and scrutinized – so watch WTF you say or don’t talk to the press. Apparently, Scooter was incapable of both and thus, should very much be out on his ass.
As a follow-up to Steyn’s comments, why in the hell did the Bush administration let Wilson go to Niger ? AS this “scandal” unravels, the administration looks like it had its collective head up its ass on a fairly regular basis.
Well, I for one would manage to stiffle a thousand yawns if Jeff would promise to publish those prison diaries. Of course, this presumes he’ll have any material to work with. If Sandy Berger has set any precedent – we’ll have to settle for the dolphin in a pea coat’s thoughts on Libby’s probation office visits…
Keep in mind that he’s only been indicted for lying, not convicted. It’s entirely possible he was just mistaken about where he heard about Plame. It doesn’t seem incredible to me that they guy could have forgotten one of thousands of conversations with his boss. Just saying, to be guilty I believe they have to prove he had an intent to deceive and the guy’s innocent until proven guilty.
let’s not delude ourselves. libby knew what he was doing—he took a gamble that the reporters wouldn’t talk. he avoided knowing whether plame was covert or classified, or whatever.
and isn’t fitzgerald a republican?
Fitzgerald claims no party affiliation.
What I’m getting from this is, Plame wasn’t a covert agent. But her status was still classified, but that the passing on of classified information here doesn’t meet the standards for prosecution under the Espionage Act.
Which should make every reporter in Washington breathe a sight of relief—but that won’t happen. Instead, a suspect the will act indignant, then go about the business of relying on leaks just like the one here to do their jobs (as has long been the case in DC).
Democrats are stoopid. Period.
They let themselves get all worked up over this BS (Fitzmas, etc.) than they unwrap their biggest gift package and discover….socks.
Now, they’re fantasizing about taking down Cheney when that should be the absolute last thing they should want. Cheney doesn’t fill the traditional second term role of “heir apparent” given his age and health and repeated denials of interest in running. Get him out of office via some sort of stupid indictment and you hand Bush the chance to nominate a successor. Someone like say…Condi Rice? Rudy Guiliani?
Smart moves, democrats! Keep up the bold strategery that’s left you powerless and increasingly marginalized.
I think you get the sequence off by a little, Jeff.
1) Libby finds out Plame’s identity via a number of government sources (including Cheney and CIA).
2) Libby tells reporters that Wilson’s wife is CIA.
3)Libby tells FBI and Grand Jury that he didn’t know anything when he spoke to reporters and either (a) was asked questions he couldn’t answer or (b) told them that all he had was the same rumor they had.
All of the reporters testified separately that Libby was the source of some degree of information and NOT that they gave info to Libby. Additionally, the Plame conversation with Russert appears to have been wholly manufactured by Libby for his testimony. It looks like he CYA’d his own leaking by denying to the FBI and Grand Jury that he was the source.
Not sure what it adds up to, but we learned a while ago that you can’t just lie to investigators. His actions appear to fit the standard for all of the charges brought, if you believe the notes of the reporters.
I missed the Hubbell, Espy, Cisneros, Tucker, and McDougal(s) indictments. Fortunately, NBC was kind enough to cut into my Days to let me know about this particular earth-shattering indictment. It also allowed me an opportunity to switch over and catch up on my World but noooooo….CBS couldn’t let NBC get all the ratings. Same thing with my Life. If I didn’t know better, I’d be almost 100% sure that the Big 3 networks shared a common frame of reference in their programming choices.
Isn’t that what I said, Charles?
Libby knew where he got the information, but he gave it to reporters, claiming his source was other reporters.
He then maintained that story when he talked to both the FBI and the grand jury—knowing full well he got the info from government officials.
That info was classified, but Plame was not covert. So the crime would have been in the passing of the material itself.
Official A, however—Novak’s source—wasn’t charged. So that suggests to me that the passing of classified info here didn’t meet the intent of necessary for criminalization spelled out under the Espionage Act.
I’m not deluding myself. I’m not Republican or even a conservative really and couldn’t give a rat’s ass about Scooter Libby. I’m just saying that to say for certain that he was lying isn’t right. I once lost $20 in a bet because I just knew that Ethan Hawk played the pothead roomie in “True Romance”. I’d seen the movie several times and could picture him in my head talking trash after the mob enforcers left. I got off light; I would have bet anything that I was right and I was totally full of shit.
