I’ve gotten into an argument with another attorney who seems to think that Libby should not be required to take the stand to offer or use the ‘memory’ defense. That Wells and others can use other witnesses to make the defense. Do you have a response or a direction to send me to research this? I do no criminal work so am at a loss as to how to respond.

Christie,

If Congress were to pass a bill stating that Cheney and everyone in his office had their Security Clearances revoked, and that anyone providing any of them with classified material was committing a felony, do you think that would effectively remove Cheney and his office from operating in Intelligence and Military Affairs?

Reading the quotes from the SF-312 seems to say so.

I think the answer is “no” for two reasons:

First, such a law could not be passed over a Presidential veto.

Second, Congress seems to have no authority to do such a thing. I’m a bit shaky on the second point, but the classification system is entirely set up and administered by the executive branch. Congress, as far as I can tell, had nothing to do with it.

The only way Fitz’s argument would be valid is if Libby had a reasonable expectation that he would be held accountable for revealing classified information…
So Libby had every right to assume that even if he was responsible for blowing the cover of an entire intelligence network, nothing would officially happen to him.

So do you think that Wells will deflect Fitz’s argument by saying:

“Mr. Libby had nothing to fear since he believed he was omnipotent and above the laws”?

Hmmm! Maybe it would work…but wouldn’t it provide another motive?

Simply that since Libby felt that as a matter of the Bush Administration he was above the law…that it was perfectly okay to lie to the Grand Jury.

Somehow that wouldn’t go over very well with this jury, I’d guess.

Or maybe Wells should try this tack. He should simply tell the jurors and the judge that the trial is just a waste of everyones time since Bush is going to pardon his client anyways!

All of the above and it goes for Cheney, Bush, Rove, and all the other WHIG players as well…conspiracy.

If Congress were to pass a bill stating that Cheney and everyone in his office had their Security Clearances revoked, and that anyone providing any of them with classified material was committing a felony, do you think that would effectively remove Cheney and his office from operating in Intelligence and Military Affairs?

Reading the quotes from the SF-312 seems to say so.

These are the guys who lied the nation into war, have gotten more than 3,000 military personnel killed in Iraq alone, slept through the briefings before 9/11 saying we were about to be hit, and shrugged off NOAA warnings about Katrina. I don’t think a little thing like the threat of losing a security clearance would mean a thing to him or anyone else in the White House. They’ve never been held accountable for anything, ever. Rove is the primary example–he’s generally acknowledged to have broken the security agreement he signed, and yet there’s been no discipline at all.

So Libby had every right to assume that even if he was responsible for blowing the cover of an entire intelligence network, nothing would officially happen to him.

That’s why it’s so important to get Congressional investigations underway, and to make sure all the details released during the Libby trial are kept in and before the public.

Kennedy rips Publicans for filibustering minimum wage bill.