Rich Lowry, writing at the Corner:
Brace yourselves—this will be lighting up Washington tomorrow. From NYTimes right now: “[…] I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.
“Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby’s testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said.
“The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration’s handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war.”
Nothing here suggests that Cheney thought Ms Plame’s identity classified (or that the VP either knew or revealed her name)—and there’s no reason that I can think of that Cheney shouldn’t share the information with his chief of staff—so it looks like any indictments could involve perjury and obstruction of justice charges for Libby, if he mislead the grand jury.
Three questions: Did Libby intentionally mislead the inquiry? And if so, why?—particularly if Cheney hadn’t done anything illegal by revealing Plame’s CIA affiliation. And did Cheney share this information with Fitzgerald when he was interviewed under oath last year? Because if not, he, too, could be open to perjury and obstruction charges.
Of course, another thing to keep in mind is that this leak could be wrong. We’ll know by Friday, I suppose. Keep your eye on Tom Maguire’s site for the latest analysis.
Meanwhile, for those who are floating the meme that any impending indictments are politically motivated, here’s Andrew McCarthy on Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald:
[…] I’ve gotten a lot of questions about this from people who say some conservatives are hitting the airwaves with preemptive suggestions that my friend Pat Fitzgerald may not be as apolitical as his press clippings indicate. In particular, I am being pointed to favorable comments made by Senator Schumer about Pat’s competence and integrity.
Let me just say this. Pat is at least as apolitical as his press clippings suggest. And just because Senator Schumer says something doesn’t make it wrong.
Pat Fitzgerald is the best prosecutor I have ever seen. By a mile. He is also the straightest shooter I have ever seen – by at least that much. And most importantly, he is a good man.
This investigation has gone on for 22 months. Most of the evidence was collected before autumn 2004 – the last year of delay has mainly been caused by reporters challenging subpoenas in the federal courts.
If Pat were political – or, worse, if he somehow had it in for the Bush administration – it was fully within his power to return indictments in the weeks before the November elections, which would almost certainly have cinched things for Senator Kerry. It is something, I am quite certain, it would never even have occurred to him to do. The only thing the guy I know would do is bring charges or close the case without charges when the facts of the investigation warranted doing so.
Unlike his predecessor, President Bush has been a model of decorum throughout this investigation, regarding it as a serious matter and being respectful and complimentary in light of the professional way in which it’s been conducted. I don’t know what’s going to happen. But I think people would do well to follow the President’s lead. They will be far less likely then to look foolish later on.
I agree. This White House has been serious, deferential, and cooperative throughout a lengthy investigation. If crimes were committed and indictments are warranted, by all means, bring them on.
There’ll be time later on—and in fact, such a follow-on investigation will be likely be demanded, I submit, in the wake of indictments—to look at the roles of both the media and the CIA (including Plame and Wilson themselves) in ginning up this “scandal” in the first place.
A-fricking-men.
SW: known
As in, they should have known NOT to lie if, in fact, they did.
Libby/Judy Miller Conspiracy Theory:
Libby perjures himself to protect Cheney from political damage in an election year(2004), with full knowledge that Judy Miller/NYT/MSM will legally slow walk Fitzgerald’s investigation, thus preventing Fitzgerald’s report from coming out until after the election.
The flaw in this theory is that Libby, knowing Fitzgerald was onto his scent, would’ve resigned after the 2004 Election to take advantage of a “private business opportunity.” But the illogical thing in the whole business is that Libby should’ve done that regardless, if he knew Fitzgerald was onto him. Maybe the leak about Libby is wrong. It completely makes no sense that Libby would’ve stayed on in any scenario in which he suspected he might be indicted for perjury.
If no indictments are returned, how long before Schumer and his ilk are before the cameras denouncing Fitzgerald as a partisan hack?
.003 seconds
Man I wish we could come up with a better word than leak. It makes me think of a colostomy bag gone bad. Perhaps a trucker that’s missplaced his piss bottle. A drunken sorority girl at a frat party that’s been overfilled from a dangerous case of DSB. (If you get that last one you are a sick bastard.)
“I’ve got a Plame leak all over the White House,” says Chimpy.”And it’s all Uncle Dick’s fault!”
“Don’t blame me Bushie!,” screams Dicky. “You know I can’t keep it down when I get excited. Besides Rover over here will take the blame.”
“Yeah,” whispers Bushie McChimp, “It’s gonna be tough to put Hot Carl down. But he’s my dog momma, and I’ll do it.”
BBBLLLAAAMMMM!!!
I have to agree. Let’s not demonize Fitzgerald. If there were crimes committed, then they need to be investigated and punished.
Remember what the liberals did to Starr because he had the gall to do his job?