I don’t think it’s incredible that he could have forgotten the Cheney conversation and remembered the Novak one or been mistaken about whick came first. It’s certainly possible that a cenversation with a boss he speaks with all day, every day held less weight in his memory than one with a journalist.
Much ado.
Personally, I just can’t wait for the “Libby Diaries” on PW. Eh, Jeff? How ‘bout it?
Am I missing something, Jeff? Is there more evidence for government sources than his notes on discussing it with Cheney? I’m not defending the guy, but the evidence I’m aware of seems a bit light for convicting him ahead of time.
Looks to me like Libby screwed the pooch. My guess is that he and Cheney talked about a political hit on Wilson, a hit he richly deserved, but Libby botched the job. Libby bet that Plame’s CIA status was not protected. Looks like he bet right, but then he simply goofed on the political cover. Don’t ever lie to the Feds, even about inane gotcha political bull shit.
So they got Libby for lying about lying to the Media – using media testamony.
Someone square me away on this.
Did Shep get malaria in Louisiana. What’s his fucking deal lately?
Shep’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Shep’s just being lazy – the herd is following the “this is all about the run up to war in Iraq” trail, and Shep just started mooing and following the rest of ‘em.
Can’t stand Shep Smith. Guy wears more makeup than my wife and looks like he’s sporting lady’s unmentionables beneath the talking head uniform.
Got a little carried away with that whole Katrina story, he did. Very excitable, he is.
Read top of indictment item #9.:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_indictment_28102005.pdf
On or about June 12, 2003, LIBBY was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson’s wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counterproliferation Divison. LIBBY understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA.
This is a crucial piece of information. the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) is part of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, i.e., not Directorate of Intelligence, the branch of the CIA where ‘analysts’ come from, but where the spies come from.
Talk to anyone who used to serve in the intelligence community.
Then ask them if they ever said “ Oh yeah, I work at the CIA / NSA / NRO / DIA.” (even if its a ‘desk job’
– While they worked there.
Get back to us all when you find one of them who says ‘yes’.
And yet Fitzgerald said, unequivically, that Libby did NOT out a covert agent.
And he charged no one with doing so.
Shep’s angling for that ABC anchor job. Eyes on the prize, baby. Eyes on the prize.
TW: image. Heh. As in “Had to change it, in order to be considered for the job.”
NPR with Juan Williams had a segment – they prefaced it with a run-up to the war bit that included:
My head exploded.
Personally, I like the old-tyme way of journalism – Yellow Journalism, William Randolph Hearst, Citizen Kane Style. The media back in the day were Proto-Blogs, dead tree opinion shapers that advertised their bias in the masthead.
I think the next few weeks would cause Bob Somerby and Tom Maguire to lose their sanity – if they hadn’t already.
BumperStickerist —
This is why the Noonan column yesterday got to me. There is very little in the way of consequence for a press that chooses to be dishonest. They just keep repeating the lie until it becomes truth, and that “truth” then forces investigations, etc., that lead to what we’ve seen today.
Wilson and Josh Marshall skate.
Up is down, black is white, Elton John is Kiki Dee.
As it happens, I have family who worked at the CIA. They were overt employees and all their friends and neighbors knew about it.
The impression you get from Tom Clancy and Hollywood is wrong. Thousands of people in the DC area work for the agency overtly and they are not required to be, nor are they usually, circumspect about it (unless they simply want to avoid the occasional idiotic response they get when people find out).
“So I ask again: was Plame “outedâ€Â? If so, where are the charges suggesting that?”
Why did the CIA forward the case if she wasn’t outed?
X.
My mother worked overtly for the CIA – she talked about it openly, including a rather humorous story that occcured during a surveillance operation.
John is right – quit thinking that Hollywood has given you an accurate representation of agency life. “True Lies” isn’t a documentary.
Elton John may want to be Kiki Dee but 45 lbs. of backfat and pendulous D-Cup manboobies says otherwise. That visual is in retaliation for you putting that inane tune in my head for the rest of the day.
“says”? Say…
PIMF
Jon, Sab.
Thanks for your candor.
More please! thats two! Do I hear more?
Um, ok. If Plame was in fact covert by law, she was outed by Libby. Justification: Libby was told by three people: the Undersecretary of State (Bolton), a senior CIA officer, and Cheney. This points strongly to that if Plame was in fact covert, then Libby had need to know. Else, you know, he wouldn’t have multiple people who know better spilling the beans to him.
So, my conclusion is that Plame was not covert by law, because if she was Libby would have been charged with outing her. He obviously did discuss her with the press, so whether or not he revealed her identity to them is more or less a foregone conclusion.
Meh. Looks to me like they hit Libby with five counts of forgetting who told him Plame’s name first. With no other indictments, this has been another waste of taxpayer’s money to keep the left happy.
Hope it has a nice, deep, permanent effect on leaks to the media – the bastards sure deserve it.
If you’re still looking for that link, check Stephen Hayes’ Weekly Standard piece (the one you linked to a few days ago). I think it was mentioned there, in the context of a speech Wilson gave before some leftie group.
X:
But this is the point: extraordinary candor is not required.
While we are on the subject, the Directorate of Operations has many, many overt employees. Not everybody in the DO is an intelligence officer.
The Hollywood-fed public assumes CIA employee = CIA “agent” and is incredulous that a high adminstration official wouldn’t act accordingly. But given Plame’s job at the agency, it would be easy for a government insider to assume just the opposite.
I’m not sure if this is what you’re looking for, but on page two of Hayes’ article we have the following:
Again, I’m not sure if that was what you were looking for, Jeff, but it mentions Plame by name.
It’s very simple, Plame’s employment status was classified (which is one part of the two part definition), but she wasn’t a covered person regarding the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421 et. seq.) because she wasn’t working outside the U.S., and hadn’t been within the prior 5 years (the second part).
Second, the Espionage Act contains a very specific and detailed list of items (mostly armaments, materiel, and munitions, or their manufacturing facilities), the disclosure of which would be a violation of the Act–one’s employment status as classified is not among those detailed. Remembering the Espionage Act was World War I-era legislation, pre-dating the CIA/OSS of WW II vintage.
So Libby’s indictment revolves around differing memories between the participants of various conversations with reporters, i.e. a he said/she said-type dispute.
Warm beer, at best.
I am underwhelmed by Fitzgerald’s concern regarding national security. Truth telling by way of exposing nepotism at the CIA is a story the public should know. Nepotism that produced a three-time liar in Wilson. The disclosure of such should have resulted in stories regarding the CIA’s engagement in politics/policy–which is outside their scope of responsibilities–rather than limiting themselves to intelligence collection, which is their responsibility.
Thanks, Sean. At some point, I actually linked to that page. Can’t seem to find it, though.
Guilty or not guilty, lie or didn’t lie, committed perjury or not, obstructed or not. Giant political concpiracy or cover up. And Elton John has giant man boobies… Where the hell is that damn dillo anyway?
conspiracy
There I said it………..
How long would it take for Karl Rove’s brainwaves to defrost a Thanksgiving turkey from a distance of 2308 miles? Could he cook an armadillo in under an hour? Or is he too distracted by this bullshit to concentrate on important matters such as these?
Please.
As it happens, I have *a lot* friends who work for a couple of those agencies (I used to be in military intelligence myself.) Most of them aren’t barred from telling me where they work (analysts all). I don’t now where you’re pulling your info from.
*a lot* of
According to Jerilynn, Rove is a rat if he tells what he knows and a criminal if he doesn’t.
DeLay is right. This is the criminalization of conservative politics.
X, I’ve worked in or around the intelligence community for my entire adult life. People in the intelligence community don’t go about shouting about it or talking to strange people that come up and ask them about their jobs out of the blue. That’s just operations security, but there’s no need for almost any of us to deny what we do.
I’ve worked at several military intelligence units, the National Air and Space Intelligence Center, and currently work at US Strategic Command. I’m not outing myself or breaking any rules in the least by saying that.
Only a very tiny fraction of people even in the CIA DO are covert agents nor would almost any of them have any reason to fear being identified as a CIA employee. There wouldn’t be any reason for someone to assume she was covert just because they were told where she worked. You simply don’t know what you’re talking about.