What I am having trouble with is how could Plame be undercover when her husband is out in front of the world preening like a peacock, and she is driving to work every day in an office job at CIA? How do you get to perjury when there is no crime to start with?
And why hasn’t the administration tried, even feebly, to take control of this story? Most people I talk to about this don’t even know that Wilson had one story for the press, and another for investigators.
The one thing that consistently pisses me off about Bush is how he sits there after someone has set his cuffs on fire and just watches as his pants burn up. I don’t get it…
The Democrat’s Media Party has been trying to indict this administration since 2000. The last two years of investigating a non-crime seems to be heading towards investigating until a crime is found. Sort of the way they created ‘fake but accurate’ to prove themselves justified in forging documents. Like the last five years the treatment towards this adminstration has all been guilty until never proven innocent.
When is anybody, particularly the formerly CIA-hating left wing media, going to be disturbed by the fact the CIA appears to be a run-away train? It is absurd the amount and scope of the leaks happening almost daily about an investigation into security violations.
“Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Notes Show”
Well, at least that’s what the NYT headline says.
When you actually READ the story, you get:
“Lawyers involved in the case, who described the notes to The New York Times, said they showed that Mr. Cheney knew that….”
So, the NYT headline and first paragraph makes a declarative “Notes Show” statement, but, in reality, no notes have been seen by the reporter. How many anonymous sources verified the contents of the purported notes? Why is the NYT getting away with this?
OOPS! Wesley Clark just came on TV and I threw up a little in my mouth, so I’ll be back later…
– The NYTrash only needs to switch to the half size format, and 4 color print, and they can take their rightful place next to the Inquirer and Star as exemplory examples of rumor monger journalism. Since the rabid “get ChimpyMcBush” left of Marx press is presently displaying their unflinching willingness to eat their own (see the public dismemberment of Judith Miller for having the temerity to actually do what the NYT told her too), the only cuffs I see burning are those of the idiotarian ideologs that can’t stop eating thier own assholes…..
wordygurdy: “Full”, as in how full of crap can one party be….
Dog-
>How do you get to perjury when there is
>no crime to start with?
A grand jury can investigate you for a crime, it can decide not to indict you. But in the meantime, if you swore you had a sandwich for lunch, and they prove you had a salad, you have perjured yourself. Perjury has no relation to guilt, except for the act of perjury itself.
– deona – Unfortunately for the koolaid drinkers behind this nefarious witch hunt, “any sort of inaccuracies involving “non-pertinant” facts to the case at hand, cannot constitute a viable perjure”. Thats the law. Whether Fitzgerald will be hearded into some malaprop by political pressures remains to be seen. In the means time what the left is proving over and over to the voting public is their single minded obsessiveness to focus on getting Bush, while putting zero effort into establishing a viable platform of socially acceptable goals as a party. If the moderates within the Democratic party aren’t able to reverse this process, and regain some semblance of control from the extremist elements, this lop-sided situation could continue for generations to come.
wordhash: “Time” … as in time is running out for the Dems…. 2006 is just around the corner
Ah yes, another one of those Kid Rock wearing the American flag issues with conservatives I suspect. So yeah, put me in the boat that says if Libby perjured himself, he should be punished. I think it’s interesting that pundits like Hewitt see a divided front of conservatives on issues like Miers, Shiavo, the flag, gay rights etc… as a weakness I for one believe the voiced diversity of opinion on these issues are strengths for the party as a whole.
In some cultures, they only eat vomit.
I believe the current outrage is that Plame was exposed as a CIA agent, and that here career, etc was ruined. I’ve seen some people intermittently claiming that this was in fact a violation (in spirit if not in letter) of the Espionage Act (or similar), but Tenet having told Cheney ought to put that to bed, if Cheney wasn’t briefed on Plame’s identity. Because we KNOW that Tenet couldn’t have outed Plame without being the subject of an investigation, himself, now don’t we?
“The one thing that consistently pisses me off about Bush is how he sits there after someone has set his cuffs on fire and just watches as his pants burn up. I don’t get it… “
I guess he’s stealing more than a few pages from The Foundation, in which some of the good side’s leaders mostly sat back and waited for their enemies to self-destruct.
It seems to work most of the time for Bush.
“How do you get to perjury when there is no crime to start with?” Dog (Lost) asks? I think Martha could give you some insight into that.
If this investigation produces an indictment against Joe Wilson, I’ll hurt myself laughing.
Uh, that first quote says she is a “fine pubic servant”–oh my!
TW: wish, as in I wish I could get that visual outta my head.
Doh! Ignore that, that was for the Hewitt-Miers thread. My bad!
“I agree. This White House has been serious, deferential, and cooperative throughout a lengthy investigation.”
They would tell us this. But it would be to comment on an ongoing investigation.
Do you want to lead or manage? ,