Don’t even bother looking for the dillo tonight. He’s probably hiding under a pile somewhere, skulking around, whispering secrets, doctoring photos, shouting invective, and throwing who-knows-what at the rest of his kind. Let him find his own separate piece tonight, I’m off to rake leaves.
Is that a regular turkey or one of the infamous “plastic” turkeys that seems to drive BDS sufferers to ever greater depths of hysteria?
I have not read all of the comments, so I may be replicating what someone else has already stated here, but for Plame to have been “outed”, it seems from what Fitzgerald said that it hinges on intent.
To out an agent, some nefarious, malicious intent has to be present, and he cannot confidently say this, so therefore it is not an “outing”. It’s clear that she was classified, but not covert. But even if she was covert, if the intent in releasing her name is not malicious, there’s no crime.
Just my opinion. I’m no lawyer.
I was busy this afternoon and didn’t get to hear the whole press conference, but on Hannity (only thing I could find >.<
they were implying that Libby got “caught” by conflicting accounts in his own written notes that he voluntarily surrendered to the GJ. This makes it very hard for me to believe he was intentionally lying.
You just can’t make this shit up.
I worked at NSA as a cryptologic linguist.
Everybody knew it.
There.
I said it.
The problem is more specific to the revelation by Scooter regarding Plame’s desk assignment. Valerie worked in ‘counter proliferation’ – that’s classified.
For example, everybody knew I worked at NSA, but nobody knew that I worked the Outer Mongolian Land Force Analysis Desk.(1) The former can be found out by following me as I go to work.
The latter could only be known by following me to my desk.
(1) Not my real assignment.
Duh! First, there’s not any noticable transit time for the brainwaves. Second, they don’t work directly on the turkey to heat it. It works like this:
After that it’s just like a regular turkey defrosting.
Why would anyone put frosting on a turkey anyway? A cake, yeah – I’ve never seen a frosted turkey. If there is – make mine chocolate.
Yawn. Nothing to see here, folks. Move along now.
Update 6: No big deal. Fitzie even said so himself. Nobody got hurt. There was no crime just a few memory discrepencies. Move along now. Nothing to see here.
Update 21: Waste of time. Now can me move along to something more interesting?
comment: I’m not paying any attention.
comment: Me neither. What’s on the other channel?
comment: Mountain. Mouse. Rabbit.
comment: We’re bored. We’re cool.
comment: The school buses did it! Heckuva job Scooter!
Bumperstickerist: you and me both (though I never worked at NSA).
TW: open, as in out in the open
Sandwichman: “WHY WON’T YOU JUST ADMIT THAT BUSH LIED AND PEOPLE DIED!
“SAVE US SAINT WILSON FROM THE LIES LIES LIES!”
Fitzgerald: “This indictment has nothing to do with the war.”
Sandwichman:
Fitzgerald:
Sandwichman: “LIES LIES LIES LIES! HALIBURTON! CHIMPY! OOOOOOIIIIIILLLLL!”
Forbes nailed it: the story of Wilson’s nepotism needed to be told, whether the witch was covered or not.
Scooter Libby is a patriot.
Maybe Libby’s problem is that he has a faulty memory. I was thinking about that and wondered if I would be able to put into chronological order every thing I said and did about a specific topic over a year ago.
I ran an experiment using a memorable event. I tried to remember what the menu was last Thanksgiving. I do remember cooking the Turkey and making the dressing, but I could not claim 100% certainty beyond that.
I certainly couldn’t tell you when we ate or in what order the dishes were made or even every person that was there.
Not exactly. Libby claimed in his testimony that he told reporters that his sources were media scuttlebutt but the reporters testified that Libby either told them or confirmed their info.
Still, even if Libby was just backing up his lie to reporters by repeating it to the grand jury, that means he was lying to the grand jury.
Innocent until proven guilty and all that, but it don’t look good.
Charles —
Lying to the grand jury, bad. Yes. I’ve said as much. We agree.
But it seems to me the only question that needed asking was whether or not Plame was covert. Then it wouldn’t have mattered what he said to whom. Right?
I’m still trying to work my way through all this.
In all this talk of indictments, there is one name that is conspicuous by its absence: Robert Novak. He’s the guy who actually published Plame’s name and connection to Wilson and the CIA.
Or is Novak exempt because he is part of the high priesthood?
Or is he exempt because no covert agent was actually outed?
Goldstein: Where is that damn caps lock key? OH HERE IT IS!
Sandwichman: Intent is an internal state.
Goldstein: Sandwichman: SMASH THE STATE!
Sandwichman: Lying is an overt behavior.
Goldstain: Sandwichman: LIES! DIES! BUSH SIGHS! BABY CRIES!
Sandwichman: Rules of evidence. Rule of law. Blah, blah, blah.
Goldenstain: Sandwichman: OH SAVE US FROM THE ROVE LEDEEN DEMON, SAINT JOE! SAINT CINDY! SAINT AL! SAINT PATRICK!
Sandwichman: Goldstrain: Sandwichman: OH, NEVERMIND.
Love ya, babe!
Jeff:
You might be working too hard at trying to figure this out. Your first instinct was correct: Martha Stewart with a security clearance.
In the process of getting the stories straight through interviews and GJ testimony, Fitzgerald turned up some inconsistencies, and in Libby’s case, so stated today, the elements of a crime.
While many of us believe Fitzgerald should’ve determined whether Plame qualified as a covered person under the IIPA–and if not, packed his bags up and gone home.
But as a politically motivated exercise that included agenda-driven reporters that screemed the loudest, and then refused to cooperate–including a trip to the DC Court of Appeals on first ammendment grounds–Fitzgerald was determined not to leave any stone unturned. (Allegations of government misconduct often include cover-ups, a prosecutors instinct would be to look for one, and if a prosecutor looks long enough, he’ll find what he’s looking for. Libby will get his day in court.)
And this is what has made “I do not recall” the famous evasion that it is. Some would insist that making that claim is a failure to cooperate, others will find that the choice between disapprobation and jail is easy.
It’s still warm beer.
And thanks for the kick to the front page.
Frankly, I don’t see what all of the fuss is about. Libby should just change his name to William Jefferson Clinton and have done with it.
tw: is
Update:
I can’t read anymore updates.
“We’d love to charge Mr. Libby for the leak, but sadly we can’t because he lied to us. We urge Mr. Libby to come clean, stop lying and start cooperating with us so we can charge him with this felony.”
Poor, poor prosecutor–the damn accused always screw everything up.
“In all this talk of indictments, there is one name that is conspicuous by its absence: Robert Novak. He’s the guy who actually published Plame’s name and connection to Wilson and the CIA.”
Novak didn’t break the law. Publishing or not is irrelevant. When someone passes classified information to the Chinese, do you think the problem is that it might show up in a newspaper in Beijing?
The law was broken by the people who told the journalists.
Regarding ‘Official A’: it’s premature to conclude that this person won’t be investigated further and/or indicted.
Apparently, in his investigation of the Ryan administration of Illinois, Fitzgerald referred to the ex-Governor in a similar fashion, in documents in other indictments of underlings.
Eventually, he worked his way up, and indicted the ex-Gov.
Also, note that other government officials, who are not going to be indicted, were *not* referred to in that way. Fitzgerald used “undersecretary of State” and similar terms, rather than “Official X” -style identifiers.
“Poor, poor prosecutor–the damn accused always screw everything up.”
So much for Republicans being tough on crime…
How are you supposed to solve crimes if it’s okay for everyone to lie to investigators and the grand jury?
I am not going to preface every statement with “lying to a grand jury is bad.” Take it as a given. I’ve said it 10 times now. Sean Hannity does not represent me. Got it?
As to future indictments? Doubtful—at least not with Rove. But time will tell.
Given enough time, is there anyone a special prosecutor could not indict for perjury?
Turing word: trying, as in very.
Jon H:
You are inferring a bit too much there. If the allegations in the indictment are true then Libby egregiously perjured himself and should face the consequences.
The question is: why didn’t they charge Libby for the leak? Fitzgerald says they couldn’t because Libby threw sand in their eyes by lying to them.
It strikes me that if a suspect can avoid a charge simply by lying then the case must be pretty weak (or nonexistent). But Fitzgerald wouldn’t say that. Instead, he makes an argument that boils down to “we can’t charge him because he won’t cooperate.” I would think that criminals usually don’t (just guessing), and that good prosecutors deal with this as an obvious fact of life rather than use it as an excuse.
Jeff,
Thanks for putting up that Andrew McCarthy update. He has been very careful in his comments always disclosing both his personal and professional relationship with Fitzgerald (ok, could that have sounded anymore gay?).
But this summation is really well put together. Does it start to answer the questions you have had?
John writes: “It strikes me that if a suspect can avoid a charge simply by lying then the case must be pretty weak (or nonexistent). But Fitzgerald wouldn’t say that. Instead, he makes an argument that boils down to “we can’t charge him because he won’t cooperate.—
If it was a more clear-cut, yes/no kind of offense, then that might be correct.
However, I think with the kind of crimes involved here, things like state of mind and intent play a big role. Fitzgerald may have evidence that satisfies other aspects of the IIPA law, but the evasions prevented Fitz from pinning down the aspects of the law related to Libby’s intent.
Perhaps it’d be different if there were a lesser offense which didn’t require intent, sort of a ‘manslaughter’ version of the IIPA, for cases that aren’t up to the “murder 1” standards we have now.
Hmmmm.
Ok. So it’s a he said/they said. I think it’s still rather confusing so it’ll take a couples for this to shake out. One question I have for anyone:
Could Libby subpoena Joe Wilson to testify about his contacts with the reporters in question?
Isn’t the crux of this that these reporters are claiming that they heard of Plame from Libby. Libby is claiming he heard it from them.
If Libby can show that Wilson was in close communication with the reporters, could that offer a defense or mitigate the charges? I.e. that Libby did in fact hear it from reporters?
And yes I realise that the documentation offered shows that Libby was informed by government sources. But I have a lot of trouble remembering daily todo list let alone when, or by whom, I learned of something first.
The place to start is the actual text of the alleged crimes and get down the elements that must be present for the crime to have been committed. Then the facts are gone over and the facts must support each of the elements in order to support a charge, the indictment.
If all the elements of the alleged crimes regarding outing covert personnel or or espionage were not met by the facts, then those crimes did not occur. The motive of the accused does not matter, criminal law rarely goes into motive.
The two things any crime must have are the actus reus and the mens rea, the guilty act and the guilty intent. If those are not met, no crime, no matter how bad the motive.
Motive is not an element to any crime that I am aware of because of the difficulty of proving motive, and the irrelevance of it. Think about that. Two questions (a) did you do x? And (b) did you intend to do x? Very easy to prove as opposed to (c) why did you do x?
The law does not go there, it does not want to get that subjective and motive is to difficult to prove.
If no indictments were handed out on the underlying alleged crimes then the prosecutor had nothing on those. The elements were not met, thus no crime.
Show seems to be over, time to go to bed. Good thing I’m already wearing my jammies.
I think the recitation in the indictment of the classified nature of Plame’s position answered this question and led to the subsequent investigation. At the least, Fitzgerald thinks that the law was implicated. I’m still thinking it through also, but I come down on the prosecutors side.
Before I get jumped on as a partisan douchebag, at least count me as the rare lefty who thinks that Clinton got off waaaaaay easy. If we disagree we don’t disagree about much. Probably only about the usefulness of special prosecutors (I’m pro; I suspect that you are con).
I also suspect that you would agree with this: once an investigation gets underway, any witness – especially the powerful (for reasons of deterrence and the credibility of the system) – has to be held accountable. If Libby lied, one would presume it was because (a) he thought the truth was politically damaging to the White House or (b) he was afraid he might have actually f’d up and committed a felony. (Those mark the bounds of the continuum, anyway.) Neither is an acceptable reason; a perjury charge is appropriate. Maybe it’s just the lawyer in me, but I prefer a world where perjury is taken seriously.
Everything I’ve read about Fitzgerald leads me to believe that he is taking his job seriously, proceeding honestly and acting honorably. Where that leads I have no idea.
If you read the last update from McCarthy, you’ll see a good summation of the case you’re using. I think McCarthy’s right—though I don’t think the intent of the espionage act was to convict people like Libby, which is likely why Fitzgerald didn’t charge him. That, and the “classified” status for a CIA agent is pretty pedestrian stuff.
Because he didn’t charge him, I don’t like that he brought all that up during the press conference. If you aren’t charging him, don’t suggest he did it.
We agree on the perjury and false statements charge, though I find it ridiculous charging him numberous times for repeating the same lie (if that’s what he did). But I suppose he was giving himself some room to deal.
The ironic thing here is Libby could have taken the fifth. But the President told his staffers to cooperate. Interesting to see if he fights it—as his lawyers suggested today he would.
This whole thing is absolutely ridiculous. Just another example of the insanity that infects our culture. Why should anybody EVER be indicted for pointing out that someone is lying? Since when does being “classified” (don’t make me laugh) entitle ANYONE to conduct their own personal foreign policy? Wilson and his wife should be facing treason charges, not running the show.
As is becoming the case, I sign off thusly:
Welcome to the new millenium.
Oh, and BTW. Shep may be an idiot, but he still hasn’t scuffed the gold star I gave him for getting arrested for knocking over the (pick one – Woman, girl, moron, idiot, word that may never be spoken) correspondent(?) that was trying to save a parking place for her network’s satellite van. Among all the egotists that prevail in the news, at least he is the funniest (make-up and all).
Wilson seems to be planning a civil suit. If that happens, the question of his character v. the character of his accusers will be examined at length. The question of the truth of his statements v. those of his detractors will be examined at length.
I certainly hope that happens, as I see that as the only way to get at the larger issues.
Consider that if you can get 30 years for lying about where you heard some classified information to cover for your boss when he had in fact committed no crime, can you imagine what would happen if you actually STOLE classified information, say from the National Archives, and selectively DESTROYED certain parts of it to cover the fact that you and your boss’s bad judgement had contributed to the crime of the century!!? And then when you finally confessed to the whole sordid thing and asked for leniency, you looked the judge in the eye and said that you had just “made an honest mistake”!? Obviously, you’d be up the river forever!! Bet old Scooter is glad he didn’t do all THAT stuff!
I agree, which is why I cut out some of the longer version. Byron York also has an excellent summary at The Corner.
I don’t think that he is being charged on multiple counts for one lie. The indictment charges Libby with multiple instances of the same type of lie (his conversations with Russert, Cooper and Miller), but also multiple types of lies (what he said to the media, who his sources were and when he learned about Plame).
In a related development, Sporting News following his incomprehensible baseball metaphor, LA Dodgers owner Frank McCourt and General Manager Paul DePodesta have made Fitzgerald an offer…
If Wilson hadn’t come out on his anti-war stance yet, why would Libby want to know who his wife was? Cheney never asked for him to be sent, he didn’t know who was sent.
We have a reporter who went to jail for not writing a story who didn’t have to, and others in the MSM who knew before her who have lied in testimony and backtracked who did publish… nothing. Meanwhile Russert sits at MTP as if he had nothing to do with it and has the nerve to comment.
Obviously the press knew Wilson was coming out (from Wilson), and called the WH for comment.
Wilson said Iraq had previously attempted to purchase uranium but he couldn’t find an actual transaction (via 9-11 commission report). He knew the amounts that Iraq had that had been previously purchased also. He didn’t swing totally to the ‘it was impossible’ stance until he started his column and speaking tours. If Kerry turned him loose from the campaign trial after a couple months, it can’t be good.
Pincus column came out before Novak’s also. Who told him? He said he knew, but chose not to print it, as did Miller.
The CIA ‘front’ company in Boston gave contributions under Valerie’s undercover’ name.
Joey had her on the website by her ‘undercover’ name way before.
Who’s Who has had them listed since 1999 – 2002.
The EPIC (Peace in Iraq) webpage has his bio which lists his wife by her undercover name. (June, before Novaks article, so we assume it was put up ahead of the conf. also).
I also saw no mention of Joe’s ex Jacqueling whom he visited in France (French Embassy, btw an acquaitance of Rocco who ‘found’ the forged Niger documents), of which Wilson commented were wrong and had heard about… though the timeline was they weren’t found till five or six months later.
So the media has more power than the courts now…
As Fitz said… “I didn’t want a first amendment fight with the press”, that says it all.
Didn’t we read somewhere that Miller had a security clearance? If that is the case, was it ok that she knew about Plame? What is a member of the press doing with a security clearance anyway?
I don’t know where I am I guess I am lost Is there any pie here?
Jesus. The gall of this guy is absolutely stunning.
He is a surreal caricature mix of arrogance and dunce. You can even smell his cologne when he appears on TV.